目的   探讨免疫及靶向药物联合肝动脉灌注化学治疗（化疗）治疗晚期肝癌的临床疗效。方法   选取甘肃省武威市人民医院2021年1月—2024年1月收治的78例晚期肝癌患者进行回顾性分析，其中20例患者采取单纯肝动脉灌注化疗（HAIC）治疗为单化疗组，30例患者采取HAIC联合程序性细胞死亡受体-1（PD-1）抗体治疗为免疫组，28例患者采取HAIC联合PD-1抗体免疫治疗与甲磺酸仑伐替尼胶囊靶向治疗为联合组。对比三组临床疗效、治疗前后胚抗原（CEA）、糖类抗原125（CA125）、甲胎蛋白（AFP）表达水平，不良反应发生率，并采用Piper疲乏修正量表（PFS-R）、世界卫生组织生存质量量表简表（WHOQOL-BREF）对两组癌因性疲乏程度及生存质量进行评价。结果   单纯化疗组、免疫组、联合组客观缓解率分别为15.00%、40.00%、64.29%，疾病控制率为30.00%、66.67%、82.14%，联合组高于单纯化疗组与免疫组（χ ² =11.720，P=0.003；χ ² =13.890，P＜0.001）；治疗后三组患者CEA、CA125、AFP水平均降低，且联合组［CEA：（13.62±4.24）ng/mL、CA125：（31.62±13.66）U/mL、AFP：（35.21±5.93）ng/mL］低于免疫组［（17.85±3.32）ng/mL、（59.26±9.35）U/mL、（42.12±4.12）ng/mL］及单纯化疗组［（23.73±4.79）ng/mL、（64.57±5.23）U/mL、（47.46±5.32）ng/mL］，对比差异有统计学意义（F=7.698，P＜0.001；F=11.480，P＜0.001；F=14.952，P＜0.001；P＜0.05）；所有患者均无5级不良反应及严重肝功能损害出现，且三组血小板减少、白细胞减少、腹痛、呕吐、消化道出血、厌食等不良反应发生率对比差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；治疗后三组患者PFS-R评分均降低，联合组（3.85±1.13）分低于免疫组（5.39±1.25）分及单纯化疗组（6.33±1.26）分，WHOQOL-BREF评分均升高，联合组（348.58±66.12）分高于免疫组（297.24±72.21）分及单纯化疗组（256.35±41.67）分，对比差异有统计学意义（F=2.526，P=0.014；F=2.167，P=0.033）。结论   免疫及靶向药物联合肝动脉灌注化疗治疗晚期肝癌疗效显著，可有效控制疾病进展的同时，降低机体肿瘤标志物水平，安全性可控，同时可改善患者生存质量，减轻癌因性疲乏程度。

       Objective  To explore the clinical efficacy of immune and targeted drugs combined with hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy（HAIC）in the treatment of advanced liver cancer．Methods  A retrospective analysis was conducted on 78 patients with advanced liver cancer admitted to our hospital from January 2021 to January 2024．Among them，20 patients were treated with simple HAIC and divided into a single chemotherapy group．Thirty patients were treated with HAIC combined with PD-1 antibody，and divided into an immune group．Twenty-eight patients were treated with HAIC combined with PD-1 antibody immunotherapy and lenvatinib mesylate capsule targeted therapy，and divided into a combination group．The clinical efficacy of three groups，the expressionlevels of CEA，CA125，AFP，and incidence of adverse reactions before and after treatment were compared．Piper Fatigue Correction Scale（PFS-R）and the WHO QOL-BREF were used to assess cancer-related fatigue in both groups．The degree of fatigue and quality of life were assessed．Results  The objective response rates of the simple chemotherapy group，the immune group，and the combination group were 15.00%，40.00% and 64.29%，respectively．The disease control  rates were 30.00%，66.67% and 82.14%，respectively．The indicators above of the combination group was significantly higher than those in the simple chemotherapy group and the immune group（χ ² =11.720，P=0.003；χ ² =13.890，P＜0.001；P＜0.05）．After treatment，the levels of CEA，CA125 and AFP were all decreased in the three groups，and those in the combined group （CEA［13.62±4.24］ng/mL，CA125［31.62±13.66］U/mL，AFP：Ng/mL［35.21±5.93］）were lower than those in the immune group（17.85±3.32 ng/mL，59.26±9.35 U/mL，/ 42.12±4.12 ng/mL）and single chemotherapy group（23.73±4.79 ng/mL，64.57±5.23 U/mL47.46±5.32］ng/mL），the differences were statistically significant（F=7.698，P＜0.001；F=11.480，P＜0.001；F=14.952，P＜0.001；P＜0.05）．All patients had no grade 5 adverse reactions or severe liver function damage，and there was no statistically significant difference in the incidence adverse reactions such as thrombocytopenia，leukopenia，abdominal pain，vomiting，gastrointestinal bleeding，and anorexia among the three groups（P＞0.05）．After treatment，the PFS-R score of the three groups was decreased，and the combined group（3.85±1.13）score was lower than that of the immune group（5.39±1.25）and the chemotherapy group（6.33±1.26）．While the WHOQOL-BREF score was increased，the score of combination group（348.58±66.12）was higher than that of immune group（297.24±72.21）and chemotherapy group（256.35±41.67），and the difference was statistically significant（F=2.526，P=0.014；F=2.167，P=0.033；P＜0.05）．Conclusions  The combination of immune and targeted drugs with hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy has a significant therapeutic effect on advanced liver cancer．It can effectively control disease progression，reduce tumor marker levels in the body，improve patient quality of life，and alleviate cancer-related fatigue，with controllable safety

        目的   探究支气管镜联合雾化吸入药物对肺炎支原体肺炎患儿症状持续时间及肺部影像学好转情况。方法   选取94例肺炎支原体肺炎患儿为研究对象，以随机数字表法分为A组、B组，各47例，分别实施布地奈德雾化吸入治疗、支气管镜肺泡灌洗联合布地奈德雾化吸入治疗，比较两组症状持续时间、治疗后肺部影像改善情况、炎症指标水平及不良反应发生率。结果  B组体温恢复时间（2.73±0.51）d、咳嗽消失时间（5.98±1.24）d、住院时间（10.96±3.36）d，A组分别为（3.14±0.83）（7.06±2.33）（13.27±3.18）d，B组较A组短（t=2.885、2.809、3.423，均P＜0.05）；治疗后B组40.43%阴影完全消失、34.04%阴影显著缩小、23.40%阴影有所缩小、2.13%阴影改善不明显，A组分别为21.28%、36.17%、25.53%、17.02%，B组肺部阴影改善情况优于A组（Z=8.311，P＜0.05）；治疗前B组白细胞计数（WBC）、超敏C-反应蛋白（hs-CRP）、降钙素原（PCT）水平与A组相近（P＞0.05）；治疗后B组WBC（7.71±1.94）×109 /L、hs-CRP（4.96±1.44）mg/L、PCT（84.32±21.40）pg/mL，A组分别为（9.05±2.48）×109 /L、（6.17±1.85）mg/L、（105.46±34.02）pg/mL，B组水平较A组低（t=2.918、3.538、3.606，均P＜0.05）；B组不良反应发生率为8.52%，A组为4.26%，B与A组相近（χ ² =0.178，P＞0.05）。结论   对肺炎支原体肺炎患儿实施支气管镜联合雾化吸入药物治疗，可缩短康复时间，促进肺部阴影消退，降低其炎症指标水平，且未增加不良反应发生率。

     Objective  To investigate the effect of bronchoscopy combined with nebulized inhalation of medication on the duration of symptoms and pulmonary imaging conversion in children with Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia（MPP）．Methods  A total of 94 children with MPP were selected as the research subjects and randomly divided into Group A and Group B using a random number table，with 47 cases in each group．They were treated with budesonide nebulization inhalation therapy and bronchoalveolar lavage combined with budesonide nebulization inhalation therapy，respectively．The duration of symptoms，improvement of lung imaging before and after treatment，levels of inflammatory indicators，and incidence of adverse  reactions were compared between the two groups．The results showed that the temperature recovery time was（2.73±0.51）days，cough disappearance time was（5.98±1.24）days，and hospitalization time was（10.96±3.36）days in Group B，（3.14±0.83）days，（7.06±2.33）days，and（13.27±3.18）days in Group A，respectively．Durpation in Group B was shorter than Group A（t=2.885，2.809，3.423，all P＜0.05）． After treatment，40.43% of the shadows in Group B completely disappeared，34.04% of the shadows significantly reduced，23.40% of the shadows reduced，and 2.13% of the shadows showed no significant improvement，better than 21.28%，36.17%，25.53%，and 17.02% in Group A（Z=8.311，P＜0.05）． Before treatment，the white blood cell count（WBC），high-sensitivity C-reactive protein（hs CRP），and procalcitonin（PCT）levels in group B were similar to those in Group A（P＞0.05）．After treatment，the WBC（7.71±1.94）×109 /L，hs CRP（4.96±1.44）mg/L，and PCT（84.32±21.40）pg/mL in Group B were lower than those in Group A（9.05±2.48）×109 /L，（6.17±1.85）mg/L，and（105.46±34.02）pg/mL，respectively（t=2.918，3.538，3.606，all P＜0.05）．The incidence of adverse reactions in Group B was 8.52%，while in Group A it was 4.26%．The incidence of adverse reactions in group B was similar to that in group A（χ ² =0.178，P＞0.05）．Conclusions  Bronchoscopy combined with nebulized inhalation therapy for children with MPP can shorten the recovery time，promote the disappearance of lung shadows，reduce their inflammatory index levels，and without increasing the incidence of adverse reactions．

       随着糖尿病发病率不断攀升，人们逐渐聚焦于糖尿病合并骨质疏松。围绕此疾病，国内外学者开展了广泛而深入的研究，临床实践聚焦于两点：糖尿病的精准治疗和骨质疏松的有效干预。在确保血糖稳定的基础上，致力于抑制骨吸收、促进骨形成。在此治疗理念指导下，临床医生应当更加全面了解血糖管理与抗骨质疏松药物的作用机制并合理应用，更大程度改善患者的临床症状及预后。然而，药物作用机制复杂，联合应用存在潜在药物相互作用问题。未来研究方向包括探索更安全有效的联合治疗方案，更加精确化地治疗以提高临床疗效。文章分析了降糖药物及抗骨质疏松药物对疾病的疗效，并展望未来的研究方向，旨在为临床实践提供更为深刻与全面的指导。

    As the incidence of diabetes mellitus continues to rise，people are also gradually focusing on diabetes mellitus combined with osteoporosis，which puts patients at a higher risk of fragility fracture．Scholars at home and abroad have conducted extensive and in-depth research around this condition，and clinical practice has focused on two points：first，the precise treatment of diabetes，and second，the effective intervention of osteoporosis．On the basis of ensuring blood glucose stabilization，we are committed to inhibiting bone resorption and promoting bone formation．Under the guidance of this therapeutic concept，we should have a more comprehensive understanding of the mechanism of action of blood glucose management and anti-osteoporosis drugs and apply them rationally，aiming to improve the clinical symptoms and prognosis of patients to a greater extent through dual intervention．However，the mechanism of action of different drugs is complex，and there are potential drug-drug interactions and safety issues associated with their combined use．Future research directions should include exploring  safer and more effective combination therapies，developing novel drugs，and more precise and individualized treatments to improve clinical efficacy．This article analyzes the efficacy of glucose-lowering drugs and anti-osteoporosis drugs on the disease and looks forward to future research directions，aiming to provide more profound and comprehensive guidance for clinical practice．