【摘要】 目的 剪切修復(fù)偶聯(lián)因子1（ERCC1）是核苷酸外切修復(fù)家族中的重要成員，它在核酸損傷修復(fù)過(guò)程和凋亡過(guò)程中起著重要作用；存活蛋白（Survivin）屬凋亡抑制蛋白家族，是迄今發(fā)現(xiàn)的最強(qiáng)的凋亡抑制因子之一。研究中初步探索晚期非小細(xì)胞肺癌（non-small-cell lung cancer，NSCLC）中ERCC1和Survivin與鉑類化學(xué)療法敏感性的關(guān)系及其相關(guān)性。 方法 2001年1月－2002年6月對(duì)51例晚期NSCLC（ⅢB或Ⅳ期）標(biāo)本經(jīng)免疫組織化學(xué)檢測(cè)ERCC1和Survivin的表達(dá)，患者行至少2周期含鉑方案化學(xué)療法，2周期化學(xué)療法后評(píng)價(jià)療效，采用SPSS 13.0軟件就檢測(cè)指標(biāo)和化學(xué)療法療效評(píng)價(jià)進(jìn)行相關(guān)統(tǒng)計(jì)分析?！〗Y(jié)果 ERCC1和Survivin在腫瘤組織中陽(yáng)性表達(dá)率分別為58.8 %（30/51）和76.5 %（39/51）。ERCC1陰性組化學(xué)療法有效率高于陽(yáng)性組（Plt;0.05），5年生存時(shí)間高于陽(yáng)性組（Plt;0.05）；Survivin陰性組化學(xué)療法有效率雖高于陽(yáng)性組，但無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（Pgt;0.05），其5年生存時(shí)間與陰性組比較無(wú)差別（Pgt;0.05）。Spearman相關(guān)分析提示ERCC1與Survivin之間無(wú)相關(guān)性（rs=-0.088，P=0.537）?！〗Y(jié)論 ERCC1和Survivin可能與NSCLC的發(fā)生相關(guān)，ERCC1可能與腫瘤的預(yù)后相關(guān)，并對(duì)化學(xué)療法療效具有一定預(yù)測(cè)價(jià)值。ERCC1和Survivin之間耐藥機(jī)制可能各不相同?！続bstract】 Objective Excision repair cross-complementing 1 (ERCC1), an important member of the DNA repair gene family, plays a key role in nucleotide excision repair and apoptosis of tumor cells. Survivin, a member of inhibitor of apoptosis protein (IAP) family, is one of the most powerful factors in inhibiting apoptosis up to now. This study is to explore the value of ERCC1 and Survivin in predicting the sensitivity of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) to platinum-based chemotherapy and the interrelationship between the two markers. Methods From January 2001 to June 2002, expressions of ERCC1 and Survivin of 51 advanced NSCLC patients (Ⅲ B or IV) were tested through immunohistochemistry. The patients were treated with at least 2 cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy. The curative effect was evaluated later, and the relationship among detected data, curative effect of chemotherapy and patients′ clinical parameters were analyzed with SPSS 13.0 software. Results The positive expression rates of ERCC1 and Survivin in NSCLC tissues were 58.8 % (30/51) and 76.5 % (39/51), respectively. The effective rate of chemotherapy and 5-year survival rate for the negative group of ERCC1 were significantly higher than those for the positive group (Plt;0.05). The results for Survivin were similar to those for ERCC1, but there was no statistical significance (Pgt;0.05). We also found there was no relationship between ERCC1 and Survivin by Spearman′s correlation analysis (rs=-0.088, P=0.537). Conclusion ERCC1 and Survivin may be correlated with the development of NSCLC, and ERCC1 may be related to curative effect and prognosis of NSCLC. There was probably no mechanism of coordination or regulation in multi-drug resistance between ERCC1 and Survivin.