• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Risk prediction model for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma in adult cardiac allograft recipients

    2021-04-13 00:39:56NandiniNairZhiyongHuDongpingDuEnriqueGongora
    World Journal of Transplantation 2021年3期

    Nandini Nair, Zhiyong Hu, Dongping Du, Enrique Gongora

    Nandini Nair, Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Texas Tech Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, TX 79430, United States

    Zhiyong Hu, Dongping Du, Department of Industrial, Manufacturing and Systems Engineering, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409, United States

    Enrique Gongora, Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35233, United States

    Abstract BACKGROUND Heart transplant recipients are at higher risk of developing skin cancer than the general population due to the long-term immunosuppression treatment.Cancer has been reported as one of the major causes of morbidity and mortality for patients after heart transplantation.Among different types of skin cancers, cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is the most common one, which requires timely screening and better management.AIM To identify risk factors and predict the incidence of cSCC for heart transplant recipients.METHODS We retrospectively analyzed adult heart transplant recipients between 2000 and 2015 extracted from the United Network for Organ Sharing registry.The whole dataset was randomly divided into a derivation set (80%) and a validation set (20%).Uni- and multivariate Cox regression were done to identify significant risk factors associated with the development of cSCC.Receiver operating characteristics curves were generated and area under the curve (AUC) was calculated to assess the accuracy of the prediction model.Based on the selected risk factors, a risk scoring system was developed to stratify patients into different risk groups.A cumulative cSCC-free survival curve was generated using the Kaplan-Meier method for each group, and the log-rank test was done to compare the intergroup cSCC rates.RESULTS There were 23736 heart-transplant recipients during the study period, and 1827 of them have been reported with cSCC.Significant predictors of post-transplant cSCC were older age, male sex, white race, recipient and donor human leukocyte antigen (HLA) mismatch level, malignancy at listing, diagnosis with restrictive myopathy or hypertrophic myopathy, heart re-transplant, and induction therapy with OKT3 or daclizumab.The multivariate model was used to predict the 5-, 8- and 10-year incidence of cSCC and respectively provided AUC of 0.79, 0.78 and 0.77 in the derivation set and 0.80, 0.78 and 0.77 in the validation set.The risk scoring system assigned each patient with a risk score within the range of 0-11, based on which they were stratified into 4 different risk groups.The predicted and observed 5-year probability of developing cSCC match well among different risk groups.In addition, the log-rank test indicated significantly different cSCCfree survival across different groups.CONCLUSION A risk prediction model for cSCC among heart-transplant recipients has been generated for the first time.It offers a c-statistic of ≥ 0.77 in both derivation and validation sets.

    Key Words: Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma; Heart transplantation; Cox proportional hazard model; Risk assessment; Squamous cell carcinoma; Mortality outcomes

    INTRODUCTION

    Skin cancer has been reported as one of the major causes of morbidity and mortality in heart transplantation recipients[1].The incidence rate of nonmelanoma and melanoma skin cancers, especially cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC), is significantly higher in heart transplant recipients than the general population with equivalent age and gender[2].

    Multiple studies have been done to investigate the risk of skin cancer in heart transplant recipients[1], and factors including male gender, older age, white race, greater sunlight exposure were commonly identified to be associated with a high risk of post-transplant skin cancer[3-6].Although risk factors have been characterized, few stratification models have been developed to predict the incidence of skin cancer after transplantation.Accurately stratifying the risk of skin cancer has been a challenge that prevents the development of evidence-based screening recommendations.In addition, most of the existing studies investigated the risk factors of several skin cancers collectively.The risk of cSCC, the most common skin cancer among heart transplant recipients, has not been exclusively assessed for a large patient population.

    In this study, we sought to develop a risk prediction model for cSCC after heart transplantation using a national organ transplant database,i.e., the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS).The model aims to stratify patients into different risk groups regarding the development of cSCC post-transplantation and provides a useful tool for pre-transplant counseling and post-transplant surveillance and management.

    MATERIALS AND METHODS

    Population

    The data consisted of 23736 adults (aged ≥ 18 years) heart transplant recipients between 2000 and 2015 were extracted from the UNOS registry of thoracic organ transplantation database.Patients who were listed for and received multi-organ transplantation were excluded from this study.Information on patient characteristics, cancer history, induction therapy, and other risk predictors were extracted for each transplant event, which includes age, sex, race, primary diagnosis, patient’s malignancy status at listing and at transplant, patient’s emergency status at transplant, donor’s cancer history, the recipient and donor human leukocyte antigen (HLA) Mismatch level, recipient’s most recent tests before transplant for panel-reactive antibody (PRA) against Class I and Class II antigens, induction with different types of drugs including thymoglobulin, ATGAM, OKT3, daclizumab, basiliximab, and alemtuzumab.cSCC event was determined by the post-transplant follow-up of malignancy status.Time to cSCC development was calculated as days between transplantation and the first reported incidence of cSCC or the last follow-up.

    Statistical analysis

    The data was randoml y divided into a derivation set (80%) and a validation set (20%).All variables were compared between the derivation and validation sets as well as between the cancer and non-cancer groups (Table 1).Continuous variables were reported as mean (standard deviation), and categorical variables were summarized as percentages.Categorical variables and continuous variables were compared usingχ2test and Wilcoxon rank-sum test, respectively.

    Uni- and multivariate Cox regression analyses were done to assess the association of different risk factors with post-transplant cSCC, and p-values, hazard ratios and their confidence intervals were reported.Variables with smallPvalues (< 0.1) in the univariate analysis were selected as inputs to the multivariate analysis.Stepwise forward selection was done to select the final multivariate model.The multivariate model was used to predict the probability of developing cSCC in 5, 8, and 10 years after heart transplantation.The model accuracy was assessed using receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves and area under curves (AUCs).Based on the hazard ratio, a risk score was assigned to each significant variable (Pvalue < 0.05), and the sum of all scores predicted the risk of a recipient developing cSCC after heart transplantation.The risk scoring system was validated by comparing the predicted and observed probability of developing cSCC 5 years after transplantation across different risk groups.The cumulative cSCC-free survival curves of different risk groups were derived using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the log-rank test was done to quantitatively assess the difference of cSCC risk.All the analysis was performed using MATLB software from MathWorks, Inc.

    RESULTS

    Patient characteristics

    Table 1 provides the summary of all variables between the derivation and validation cohorts as well as between the cancer and non-cancer groups.No significant differences were observed between the derivation and validation groups for all factors.Within the study population, 1827 recipients (7.70%) developed cSCC whereas 21909 recipients (92.30%) were not reported with the event.Patients in the cSCC positive group were older, had a higher percentage of male sex and white race, had a lower level of recipient and donor HLA mismatch level, had a lower level of PRA against Class I and Class II antigens.The cSCC positive group had a higher percentage of patients who had coronary artery disease at listing, and a lower percentage of patients who had congenital heart defect at listing.More patients in the cSCC positive group had malignancy at listing and at transplantation.Patients in the cSCC positive group were less likely to be in status 1A and more likely in status 1B or status 2.In addition, recipients with post-transplant cSCC were more likely to be inducted with OKT3 or daclizumab while less likely to be inducted with basiliximab.

    Table 1 Patient characteristics and predictive variables

    1Continuous variables are expressed as mean (SD).The rest of the values are categorical variables expressed as percentages.cSCC: Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma; HLA: Human leukocyte antigen; PRA: Panel-reactive antibody.

    Prediction of cSCC

    Table 2 gives a summary of the univariate Cox regression analysis, where 10 variables were significant (P< 0.05).These variables include age, sex, race, HLA mismatch level, PRA against Class I antigens, PRA against Class II antigens, diagnosis of coronary artery disease or congenital heart disease, patient’s malignancy status at listing, and at transplant, and OKT3.The final multivariate model had 8 variables (Table 3), including age, sex, HLA mismatch level, race, malignancy at listing, diagnosis at listing, and induction with OKT3 or daclizumab.ROC curves for the 5-year, 8-year and 10-year post-transplant cSCC prediction provided AUCs of 0.79, 0.78, 0.77 respectively in the derivation set and 0.80, 0.78, 0.77 respectively in the validation set (Figure 1).

    Risk stratification

    Table 4 provides the risk scores derived based on the multivariate model to predict the risk of developing cSCC 5 years after heart transplantation.The scoring system can classify patients into 4 risk groups: very low-risk group (score ≤ 5,n= 12383), low-risk group (score = 6,n= 6162), medium-risk group (score = 7,n= 4371), high-risk group (score ≥ 8,n= 820).Figure 2 shows the predicted and observed probabilities of developing cSCC 5 years after heart transplantation, which match well across different riskgroups.Patients in the high-risk group (score ≥ 8) had a higher probability (11-fold higher) of developing cSCC after transplant than patients in the very low-risk group (score ≤ 5).

    Figure 3 shows the Kaplan Meier estimator of the cSCC-free survival curve and risk table for each risk group.It shows that the probability of developing cSCC in the very low-risk group is significantly lower than that of the high-risk group, and about 20% of the subjects in the high-risk group developed cSCC 5 years after transplantation.In addition, log-rank test was performed to test the null hypothesis that there was no difference regarding the occurrence probability of cSCC among the four groups.The results in Table 5 show that the risk of developing cSCC in high-risk group is greater than that in the low and medium-risk groups.Significant differences (Pvalue < 0.001) were observed between every two groups.The cSCC risk in the high-risk group is respectively 9.16-fold, 2.18-fold, and 1.28-fold higher than that of the very low-risk, low-risk, and medium-risk group; the risk of the medium-risk group is respectively 7.12-fold and 1.69-fold higher than that of the very low-risk and low-risk group, and the risk of the low-risk group is 4.19-fold higher than that of the very low-risk group.

    Table 2 Univariate analysis of predictive variables associated with incidence probability of post-transplant cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma

    HLA: Human leukocyte antigen; PRA: Panel-reactive antibody; CI: Confidence interval.

    Table 3 Risk factors selected from multivariate analysis

    Mortality outcomes

    Most of the registry data including UNOS database showed that heart-transplant recipients with skin cancer revealed significantly lower overall survival than the recipients with no skin cancer.To demonstrate the consistency of our dataset, the survival experience of these two groups of patients were compared using landmark analysis[7].Median time from the date of transplantation to cSCC was taken as the landmark time point.Kaplan Meier survival curves of the two groups were displayed in Figure 4.The log-rank test demonstrates a significant difference between the two groups and the mortality risk of the group with skin cancer is 1.51-fold greater than its counterpart.

    Table 4 Risk score for the 5-yr development of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma after transplantation

    Table 5 Log-rank test to compare the cumulative incidence of post-transplant cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma between risk groups

    Prediction of cSCC without OKT3 and daclizumab

    Since induction drugs of OKT3 and daclizumab are not used currently, additional analysis without these two drugs was conducted.The analysis followed the same procedure as described in the Statistical Analysis section.The multivariate model excluding OKT3 and daclizumab was given in Table 6, which had six variables, including age, sex, HLA mismatch level, race, diagnosis at listing, and malignancy at listing.None of the rest of the induction drugs were significant and selected in the multivariate model.The AUCs for 5-year, 8-year, and 10-year post-transplant cSCC prediction were 0.79, 0.77, 0.77 respectively in the derivation set and 0.79, 0.76, 0.75 respectively in the validation set (Figure 5).Eliminating OKT3 and daclizumab slightly affected the AUCs (decreased by 0.01-0.02) in the validation set compared to the model with OKT3 and daclizumab.In addition, a new risk stratification model without OKT3 and daclizumab was developed, and the risk scores were given in Table 7.The scoring system without OKT3 and daclizumab divided patients into 4 risk groups: very lowrisk group (score ≤ 5), low-risk group (score = 6), medium-risk group (score = 7), highrisk group (score ≥ 8).The predicted and observed probabilities of developing cSCC 5 years after transplant in different risk groups were shown in Figure 6, and the Kaplan Meier estimator of the cSCC-free survival curve was given in Figure 7.Further, logrank test was done to compare the risk between different groups where patients were divided using the new scoring system, and significant differences were observed between every two groups (Table 8).The new stratification model without induction drugs provided comparable results to the model with OKT3 and daclizumab.

    Table 6 Risk factors selected from multivariate analysis without OKT3 and daclizumab

    Figure 1 Receiver operating characteristics curves of the multivariate model for the 5-yr, 8-yr and 10-yr post-transplant cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma prediction.

    Table 7 Risk score without OKT3 and daclizumab for the 5-yr development of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma after transplantation

    Figure 2 Predicted vs observed probabilities of developing cSCC 5 yr after transplant in different risk groups: very low-risk group (score ≤ 5), low-risk group (score = 6), medium-risk group (score = 7), high-risk group (score ≥ 8).

    DISCUSSION

    cSCC is a predominant skin malignancy among heart transplant recipients.Studies have been done to investigate the risk factors of post-transplant cSCC, but risk stratification and prediction have not been examined in the literature.This study conducted a retrospective study of the post-transplant event of cSCC for a large cohort of heart transplant patients in the UNOS registry and developed a risk score model to stratify patients into different risk groups.

    Table 8 Log-rank test to compare the cumulative incidence of post-transplant cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma between different risk groups where patients were divided using the scoring system without OKT3 and daclizumab

    Figure 3 Cumulative cSCC-free survival curves for different risk groups.

    In the univariate analysis, PRA against Class I and Class II antigens were identified as significant factors, but they were not significant in the multivariable analysis.Coronary artery disease was a risk factor in univariate analysis but was not selected in the multivariate model.The univariate analysis also identified congenital heart defect as a protective factor, but the observation did not hold up in multivariate analysis.The possible reason is that these two diseases are strongly correlated with patient age, thus the inclusion of age in the multivariate model eliminated the influence of these two diseases.

    Figure 4 Cumulative survival curves for heart transplant recipients with cSCC and with no cancer.

    Figure 5 Receiver operating characteristics curves of the multivariate model without OKT3 and daclizumab for the 5-yr, 8-yr and 10-yr post-transplant cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma prediction.

    Eight predictors, including age, gender, HLA mismatch level, race, patient’s malignancy at listing, patient’s diagnosis at listing, induction therapy with OKT3 or daclizumab were selected in the final multivariate model.Among these predictors, older age, male sex, and white race have been previously reported as significant risk factors in many studies[3,8,9].In addition, the multivariate model included the HLA mismatch level as a protective factor for cSCC, which is consistent with the observation in a recent study on the relationship between the HLA antigen mismatch level and the skin cancer incidence after heart and lung transplantation[10].Heart retransplant was identified as a significant risk factor as compared to dilated myopathy, which matches with a previous report that suggested re-transplant was a risk factorvscardiomyopathy[11].The multivariate model also showed that patients diagnosed with restrictive myopathy or hypertrophic myopathy before transplant had a higher risk of developing cSCC than patients who had other types of conditions.Recipients’ malignancy status is an indication of patients’ cancer history, which has been reported as a risk factor for skin cancer development in various studies[12,13], and was also identified as a risk factor for heart-transplant recipients in this study.In addition, the multivariate analysis revealed that induction therapy with OKT3 resulted in an increased incidence of cSCC, which is consistent with the observation reported in a previous study on a small cohort of heart transplant patients[3].Our analysis also found that induction with daclizumab significantly (Pvalue < 0.001) increased the risk of post-transplant cSCC.

    The risk score separated patients into four risk groups (Figure 2), and the observed and predicted probabilities of developing cSCC 5 years after transplantation in very low-risk, low-risk, medium-risk, and high-risk groups were 0.017vs0.010, 0.077vs0.076, 0.142vs0.133 and 0.195vs0.195, respectively.The cumulative incidence probability of post-transplant cSCC was compared between different risk groups (Figure 3).For the high-risk group, the cumulative incidence rate increased significantly with respect to time.The one-, three-, and five-year incidence probabilities in the high-risk group were 0.03, 0.12, and 0.19, respectively.The significant differences in the cumulative incidence rates among different risk groups show the effectiveness of the proposed risk stratification model.Furthermore, cSCC greatly increased the mortality after heart transplantation with a hazard ratio of 1.51 (Pvalue < 0.001) (Figure 4), which shows the importance of early screening and identification of cSCC among heart-transplant recipients.

    Figure 6 Predicted vs observed probabilities of developing cSCC 5 yr after transplant in different risk groups where patients were divided using the scoring system without OKT3 and daclizumab: very low-risk group (score ≤ 5), low-risk group (score = 6), medium-risk group (score = 7), high-risk group (score ≥ 8).

    Figure 7 Cumulative cSCC-free survival curves for different risk groups where patients were divided using the scoring system without OKT3 and daclizumab.

    Limits of the study

    The study has limitations which are discussed here.Firstly, this is a retrospective study using a single data source for the derivation and the validation cohorts.Missing data and poor data quality are generally recognized as drawbacks of retrospective studies.Thus, the results will need to be replicated in a separate patient population and ideally prospectively.Secondly, sunshine exposure has been identified as a risk factor for skin cancer but was not included in the current study.Ultraviolet exposure information such as latitude, average daily total global solar radiation, or patients' reports of previous sun exposure was used in many studies to assess the risk of ultraviolet exposure on skin cancer.However, it was previously reported that such information was not reliable biomarkers of ultraviolet radiation[9], and these data were not reported in the UNOS database.

    In addition, the UNOS database contains missing and inaccurate reporting.Some posttransplant malignancy forms submitted to the Organ Procurement Transplant Network registry have been reported to be incomplete[9,14].To minimize the possible bias due to incomplete reports, our analysis only used patient records with a clear indication of post-transplant malignancy status.That is, the records with unknown post-transplant malignancy status were excluded for the analysis.

    CONCLUSION

    In conclusion, this study developed a risk prediction model for post-transplant cSCC using a group of basic demographic and clinical parameters that can be estimated in every local center.The model provides a simple tool to aid clinical judgment for pretransplant counseling and post-transplant health management.Identification of highrisk patients can facilitate the diagnosis of skin cancer in an early stage and potentially reduce morbidity and mortality after heart transplantation.

    ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS

    Research background

    Heart transplant recipients are at higher risk of developing skin cancer than the general population due to the long-term immunosuppression treatment.Cancer has been reported as one of the major causes of morbidity and mortality for patients after heart transplantation.

    Research motivation

    Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is reported as the most common skin cancer in adult heart transplant recipients.This study was initiated to develop a risk stratification model using the United Network for Organ Sharing database in order to identify important risk factors and predict post-transplant incidence of cSCC.Among the different types of skin cancers, cSCC is the most common type of cancer.Timely screening and better management would help in prevention of long-term complications.

    Research objectives

    To identify risk factors and predict the incidence of cSCC for heart transplant recipients.Develop a risk prediction model for cSCC.

    Research methods

    The whole dataset was randomly divided into a derivation set (80%) and a validation set (20%).Uni- and multivariate Cox regression were done to identify significant risk factors associated with the development of cSCC.Receiver operating characteristics curves were generated and area under the curve (AUC) was calculated to assess the accuracy of the prediction model.

    Research results

    Of the 23736 heart-transplant recipients in the database during the study period, 1827 were reported to have cSCC.Significant predictors of post-transplant cSCC were older age, male sex, white race, recipient and donor human leukocyte antigen mismatch level, malignancy at listing, a diagnosis of restrictive myopathy or hypertrophic myopathy, re-transplantation of the heart, and induction therapy with OKT3 or daclizumab.The multivariate model was used to predict the 5-, 8- and 10-year incidence of cSCC and respectively provided AUC of 0.79, 0.78, and 0.77 in the derivation set and 0.80, 0.78, and 0.77 in the validation set.The risk scoring system assigned each patient with a risk score within the range of 0-11.Based on the scores they were stratified into 4 different risk groups.The predicted and observed 5-year probability of developing cSCC match well among different risk groups.In addition,the log-rank test indicated significantly different cSCC-free survival across different groups.

    Research conclusions

    A risk prediction model for cSCC among heart-transplant recipients has been generated for the first time.It offers a c-statistic of ≥ 0.77 in both derivation and validation sets.

    Research perspectives

    Using a risk prediction score for screening of adult cardiac allograft recipients for early detection of cSCC can become a reality.The risk prediction score can be further validated in independent data sets in the future.Identification of risk factors is an important step towards the prevention of cSCC in this population.

    伊人久久国产一区二区| 欧美一级a爱片免费观看看| 99九九在线精品视频| 王馨瑶露胸无遮挡在线观看| 亚洲精品av麻豆狂野| 人人澡人人妻人| 欧美另类一区| 国产亚洲最大av| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 久久午夜综合久久蜜桃| 国产精品欧美亚洲77777| 有码 亚洲区| 国产亚洲最大av| 欧美日韩国产mv在线观看视频| 欧美亚洲日本最大视频资源| 在线精品无人区一区二区三| 制服诱惑二区| 欧美日韩视频高清一区二区三区二| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影小说| 国产乱人偷精品视频| 精品人妻熟女毛片av久久网站| 天堂中文最新版在线下载| 视频区图区小说| 人人澡人人妻人| 在线免费观看不下载黄p国产| 日韩视频在线欧美| 国产成人精品无人区| 色婷婷av一区二区三区视频| 亚洲国产最新在线播放| 在线观看人妻少妇| 色网站视频免费| 最新中文字幕久久久久| 午夜福利视频精品| 三上悠亚av全集在线观看| 午夜福利,免费看| 亚洲av欧美aⅴ国产| 一区二区三区精品91| 免费播放大片免费观看视频在线观看| 久久青草综合色| 最近2019中文字幕mv第一页| 99热6这里只有精品| 十八禁高潮呻吟视频| 中文字幕人妻熟人妻熟丝袜美| av视频免费观看在线观看| 久久人妻熟女aⅴ| 国产一区二区在线观看av| xxxhd国产人妻xxx| 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片| 国产伦理片在线播放av一区| 成人手机av| 一级毛片电影观看| 亚洲五月色婷婷综合| 日韩精品免费视频一区二区三区 | 免费av不卡在线播放| 制服诱惑二区| 久久国产亚洲av麻豆专区| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 欧美老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 欧美亚洲 丝袜 人妻 在线| 国产精品免费大片| 色婷婷久久久亚洲欧美| 成年女人在线观看亚洲视频| 欧美三级亚洲精品| av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看| 午夜老司机福利剧场| 乱人伦中国视频| 性高湖久久久久久久久免费观看| 亚洲综合色惰| 国产精品久久久久成人av| 新久久久久国产一级毛片| 国产男女超爽视频在线观看| 亚洲av成人精品一二三区| 日日爽夜夜爽网站| 国产乱人偷精品视频| 免费高清在线观看日韩| 97超视频在线观看视频| 99久国产av精品国产电影| 中文字幕人妻熟人妻熟丝袜美| 亚洲成色77777| 亚洲欧洲国产日韩| 一级毛片我不卡| 亚洲精品一区蜜桃| 免费观看av网站的网址| 五月玫瑰六月丁香| 成年人午夜在线观看视频| 久久久久久久亚洲中文字幕| 成人毛片a级毛片在线播放| 啦啦啦在线观看免费高清www| 大香蕉97超碰在线| 考比视频在线观看| 欧美亚洲 丝袜 人妻 在线| 中国国产av一级| 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的| 少妇的逼水好多| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 午夜免费鲁丝| 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 日韩熟女老妇一区二区性免费视频| 国产欧美日韩综合在线一区二区| 91久久精品国产一区二区成人| 中文字幕制服av| 黄色配什么色好看| 精品国产一区二区久久| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 精品一品国产午夜福利视频| 色网站视频免费| 七月丁香在线播放| 一级毛片我不卡| 日本91视频免费播放| 熟女电影av网| 日本猛色少妇xxxxx猛交久久| 卡戴珊不雅视频在线播放| 夜夜骑夜夜射夜夜干| 亚洲精品日韩在线中文字幕| 蜜臀久久99精品久久宅男| 日本vs欧美在线观看视频| 国产成人免费观看mmmm| 色吧在线观看| 9色porny在线观看| 简卡轻食公司| 欧美97在线视频| 久久精品人人爽人人爽视色| 亚洲美女黄色视频免费看| 亚洲精品色激情综合| 少妇猛男粗大的猛烈进出视频| 51国产日韩欧美| 丝袜喷水一区| 女性生殖器流出的白浆| 久久久午夜欧美精品| 精品一区二区免费观看| 国产日韩一区二区三区精品不卡 | 欧美丝袜亚洲另类| 国产精品国产av在线观看| 日韩人妻高清精品专区| 日韩三级伦理在线观看| 黄色毛片三级朝国网站| 国产 精品1| 十八禁高潮呻吟视频| 色5月婷婷丁香| 99视频精品全部免费 在线| 午夜av观看不卡| 国产亚洲午夜精品一区二区久久| 国产亚洲精品久久久com| 国产黄色视频一区二区在线观看| 水蜜桃什么品种好| 日本黄色片子视频| 91成人精品电影| 在线精品无人区一区二区三| 亚洲av日韩在线播放| 26uuu在线亚洲综合色| 一级片'在线观看视频| 久久精品久久精品一区二区三区| 欧美xxxx性猛交bbbb| 亚洲少妇的诱惑av| 免费看光身美女| 亚洲精品日韩在线中文字幕| 久久久久久伊人网av| 青春草亚洲视频在线观看| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影小说| 亚洲图色成人| 男女边摸边吃奶| 一区二区三区四区激情视频| 久久久国产欧美日韩av| 蜜臀久久99精品久久宅男| 91久久精品国产一区二区成人| 午夜福利视频在线观看免费| 大香蕉久久成人网| 男男h啪啪无遮挡| 国产成人精品一,二区| 久久久亚洲精品成人影院| 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站| 久久久久久久久久久丰满| 亚洲国产精品一区二区三区在线| 日本av手机在线免费观看| 伊人久久国产一区二区| 久久99蜜桃精品久久| 91精品伊人久久大香线蕉| 一级爰片在线观看| 久久99蜜桃精品久久| 好男人视频免费观看在线| 中文字幕久久专区| 26uuu在线亚洲综合色| 大香蕉97超碰在线| 日本黄色日本黄色录像| 九色成人免费人妻av| 久久精品久久久久久久性| 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜| 在线观看三级黄色| 特大巨黑吊av在线直播| 久久热精品热| 午夜老司机福利剧场| 另类亚洲欧美激情| 色吧在线观看| 99热这里只有是精品在线观看| 看十八女毛片水多多多| 日韩强制内射视频| 丝袜喷水一区| 街头女战士在线观看网站| 美女内射精品一级片tv| 欧美激情 高清一区二区三区| 亚洲国产av新网站| 欧美精品亚洲一区二区| 伦理电影大哥的女人| 26uuu在线亚洲综合色| 亚洲国产最新在线播放| 亚洲精品成人av观看孕妇| 99国产精品免费福利视频| 国产在线免费精品| 日韩不卡一区二区三区视频在线| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 国产伦理片在线播放av一区| av福利片在线| 麻豆乱淫一区二区| 人妻一区二区av| 国产成人91sexporn| 精品国产国语对白av| 赤兔流量卡办理| 亚洲av国产av综合av卡| 欧美性感艳星| 日韩 亚洲 欧美在线| 亚洲,一卡二卡三卡| 色吧在线观看| 边亲边吃奶的免费视频| 久久精品夜色国产| 亚洲精品中文字幕在线视频| 久久国产精品男人的天堂亚洲 | av电影中文网址| a 毛片基地| av电影中文网址| 高清在线视频一区二区三区| 韩国av在线不卡| 少妇 在线观看| 18禁观看日本| 欧美变态另类bdsm刘玥| 国产一区二区三区综合在线观看 | 欧美日韩av久久| 国产精品蜜桃在线观看| 国产精品麻豆人妻色哟哟久久| 日本av免费视频播放| 一级片'在线观看视频| 97在线视频观看| 国产精品久久久久久av不卡| 久久久a久久爽久久v久久| 亚洲美女黄色视频免费看| 久久青草综合色| 99热这里只有精品一区| 男的添女的下面高潮视频| 一二三四中文在线观看免费高清| 成年av动漫网址| 看十八女毛片水多多多| 国产成人精品婷婷| 久久精品夜色国产| 久久99一区二区三区| 国产国拍精品亚洲av在线观看| 少妇人妻精品综合一区二区| 色5月婷婷丁香| 欧美精品国产亚洲| 99热全是精品| 国产精品.久久久| 大码成人一级视频| 国产 精品1| 亚洲欧美成人精品一区二区| 草草在线视频免费看| 日韩亚洲欧美综合| 日韩视频在线欧美| 成人国产av品久久久| 久久午夜综合久久蜜桃| 特大巨黑吊av在线直播| 永久网站在线| 中文字幕最新亚洲高清| 精品久久久噜噜| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看 | 国产亚洲av片在线观看秒播厂| 精品一品国产午夜福利视频| 国产午夜精品一二区理论片| 伦精品一区二区三区| 女性被躁到高潮视频| 欧美精品国产亚洲| 激情五月婷婷亚洲| 成人18禁高潮啪啪吃奶动态图 | 日产精品乱码卡一卡2卡三| 国产免费一级a男人的天堂| 老司机影院毛片| 男的添女的下面高潮视频| 有码 亚洲区| 精品国产国语对白av| 啦啦啦啦在线视频资源| 国产色婷婷99| 久久精品国产亚洲av涩爱| 久久99一区二区三区| 一级片'在线观看视频| 丝袜美足系列| 特大巨黑吊av在线直播| 欧美97在线视频| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区 | 国产成人精品福利久久| 亚洲美女黄色视频免费看| 免费观看无遮挡的男女| 亚洲第一av免费看| av播播在线观看一区| 久久国内精品自在自线图片| 国产成人freesex在线| 十分钟在线观看高清视频www| 久久久久久久国产电影| 国产永久视频网站| 国产精品久久久久成人av| 一本一本久久a久久精品综合妖精 国产伦在线观看视频一区 | 久久久久久久大尺度免费视频| 看十八女毛片水多多多| 啦啦啦视频在线资源免费观看| 国产成人精品一,二区| 少妇人妻久久综合中文| 人妻少妇偷人精品九色| 波野结衣二区三区在线| 大片电影免费在线观看免费| 国产成人精品一,二区| 美女国产视频在线观看| 热re99久久精品国产66热6| 视频在线观看一区二区三区| 黄色毛片三级朝国网站| 亚洲在久久综合| 97超视频在线观看视频| 亚洲少妇的诱惑av| 国产精品一国产av| 亚洲av综合色区一区| 欧美日韩综合久久久久久| 欧美人与性动交α欧美精品济南到 | 在线免费观看不下载黄p国产| 女人久久www免费人成看片| 午夜激情久久久久久久| 精品一品国产午夜福利视频| 久久久久精品久久久久真实原创| 熟妇人妻不卡中文字幕| 日本午夜av视频| 老司机亚洲免费影院| 精品国产露脸久久av麻豆| 国产高清国产精品国产三级| 三上悠亚av全集在线观看| 国产精品 国内视频| 在线观看免费日韩欧美大片 | 国产一区二区三区综合在线观看 | 久久韩国三级中文字幕| 精品少妇黑人巨大在线播放| √禁漫天堂资源中文www| 天天影视国产精品| 日产精品乱码卡一卡2卡三| 最近的中文字幕免费完整| 国产免费现黄频在线看| 久久99热这里只频精品6学生| 久久久久久久国产电影| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄| 成人二区视频| 日韩一本色道免费dvd| 精品人妻熟女av久视频| 熟女电影av网| 国产精品熟女久久久久浪| 日本黄色日本黄色录像| 久久久久久久精品精品| 国产av一区二区精品久久| 多毛熟女@视频| 国产爽快片一区二区三区| 国产 一区精品| 女性被躁到高潮视频| 日本黄大片高清| 日本爱情动作片www.在线观看| 久久精品国产亚洲av涩爱| 日韩三级伦理在线观看| 2021少妇久久久久久久久久久| 精品国产一区二区三区久久久樱花| 人人妻人人添人人爽欧美一区卜| 看免费成人av毛片| 五月玫瑰六月丁香| 欧美97在线视频| 街头女战士在线观看网站| 97精品久久久久久久久久精品| 看十八女毛片水多多多| 国语对白做爰xxxⅹ性视频网站| 97超碰精品成人国产| 男女国产视频网站| 一级毛片aaaaaa免费看小| 啦啦啦在线观看免费高清www| 丝袜在线中文字幕| 久久精品国产自在天天线| 国产精品蜜桃在线观看| 蜜臀久久99精品久久宅男| 青春草国产在线视频| 日本黄大片高清| 一本一本综合久久| 夜夜看夜夜爽夜夜摸| 亚洲精品色激情综合| 夜夜爽夜夜爽视频| av福利片在线| 国产精品久久久久久精品古装| 肉色欧美久久久久久久蜜桃| 简卡轻食公司| 在线观看免费日韩欧美大片 | 国产精品 国内视频| 国产免费一区二区三区四区乱码| 亚洲第一区二区三区不卡| 黄色毛片三级朝国网站| 免费高清在线观看日韩| 国精品久久久久久国模美| videosex国产| 久久青草综合色| 五月开心婷婷网| 99九九线精品视频在线观看视频| 一个人看视频在线观看www免费| 欧美少妇被猛烈插入视频| 少妇的逼水好多| 777米奇影视久久| 91成人精品电影| 日韩不卡一区二区三区视频在线| 夜夜骑夜夜射夜夜干| 免费观看在线日韩| av卡一久久| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 亚洲,一卡二卡三卡| 波野结衣二区三区在线| 免费观看无遮挡的男女| 亚洲成人av在线免费| 亚洲av电影在线观看一区二区三区| 天天影视国产精品| 男女免费视频国产| 国产在视频线精品| 永久免费av网站大全| 青青草视频在线视频观看| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区 | 97在线视频观看| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 超碰97精品在线观看| 精品国产露脸久久av麻豆| 啦啦啦在线观看免费高清www| 午夜激情福利司机影院| 国产精品.久久久| 国产综合精华液| 三级国产精品片| 国产精品99久久久久久久久| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| 人妻少妇偷人精品九色| h视频一区二区三区| 亚洲激情五月婷婷啪啪| 一级毛片我不卡| 蜜桃在线观看..| 各种免费的搞黄视频| 少妇人妻精品综合一区二区| 欧美日本中文国产一区发布| 一级a做视频免费观看| 另类精品久久| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看 | 国产av国产精品国产| 国产在线一区二区三区精| 国产精品无大码| 免费黄色在线免费观看| 欧美日韩视频精品一区| 少妇熟女欧美另类| 3wmmmm亚洲av在线观看| av在线老鸭窝| 国产一区亚洲一区在线观看| 亚洲人成网站在线观看播放| av国产精品久久久久影院| 国产毛片在线视频| videossex国产| 伦理电影大哥的女人| 大香蕉97超碰在线| 国产极品天堂在线| 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡 | 国产av国产精品国产| 久久国产精品大桥未久av| av不卡在线播放| 日本免费在线观看一区| 最近的中文字幕免费完整| 亚洲av日韩在线播放| 国产精品国产三级国产专区5o| 午夜福利网站1000一区二区三区| 18禁裸乳无遮挡动漫免费视频| 久久人人爽人人片av| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠久久av| 18禁在线无遮挡免费观看视频| 成人毛片60女人毛片免费| 亚洲精品国产av成人精品| 中文天堂在线官网| 婷婷成人精品国产| 久久99蜜桃精品久久| 国产在线一区二区三区精| 日韩中字成人| 国产日韩欧美在线精品| 人人妻人人澡人人看| 亚洲av成人精品一区久久| 一本—道久久a久久精品蜜桃钙片| 午夜免费观看性视频| 精品久久久久久久久av| 在线精品无人区一区二区三| 校园人妻丝袜中文字幕| 精品熟女少妇av免费看| 午夜91福利影院| 男女啪啪激烈高潮av片| 简卡轻食公司| av福利片在线| 91精品国产九色| 亚州av有码| 国产精品人妻久久久久久| 国产日韩一区二区三区精品不卡 | 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久| 国产精品麻豆人妻色哟哟久久| 精品久久久久久电影网| 国产av一区二区精品久久| 国产 一区精品| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三区在线 | 亚洲图色成人| 色哟哟·www| 日韩一区二区三区影片| 少妇人妻久久综合中文| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜| 国产精品一区www在线观看| 美女大奶头黄色视频| 在线亚洲精品国产二区图片欧美 | 97在线人人人人妻| 久久99蜜桃精品久久| a级毛色黄片| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 国产日韩欧美亚洲二区| 夫妻午夜视频| 少妇被粗大的猛进出69影院 | 亚洲三级黄色毛片| 多毛熟女@视频| 看十八女毛片水多多多| 狂野欧美激情性bbbbbb| 亚洲怡红院男人天堂| 欧美变态另类bdsm刘玥| 久久午夜福利片| 国产黄色免费在线视频| 国产乱人偷精品视频| 久久ye,这里只有精品| 成人亚洲欧美一区二区av| 少妇熟女欧美另类| 女人精品久久久久毛片| 在线播放无遮挡| videossex国产| 汤姆久久久久久久影院中文字幕| 乱人伦中国视频| av天堂久久9| 精品国产露脸久久av麻豆| 韩国高清视频一区二区三区| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| 十八禁网站网址无遮挡| 亚洲国产色片| 少妇被粗大猛烈的视频| 久久这里有精品视频免费| 亚洲美女黄色视频免费看| 最近最新中文字幕免费大全7| 麻豆精品久久久久久蜜桃| kizo精华| 制服人妻中文乱码| 热99久久久久精品小说推荐| 好男人视频免费观看在线| 一级毛片黄色毛片免费观看视频| 97精品久久久久久久久久精品| 蜜臀久久99精品久久宅男| 精品亚洲成a人片在线观看| 精品一区在线观看国产| 麻豆成人av视频| 最近手机中文字幕大全| 九九在线视频观看精品| 热re99久久精品国产66热6| 汤姆久久久久久久影院中文字幕| 飞空精品影院首页| 亚洲欧洲日产国产| 考比视频在线观看| 欧美日韩国产mv在线观看视频| 欧美三级亚洲精品| 欧美 日韩 精品 国产| 亚洲国产av影院在线观看| 另类亚洲欧美激情| 国产成人av激情在线播放 | 欧美日韩综合久久久久久| 亚洲精品日本国产第一区| 成人毛片a级毛片在线播放| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| 肉色欧美久久久久久久蜜桃| 久久久国产一区二区| 中文字幕精品免费在线观看视频 | 国产高清不卡午夜福利| 亚洲精品国产色婷婷电影| 久久久久国产网址| 亚洲高清免费不卡视频| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区国产| 18在线观看网站| 免费黄网站久久成人精品| 在线观看三级黄色| 国内精品宾馆在线| 日本av免费视频播放| 免费黄频网站在线观看国产| 久久影院123| 国产在线视频一区二区| 99久国产av精品国产电影| av在线观看视频网站免费| 亚洲国产欧美日韩在线播放| 一级毛片 在线播放| 国产淫语在线视频| 色婷婷av一区二区三区视频| 乱人伦中国视频| 男女边吃奶边做爰视频| 伦精品一区二区三区| 久久人人爽av亚洲精品天堂| www.av在线官网国产| 午夜免费鲁丝| 人妻 亚洲 视频| 一区二区三区四区激情视频| 99视频精品全部免费 在线| 热re99久久国产66热| 黄色一级大片看看|