[ISOTOPIC DISSECTION].

J. Bernier

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The Efficacy and Toxicity of Afatinib in Advanced EGFR-positive Non-Small-cell Lung Cancer Patients after Failure of First-Generation Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Yaxiong Zhang,Siyu Miao,Fang Wang,Wenfeng Fang,Gang Chen,Xi Chen,Yan Fang,Xiaodan Huang,Meimei Wu,Yan Huang,Li Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd.2017.06.08

2017-01-01

Journal of Thoracic Disease

Abstract:The first generation epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs), gefitinib and erlotinib, have become the standard first-line treatment for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with EGFR mutation. However, there was no pooled analysis focused on the usage of the second-generation TKI, afatinib, in advanced EGFR-positive NSCLC patients after failure of first generation TKIs. Therefore, a meta-analysis was conducted to solve the above question.Electronic databases were searched for eligible literatures. ORR (objective response rate), DCR (disease controlled rate), PFS (progression-free survival), OS (overall survival) and primary grade 3/4 adverse events were pooled with the corresponding 95% confidence interval using R software. Sensitivity analyses and heterogeneity were quantitatively evaluated.A total of 545 EGFR-positive patients were available for analysis from five studies after detailed screening from 909 relevant studies. The pooled ORR and DCR of afatinib in EGFR-positive patients after failure of the first generation EGFR-TKIs were 0.12 (0.08-0.19) and 0.60 (0.53-0.68), respectively. Besides, the 6 m-PFS rate, 1 y-PFS rate and 6 m-OS rate were 0.26 (0.22-0.30), 0.08 (0.06-0.10) and 0.74 (0.56-0.86). The grade 3/4 rate of diarrhea and that of skin deformity were 0.23 (0.10-0.46) and 0.14 (0.05-0.33), respectively. Sensitivity analyses revealed similar results with lower heterogeneity.Considering the efficacy, toxicity and current availability, afatinib could be a therapeutic option for advanced EGFR mutated NSCLC patients after the failure of 1st-generation TKIs.
First-Generation Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Inhibitors Plus Antiangiogenic Drugs Versus Third-Generation Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Inhibitors in Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Mirta Mosca,Nicole Conci,Alessandro Di Federico,Valentina Tateo,Valentina Favorito,Arianna Zappi,Francesco Gelsomino,Andrea De Giglio

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/PO.23.00073

Abstract:Purpose: Epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) revolutionized the therapeutic landscape of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, despite significant survival improvement, the emergence of resistance mechanisms represents a common event. In this meta-analysis, we compared the efficacy and safety of third-generation EGFR-TKIs, the current standard of care, to first-generation EGFR-TKIs with antiangiogenic drugs for the first-line treatment of NSCLC harboring EGFR mutations. Materials and methods: Randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) reporting survival data published before September 1, 2022, were searched through the MEDLINE databases (PubMed), the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Central Register of Controlled Trials (Wiley). Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events (≥3 TRAEs) data were analyzed. Results: Twelve RCTs were included in our meta-analysis, with a total of 3,565 patients. We observed that third-generation EGFR-TKIs and first-generation EGFR-TKIs combined with antiangiogenic drugs provided a similar OS benefit over first-generation EGFR-TKIs in any of the subgroups. However, we indirectly observed a greater PFS benefit of third-generation EGFR-TKIs over first-generation EGFR-TKIs in females, never-smokers, in patients harboring exon 19 deletions, and in those with brain metastasis, as compared with using first-generation EGFR-TKIs plus antiangiogenic drugs. The ORR did not differ between the combination strategy and third-generation EGFR-TKIs. Finally, the risk of developing grade ≥3 TRAEs was higher using the combination of first-generation EGFR-TKIs and antiangiogenic drugs over first-generation EGFR-TKIs than third-generation EGFR-TKIs over first-generation EGFR-TKIs. Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests that the combination strategy may provide an alternative to third-generation EGFR-TKIs, but more data are needed to determine the predictive clinicopathologic characteristics that can influence the treatment choice. Until then, third-generation EGFR-TKIs still represent the first choice in advanced NSCLC harboring EGFR mutations.
Investigating the Efficacy of EGFR-TKIs and Anti-VEGFR Combination in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Prashant Sakharkar,Sonali Kurup,Subrata Deb,Kaitlin Assaad,Dayna Gesinski,Erysa J. Gayle

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16061188

2024-03-18

Cancers

Abstract:Introduction: The epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) in combination with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) agents have shown improved survival outcomes in recent studies. However, its efficacy related to survival outcomes as a first- or second-line agent and based on generations remains to be explored. This study estimated the survival outcomes of EGFR-TKIs plus anti-VEGFR in combination in defined populations of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients overall, as a first- or second line of treatment, with different generations of EGFR-TKIs and EGFR-TKIs plus bevacizumab combination as a subgroup. Methods: A literature search was conducted using PubMed, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases through June 2023 to identify primary research reporting the survival outcomes of EGFR-TKIs in combination with anti-VEGFR agents in patients with advanced NSCLC. Studies that were single-arm, published in non-English languages, and had missing data on survival outcomes were excluded. A meta-analysis was conducted to generate pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Methodological quality and risk of bias in studies were assessed using the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions risk of bias tool. Results: A total of 20 randomized controlled trials were included in the qualitative synthesis, and 11 (2182 participants) were included in the meta-analysis. Patients' median age ranged from 58 to 68 years; 36% to 70% of patients were female; most of them had IIIa/b to IV stage cancer. In meta-analyses, the EGFR-TKIs plus anti-VEGFR combination resulted in improved PFS (HR, 0.73; 95% CI: 0.61, 0.86; p < 0.00001) in patients with advanced NSCLC but had no impact on OS (HR, 0.93; 95% CI: 0.79, 1.10; p = 0.41). The first line of treatment and first-generation EGFR-TKIs with the combination also improved the PFS (HR, 0.64; 95% CI: 0.57, 0.71; p < 0.00001; HR, 0.63; 95% CI: 0.56, 0.71; p < 0.00001) respectively, however, had no impact on OS. Conclusions: Our meta-analysis indicated EGFR-TKIs with anti-VEGFR in combination not only improved overall PFS but also showed similar results to a first line and first-generation agent compared to EGFR-TKI alone.

oncology
Clinical outcomes and secondary epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) T790M mutation among first‐line gefitinib, erlotinib and afatinib‐treated non‐small cell lung cancer patients with activating EGFR mutations

Yen‐Ting Lin,Jin‐Shing Chen,Wei‐Yu Liao,Chao‐Chi Ho,Chia‐Lin Hsu,Ching‐Yao Yang,Kuan‐Yu Chen,Jih‐Hsiang Lee,Zhong‐Zhe Lin,Jin‐Yuan Shih,James Chih‐Hsin Yang,Chong‐Jen Yu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.32025

2019-01-05

International Journal of Cancer

Abstract:Gefitinib, erlotinib and afatinib are approved for first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) bearing an activating epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation. However, the clinical outcomes among the three EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are still controversial. We aimed to evaluate clinical outcomes and secondary EGFR T790M mutation among the three EGFR TKIs. From May 2014 to January 2016, a total of 301 patients received treatment with gefitinib, erlotinib or afatinib, for first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC with an activating EGFR mutation, based on their clinicians' choice. The median overall survival (OS) was 37.0 months. Although the baseline characteristics of patients were unequal, progression-free survival and OS did not differ among the 3 groups. Multivariate analysis found that gefitinib (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.29, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-9.46, p = 0.027), EGFR TKI treatment duration more than 13 months (aOR 3.16, 95% CI, 1.20-8.33, p = 0.020), male (aOR 3.25, 95% CI, 1.10-9.66, p = 0.034), initial liver metastasis (aOR 4.97, 95% CI 1.18-20.96, p = 0.029) and uncommon EGFR mutation (aOR 0.14, 95% CI, 0.02-0.97, compared to EGFR deletion 19, p = 0.047) were independent factors for secondary T790M mutation. In real-world practice, choosing first line EGFR TKI based on the patients' clinical characteristics yielded good clinical outcomes. First-line gefitinib, longer EGFR TKI treatment duration, male, initial liver metastasis and uncommon EGFR mutations may be independent factors for secondary EGFR T790M mutation.

oncology
First‐line treatment with irreversible tyrosine kinase inhibitors associated with longer OS in EGFR mutation‐positive non‐small cell lung cancer

Po‐Lan Su,Chian‐Wei Chen,Yi‐Lin Wu,Chien‐Chung Lin,Wu‐Chou Su

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1759-7714.13462

IF: 3.223

2020-12-18

Thoracic Cancer

Abstract:<section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Background</h3><p>Few studies have compared the efficacy of the irreversible epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR‐TKI), afatinib, with that of reversible EGFR‐TKIs. Therefore, this study assessed the effectiveness of afatinib, erlotinib, and gefitinib in terms of OS (overall survival) and progression‐free survival (PFS) in <i>EGFR</i> mutation‐positive advanced non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. </p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Methods</h3><p>Patients with <i>EGFR</i> mutation‐positive advanced NSCLC who sought treatment from December 2013 to June 2018, at a tertiary referral center were retrospectively analyzed. These patients were treated with afatinib or a reversible EGFR‐TKI (erlotinib or gefitinib) until disease progression, intolerable adverse events, or death. The Kaplan‐Meier and log‐rank tests were then used to compare the OS and PFS of the patients. We further analyzed the survival differences among the subgroup of patients without brain metastases. </p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Results</h3><p>Of the 363 patients enrolled, 134 and 229 received first‐line afatinib and first‐line reversible EGFR‐TKI, respectively. Those given afatinib had better OS (39.3 vs. 26.0 months; HR 0.65, <i>P</i> = 0.033) and PFS (14.1 vs.11.2 months; HR 0.58, <i>P</i> < 0.001). Of the 246 patients without brain metastases, 93 and 153 received first‐line afatinib and a first‐line reversible EGFR‐TKI, respectively. Those given afatinib had a better OS (52.6 vs. 24.9 months; HR 0.62, <i>P =</i> 0.0030) and PFS (17.7 vs. 11.1 months; HR 0.51, <i>P</i> < 0.001). The survival benefit was more significant in the subgroup of patients with L858R substitutions. </p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Conclusions</h3><p>The results indicated that afatnib resulted in significantly better OS and PFS than gefitnib and erlotinib for <i>EGFR</i> mutation‐positive advanced NSCLC patients without brain metastases. </p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Key points</h3><p><b>Significant findings of the study</b></p><p>Afatnib resulted in significantly better overall survival and progression‐free survival than gefitnib and erlotinib for <i>EGFR</i> mutation‐positive advanced non‐small cell lung cancer patients without brain metastases. </p><p><b>What this study adds</b></p><p>This study helps fill the gap in our limited understanding of the differences in the efficacy of the irreversible epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR‐TKI), afatinib, with that of reversible EGFR‐TKIs.</p></section>

oncology,respiratory system
First-line therapeutic strategy for patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer with Leu858Arg epidermal growth factor receptor mutations: a Bayesian network meta-analysis

Chongxiang Chen,Chunning Zhang,Huaming Lin,Qianyin Liu,Limian Wu,Chengzhi Zhou,Jiexia Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/20406223221125706

2022-10-19

Therapeutic Advances in Chronic Disease

Abstract:Therapeutic Advances in Chronic Disease, Volume 13, Issue , January-December 2022. Aim:The objective of this network meta-analysis was to determine the most useful first-line therapeutic strategy for patients with advanced (IIIB/IV or relapsed) non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) Leu858Arg or EGFR 19del mutations.Methods:PubMed, the Web of Science, Medline, and reports of the top three world cancer conferences (WCLC, ESMO, and ASCO) were searched for appropriated randomized controlled studies (RCTs) discussing the use of various generations of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs; gefitinib, erlotinib, icotinib, afatinib, dacomitinib, osimertinib, aumolertinib), chemotherapy [pemetrexed-based chemotherapy (PC), non-pemetrexed-based chemotherapy (NPC)], and different combined therapies (osimertinib plus bevacizumab, afatinib plus cetuximab, erlotinib plus bevacizumab, erlotinib plus ramucirumab, gefitinib plus apatinib, gefitinib plus PC, and gefitinib plus pemetrexed) to treat patients with advanced NSCLC with EGFR Leu858Arg or 19del mutations. OpenBugs and Stata software were used to analyze the data.Results:We included 21 studies with 16 arms (including 2479 cases with EGFR Leu858Arg mutations and 3325 cases with EGFR 19del mutations). Among patients with NSCLC with EGFR Leu858Arg mutations, compared with the first-generation TKIs (such as gefitinib), the second- or third-generation TKIs [dacomitinib: hazard ratio (HR) = 0.63; 95% confidence index (CI) = (0.45, 0.89); osimertinib: HR = 0.63; 95% CI = (0.42, 0.97)] showed significant benefits in improving progression-free survival (PFS), as did afatinib plus cetuximab [HR = 1.98; 95% CI = (1.01, 3.95)], erlotinib plus bevacizumab [HR = 1.79; 95% CI = (1.22, 2.62)], and erlotinib plus ramucirumab [HR = 1.62; 95% CI = (1.07, 2.48)]. In terms of overall survival (OS), these 16 arms showed no significant differences between each other (p > 0.05). Among patients with NSCLC with EGFR 19del mutations, compared with the first- or second-generation TKIs (such as gefitinib and afatinib), aumolertinib [versus gefitinib: HR = 0.39; 95% CI = (0.28, 0.55) versus afatinib: HR = 0.53; 95% CI = (0.35, 0.84)] and osimertinib [versus gefitinib: HR = 0.40; 95% CI = (0.32, 0.51) versus afatinib: HR = 0.53, 95% CI = (0.38, 0.79)] showed significantly beneficial effects. Among these first-line therapeutic strategies for patients with EGFR Leu858Arg mutations, the combination of afatinib and cetuximab ranked as the best to prolong PFS (33.0%). For NSCLC patients with 19del mutations, however, osimertinib plus bevacizumab was the best at prolonging PFS (84.3%).Conclusion:For NSCLC patients with EGFR Leu858Arg mutations, the second-generation TKIs, the third-generation TKIs, and the combined treatments showed better efficacy than the first-generation TKIs for PFS. There were, however, no significant differences between each group for OS.

pharmacology & pharmacy
Mefatinib As First-Line Treatment of EGFR Sensitizing Mutation-Positive Non-Small-cell Lung Cancer: A Phase III Efficacy and Biomarker Study.

Jia Yu,Caicun Zhou,Wang Kai,Qiming Wang,Hongrui Niu,Cheng-Zhi Zhou,Panwen Tian,Wu Zhuang,Jie Li,Jing Wang,Xu Sun,Bing Yu,Chaonan Zhu,Jianghua Chen,June Xu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2024.42.16_suppl.8546

IF: 45.3

2024-01-01

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract:8546 Background: Mefatinib is an irreversible and highly effective EGFR and HER2 dual inhibitor. Although EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors are standard 1st line therapy for EGFR mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), co-mutations, such as TP53 are associated with shorter PFS of EGFR TKI. Methods: Patients newly diagnosed with EGFR exon 19 deletion (19 del) or exon 21 L858R mutant (L858R), stage IIIB/IV NSCLC were enrolled and randomized at 2:1 ratio to receive mefatinib 60 mg PO QD or gefitinib 250 mg PO QD; The primary endpoint of the study was progression-free survival (PFS) per independent review committee (IRC). Archival tumor samples were analyzed using a 150 genes next-generation sequencing panel for biomarker analysis. Results: 336 eligible patients were assigned to receive mefatinib (n = 223) or gefitinib (n = 113). The median PFS of mefatinib was longer than gefitinib (13.73 vs. 9.66 months, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.68, P= 0.0024) and even longer in L858R subgroup (13.73 vs. 8.28 months, HR = 0.55). The data on overall survival (OS) were immature at the cut-off date ( < 40% events). 288 patients (189 in mefatinib and 99 in gefitinib) had available tumor samples for exploratory biomarker analysis. TP53 mutations were the most common disruptive concurrent alterations (45%). In patients with co-occurring disruptive mutations, mefatinib showed significant improvement in PFS compared to gefininib (12.55 vs 9.56 months, HR = 0.56, P= 0.0005; 12.55 vs 12.39 months, HR = 0.65, P= 0.0753 in 19del; and 13.70 vs 8.28 months, HR = 0.44, P= 0.0004 in L858R); Similarly, OS benefit of mefatinib was observed compared to gefitinib (not reached vs 26.68 months, HR = 0.54, P= 0.0045; not reached vs not reached, HR = 0.75, P= 0.4121 in 19del; and not reached vs 20.01 months, HR = 0.40, P= 0.0006 in L858R). Mefatinib had a favorable safety profile, with only 5.8% of patients experiencing dose reduction and less than 5% discontinuing treatment. Conclusions: Mefatinib is a new frontline option for EGFRmutant NSCLC. Co-occurring disruptive mutations caused decreased therapeutic efficacy of gefitinib, but had minimal impact on the PFS and OS of mefatinib. Comparing to gefitinib, PFS and OS improvements of mefatinib were most pronounced in patients with EGFR L858R mutation, especially those with disruptive co-occurring mutations. EGFR 19del or L858R mutation alone may not be sufficient to inform optimized front line therapies. Further studies are warranted to verify functional concurrent mutations for a better individualized precision medicine. Clinical trial information: CTR20192297.
Efficacy and safety of first line treatments for patients with advanced epidermal growth factor receptor mutated, non-small cell lung cancer: systematic review and network meta-analysis

Yi Zhao,Jingting Liu,Xiuyu Cai,Zhenkui Pan,Jun Liu,Weiqiang Yin,Hanzhang Chen,Zhanhong Xie,Hengrui Liang,Wei Wang,Zhihua Guo,Shen Zhao,Wenhua Liang,Jianxing He

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l5460

2019-10-07

BMJ

Abstract:Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of first line treatments for patients with advanced epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Design: Systematic review and network meta-analysis. Data sources: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, and several international conference databases, from inception to 20 May 2019. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Published and unpublished randomised controlled trials comparing two or more treatments in the first line setting for patients with advanced EGFR mutated NSCLC were included in a bayesian network meta-analysis. Eligible studies reported at least one of the following clinical outcome measures: progression free survival, overall survival, objective response rate, and adverse events of grade 3 or higher. Results: 18 eligible trials involved 4628 patients and 12 treatments: EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs; osimertinib, dacomitinib, afatinib, erlotinib, gefitinib, and icotinib), pemetrexed based chemotherapy, pemetrexed free chemotherapy, and combination treatments (afatinib plus cetuximab, erlotinib plus bevacizumab, gefitinib plus pemetrexed based chemotherapy, and gefitinib plus pemetrexed). Consistent with gefitinib plus pemetrexed based chemotherapy (hazard ratio 0.95, 95% credible interval 0.72 to 1.24), osimertinib showed the most favourable progression free survival, with significant differences versus dacomitinib (0.74, 0.55 to 1.00), afatinib (0.52, 0.40 to 0.68), erlotinib (0.48, 0.40 to 0.57), gefitinib (0.44, 0.37 to 0.52), icotinib (0.39, 0.24 to 0.62), pemetrexed based chemotherapy (0.24, 0.17 to 0.33), pemetrexed free chemotherapy (0.16, 0.13 to 0.20), afatinib plus cetuximab (0.44, 0.28 to 0.71), and gefitinib plus pemetrexed (0.65, 0.46 to 0.92). Osimertinib and gefitinib plus pemetrexed based chemotherapy were also consistent (0.94, 0.66 to 1.35) in providing the best overall survival benefit. Combination treatments caused more toxicity in general, especially erlotinib plus bevacizumab, which caused the most adverse events of grade 3 or higher. Different toxicity spectrums were revealed for individual EGFR-TKIs. Subgroup analyses by the two most common EGFR mutation types indicated that osimertinib was associated with the best progression free survival in patients with the exon 19 deletion, and gefitinib plus pemetrexed based chemotherapy was associated with the best progression free survival in patients with the Leu858Arg mutation. Conclusions: These results indicate that osimertinib and gefitinib plus pemetrexed based chemotherapy were associated with the best progression free survival and overall survival benefits for patients with advanced EGFR mutated NSCLC, compared with other first line treatments. The treatments resulting in the best progression free survival for patients with the exon 19 deletion and Leu858Arg mutations were osimertinib and gefitinib plus pemetrexed based chemotherapy, respectively. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42018111954.
The efficacy of first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors combined with co-medications in Asian patients with EGFR mutation non-small cell lung cancer

Vincent Yi-Fong Su,Kuang-Yao Yang,Ting-Yu Huang,Chia-Chen Hsu,Yuh-Min Chen,Jiin-Cherng Yen,Yueh-Ching Chou,Yuh-Lih Chang,Chien-Hui He

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-71583-w

IF: 4.6

2020-09-11

Scientific Reports

Abstract:Abstract The real-world efficacy of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring EGFR-activating mutations remains unclear. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from the claims database of Taipei Veterans General Hospital to perform direct comparisons of these three EGFR-TKIs (gefitinib, erlotinib, and afatinib) combined with co-medications (metformin, statins, antacids, and steroids). Stage IIIB and IV NSCLC patients with EGFR mutations receiving EGFR-TKIs as first-line treatment for > 3 months between 2011 and 2016 were enrolled. The primary endpoint was time to treatment failure (TTF). Patients who had received co-medications (≥ 28 defined daily doses) in the first 3 months of EGFR-TKI therapy were assigned to co-medications groups. A total of 853 patients treated with gefitinib (n = 534), erlotinib (n = 220), and afatinib (n = 99) were enrolled. The median duration of TTF was 11.5 months in the gefitinib arm, 11.7 months in the erlotinib arm, and 16.1 months in the afatinib arm (log-rank test, P < 0.001). After adjustments, afatinib showed lower risk of treatment failure compared with gefitinib (hazard ratio [HR] 0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.41–0.71) and erlotinib (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.46–0.83). The risk of treatment failure in patients treated with EGFR-TKIs who received concomitant systemic glucocorticoid therapy was higher than in those treated with EGFR-TKI monotherapy (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.08–2.01). Afatinib or erlotinib use was associated with a lower risk of treatment failure in patients with advanced NSCLC harboring EGFR mutations compared to gefitinib use. Concurrent use of systemic glucocorticoids was linked to higher risk of treatment failure.

multidisciplinary sciences
Mefatinib as first-line treatment of patients with advanced EGFR-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase Ib/II efficacy and biomarker study.

Pingli Wang,Yuping Li,Dongqing Lv,Lingge Yang,Liren Ding,Jianya Zhou,Wei Hong,Youfei Chen,Dongqing Zhang,Susu He,Jianying Zhou,Kai Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41392-021-00773-3

IF: 39.3

2021-01-01

Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy

Abstract:EGFR inhibitors have revolutionized the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Mefatinib is a novel, bioavailable, second-generation, irreversible pan-EGFR inhibitor. This phase Ib/II open-label, single-arm, multi-center study investigated the efficacy, safety, biomarker, and resistance mechanisms of mefatinib in the first-line treatment of patients with advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC. This study included 106 patients with EGFR-mutant stage IIIB-IV NSCLC who received first-line mefatinib at a daily dose of either 60 mg (n = 51) or 80 mg (n = 55). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), and safety. The cohort achieved an ORR of 84.9% and DCR of 97.2%. The median PFS was 15.4 months and the median OS was 31.6 months. Brain metastasis was detected in 29% of patients (n = 31) at diagnosis and demonstrated an ORR of 87.1%, PFS of 12.8 months, and OS of 25.2 months. Adverse events primarily involved skin and gastrointestinal toxicities, which were well-tolerated and manageable. Analyses of mutation profiles were performed using targeted sequencing of plasma samples at baseline, first follow-up 6 weeks from starting mefatinib therapy (F1), and at progression. Patients with concurrent TP53 mutations had comparable PFS as wild-type TP53 (14.0 vs 15.4 months; p = 0.315). Furthermore, circulating tumor DNA clearance was associated with longer PFS (p = 0.040) and OS (p = 0.002). EGFR T790M was the predominant molecular mechanism of mefatinib resistance (42.1%, 16/38). First-line mefatinib provides durable PFS and an acceptable toxicity profile in patients with advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC.
Therapeutic Efficacy Comparison of 5 Major Egfr-Tkis in Advanced Egfr-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis Based on Head-To-Head Trials

Yaxiong Zhang,Zhonghan Zhang,Xiaodan Huang,Shiyang Kang,Gang Chen,Manli Wu,Siyu Miao,Yan Huang,Hongyun Zhao,Li Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cllc.2016.09.006

IF: 4.84

2017-01-01

Clinical Lung Cancer

Abstract:This is the first head-to-head-based network meta-analysis making multiple therapeutic comparisons of 5 current epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in advanced epidermal growth factor receptor-positive patients with nonesmall-cell lung cancer that integrates the latest data. The results indicated a preferable therapeutic efficacy in the second-generation TKIs (dacomitinib and afatinib) when compared with the first-generation TKIs (erlotinib, gefitinib, and icotinib).Background: Five major first-and second-generation epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs), including erlotinib, gefitinib, icotinib, afatinib, and dacomitinib, are currently optional for patients with advanced nonesmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who harbor EGFR mutations. However, there was no head-to-head-based network meta-analysis among all the TKIs in EGFR-mutated populations. Methods: Eligible literature was searched from an electronic database. Data of objective response rate, disease control rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival were extracted from enrolled studies. Multiple treatment comparisons based on Bayesian network integrated the efficacy of all included treatments. Results: Six phase III randomized trials involving 1055 EGFR-mutated patients with advanced NSCLC were enrolled. Multiple treatment comparisons showed that 5 different EGFR-TKIs shared equivalent therapeutic efficacy in terms of all outcome measures. Rank probabilities indicated that dacomitinib and afatinib had potentially better efficacy compared with erlotinib, gefitinib, and icotinib in the EGFR-mutated patients. When compared with other agents, potential survival benefits (progression-free and overall survival) were observed in dacomitinib, whereas afatinib showed a better rank probability in overall response rate and disease control rate. Conclusion: Our study indicated a preferable therapeutic efficacy in the second-generation TKIs (dacomitinib and afatinib) when compared with the first-generation TKIs (erlotinib, gefitinib, and icotinib). (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Critical Appraisal of the Role of Gefitinib in the Management of Locally Advanced or Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Ying Yuan,Xiaofen Li,Jiaqi Chen,Caixia Dong,Shan‐Shan Weng,Jianjin Huang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/ott.s34124

IF: 4

2014-01-01

OncoTargets and Therapy

Abstract:Past studies have demonstrated that epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors can significantly improve clinical outcomes in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and sensitive EGFR gene mutations. Gefitinib (Iressa(®)), the first oral EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has been shown to be more effective and better tolerated than chemotherapy either in first-line or second-line treatment for patients with advanced NSCLC harboring sensitive EGFR mutations. Conversely, among patients with wild-type EGFR, gefitinib is inferior to standard chemotherapy in both the first-line and second-line settings. Further, gefitinib is effective in patients with brain metastases because of its low molecular weight and excellent penetration of the blood-brain barrier. In this review, we summarize the current data from clinical trials with gefitinib and appraise its role in the management of locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC.
First-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors in EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: a network meta-analysis

Marscha S Holleman,Harm van Tinteren,Harry JM Groen,Maiwenn J Al,Carin A Uyl-de Groot,Harry J M Groen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/OTT.S189438

IF: 4

2019-10-07

OncoTargets and Therapy

Abstract:Marscha S Holleman, 1,2 Harm van Tinteren, 3 Harry JM Groen, 4 Maiwenn J Al, 1,2 Carin A Uyl-de Groot 1,2 1 Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; 2 Institute for Medical Technology Assessment, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; 3 Department of Biometrics, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; 4 Department of Pulmonary Diseases, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands Background: EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) including afatinib, dacomitinib, erlotinib, gefitinib, and osimertinib have proven efficacy in terms of progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring EGFR mutations. However, an overall view for comparing efficacy and toxicity on a meta-level is lacking. This study compared efficacy and toxicity of first-line treatment with five different EGFR-TKIs by conducting a network meta-analysis (NMA). Methods: A systematic review was performed, aiming to find eligible literature. Data of PFS, overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events were extracted. An NMA based on Bayesian statistics was established to synthesize the efficacy and toxicity of all treatments. Results: Thirteen randomized controlled trials, including data from 3,539 patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC, were analyzed. Rank probabilities showed that osimertinib had a potentially better efficacy in terms of PFS and OS compared to all other TKIs. For ORR, afatinib and osimertinib showed a trend of superiority compared to the other four TKIs. Furthermore, there was a high risk of diarrhea and rash for patients treated with afatinib or dacomitinib as well as a moderate risk for treatment with erlotinib, gefitinib, and osimertinib. Conclusion: Our study showed a favorable efficacy of osimertinib in terms of PFS and OS compared to all other EGFR-TKIs in patients with NSCLC harboring activating EGFR mutations. Furthermore, gefitinib, erlotinib, and osimertinib were associated with fewer toxicities compared to the other TKIs. Therefore, osimertinib is indicated as a preferable first-line TKI in patients with activating EGFR-mutated NSCLC. Keywords: EGFR-TKI, gefitinib, erlotinib, afatinib, osimertinib, network meta-analysis

oncology,biotechnology & applied microbiology
Comparison Of Gefitinib, Erlotinib And Afatinib In Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Zu-Yao Yang,Allan Hackshaw,Qi Feng,Xiao-Hong Fu,Yuelun Zhang,Chen Mao,Jin-Ling Tang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.30691

2017-01-01

International Journal of Cancer

Abstract:Gefitinib, erlotinib and afatinib are three widely used epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR TKIs) for treating advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with proven efficacy. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to synthesize existing studies with direct comparisons of EGFR TKIs in NSCLC in terms of both efficacy and safety. Eight randomized trials and 82 cohort studies with a total of 17,621 patients were included for analysis. Gefitinib and erlotinib demonstrated comparable effects on progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95 to 1.04), overall survival (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.06), overall response rate (risk ratio [RR], 1.05; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.11), and disease control rate (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.01), which did not vary considerably with EGFR mutation status, ethnicity, line of treatment, and baseline brain metastasis status. Gefitinib was associated with more grade 3/4 liver dysfunction, but tended to cause lower rates of dose reduction, treatment discontinuation, total grade 3/4 adverse events (RR, 0.78; 95% CI 0.65 to 0.94), and a number of specific adverse events such as rash and diarrhea. No solid evidence was found that afatinib had greater efficacy than gefitinib or erlotinib in first-line treatment of EGFR-mutant NSCLC. However, afatinib was more effective than erlotinib as second-line treatment of patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma. The grade 3/4 adverse events rate of afatinib was comparable to that of erlotinib but higher than that of gefitinib.What's new? Which drug is best for treating non-small cell lung cancer? These authors compared three chemotherapy drugs: two that have been around for over a decade, and one second-generation agent that was approved for use in 2013. While all three are well-studied, few direct comparisons have been undertaken. The authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on the existing literature. They found that all three drugs had similar effectiveness as first-line chemotherapy of NSCLC. Gefitinib seemed to spur fewer adverse events. However, afatinib, the newer drug, worked better than the others as a second-line treatment for advanced squamous cell carcinoma.
Critical appraisal of the role of gefitinib in the management of locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

Ying Yuan,Xiao-Fen Li,Jia-Qi Chen,Cai-Xia Dong,Shan-Shan Weng,Jian-Jin Huang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/OTT.S34124

IF: 4

2014-01-01

OncoTargets and Therapy

Abstract:Past studies have demonstrated that epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors can significantly improve clinical outcomes in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and sensitive EGFR gene mutations. Gefitinib (Iressa (R)), the first oral EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has been shown to be more effective and better tolerated than chemotherapy either in first-line or second-line treatment for patients with advanced NSCLC harboring sensitive EGFR mutations. Conversely, among patients with wild-type EGFR, gefitinib is inferior to standard chemotherapy in both the first-line and second-line settings. Further, gefitinib is effective in patients with brain metastases because of its low molecular weight and excellent penetration of the blood-brain barrier. In this review, we summarize the current data from clinical trials with gefitinib and appraise its role in the management of locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC.
First-line treatment of advanced epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation positive non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer.

Janette Greenhalgh,Angela Boland,Victoria Bates,Fabio Vecchio,Yenal Dundar,Marty Chaplin,John A Green

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010383.pub3

IF: 8.4

2021-03-19

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract:Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation positive (M+) non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is an important subtype of lung cancer comprising 10% to 15% of non‐squamous tumours. This subtype is more common in women than men, is less associated with smoking, but occurs at a younger age than sporadic tumours. To assess the clinical effectiveness of single‐agent or combination EGFR therapies used in the first‐line treatment of people with locally advanced or metastatic EGFR M+ NSCLC compared with other cytotoxic chemotherapy (CTX) agents used alone or in combination, or best supportive care (BSC). The primary outcomes were overall survival and progression‐free survival. Secondary outcomes included response rate, symptom palliation, toxicity, and health‐related quality of life. We conducted electronic searches of the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2020, Issue 7), MEDLINE (1946 to 27th July 2020), Embase (1980 to 27th July 2020), and ISI Web of Science (1899 to 27th July 2020). We also searched the conference abstracts of the American Society for Clinical Oncology and the European Society for Medical Oncology (July 2020); Evidence Review Group submissions to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; and the reference lists of retrieved articles. Parallel‐group randomised controlled trials comparing EGFR‐targeted agents (alone or in combination with cytotoxic agents or BSC) with cytotoxic chemotherapy (single or doublet) or BSC in chemotherapy‐naive patients with locally advanced or metastatic (stage IIIB or IV) EGFR M+ NSCLC unsuitable for treatment with curative intent. Two review authors independently identified articles, extracted data, and carried out the 'Risk of bias' assessment. We conducted meta‐analyses using a fixed‐effect model unless there was substantial heterogeneity, in which case we also performed a random‐effects analysis as a sensitivity analysis. Twenty‐two trials met the inclusion criteria. Ten of these exclusively recruited people with EGFR M+ NSCLC; the remainder recruited a mixed population and reported results for people with EGFR M+ NSCLC as subgroup analyses. The number of participants with EGFR M+ tumours totalled 3023, of whom approximately 2563 were of Asian origin. Overall survival (OS) data showed inconsistent results between the included trials that compared EGFR‐targeted treatments against cytotoxic chemotherapy or placebo. Erlotinib was used in eight trials, gefitinib in nine trials, afatinib in two trials, cetuximab in two trials, and icotinib in one trial. The findings of FASTACT 2 suggested a clinical benefit for OS for participants treated with erlotinib plus cytotoxic chemotherapy when compared to cytotoxic chemotherapy alone, as did the Han 2017 trial for gefitinib plus cytotoxic chemotherapy, but both results were based on a small number of participants (n = 97 and 122, respectively). For progression‐free survival (PFS), a pooled analysis of four trials showed evidence of clinical benefit for erlotinib compared with cytotoxic chemotherapy (hazard ratio (HR) 0.31; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25 to 0.39 ; 583 participants ; high‐certainty evidence). A pooled analysis of two trials of gefitinib versus paclitaxel plus carboplatin showed evidence of clinical benefit for PFS for gefitinib (HR 0.39; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.48 ; 491 participants high‐certainty evidence), and a pooled analysis of two trials of gefitinib versus pemetrexed plus carboplatin with pemetrexed maintenance also showed evidence of clinical benefit for PFS for gefitinib (HR 0.59; 95% CI 0.46 to 0.74, 371 participants ; moderate‐certainty evidence). Afatinib showed evidence of clinical benefit for PFS when compared with chemotherapy in a pooled analysis of two trials (HR 0.42; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.53, 709 participants high‐certainty evidence). All but one small trial showed a corresponding improvement in response rate with tyrosine‐kinase inhibitor (TKI) compared to chemotherapy. Commonly reported grade 3/4 adverse events associated with afatinib, erlotinib, gefitinib and icotinib monotherapy were rash and diarrhoea. Myelosuppression was consistently worse in the chemotherapy arms; fatigue and anorexia were also associated with some chemotherapies. Seven trials reported on health‐related quality of life and symptom improvement using different methodologies. For each of erlotinib, gefitinib, and afatinib, two trials showed improvement in one or more indices for the TKI compared to chemotherapy. The quality of evidence was high for the comparisons of erlotinib and gefitinib with cytotoxic chemotherapy and for the comparison of afatinib with cytotoxic chemotherapy. Erlotinib, gefitinib, afatinib and icotinib are all active agents in EGFR M+ NSCLC patients, and demonstrate an increased tumour response rate and prolonged PFS compared to cytotoxic chemotherapy. We found a beneficial effect of the TKI compared to cytotoxic c -Abstract Truncated-

medicine, general & internal
Do patient characteristics affect EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment outcomes? A network meta‐analysis of real‐world survival outcomes of East Asian patients with advanced non‐small cell lung cancer treated with first‐line EGFR‐TKIs

Huang‐Chih Chang,Chin‐Chou Wang,Chia‐Cheng Tseng,Kuo‐Tung Huang,Yu‐Mu Chen,Yu‐Ping Chang,Chien‐Hao Lai,Wen‐Feng Fang,Meng‐Chih Lin,Hung‐Yi Chuang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1759-7714.15111

IF: 3.223

2023-09-23

Thoracic Cancer

Abstract:Predictors of first‐line epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)‐tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) outcomes? The aim of this network meta‐analysis was to compare survival outcomes among first‐line EGFR‐TKIs in different subgroups of East Asian patients with advanced NSCLC. Eleven real‐world observational studies were included. This NMA suggests that afatinib results in longer progression‐free survival (PFS) in EGFR L858R and EGFR Del19 mutations, longer PFS than gefitinib in patients with brain metastasis and longer PFS than gefitinib in patients with ECOG status 0–1. Background Despite the well‐established efficacies of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)‐mutated non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), there is limited real‐world evidence comparing their effectiveness according to patients' clinical characteristics. This network meta‐analysis (NMA) compared survival outcomes among first‐line EGFR‐TKIs in different subgroups of East Asian patients with advanced NSCLC. Methods This NMA included real‐world observational studies reporting outcomes with TKIs in patients aged >65 years, with baseline brain metastasis, with different Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) statuses, or with different common EGFR mutation types. Results In patients with the EGFR L858R mutation, afatinib resulted in significantly longer progression‐free survival (PFS) than erlotinib (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.46–0.75) and gefitinib (HR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.32–0.53). Similarly, in patients with the EGFR Del19 mutation, afatinib and erlotinib resulted in significantly longer PFS than gefitinib (HR: 0.48 with 95% CI: 0.33–0.71 and HR: 0.54 with 95% CI: 0.36–0.80, respectively). Moreover, afatinib resulted in significantly longer PFS than gefitinib in patients with brain metastasis (HR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.33–0.87) or ECOG status 0–1 (HR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.23–0.59). Conclusion This NMA suggests that afatinib results in similar PFS to erlotinib and superior PFS than gefitinib in patients with Del19 mutant NSCLC, aged ≥65 years, with ECOG scores of 0–1, and with baseline brain metastasis.

oncology,respiratory system
Targeted Therapy for Non-Small-cell Lung Cancer Using EGFR-TKIs

TAN Fen-lai,WANG Yin-xiang,YUAN Xiao-fen,DING Lie-ming,HU Bei,ZHANG Li,ZHOU Jian-ying,SHENG-TU Jian-zhong,SUN Yan

2011-01-01

Abstract:Non-small cell lung cancer(NSCLC) is the leading cause of cancer mortality worldwide.The management of NSCLC has changed dramatically in the last decade.A number of well documented clinical studies demonstrated that the epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors(EGFR-TKIs) showed a better survival benefit comparing to the standard treatments in patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC.EGFR-TKIs,including gefitinib and erlotinib,have been used in first-line,second-line and more other settings with obvious survival benefits in a subgroup of patients with EGFR mutations.Moreover,icotinib,a novel EGFR-TKIs developed by BetaPharma Inc.,has finished its phase III trial(ICOGEN) with encouraging efficacy and safety profile in China recently.This review will summarize the results of clinical trials of erlotinib,gefitinib or icotinib for patients with advanced NSCLC.
Comparison of the efficacy and safety of first-line treatments based on clinicopathological characteristics for patients with advanced epidermal growth factor receptor mutated non-small-cell lung cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Fei Yang,Wengang Zhang,Xiaoling Shang,Ni Liu,Xinchun Ma,Jing Qin,Yuqing Zhang,Yanguo Liu,Xiuwen Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.critrevonc.2022.103760

Abstract:Background: A growing number of regimens have been approved as first-line treatments for patients with advanced epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutated non-small cell lung cancer. However, the optimal regimen has not been determined, especially for patients with different clinicopathological characteristics. Therefore, we performed this meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of first-line treatments for patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC based on clinicopathological characteristics, thereby providing evidence for individual patient clinical decision-making. Methods: The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library databases, and abstracts of ASCO, ESMO, and WCLC were searched from inception to 3 June 2021 to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The outcomes of progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and grade 3 or higher adverse events (≥3AEs) were compared and ranked based on various clinicopathological characteristics among 14 regimens by network meta-analysis (NMA) and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), respectively. Results: 25 RCTs were included, with a total of 6965 patients and 14 treatment regimens. The primary endpoint of all RCTs was PFS, and OS, ORR, and ≥3AEs were secondary endpoints. Regarding overall patients, the most distinct PFS benefit was observed in osimertinib (OSI), with the fewest ≥3AEs, whereas gefitinib plus pemetrexed-based chemotherapy (GEF+PB) provided the greatest benefit for OS. When considering EGFR mutation type, aumolertinib (AUM) and GEF+PB could be the optimal regimens in terms of PFS for patients with EGFR 19DEL and EGFR 21L858R, respectively. Notably, the efficacy of the 14 regimens for PFS varied across clinicopathological characteristics, with GEP+PB ranking first in Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS)= 1, Asian, age＜65 and smoking subgroups, with AUM ranking first in ECOG PS= 0 and female subgroups, with ICO+PB ranking first in age ≥65 and no smoking subgroups, and with AFA+CET ranking first in the male subgroup. In terms of brain metastases, third-generation EGFR-TKI showed obvious superiority, with AUM and OSI optimally prolonging PFS in patients with and without brain metastases, respectively. In addition, GEF+PB is a superior alternative, ranking second in terms of PFS regardless of the presence of brain metastases. Conclusions: OSI and GEF+PB were the most two effective first-line regimens for overall patients, ranking first in PFS and OS, respectively. GEF+PB ranked first in terms of PFS in subgroups of EGFR 21L858R, ECOG PS= 1, Asian, age <65, and smoking. Meanwhile, AUM in subgroups of EGFR 19DEL, ECOG PS= 0, female, brain metastasis, OSI in the subgroup of without brain metastasis, ICO+PB in no smoking subgroup, and AFA+CET in male subgroup were the best options as for their evident superiority in PFS.
Immediate Versus Delayed Treatment with Egfr Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors after First-Line Therapy in Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Zhi-jie Wang,Tong-tong An,Tony Mok,Lu Yang,Hua Bai,Jun Zhao,Jian-chun Duan,Mei-na Wu,Yu-yan Wang,Ping-ping Li,Hong Sun,Ping Yang,Jie Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11670-011-0112-5

2011-01-01

Abstract:Objective: To analyze the outcomes of patients who received TKI immediately after the first-line without progression as maintenance treatment （immediate group） vs. those received delayed treatment upon disease progression as second-line therapy （delayed group）. Methods: The study included 159 no-small-cell lung cancer （NSCLC） patients who received gefitinib or erlotinib as maintenance treatment in the immediate group （85 patients） or as second-line therapy in the delayed group （74 patients）. The primary end point was progression-free survival （PFS）. EGFR mutation status was detected using denaturing high-performance liquid chromatography （DHPLC）. Results: PFS was 17.3 and 16.4 months in the immediate and delayed groups, respectively （hazard ratio [HR], 0.99; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 0.69-1.42; P=0.947）. In a subgroup analysis that included only patients with EGFR mutation, however, PFS was significantly longer in the immediate group than in the delayed group （HR, 0.48; 95% CI: 0.27-0.85; P=0.012）. In patients with wild type EGFR, the risk for disease progression was comparable between the two groups （HR, 1.23; 95% CI: 0.61-2.51; P=0.564）. No significant difference was demonstrated between the immediate and delayed group in terms of the overall survival （OS）（26.1 months vs. 21.6 months, respectively; HR=0.53; 95% CI: 0.27 to 1.06; P=0.072）. There was also no difference in the incidence of adverse events between the two groups. Conclusions: EGFR TKI maintenance improves PFS in patients with EGFR mutation. Prospectively designed clinical studies that compare TKI immediate vs. delayed treatment after first-line chemotherapy upon disease progression are needed.

[ISOTOPIC DISSECTION].

The Efficacy and Toxicity of Afatinib in Advanced EGFR-positive Non-Small-cell Lung Cancer Patients after Failure of First-Generation Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

First-Generation Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Inhibitors Plus Antiangiogenic Drugs Versus Third-Generation Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Inhibitors in Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Investigating the Efficacy of EGFR-TKIs and Anti-VEGFR Combination in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Clinical outcomes and secondary epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) T790M mutation among first‐line gefitinib, erlotinib and afatinib‐treated non‐small cell lung cancer patients with activating EGFR mutations

First‐line treatment with irreversible tyrosine kinase inhibitors associated with longer OS in EGFR mutation‐positive non‐small cell lung cancer

First-line therapeutic strategy for patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer with Leu858Arg epidermal growth factor receptor mutations: a Bayesian network meta-analysis

Mefatinib As First-Line Treatment of EGFR Sensitizing Mutation-Positive Non-Small-cell Lung Cancer: A Phase III Efficacy and Biomarker Study.

Efficacy and safety of first line treatments for patients with advanced epidermal growth factor receptor mutated, non-small cell lung cancer: systematic review and network meta-analysis

The efficacy of first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors combined with co-medications in Asian patients with EGFR mutation non-small cell lung cancer

Mefatinib as first-line treatment of patients with advanced EGFR-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase Ib/II efficacy and biomarker study.

Therapeutic Efficacy Comparison of 5 Major Egfr-Tkis in Advanced Egfr-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis Based on Head-To-Head Trials

Critical Appraisal of the Role of Gefitinib in the Management of Locally Advanced or Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

First-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors in EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: a network meta-analysis

Comparison Of Gefitinib, Erlotinib And Afatinib In Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Critical appraisal of the role of gefitinib in the management of locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

First-line treatment of advanced epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation positive non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer.

Do patient characteristics affect EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment outcomes? A network meta‐analysis of real‐world survival outcomes of East Asian patients with advanced non‐small cell lung cancer treated with first‐line EGFR‐TKIs

Targeted Therapy for Non-Small-cell Lung Cancer Using EGFR-TKIs

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of first-line treatments based on clinicopathological characteristics for patients with advanced epidermal growth factor receptor mutated non-small-cell lung cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Immediate Versus Delayed Treatment with Egfr Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors after First-Line Therapy in Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer