-
Chinese Medical Journal Nov 2023The brain is a common metastatic site in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), resulting in a relatively poor prognosis. Systemic therapy with epidermal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The brain is a common metastatic site in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), resulting in a relatively poor prognosis. Systemic therapy with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) is recommended as the first-line treatment for EGFR -mutated, advanced NSCLC patients. However, intracranial activity varies in different drugs. Thus, brain metastasis (BM) should be considered when choosing the treatment regimens. We conducted this network meta-analysis to explore the optimal first-line therapeutic schedule for advanced EGFR -mutated NSCLC patients with different BM statuses.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials focusing on EGFR-TKIs (alone or in combination) in advanced and EGFR -mutant NSCLC patients, who have not received systematic treatment, were systematically searched up to December 2021. We extracted and analyzed progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). A network meta-analysis was performed with the Bayesian statistical model to determine the survival outcomes of all included therapy regimens using the R software. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to compare intervention measures, and overall rankings of therapies were estimated under the Bayesian framework.
RESULTS
This analysis included 17 RCTs with 5077 patients and 12 therapies, including osimertinib + bevacizumab, aumolertinib, osimertinib, afatinib, dacomitinib, standards of care (SoC, including gefitinib, erlotinib, or icotinib), SoC + apatinib, SoC + bevacizumab, SoC + ramucirumab, SoC + pemetrexed based chemotherapy (PbCT), PbCT, and pemetrexed free chemotherapy (PfCT). For patients with BM, SoC + PbCT improved PFS compared with SoC (HR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.17-0.95), and osimertinib + bevacizumab was most likely to rank first in PFS, with a cumulative probability of 34.5%, followed by aumolertinib, with a cumulative probability of 28.3%. For patients without BM, osimertinib + bevacizumab, osimertinib, aumolertinib, SoC + PbCT, dacomitinib, SoC + ramucirumab, SoC + bevacizumab, and afatinib showed superior efficacy compared with SoC (HR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.20-0.90; HR = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.31-0.68; HR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.34-0.77; HR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.38-0.66; HR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.43-0.89; HR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.44-0.94; HR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.48-0.76; HR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.50-1.00), PbCT (HR = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.11-0.74; HR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.15-0.62; HR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.17-0.69; HR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.18-0.64; HR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.21-0.82; HR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.22-0.87; HR = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.22-0.74; HR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.31-0.75), and PfCT (HR = 0.14, 95% CI: 0.06-0.32; HR = 0.15, 95% CI: 0.09-0.26; HR = 0.17, 95% CI: 0.09-0.29; HR = 0.16, 95% CI: 0.10-0.26; HR = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.12-0.35; HR = 0.21, 95% CI: 0.12-0.39; HR = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.12-0.31; HR = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.16-0.34) in terms of PFS. And, SoC + apatinib showed relatively superior PFS when compared with PbCT (HR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.22-0.92) and PfCT (HR = 0.21, 95% CI: 0.12-0.39), but similar PFS to SoC (HR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.42-1.03). No statistical differences were observed for PFS in patients without BM between PbCT and SoC (HR = 1.49, 95% CI: 0.84-2.64), but both showed favorable PFS when compared with PfCT (PfCT vs. SoC, HR = 3.09, 95% CI: 2.06-4.55; PbCT vs. PfCT, HR = 0.14, 95% CI: 0.06-0.32). For patients without BM, osimertinib + bevacizumab was most likely to rank the first, with cumulative probabilities of 47.1%. For OS, SoC + PbCT was most likely to rank first in patients with and without BM, with cumulative probabilities of 46.8%, and 37.3%, respectively.
CONCLUSION
Osimertinib + bevacizumab is most likely to rank first in PFS in advanced EGFR -mutated NSCLC patients with or without BM, and SoC + PbCT is most likely to rank first in OS.
Topics: Humans; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Afatinib; Lung Neoplasms; Bevacizumab; Bayes Theorem; Network Meta-Analysis; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Pemetrexed; ErbB Receptors; Brain Neoplasms; Mutation
PubMed: 37160733
DOI: 10.1097/CM9.0000000000002468 -
ESMO Open Jun 2022Brain metastases (BMs) are frequent events in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and are associated with poor prognosis. Small-molecule anti-HER2... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Brain metastases (BMs) are frequent events in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and are associated with poor prognosis. Small-molecule anti-HER2 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are promising agents for the treatment of BM. In this study, we assess the clinical outcomes of patients with HER2-positive MBC and BM treated with TKI-containing regimens compared with those treated with non-TKI-containing regimens.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and conference proceedings (ASCO, SABCS, ESMO, and ESMO Breast) were searched up to June 2021. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with BM. Secondary endpoints included PFS in patients without BM and overall survival (OS). The study was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Overall effects were pooled using random-effects models.
RESULTS
This systematic review and meta-analysis included data from 2437 patients (490 with and 1947 without BM at baseline) enrolled in five trials assessing tucatinib-, lapatinib-, pyrotinib-, or afatinib-based combinations. A nonstatistically significant PFS benefit favoring TKI-containing regimens was observed in both patients with BM [hazard ratio (HR) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41-1.12; P = 0.13] and without BM (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.24-1.26; P = 0.16). Sensitivity analysis, excluding each study singly, demonstrated a significant PFS benefit favoring TKI-containing regimens in patients with BM after the exclusion of afatinib from the analysis (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.35-0.90; P = 0.016). No statistically significant differences in OS were observed between the comparison groups.
CONCLUSIONS
A trend in PFS favoring TKI-containing regimens was observed in patients with BM. Sensitivity analysis including only trials that evaluated regimens containing tucatinib, lapatinib, or pyrotinib demonstrated a significant PFS benefit favoring TKI-containing regimens in patients with BM.
Topics: Afatinib; Brain Neoplasms; Breast Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Lapatinib; Protein Kinase Inhibitors
PubMed: 35653982
DOI: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2022.100501 -
Cancers Jul 2022(1) Background: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have explored various primary treatments for individuals diagnosed as having later-stage epidermal growth factor... (Review)
Review
Overall Survival Benefits of First-Line Treatments for Asian Patients with Advanced Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-Mutated NSCLC Harboring Exon 19 Deletion: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
(1) Background: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have explored various primary treatments for individuals diagnosed as having later-stage epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer. Nevertheless, the extent to which such treatments are efficacious, particularly with regard to overall survival (OS) rates of patients from Asia with exon 19 deletion (19del), has yet to be clarified. (2) Methods: A systematic review and frequentist network meta-analysis were conducted by obtaining pertinent studies from PubMed/MEDLINE Ovid, Embase, Cochrane Library, and trial registries, as well as various other sources. RCTs in which two or multiple treatments in the primary setting for patients from Asia with EGFR 19del were compared were included. This research has been recorded in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD 42022320833). (3) Results: A total of 2715 patients from Asia participated in 18 trials in which 12 different treatments were administered, which included: EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) (osimertinib, dacomitinib, afatinib, erlotinib, gefitinib, and icotinib), pemetrexed-based chemotherapy, pemetrexed-free chemotherapy, and combination treatments (gefitinib plus apatinib, erlotinib plus ramucirumab, erlotinib plus bevacizumab, and gefitinib plus pemetrexed-based chemotherapy). Such treatments were not significantly beneficial in terms of OS for patients from Asia who had 19del. It was demonstrated that erlotinib plus bevacizumab, ramucirumab plus erlotinib, and osimertinib consistently yielded the greatest benefits regarding progression-free survival benefit (P-scores = 94%, 84%, and 80%, respectively). Combination treatments resulted in increased toxicity, particularly gefitinib plus apatinib and erlotinib plus bevacizumab, causing the highest prevalence of grade ≥ 3 adverse events. Icotinib and osimertinib had the fewest grade ≥ 3 adverse events. Specific treatments were associated with a wide range of toxicity levels. (4) Conclusions: In patients from Asia with 19del, both EGFR-TKIs and treatments in which therapies were combined exhibited no OS benefits in comparison with standard chemotherapy treatments. Additional research is required to study TKIs' resistance mechanisms and possible combined approaches for individuals harboring this common mutation.
PubMed: 35884423
DOI: 10.3390/cancers14143362 -
The European Journal of Health... Feb 2020To compare the cost-effectiveness of first-line gefitinib, erlotinib, afatinib, and osimertinib in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harbouring epidermal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
To compare the cost-effectiveness of first-line gefitinib, erlotinib, afatinib, and osimertinib in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harbouring epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations.
METHODS
A systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted to compare the relative efficacy of gefitinib, erlotinib, afatinib, and osimertinib in EGFR-mutated NSCLC. To assess the cost-effectiveness of these treatments, a Markov model was developed from Dutch societal perspective. The model was based on the clinical studies included in the NMA. Incremental costs per life-year (LY) and per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained were estimated. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were conducted.
RESULTS
Total discounted per patient costs for gefitinib, erlotinib, afatinib, and osimertinib were €65,889, €64,035, €69,418, and €131,997, and mean QALYs were 1.36, 1.39, 1.52, and 2.01 per patient, respectively. Erlotinib dominated gefitinib. Afatinib versus erlotinib yielded incremental costs of €27,058/LY and €41,504/QALY gained. Osimertinib resulted in €91,726/LY and €128,343/QALY gained compared to afatinib. PSA showed that gefitinib, erlotinib, afatinib, and osimertinib had 13%, 19%, 43%, and 26% probability to be cost-effective at a threshold of €80,000/QALY. A price reduction of osimertinib of 30% is required for osimertinib to be cost-effective at a threshold of €80,000/QALY.
CONCLUSIONS
Osimertinib has a better effectiveness compared to all other TKIs. However, at a Dutch threshold of €80,000/QALY, osimertinib appears not to be cost-effective.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Cost-Benefit Analysis; ErbB Receptors; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Markov Chains; Netherlands; Network Meta-Analysis; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Quality-Adjusted Life Years
PubMed: 31541309
DOI: 10.1007/s10198-019-01117-3 -
OncoTargets and Therapy 2022Hepatoid adenocarcinoma (HAC) of the lung (HAL) is a rare and aggressive extrahepatic adenocarcinoma with an unknown etiology and unfavorable prognosis, which is similar...
BACKGROUND
Hepatoid adenocarcinoma (HAC) of the lung (HAL) is a rare and aggressive extrahepatic adenocarcinoma with an unknown etiology and unfavorable prognosis, which is similar to the pathophysiological characteristics of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).
METHODS
We first presented a 67-year-old patient diagnosed with HAC in the right middle lobe of the lung. Then, a systematic literature search was performed for HAL cases recorded between 1990 and 2020 based on three databases. The clinicopathological features, therapeutic method, and prognosis of this rare disease were reviewed, and corresponding prognostic factors were explored using Kaplan-Meier (K-M) curve and Cox proportional hazards regression model. Additionally, the potential biological mechanisms of HAL were further explored and compared with HCC and lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) based on online databases.
RESULTS
In the present study, we reported an HAL patient who underwent surgical resection combined with chemotherapy and succumbed to disease 13 months after surgery. Additionally, a total of 43 experimental studies with 49 HAL patients, including the present case, met the inclusion criteria and were included in the present review. We found that HAL is characterized by a male-dominated incidence and is more common in the right lung. Patients in the surgical subgroup have a better prognosis than those in the non-surgical subgroup (p = 0.034). Moreover, the Cox proportional hazards regression model demonstrated that surgical resection can significantly improve the prognosis of HAL patients (p = 0.016). HAL is a rare disease associated with gene mutations that has a distinctive cause and unique pathogenesis. Additionally, Afatinib and Gefitinib may be new effective agents to better combat HAL.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, males may exhibit an increased risk of developing HAL and poorer prognosis than females. Surgical resection combined with chemotherapy may prolong the survival of patients with HAL. HAL has its unique clinicopathological characteristics and biological mechanisms.
PubMed: 35676912
DOI: 10.2147/OTT.S364465 -
Oncology and Therapy Dec 2022Despite the growing evidence for the anticancer effect of metformin or its combination with epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs), the... (Review)
Review
The Anticancer Effect of Metformin Combined with Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Patients with or Without Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
INTRODUCTION
Despite the growing evidence for the anticancer effect of metformin or its combination with epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs), the efficacies and side effects of such strategies in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with or without type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are not well understood. This meta-analysis was performed to determine the efficacy and side effects of metformin combined with EGFR-TKIs (MET-EGFR-TKIs) for the treatment of NSCLC with or without T2DM.
METHODS
PubMed and Cochrane Library databases were used to retrieve relevant studies through August 2020 using the keywords "metformin", "EGFR-TKIs" ("gefitinib" or "erlotinib" or "afatinib" or "icotinib" or "dacomitinib") and "lung cancer". The patients in the experimental group received MET-EGFR-TKIs, while those in the control group received only EGFR-TKIs. The outcome analysis reported overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and disease control rate (DCR). Random-effect models and fixed-effect models were used to estimate the combined hazard ratio (HR) and odds ratio (OR) depending on the data heterogeneity. Three studies (including 1996 patients) were included in the current meta-analysis.
RESULTS
There were significant differences in PFS (HR 0.84; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75-0.95; P = 0.004) and OS (HR 0.77; 95% CI, 0.50-1.04; P < 0.001) between the MET-EGFR-TKI and EGFR-TKI groups. Although the ORR (OR 1.38; 95% CI 0.66-2.88; P = 0.105) and DCR (OR 2.61, 95% CI 0.68-9.95, P = 0.160) were improved, there was no statistical significance. OS subgroup analysis showed that the combination was more effective in NSCLC with T2DM than in NSCLC without T2DM (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.74-0.95; P < 0.005).
CONCLUSIONS
MET-EGFR-TKIs provided benefits for PFS and OS, and OS subgroup analysis showed that patients with NSCLC with T2DM received greater benefit than NSCLC patients without T2DM. However, further large-scale, well-designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are warranted to confirm the findings in the present investigation.
PubMed: 36282467
DOI: 10.1007/s40487-022-00209-0 -
Future Oncology (London, England) Aug 2019Here, we compare the relative clinical efficacy of -targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors ( TKIs) for -positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The authors... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Here, we compare the relative clinical efficacy of -targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors ( TKIs) for -positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The authors systematically searched 11 electronic databases from January 2004 to August 2018 for randomized controlled trials measuring clinical efficacy of first-line TKI therapies. Clinical efficacy outcomes included overall survival and progression-free survival. Bayesian network meta-analysis was used to assess the relative efficacy of first-line TKIs for overall survival and progression-free survival. This network meta-analysis showed that dacomitinib and osimertinib resulted in improved efficacy outcomes compared with afatinib, erlotinib and gefitinib. Both osimertinib and dacomitinib should be considered as standard first-line treatment options for patients diagnosed with advanced -positive non-small-cell lung cancer.
Topics: Bayes Theorem; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Disease-Free Survival; ErbB Receptors; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Network Meta-Analysis; Protein Kinase Inhibitors
PubMed: 31298572
DOI: 10.2217/fon-2019-0270 -
JTO Clinical and Research Reports May 2022Randomized controlled trials have investigated different first-line treatments for patients with advanced -mutated NSCLC. Nevertheless, their efficacy, in particular,...
Overall Survival Benefits of First-Line Treatments for Asian Patients With Advanced EGFR-Mutated NSCLC Harboring L858R Mutation: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
INTRODUCTION
Randomized controlled trials have investigated different first-line treatments for patients with advanced -mutated NSCLC. Nevertheless, their efficacy, in particular, the long-term overall survival (OS) benefit in Asian patients with L858R mutation, remains unclear.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and frequentist network meta-analysis by retrieving relevant literature from PubMed/MEDLINE, Ovid, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, trial registries, and other sources. We included randomized controlled trials comparing two or more treatments in the first-line setting for Asian patients with L858R mutation. This study was registered in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD 42022295897).
RESULTS
There were a total of 18 trials that involved 1852 Asian patients and 12 treatments, including the following: tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) (osimertinib, dacomitinib, afatinib, erlotinib, gefitinib, and icotinib), pemetrexed-based chemotherapy, pemetrexed-free chemotherapy, and combination treatments (gefitinib plus apatinib, erlotinib plus ramucirumab, erlotinib plus bevacizumab and gefitinib plus pemetrexed-based chemotherapy). Asian patients with L858R mutation had no significant OS benefits from all these treatments. Gefitinib plus pemetrexed-based chemotherapy, dacomitinib, osimertinib, and erlotinib plus bevacizumab were found to be consistent in yielding the best progression-free survival benefit ( scores = 93%, 79%, 77%, and 70%). Combination treatments caused more toxicity, especially erlotinib plus bevacizumab and gefitinib plus pemetrexed-based chemotherapy, resulting in the greatest incidence of grade greater than or equal to 3 adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS
In Asian patients harboring L858R mutation, TKIs and combination treatments had no OS benefit when compared with conventional chemotherapies. Further studies are warranted to investigate the resistance mechanism with TKIs and potential combination strategies in patients with this common but less favorable mutation.
PubMed: 35516725
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtocrr.2022.100322 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2021Epidermal 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... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
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.
OBJECTIVES
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.
SEARCH METHODS
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.
SELECTION CRITERIA
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.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
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.
MAIN RESULTS
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.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
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 chemotherapy in adverse effect and health-related quality of life. We found limited evidence for increased OS for the TKI when compared with standard chemotherapy, but the majority of the included trials allowed participants to switch treatments on disease progression, which will have a confounding effect on any OS analysis. Single agent-TKI remains the standard of care and the benefit of combining a TKI and chemotherapy remains uncertain as the evidence is based on small patient numbers. Cytotoxic chemotherapy is less effective in EGFR M+ NSCLC than erlotinib, gefitinib, afatinib or icotinib and is associated with greater toxicity. There are no data supporting the use of monoclonal antibody therapy. Icotinib is not available outside China.
Topics: Afatinib; Aged; Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bias; Carboplatin; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Cetuximab; Crown Ethers; ErbB Receptors; Erlotinib Hydrochloride; Female; Gefitinib; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Male; Middle Aged; Mutation; Paclitaxel; Pemetrexed; Progression-Free Survival; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Quality of Life; Quinazolines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33734432
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010383.pub3 -
Pakistan Journal of Pharmaceutical... Jul 2021First-generation EGFR-TKIs (gefitinib/erlotinib) and second-generation EGFR-TKI (afatinib) have become the current first-line treatments for EGFR-mutated non-small cell... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
REPORT- Clinical outcomes of using second - versus first-Generation EGFR-tkis for the First-Line treatment of advanced NSCLC patients with EGFR mutations: A meta-analysis.
First-generation EGFR-TKIs (gefitinib/erlotinib) and second-generation EGFR-TKI (afatinib) have become the current first-line treatments for EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), however, the effects of using second-generation EGFR-TKIs compared to those of using first-generation EGFR-TKIs as a first-line treatment for NSCLC patients with EGFR mutations remain unknown. We conducted this meta-analysis based on 4 retrospective and 2 randomized controlled studies published between 2016 and 2018. We surveyed the effectiveness of afatinib/dacomitinib and gefitinib/erlotinib as first-line treatments for stage III-IV EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients. The combined hazard ratio (HR) for the progression free survival (PFS) of second-generation EGFR-TKI group versus that first-generation drug group was 0.64 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.55-0.74; P<0.001], demonstrating a superior PFS in the second-generation group. This outcome coincided with the subgroup analyses comparing the PFS of patients with EGFR exon 19 deletion (HR = 0.68 [95% CI 0.55-0.83; P = 0.0002]) or L858R mutation (HR = 0.64 [95% CI 0.51-0.81; p=0.0002]). Meanwhile, second-generation drugs could to significantly improve the time to progression (TTFs) compared to first-generation drugs (HR = 0.81 [95% CI 0.67-0.89; P = 0.03]). Afatinib and dacomitinib may be the superior first-line treatment for advanced NSCLC patients with EGFR mutations.
Topics: Afatinib; Antineoplastic Agents; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; ErbB Receptors; Erlotinib Hydrochloride; Gefitinib; Genes, erbB-1; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Mutation; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34799322
DOI: No ID Found