-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2007Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a highly aggressive malignancy whose incidence is expected to increase in the United Kingdom, Western Europe, and Australia over... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a highly aggressive malignancy whose incidence is expected to increase in the United Kingdom, Western Europe, and Australia over the next 20 years as a result of occupational exposure to asbestos fibres. Surgery is feasible in only a small proportion of cases, and radiotherapy and cytotoxic chemotherapy are used in palliation. Pemetrexed is the first and only chemotherapy agent that has been granted a marketing approval for use in combination with cisplatin for the treatment of chemo-naïve patients with unresectable MPM.
OBJECTIVES
To examine evidence on the clinical effectiveness of pemetrexed disodium used in combination with cisplatin for the treatment of unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma in chemotherapy naïve patients compared with other cytotoxic agents used alone or in combination, or supportive care.
SEARCH STRATEGY
CENTRAL (Issue 2, 2005), EMBASE (1980-2005), MEDLINE (1980-2005), HTA database (1990-2005), Web of Knowledge (1990-2005) and handsearching (including reference lists of retrieved articles and the pharmaceutical company submission to to NICE), up to October 2005.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) where the use of pemetrexed disodium in combination with cisplatin is compared with other cytotoxic agents, or supportive care for the treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma (or non-RCTs, in the absence of RCT data ).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Outcomes included overall survival, tumour response, progression-free survival, toxicity and quality of life. Data extraction and quality assessment of included trials was completed independently. Trial data and quality assessment were tabulated and presented narratively.
MAIN RESULTS
One RCT involving 448 patients and comparing pemetrexed plus cisplatin versus cisplatin alone for the treatment of unresectable malignant mesothelioma was included in the review. In the intention-to-treat study population, the median survival was statistically significantly longer in the combination arm of pemetrexed plus cisplatin when compared with the cisplatin alone arm. (12.1 and 9.3 months, respectively, p=0.002). The incidence of grade 3/4 toxicities was higher in the combination arm compared with the cisplatin alone arm.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Pemetrexed disodium in combination with cisplatin and with folic acid and vitamin B(12 )supplementation may improve survival when used in combination with cisplatin in good performance status patients. Further studies including patients with poor performance status are needed in order to generalise the treatment findings. Further studies are also needed into the optimum chemotherapy, and a clear definition of what constitutes best supportive care.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Cisplatin; Glutamates; Guanine; Humans; Mesothelioma; Pemetrexed; Pleural Neoplasms
PubMed: 17253564
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005574.pub2 -
Cancers Oct 2022(1) Background: Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted in combination with Efficacy and Safety of Epidermal Growth Factor... (Review)
Review
Efficacy and Safety of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR)-Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Combination Therapy as First-Line Treatment for Patients with Advanced -Mutated, Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.
(1) Background: Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted in combination with Efficacy and Safety of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor(EGFR)-Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor (TKI) for the first-line treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer; however, head-to-head comparisons of combination therapies are still lacking. Therefore, this study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of various combination treatments. (2) Methods: We conducted a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, and COCHRANE for relevant RCTs. (3) Results: TKI combined with antiangiogenic therapy, chemotherapy, or radiation achieved a significant benefit compared with TKI alone for progression free survival (PFS). A combination with radiation yielded better benefits in PFS than any other treatment. In terms of overall survival (OS), only the combination with pemetrexed and carboplatin (HR = 0.63, 95% credible interval 0.43-0.86)/radiation (0.44, 0.23-0.83) was superior to TKI alone. All of the combination therapies may increase the incidence of ≥Grade 3 AEs, as the pooled RRs are over 1; different toxicity spectrums were revealed for individual treatments. (4) Conclusions: The TKI combination of radiation/pemetrexed and carboplatin could provide the best antitumor effects among the first generation TKI-based treatments. Considering safety, ramucirumab and bevacizumab may be the ideal additions to TKIs (systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42022350474).
PubMed: 36230817
DOI: 10.3390/cancers14194894 -
Respiratory Medicine Aug 2018Advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is generally treated with platinum/pemetrexed-based first-line therapy. Once the disease progresses, evidence for the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is generally treated with platinum/pemetrexed-based first-line therapy. Once the disease progresses, evidence for the efficacy of palliative treatments is lacking, and platinum re-challenge or single-agent chemotherapy are commonly used. To assess the effects of cytostatic or targeted therapy for treating MPM, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were searched to identify published articles on second-line treatments for recurrent or advanced mesothelioma. Inclusion criteria were publication in the English language, describing clinical trials with 20 or more patients, and evaluability for efficacy and for receiving second-line systemic therapies. Data were pooled using number of events/number of evaluable patients, median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), according to a fixed or random effect model. Pooled median OS was the primary endpoint.
RESULTS
A total of 49 eligible studies (n = 3938 patients; range, 12-400) were identified. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.4 months (95%CI 2.87-3.93). Median pooled OS was 7.86 (95%CI 7.01-8.72). The pooled overall response rate (ORR) was 8.63% (95%CI 6-11.26), and the pooled disease control rate (DCR) was 54.8% (95%CI 48.9-60.6). Median pooled OS with platinum- and pemetrexed-based chemotherapy were 7.93 and 7.78 months, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
There remains uncertainty about the ideal second-line agent for MPM. Based on this meta-analysis, palliative chemotherapy or other experimental agents can be considered for patients with MPM who desire further treatment after their disease has progressed, during or after first-line therapy.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Clinical Trials as Topic; Female; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Male; Mesothelioma; Mesothelioma, Malignant; Pemetrexed; Platinum; Progression-Free Survival; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30053976
DOI: 10.1016/j.rmed.2018.06.026 -
Cancers Dec 2021Patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) have very poor prognoses, and pemetrexed plus platinum is the standard first-line therapy. However, the second-line... (Review)
Review
Patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) have very poor prognoses, and pemetrexed plus platinum is the standard first-line therapy. However, the second-line therapy for relapsed MPM remains controversial. A comprehensive search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating various second-line regimens in patients with relapsed MPM. Indirect comparisons of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were performed using network meta-analysis. Surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values were used to rank the included treatments according to each outcome. Nivolumab alone or nivolumab plus ipilimumab provided significantly longer OS than placebo (hazard ratio (HR): 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.55-0.94 for nivolumab alone; HR: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.31-0.92 for nivolumab plus ipilimumab). The best SUCRA ranking for OS was identified for nivolumab plus ipilimumab (SUCRA: 90.8%). Tremelimumab, vorinostat, nivolumab alone, chemotherapy (CTX), asparagine-glycine-arginine-human tumor necrosis factor plus CTX, and nivolumab plus ipilimumab all produced noticeable PFS benefits compared with placebo. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab had the best PFS ranking (SUCRA: 92.3%). Second-line treatment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab provided the OS and PFS outcomes for patients with relapsed MPM.
PubMed: 35008346
DOI: 10.3390/cancers14010182 -
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 -
Health Technology Assessment... Jul 2013The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has issued multiple guidance for the first-line management of patients with lung cancer and recommends... (Review)
Review
Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of first-line chemotherapy for adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and economic evaluation.
BACKGROUND
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has issued multiple guidance for the first-line management of patients with lung cancer and recommends different combinations of chemotherapy treatments. This review provides a synthesis of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness evidence supporting current guidance.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of first-line chemotherapy currently licensed in Europe and recommended by NICE, for adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
DATA SOURCES
Three electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library) were searched from 2001 to August 2010.
REVIEW METHODS
Trials that compared first-line chemotherapy currently licensed in Europe and recommended by NICE in chemotherapy-naive adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC were included. Data on key outcomes including, but not limited to, overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events (AEs) were extracted. For the assessment of cost-effectiveness, outcomes included incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Analyses were performed for three NSCLC subpopulations: patients with predominantly squamous disease, patients with predominantly non-squamous disease and patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation-positive (M+) status. Meta-analysis and mixed-treatment comparison methodology were conducted where appropriate.
RESULTS
Twenty-three trials involving > 11,000 patients in total met the inclusion criteria. The quality of the trials was poor. In the case of patients with squamous disease, there were no statistically significant differences in OS between treatment regimes. The mixed-treatment comparison demonstrated that, in patients with non-squamous disease, pemetrexed (Alimta®, Eli Lilly and Company; PEM) + platinum (PLAT) increases OS statistically significantly compared with gemcitabine (Gemzar®, Eli Lilly and Company; GEM) + PLAT [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.85; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 0.98] and that paclitaxel (Abraxane®, Celgene Corporation; PAX) + PLAT increases OS statistically significantly compared with docetaxel (Taxotere®, Sanofi-aventis; DOC) + PLAT (HR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.93). None of the comparisons found any statistically significant differences in OS among patients with EGFR M+ status. Direct meta-analysis showed a statistically significant improvement in PFS with gefitinib (Iressa®, AstraZeneca; GEF) compared with DOC + PLAT and PAX + PLAT (HR = 0.49; 95% CI 0.33 to 0.73; and HR = 0.38; 95% CI 0.24 to 0.60, respectively). No papers related to UK decision-making were identified. A de novo economic model was developed. Using list prices (British National Formulary), cisplatin (CIS) doublets are preferable to carboplatin doublets, but this is reversed if electronic market information tool prices are used, in which case drug administration costs then become more important than drug acquisition costs. For patients with both squamous and non-squamous disease, moving from low to moderate willingness-to-pay thresholds, the preferred drugs are PAX → GEM → DOC. However, in patients with non-squamous disease, PEM + CIS resulted in increased OS and would be considered cost-effective up to £35,000 per QALY gained. For patients with EGFR M+, use of GEF compared with PAX or DOC yields very high incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Vinorelbine (Navelbine®, Pierre Fabre Pharmaceutical Inc.) was not shown to be cost-effective in any comparison.
LIMITATIONS
Poor trial quality and a lack of evidence for all drug comparisons complicated and limited the data analysis. Outcomes and adverse effects are not consistently combined across the trials. Few trials reported quality-of-life data despite their relevance to patients and clinicians.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this comprehensive review are unique to NSCLC and will assist clinicians to make decisions regarding the treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC. The design of future lung cancer trials needs to reflect the influence of factors such as histology, genetics and the new prognostic biomarkers that are currently being identified. In addition, trials will need to be adequately powered so as to be able to test for statistically significant clinical effectiveness differences within patient populations. New initiatives are in place to record detailed information on the precise chemotherapy (and targeted chemotherapy) regimens being used, together with data on age, cell type, stage of disease and performance status, allowing for very detailed observational audits of management and outcomes at a population level. It would be useful if these initiatives could be expanded to include the collection of health economics data.
FUNDING
The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell; Clinical Trials as Topic; Cost-Benefit Analysis; ErbB Receptors; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Neoplasm Metastasis; Quality-Adjusted Life Years
PubMed: 23886301
DOI: 10.3310/hta17310 -
PloS One 2022Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) monotherapy is the standard of care in treating advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The efficacy and tolerability of combining pemetrexed-based chemotherapy with gefitinib in the first-line treatment of non-small cell lung cancer with mutated EGFR: A pooled analysis of randomized clinical trials.
BACKGROUND
Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) monotherapy is the standard of care in treating advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Nevertheless, whether adding pemetrexed-based chemotherapy to EGFR-TKI targeted therapy furtherly prolongs survival outcomes and improves responses remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted this pooled analysis to compare the efficacy and tolerability between gefitinib plus pemetrexed-based chemotherapy and gefitinib alone in the first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC patients with mutated EGFR.
METHODS
We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL on June 23, 2022. Eligible studies were registered randomized clinical trials comparing gefitinib plus pemetrexed-based chemotherapy with gefitinib alone. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and discontinuation rate (DR) were explored as secondary outcomes.
RESULTS
Eight studies within five randomized clinical trials were eligible. Gefitinib combined with pemetrexed-based chemotherapy significantly prolonged OS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.57, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37-0.89, p = 0.0125) and PFS (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.39-0.70, p < 0.0001) versus gefitinib alone. In subgroup analysis, patients with EGFR exon 19 deletion and exon 21 L858R could benefit from the addition of pemetrexed-based chemotherapy to gefitinib in terms of PFS (EGFR exon 19 deletion: HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.34-0.75, p = 0.0008; EGFR exon 21 L858R: HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.26-0.82, p = 0.0079) but not OS. In addition, ORR was improved after the administration of gefitinib plus pemetrexed-based chemotherapy against gefitinib (odds ratio [OR] 1.91, 95% CI 1.44-2.55, p < 0.0001). Both strategies showed comparable DCRs (OR 1.46, 95% CI 0.94-2.26, p = 0.0952) and DRs (risk ratio [RR] 2.80, 95% CI 0.69-11.44, p = 0.1509).
CONCLUSION
Compared with gefitinib alone, combining pemetrexed-based chemotherapy with gefitinib significantly improved OS and PFS in advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients with acceptable tolerability. However, the accurate sub-population who could have OS benefits requires further validation.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; ErbB Receptors; Gefitinib; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Mutation; Pemetrexed; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36215289
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0275919 -
OncoTargets and Therapy 2018Pemetrexed-based chemotherapy regimens (pem regimens) are the standard first-line treatment option in patients with non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The... (Review)
Review
Efficacy of pemetrexed-based regimens in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients with activating epidermal growth factor receptor mutations after tyrosine kinase inhibitor failure: a systematic review.
Pemetrexed-based chemotherapy regimens (pem regimens) are the standard first-line treatment option in patients with non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The objective of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy of pemetrexed in the context of epidermal growth factor receptor () mutation-positive NSCLC following the failure of -tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment. We searched biomedical literature databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library) and conference proceedings for studies evaluating the efficacy of pemetrexed monotherapy or pemetrexed combined with platinum or any other chemotherapeutic agent in -mutation-positive NSCLC after -TKI failure. We extracted data of primary outcomes of interest (progression-free survival [PFS], overall survival [OS], and overall response rate [ORR]). The weighted median PFS, OS, and ORR were then calculated. Of 83 potentially relevant studies, eight (three randomized studies and five retrospective studies) were identified (involving 1,193 patients) and included in this systematic review, with 640 patients receiving pem regimens. The weighted median PFS, median OS, and ORR for patients treated with pem regimens were 5.09 months, 15.91 months, and 30.19%, respectively. Our systematic review results showed a favorable efficacy profile of pem regimens in NSCLC patients with mutation after -TKI failure.
PubMed: 29695919
DOI: 10.2147/OTT.S157370 -
BioMed Research International 2018To evaluate the effect of combination maintenance therapy of pemetrexed plus bevacizumab for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To evaluate the effect of combination maintenance therapy of pemetrexed plus bevacizumab for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.
METHODS
We identified relevant studies by electronic search (Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science from 1 January 1960 to 29 October 2016) and manual search. The primary outcome of interest was progression-free survival (PFS) and secondary end point included overall survival (OS) and toxicities. The data was pooled for quantitative analysis and the final effect size was reported as hazard ratio (HR) for survival outcomes and relative risk (RR) for safety outcomes, both with a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Three randomized controlled trials enrolling 1302 patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer were included in this meta-analysis. An evident PFS improvement (HR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.63-0.83, < 0.01) was observed in patients with pemetrexed and bevacizumab combination maintenance therapy compared with single-agent maintenance therapy, yet it did not subsequently lead to a significant improvement in OS (HR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.84-1.10, = 0.66). Our analysis also showed statistically increased risks for provoking grade 3-4 adverse events in patients managed using pemetrexed plus bevacizumab combination (RR = 1.59, 95% CI = 1.07-2.36, = 0.022).
CONCLUSIONS
Pemetrexed plus bevacizumab combination maintenance therapy leads to significant improvement in PFS but not in OS for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer, which also increases the risks of grade 3-4 adverse events. Yet, in view of the limitation of existing studies and this meta-analysis, current evidence is not adequate to support routine use of pemetrexed-bevacizumab maintenance.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bevacizumab; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Pemetrexed; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29998136
DOI: 10.1155/2018/5839081 -
OncoTargets and Therapy 2018The development of acquired resistance to the first-line epidermal growth factor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) treatment in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is...
Chemotherapy with or without pemetrexed as second-line regimens for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients who have progressed after first-line EGFR TKIs: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
PURPOSE
The development of acquired resistance to the first-line epidermal growth factor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) treatment in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is inevitable, and most of these patients needed second-line chemotherapy. Furthermore, the optimum chemotherapeutic regimen is unclear. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the chemotherapeutic regimens "with-pemetrexed" versus "non-pemetrexed" in advanced NSCLC patients who had progressed after first-line EGFR-TKIs.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and the Web of science for relevant clinical trials. Outcomes analyzed were response rate (RR), disease control rate (DCR), 1-year survival rate (1-year SR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).
RESULTS
One randomized controlled trial (RCT) and three retrospective studies were included in this meta-analysis, covering a total of 354 patients. The results showed that there was no significant difference between with-pemetrexed arm and non-pemetrexed arm in RR (OR 1.43, 95% CI 0.85-2.41, =0.18), DCR (OR 1.5, 95% CI 0.94-2.39, =0.09), and 1-year SR (OR 1.47, 95% CI 0.79-2.74, =0.22). But the with-pemetrexed chemotherapeutic regimens significantly improved the PFS (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.46-0.81, =0.0005) and OS (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.42-0.90, =0.01).
CONCLUSION
The second-line with-pemetrexed chemotherapeutic regimens provided significantly longer PFS and OS than non-pemetrexed chemotherapeutic regimens. These findings indicate that the with-pemetrexed chemotherapeutic regimen may be an optimal second-line chemotherapeutic regimen for patients with advanced NSCLC following EGFR-TKI failure.
PubMed: 29983578
DOI: 10.2147/OTT.S160147