Literature DB >> 20564408

Comparison of gefitinib versus erlotinib in patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer who failed previous chemotherapy.

Seung Tae Kim1, Jeeyun Lee, Jeong-Hoon Kim, Young-Woong Won, Jong-Mu Sun, Jina Yun, Yeon Hee Park, Jin Seok Ahn, Keunchil Park, Myung-Ju Ahn.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Gefitinib and erlotinib are commonly used for salvage therapy in patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who have progressed on prior therapies. Although both agents have similar structure and have demonstrated efficacy in NSCLC, gefitinib and erlotinib have not been directly compared in terms of efficacy and other clinical outcomes in patients with NSCLC who have failed prior chemotherapy. This prompted us to analyze the clinical outcomes between gefitinib-treated and erlotinib-treated patients with metastatic or recurrent NSCLC.
METHODS: A total of 467 patients with metastatic or recurrent NSCLC who had progressed on prior therapies and received gefitinib or erlotinib therapy between January 2006 and December 2008 were retrospectively reviewed. By using a matched-pair case-control study design, 171 pairs of gefitinib-treated and erlotinib-treated patients were matched according to sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, histologic type, and smoking history.
RESULTS: The median age of all patients was 58 years (range, 20-85 years), and the median ECOG performance status was 1 (range, 0-3). Of 342 patients, 294 (86%) received an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase (TK) inhibitor as second-line or third-line therapy, whereas the remaining 14% had received >2 prior chemotherapy regimens before starting EGFR TK inhibitor therapy. The confirmed overall response rate was 35.1%, and the disease control rate was 64%. With 13.2 months of follow-up, the median overall survival (OS) for the total 342 patients was 12.4 months (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 10.66-14.14 months), and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.2 months (95% CI, 2.65-3.75 months). The overall response rates and disease control rates in the gefitinib-treated and erlotinib-treated groups were 38% versus 32.2% (P = .273) and 63.2% versus 64.9%, respectively (P = .677). There was no statistically significant difference noted with regard to OS (median, 12.6 vs 12.1 months; P = 0.99) and PFS (median, 4.6 vs 2.7 months; P = .06) between the gefitinib-treated and erlotinib-treated groups.
CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective analysis shows that gefitinib and erlotinib appear to have similar antitumor activity in terms of response rate and OS in pretreated patients with metastatic or recurrent NSCLC. Further prospective studies are warranted to elucidate any potential differences in toxicity and in dose intensity between gefitinib- and erlotinib-treated patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20564408     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.25130

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  10 in total

1.  Validation of a high-content screening assay using whole-well imaging of transformed phenotypes.

Authors:  Christina N Ramirez; Tatsuya Ozawa; Toshimitsu Takagi; Christophe Antczak; David Shum; Robert Graves; Eric C Holland; Hakim Djaballah
Journal:  Assay Drug Dev Technol       Date:  2010-12-23       Impact factor: 1.738

Review 2.  Gefitinib: a review of its use in adults with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Sohita Dhillon
Journal:  Target Oncol       Date:  2015-02-01       Impact factor: 4.493

3.  Inhibition of IGF1R signaling abrogates resistance to afatinib (BIBW2992) in EGFR T790M mutant lung cancer cells.

Authors:  Yongik Lee; Yian Wang; Michael James; Joseph H Jeong; Ming You
Journal:  Mol Carcinog       Date:  2015-06-04       Impact factor: 4.784

4.  Biological characteristics and epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors efficacy of EGFR mutation and its subtypes in lung adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Rong-Li Lu; Cheng-Ping Hu; Hua-Ping Yang; Yuan-Yuan Li; Qi-Hua Gu; Lielin Wu
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2013-12-03       Impact factor: 3.201

5.  Factors associated with early progression of non-small-cell lung cancer treated by epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine-kinase inhibitors.

Authors:  Nathalie Rozensztajn; Anne-Marie Ruppert; Armelle Lavole; Etienne Giroux Leprieur; Michael Duruisseaux; Thibault Vieira; Nathalie Rabbe; Roger Lacave; Martine Antoine; Jacques Cadranel; Marie Wislez
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2014-01-10       Impact factor: 4.452

Review 6.  Critical appraisal of the role of gefitinib in the management of locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Ying Yuan; Xiao-Fen Li; Jia-Qi Chen; Cai-Xia Dong; Shan-Shan Weng; Jian-Jin Huang
Journal:  Onco Targets Ther       Date:  2014-05-28       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Gefitinib or erlotinib in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer patients: a cohort study in Taiwan.

Authors:  Chia-Hao Chang; Chih-Hsin Lee; Jen-Chung Ko; Lih-Yu Chang; Ming-Chia Lee; Jann-Yuan Wang; Chong-Jen Yu
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2017-06-22       Impact factor: 4.452

8.  Gefitinib provides similar effectiveness and improved safety than erlotinib for east Asian populations with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Wenxiong Zhang; Yiping Wei; Dongliang Yu; Jianjun Xu; Jinhua Peng
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2018-08-02       Impact factor: 4.430

9.  [Clinical observation of EGFR-TKI as a first-line therapy on advanced non-small cell lung cancer].

Authors:  Jianjie Li; Lili Qu; Xing Wei; Hongjun Gao; Weixia Wang; Haifeng Qin; Chuanhao Tang; Wanfeng Guo; Hong Wang; Xiaoqing Liu
Journal:  Zhongguo Fei Ai Za Zhi       Date:  2012-05

10.  Comparison of effectiveness and adverse effects of gefitinib, erlotinib and icotinib among patients with non-small cell lung cancer: A network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yuanyuan Liu; Yu Zhang; Gangling Feng; Qiang Niu; Shangzhi Xu; Yizhong Yan; Shugang Li; Mingxia Jing
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 2.447

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.