Literature DB >> 25469285

Indirect comparison of the efficacy and safety of gefitinib and cetuximab-based therapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

Jifeng Tang1, Hena Zhang1, Jianzhou Yan2, Rong Shao2.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of gefitinib and cetuximab-based therapies in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The studies to be used for the comparisons were selected from the available literature on gefitinib and cetuximab-based therapies compared to conventional chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. The meta-analysis was performed with RevMan 5.0 software and the Bucher approach was applied to conduct the indirect comparisons. A total of 4 studies, including 935 patients, on gefitinib therapy vs. conventional chemotherapy and 4 studies, including 1,015 patients, on cetuximab-based therapy vs. conventional chemotherapy, were used for indirect comparisons. As regards efficacy, the risk ratio (RR) of objective response rate and 1-year survival rate between gefitinib and cetuximab-based therapies in patients with advanced NSCLC were 0.99 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.75-1.32; P=0.9584] and 0.85 (95% CI: 0.71-1.01; P=0.0696), respectively, and the mean difference of progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) were -0.15 (95% CI: -0.90 to 0.60; P=0.6946) and -1.84 (95% CI: -3.53 to -0.15; P=0.0331), respectively. As regards safety, the RR of grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) was 0.29 (95% CI: 0.19-0.44; P=0.0001). The results demonstrated that cetuximab-based therapy was superior to gefitinib therapy in terms of OS and inferior to gefitinib therapy in terms of AEs, whereas there were no significant differences in terms of efficacy and safety between the two therapies on other endpoints adopted for advanced NSCLC. However, further well-designed randomized controlled trials and continuous studies are required to confirm our findings.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cetuximab; chemotherapy; gefitinib; indirect comparison; meta-analysis; non-small-cell lung cancer

Year:  2014        PMID: 25469285      PMCID: PMC4251263          DOI: 10.3892/mco.2014.424

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Clin Oncol        ISSN: 2049-9450


  23 in total

1.  Erlotinib in lung cancer - molecular and clinical predictors of outcome.

Authors:  Ming-Sound Tsao; Akira Sakurada; Jean-Claude Cutz; Chang-Qi Zhu; Suzanne Kamel-Reid; Jeremy Squire; Ian Lorimer; Tong Zhang; Ni Liu; Manijeh Daneshmand; Paula Marrano; Gilda da Cunha Santos; Alain Lagarde; Frank Richardson; Lesley Seymour; Marlo Whitehead; Keyue Ding; Joseph Pater; Frances A Shepherd
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-07-14       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Meta-analysis in clinical trials.

Authors:  R DerSimonian; N Laird
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  1986-09

Review 3.  Chemotherapy with cetuximab or chemotherapy alone for untreated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Hao Lin; Jingwei Jiang; Xiaohua Liang; Xinli Zhou; Ruofan Huang
Journal:  Lung Cancer       Date:  2010-02-10       Impact factor: 5.705

Review 4.  The EGF receptor family as targets for cancer therapy.

Authors:  J Mendelsohn; J Baselga
Journal:  Oncogene       Date:  2000-12-27       Impact factor: 9.867

5.  Frontline gefitinib in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Meta-analysis of published randomized trials.

Authors:  Ezzeldin M Ibrahim
Journal:  Ann Thorac Med       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 2.219

6.  Randomized phase II study of cetuximab plus cisplatin/vinorelbine compared with cisplatin/vinorelbine alone as first-line therapy in EGFR-expressing advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

Authors:  R Rosell; G Robinet; A Szczesna; R Ramlau; M Constenla; B C Mennecier; W Pfeifer; K J O'Byrne; T Welte; R Kolb; R Pirker; A Chemaissani; M Perol; M R Ranson; P A Ellis; K Pilz; M Reck
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2007-10-17       Impact factor: 32.976

7.  Gefitinib versus docetaxel in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (INTEREST): a randomised phase III trial.

Authors:  Edward S Kim; Vera Hirsh; Tony Mok; Mark A Socinski; Radj Gervais; Yi-Long Wu; Long-Yun Li; Claire L Watkins; Mark V Sellers; Elizabeth S Lowe; Yan Sun; Mei-Lin Liao; Kell Osterlind; Martin Reck; Alison A Armour; Frances A Shepherd; Scott M Lippman; Jean-Yves Douillard
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2008-11-22       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Randomized phase II study of gemcitabine plus cisplatin or carboplatin [corrected], with or without cetuximab, as first-line therapy for patients with advanced or metastatic non small-cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Charles A Butts; David Bodkin; Edward L Middleman; Craig W Englund; David Ellison; Yasmin Alam; Harvey Kreisman; Peter Graze; James Maher; Helen J Ross; Peter M Ellis; William McNulty; Edward Kaplan; Virginie Pautret; Martin R Weber; Frances A Shepherd
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-12-20       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 9.  Simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments: combining direct and indirect evidence.

Authors:  Deborah M Caldwell; A E Ades; J P T Higgins
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-10-15

10.  Long-term survival rates of patients with stage IIIB and IV non-small cell lung cancer treated with cisplatin plus vinorelbine or gemcitabine.

Authors:  Sevket Ozkaya; Serhat Findik; Adem Dirican; Atilla Güven Atici
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2012-09-18       Impact factor: 2.447

View more
  1 in total

1.  Indirect treatment comparison of dabrafenib plus trametinib versus vemurafenib plus cobimetinib in previously untreated metastatic melanoma patients.

Authors:  Adil Daud; Japinder Gill; Sheily Kamra; Lei Chen; Amit Ahuja
Journal:  J Hematol Oncol       Date:  2017-01-04       Impact factor: 17.388

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.