PURPOSE: Gefitinib is an effective first-line chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients harboring sensitive EGFR mutations. However, whether second-line platinum combination chemotherapy after first-line gefitinib treatment shows similar effects to first-line platinum combination chemotherapy in these patients remains unclear. Therefore, we here aimed to investigate the efficacy of platinum combination chemotherapy after first-line gefitinib treatment in NSCLC patients harboring sensitive EGFR mutations. METHODS/PATIENTS: We retrospectively evaluated the clinical effects of second-line platinum combination chemotherapy after first-line gefitinib treatment in NSCLC patients harboring sensitive EGFR mutations (exon 19 deletion or exon 21 L858R mutation) at five institutions. All patients were initially treated with gefitinib (250 mg/day) followed by platinum combination chemotherapy as second-line chemotherapy. RESULTS: Between January 2006 and December 2012, 42 patients [8 men, 34 women; median age, 63 years (range 39-75 years)] were enrolled. The overall response rate, disease control rate, and median progression-free survival (PFS) were 26.2, 61.9%, and 5.1 months, respectively, after the second-line treatment. The corresponding values for first-line gefitinib treatment were 69.0, 95.2%, and 11.1 months, respectively. Moreover, second-line platinum combination chemotherapy with pemetrexed or bevacizumab-containing regimens was independently associated with improved PFS. CONCLUSIONS: Second-line platinum combination chemotherapy after first-line gefitinib treatment in NSCLC patients harboring sensitive EGFR mutations was effective and showed equivalent outcomes to first-line platinum combination chemotherapy. After failure of first-line gefitinib therapy, second-line platinum combination chemotherapy with pemetrexed or bevacizumab might result in improved PFS.
PURPOSE:Gefitinib is an effective first-line chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients harboring sensitive EGFR mutations. However, whether second-line platinum combination chemotherapy after first-line gefitinib treatment shows similar effects to first-line platinum combination chemotherapy in these patients remains unclear. Therefore, we here aimed to investigate the efficacy of platinum combination chemotherapy after first-line gefitinib treatment in NSCLCpatients harboring sensitive EGFR mutations. METHODS/PATIENTS: We retrospectively evaluated the clinical effects of second-line platinum combination chemotherapy after first-line gefitinib treatment in NSCLCpatients harboring sensitive EGFR mutations (exon 19 deletion or exon 21 L858R mutation) at five institutions. All patients were initially treated with gefitinib (250 mg/day) followed by platinum combination chemotherapy as second-line chemotherapy. RESULTS: Between January 2006 and December 2012, 42 patients [8 men, 34 women; median age, 63 years (range 39-75 years)] were enrolled. The overall response rate, disease control rate, and median progression-free survival (PFS) were 26.2, 61.9%, and 5.1 months, respectively, after the second-line treatment. The corresponding values for first-line gefitinib treatment were 69.0, 95.2%, and 11.1 months, respectively. Moreover, second-line platinum combination chemotherapy with pemetrexed or bevacizumab-containing regimens was independently associated with improved PFS. CONCLUSIONS: Second-line platinum combination chemotherapy after first-line gefitinib treatment in NSCLCpatients harboring sensitive EGFR mutations was effective and showed equivalent outcomes to first-line platinum combination chemotherapy. After failure of first-line gefitinib therapy, second-line platinum combination chemotherapy with pemetrexed or bevacizumab might result in improved PFS.
Authors: David G Pfister; David H Johnson; Christopher G Azzoli; William Sause; Thomas J Smith; Sherman Baker; Jemi Olak; Diane Stover; John R Strawn; Andrew T Turrisi; Mark R Somerfield Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-12-22 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Paolo Ceppi; Marco Volante; Silvia Saviozzi; Ida Rapa; Silvia Novello; Alberto Cambieri; Marco Lo Iacono; Susanna Cappia; Mauro Papotti; Giorgio V Scagliotti Journal: Cancer Date: 2006-10-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Caroline Mariano; Ian Bosdet; Aly Karsan; Diana Ionescu; Nevin Murray; Janessa J Laskin; Yongliang Zhai; Barbara Melosky; Sophie Sun; Cheryl Ho Journal: Lung Cancer Date: 2013-10-19 Impact factor: 5.705
Authors: Henry L Gomez; Sergio L Santillana; Carlos S Vallejos; Raul Velarde; Juvenal Sanchez; Xinpeng Wang; Nancy L Bauer; Richard D Hockett; Victor J Chen; Clet Niyikiza; Axel R Hanauske Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2006-02-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Jennifer Sigmond; Harold H J Backus; Dorine Wouters; Olaf H Temmink; Gerrit Jansen; Godefridus J Peters Journal: Biochem Pharmacol Date: 2003-08-01 Impact factor: 5.858
Authors: George N Naumov; Monique B Nilsson; Tina Cascone; Alexandra Briggs; Oddbjorn Straume; Lars A Akslen; Eugene Lifshits; Lauren Averett Byers; Li Xu; Hua-Kang Wu; Pasi Jänne; Susumu Kobayashi; Balazs Halmos; Daniel Tenen; Xi M Tang; Jeffrey Engelman; Beow Yeap; Judah Folkman; Bruce E Johnson; John V Heymach Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2009-05-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Ernest Nadal; Dolores Bautista; Luis Cabezón-Gutiérrez; Ana Laura Ortega; Héctor Torres; David Carcedo; Lucía Ruiz de Alda; J Francisco Garcia; Paula Vieitez; Federico Rojo Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2021-06-10 Impact factor: 4.430