P M Ellis1, N Coakley2, R Feld3, S Kuruvilla4, Y C Ung5. 1. Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON; ; Juravinski Cancer Centre, Hamilton, ON; 2. Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON; ; Cancer Care Ontario, Program in Evidence-Based Care, Hamilton, ON; 3. Division of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, and University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON; 4. Department of Oncology, The University of Western Ontario, and London Regional Cancer Program, London, ON; 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This systematic review addresses the use of epidermal growth factor receptor (egfr) inhibitors in three populations of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc) patients-unselected, selected, and molecularly selected-in three treatment settings: first line, second line, and maintenance. METHODS: Ninety-six randomized controlled trials found using the medline and embase databases form the basis of this review. RESULTS: In the first-line setting, data about the efficacy of egfr tyrosine kinase inhibitors (tkis) compared with platinum-based chemotherapy are inconsistent. Results from studies that selected patients based on clinical characteristics are also mixed. There is high-quality evidence that an egfrtki is preferred over a platinum doublet as initial therapy for patients with an activating mutation of the EGFR gene. The egfrtkis are associated with a higher likelihood of response, longer progression-free survival, and improved quality of life. Multiple trials of second-line therapy have compared an egfrtki with chemotherapy. Meta-analysis of those data demonstrates similar progression-free and overall survival. There is consequently no preferred sequence for second-line egfrtki or second-line chemotherapy. The egfrtkis have also been evaluated as switch-maintenance therapy. No molecular marker could identify patients in whom a survival benefit was not observed; however, the magnitude of the benefit was modest. CONCLUSIONS: Determination of EGFR mutation status is essential to making appropriate treatment decisions in patients with nsclc. Patients who are EGFR mutation-positive should be treated with an egfrtki as first-line therapy. An egfrtki is still appropriate therapy in patients who are EGFR wild-type, but the selected agent should be administered as second- or third-line therapy.
INTRODUCTION: This systematic review addresses the use of epidermal growth factor receptor (egfr) inhibitors in three populations of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc) patients-unselected, selected, and molecularly selected-in three treatment settings: first line, second line, and maintenance. METHODS: Ninety-six randomized controlled trials found using the medline and embase databases form the basis of this review. RESULTS: In the first-line setting, data about the efficacy of egfr tyrosine kinase inhibitors (tkis) compared with platinum-based chemotherapy are inconsistent. Results from studies that selected patients based on clinical characteristics are also mixed. There is high-quality evidence that an egfrtki is preferred over a platinum doublet as initial therapy for patients with an activating mutation of the EGFR gene. The egfrtkis are associated with a higher likelihood of response, longer progression-free survival, and improved quality of life. Multiple trials of second-line therapy have compared an egfrtki with chemotherapy. Meta-analysis of those data demonstrates similar progression-free and overall survival. There is consequently no preferred sequence for second-line egfrtki or second-line chemotherapy. The egfrtkis have also been evaluated as switch-maintenance therapy. No molecular marker could identify patients in whom a survival benefit was not observed; however, the magnitude of the benefit was modest. CONCLUSIONS: Determination of EGFR mutation status is essential to making appropriate treatment decisions in patients with nsclc. Patients who are EGFR mutation-positive should be treated with an egfrtki as first-line therapy. An egfrtki is still appropriate therapy in patients who are EGFR wild-type, but the selected agent should be administered as second- or third-line therapy.
Authors: Karen Kelly; Christopher G Azzoli; Petr Zatloukal; István Albert; Peter Y Z Jiang; David Bodkin; José Rodrigues Pereira; Erzsébet Juhász; Nicholas O Iannotti; Garry Weems; Tony Koutsoukos; Jyoti D Patel Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2012-06 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: Roy S Herbst; Diane Prager; Robert Hermann; Lou Fehrenbacher; Bruce E Johnson; Alan Sandler; Mark G Kris; Hai T Tran; Pam Klein; Xin Li; David Ramies; David H Johnson; Vincent A Miller Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-07-25 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Fred R Hirsch; Fairooz Kabbinavar; Tim Eisen; Renato Martins; Fredrick M Schnell; Rafal Dziadziuszko; Katherine Richardson; Frank Richardson; Bret Wacker; David W Sternberg; Jason Rusk; Wilbur A Franklin; Marileila Varella-Garcia; Paul A Bunn; Ross Camidge; D Ross Camidge Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-08-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Pasi A Jänne; Xiaofei Wang; Mark A Socinski; Jeffrey Crawford; Thomas E Stinchcombe; Lin Gu; Marzia Capelletti; Martin J Edelman; Miguel A Villalona-Calero; Robert Kratzke; Everett E Vokes; Vincent A Miller Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-04-30 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: B Besse; N Leighl; J Bennouna; V A Papadimitrakopoulou; N Blais; A M Traynor; J-C Soria; S Gogov; N Miller; V Jehl; B E Johnson Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2013-12-23 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Thomas J Lynch; David Fenton; Vera Hirsh; David Bodkin; Edward L Middleman; Alberto Chiappori; Balazs Halmos; Reyna Favis; Hua Liu; William L Trepicchio; Omar Eton; Frances A Shepherd Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2009-08 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: Giuseppe Giaccone; Roy S Herbst; Christian Manegold; Giorgio Scagliotti; Rafael Rosell; Vincent Miller; Ronald B Natale; Joan H Schiller; Joachim Von Pawel; Anna Pluzanska; Ulrich Gatzemeier; John Grous; Judith S Ochs; Steven D Averbuch; Michael K Wolf; Pamela Rennie; Abderrahim Fandi; David H Johnson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-03-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: J G Aerts; H Codrington; N A G Lankheet; S Burgers; B Biesma; A-M C Dingemans; A D Vincent; O Dalesio; H J M Groen; E F Smit Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2013-08-28 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Kimberly M Sogi; Katie A Lien; Jeffrey R Johnson; Nevan J Krogan; Sarah A Stanley Journal: ACS Infect Dis Date: 2017-06-05 Impact factor: 5.084
Authors: Kanika Bajaj Pahuja; Thong T Nguyen; Bijay S Jaiswal; Kumar Prabhash; Tarjani M Thaker; Kate Senger; Subhra Chaudhuri; Noelyn M Kljavin; Aju Antony; Sameer Phalke; Prasanna Kumar; Marco Mravic; Eric W Stawiski; Derek Vargas; Steffen Durinck; Ravi Gupta; Arati Khanna-Gupta; Sally E Trabucco; Ethan S Sokol; Ryan J Hartmaier; Ashish Singh; Anuradha Chougule; Vaishakhi Trivedi; Amit Dutt; Vijay Patil; Amit Joshi; Vanita Noronha; James Ziai; Sripad D Banavali; Vedam Ramprasad; William F DeGrado; Raphael Bueno; Natalia Jura; Somasekar Seshagiri Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2018-10-25 Impact factor: 31.743