R Li1, Q Li2, S Lin2, W Li2, L Yu2, L Wang2, X Dong2, L Yu2, S Li2, W Liu3, B Li4. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute Affiliated to Shandong University, No 440, Jiyan Road, Jinan, Shandong, China. 2. Department of Oncology II, Yantai Affiliated Hospital of Binzhou Medical University, Yantai, Shandong, China. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin, China. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute Affiliated to Shandong University, No 440, Jiyan Road, Jinan, Shandong, China. lrjsss@163.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the pure prognostic role of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation status and subtype in lung adenocarcinoma patients irrespective of therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 119 cases of completely resected pathological stage I lung adenocarcinoma patients who received no postoperative chemotherapy or tyrosine kinase inhibitors. EGFR gene mutations from 18 to 21 exons were tested for all the patients. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between patients with different EGFR mutation status and subtype using Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: EGFR mutations were detected in 54 (45.4%) patients including two common mutation subtypes: 32 in-frame deletion within exon 19 (19del) and 19 point mutation within exon 21 (L858R). The frequency of EGFR mutations was much greater for patients of non-smokers versus current or ever smokers (58.1 versus 24.4%, P = 0.000), and a little greater for females versus males (53.8 versus 35.2%, P = 0.042). The median follow-up duration was 43.5 months, and there were no differences on DFS (P = 0.461) and OS (P = 0.989) between patients with EGFR mutations and those without in univariate analysis. The patients harboring 19del mutation had a better DFS (P = 0.028) and OS (P = 0.001) than the patients harboring L858R mutation with significant statistical difference. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that there is no difference on survival between patients with EGFR mutations and those without, but the patients harboring EGFR 19del mutation have survival advantage compared to those harboring EGFR L858R mutation.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the pure prognostic role of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation status and subtype in lung adenocarcinomapatients irrespective of therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 119 cases of completely resected pathological stage I lung adenocarcinomapatients who received no postoperative chemotherapy or tyrosine kinase inhibitors. EGFR gene mutations from 18 to 21 exons were tested for all the patients. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between patients with different EGFR mutation status and subtype using Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS:EGFR mutations were detected in 54 (45.4%) patients including two common mutation subtypes: 32 in-frame deletion within exon 19 (19del) and 19 point mutation within exon 21 (L858R). The frequency of EGFR mutations was much greater for patients of non-smokers versus current or ever smokers (58.1 versus 24.4%, P = 0.000), and a little greater for females versus males (53.8 versus 35.2%, P = 0.042). The median follow-up duration was 43.5 months, and there were no differences on DFS (P = 0.461) and OS (P = 0.989) between patients with EGFR mutations and those without in univariate analysis. The patients harboring 19del mutation had a better DFS (P = 0.028) and OS (P = 0.001) than the patients harboring L858R mutation with significant statistical difference. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that there is no difference on survival between patients with EGFR mutations and those without, but the patients harboring EGFR 19del mutation have survival advantage compared to those harboring EGFRL858R mutation.
Authors: David M Jackman; Beow Y Yeap; Lecia V Sequist; Neal Lindeman; Alison J Holmes; Victoria A Joshi; Daphne W Bell; Mark S Huberman; Balazs Halmos; Michael S Rabin; Daniel A Haber; Thomas J Lynch; Matthew Meyerson; Bruce E Johnson; Pasi A Jänne Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2006-07-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Benjamin Izar; Lecia Sequist; Mihan Lee; Alona Muzikansky; Rebecca Heist; John Iafrate; Dora Dias-Santagata; Douglas Mathisen; Michael Lanuti Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2013-08-08 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Yun Du; Xiao Guo; Rui Wang; Yang Ma; Yan Zhang; Ying Liu; Lvli Dong; Juan Wu; Xiaokun Ji; Heng Wang Journal: J Cancer Date: 2020-02-06 Impact factor: 4.207