Sally C Lau1, Negar Chooback2, Cheryl Ho3, Barbara Melosky4. 1. Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 2. Cancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario at Kingston General Hospital, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada. 3. Department of Medical Oncology, BC Cancer, Vancouver Centre, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 4. Department of Medical Oncology, BC Cancer, Vancouver Centre, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Electronic address: bmelosky@bccancer.bc.ca.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Second-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) appear superior to first-generation TKIs in clinical trials, but at the cost of greater toxicity. It is unclear whether real-world patients, who often suffer worse outcomes, experience similar survival benefits. Using population-based data, we aim to characterize outcome differences by type of treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed all patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer who initiated treatment with an EGFR TKI at BC Cancer between 2010 and 2015. A propensity score was generated to account for imbalances in patient characteristics between treatment groups. A Cox proportional hazards model based on the propensity score was then used to estimate effects of treatment on survival. RESULTS: A total of 484 patients were identified for analysis. Patients in the second-generation cohort were younger (62 vs. 67 years), had less baseline central nervous system metastases (9% vs. 22%), and more uncommon EGFR mutations (13% vs. 7%). Patients receiving a second-generation TKI had an improved overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.69; P = .05), driven by the subgroup with an EGFR exon 19 deletion. Patients with a L858R mutation did not appear to derive benefit from a second-generation TKI (hazard ratio, 0.91; P = .74). Overall, 40% of patients receiving a second-generation TKI required a dose reduction, but only 1% required discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: Second-generation TKIs tended to be chosen over first-generation TKIs as frontline therapy in younger patients with uncommon EGFR mutations and without central nervous system metastases. The survival benefit of a second-generation TKI seen in clinical trials appeared to be generalizable to real-world patients and is a reasonable first-line therapy.
INTRODUCTION: Second-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) appear superior to first-generation TKIs in clinical trials, but at the cost of greater toxicity. It is unclear whether real-world patients, who often suffer worse outcomes, experience similar survival benefits. Using population-based data, we aim to characterize outcome differences by type of treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed all patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer who initiated treatment with an EGFR TKI at BC Cancer between 2010 and 2015. A propensity score was generated to account for imbalances in patient characteristics between treatment groups. A Cox proportional hazards model based on the propensity score was then used to estimate effects of treatment on survival. RESULTS: A total of 484 patients were identified for analysis. Patients in the second-generation cohort were younger (62 vs. 67 years), had less baseline central nervous system metastases (9% vs. 22%), and more uncommon EGFR mutations (13% vs. 7%). Patients receiving a second-generation TKI had an improved overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.69; P = .05), driven by the subgroup with an EGFR exon 19 deletion. Patients with a L858R mutation did not appear to derive benefit from a second-generation TKI (hazard ratio, 0.91; P = .74). Overall, 40% of patients receiving a second-generation TKI required a dose reduction, but only 1% required discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: Second-generation TKIs tended to be chosen over first-generation TKIs as frontline therapy in younger patients with uncommon EGFR mutations and without central nervous system metastases. The survival benefit of a second-generation TKI seen in clinical trials appeared to be generalizable to real-world patients and is a reasonable first-line therapy.
Authors: Lucas P Carlstrom; Amanda Muñoz-Casabella; Avital Perry; Christopher S Graffeo; Michael J Link Journal: Otol Neurotol Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 2.619
Authors: Shun Lu; Jian-Ying Zhou; Xiao-Min Niu; Jian-Ya Zhou; Hong Jian; Hong-Yan Yin; Sha Guan; Lin-Fang Wang; Ke Li; James He; Wei-Guo Su Journal: Transl Lung Cancer Res Date: 2021-02
Authors: Jason S Agulnik; Goulnar Kasymjanova; Carmela Pepe; Manjusha Hurry; Ryan N Walton; Lama Sakr; Victor Cohen; David Small Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2021-12-07 Impact factor: 3.677