Epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy is effective as first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with mutated EGFR: A meta-analysis from six phase III randomized controlled trials

Gefiinib and erlotinib are two similar small molecules of selective and reversible epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs), which have been approved for second-line or third-line indication in previously treated advanced Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. The results of comparing the EGFR-TKI with standard platinum-based doublet chemotherapy as the first-line treatment in advanced NSCLC patients with activated EGFR mutation were still controversial. A meta-analysis was performed to derive a more precise estimation of these regimens. Finally, six eligible trials involved 1,021 patients were identified. The patients receiving EGFR-TKI as front-line therapy had a significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) than patients treated with chemotherapy [median PFS was 9.5 versus 5.9 months; hazard ratio (HR)=0.37; 95% confidence intervals (CI)=0.27-0.52; p<0.001]. The overall response rate (ORR) of EGFR-TKI was 66.60%, whereas the ORR of chemotherapy regimen was 30.62%, which was also a statistically significant favor for EGFR-TKI [relative risk (RR)=5.68; 95% CI=3.17-10.18; p<0.001]. The overall survival (OS) was numerically longer in the patients received EGFR-TKI than patients treated by chemotherapy, although the difference did not reach a statistical significance (median OS was 30.5 vs. 23.6 months; HR=0.94; 95% CI=0.77-1.15; p=0.57). Comparing with first-line chemotherapy, treatment of EGFR-TKI achieved a statistical significantly longer PFS, higher ORR and numerically longer OS in the advanced NSCLC patients harboring activated EGFR mutations, thus, it should be the first choice in the previously untreated NSCLC patients with activated EGFR mutation.     

Meta-analysis of Seven Randomized Control Trials to Assess the Efficacy and Toxicity of Combining EGFR-TKI with Chemotherapy for Patients with Advanced NSCLC who Failed First-Line Treatment

Background: Some recent clinical trials have been conducted to evaluate a combination of EGFR- TKI withchemotherapy for advanced NSCLC patients as second-line therapy, but the results on the efficacy of such trialsare inconsistent. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination of EGFR-TKIand chemotherapy for patients with advanced NSCLC who failed first-line treatment. Materials and Methods:We searched relative trials from PubMed, EMBASE, ASCO Abstracts, ESMO Abstracts, Cochrane Libraryand Clinical Trials.gov. Outcomes analyzed were overall response rate (ORR), progression- free survival (PFS),overall survival (OS) and major toxicity. Results: Seven trails eventually were included in this meta-analysis,covering 1,168 patients. The results showed that the combined regimen arm had a significant higher ORR (RR1.76 [1.16, 2.66], p=0.007) and longer PFS (HR 0.75 [0.66-0.85], p<0.00001), but failed to show effects on OS (HR0.88 [0.68- 1.15], p=0.36). In terms of subgroup results, continuation of EGFR-TKI in addition to chemotherapyafter first-line EGFR-TKI resistance confered no improvement in ORR (RR 0.95 [0.68, 1.33], p=0.75) and PFS(HR 0.89[0.69, 1.15], p=0.38), and OS was even shorter (HR1.52 [1.05- 2.21], p=0.03). However, combinationtherapy with EGFR-TKI and chemotherapy after failure of first-line chemotherapy significantly improvedthe ORR (RR 2.06 [1.42, 2.99], p=0.0002), PFS (HR 0.71 [0.61, 0.82], p<0.00001) and OS (HR 0.74 [0.62- 0.88],p=0.0008), clinical benefit being restricted to combining EGFR-TKI with pemetrexed, but not docetaxel. Grade3-4 toxicity was found at significantly higher incidence in the combined regimen arm. Conclusions: Continuationof EGFR-TKI in addition to chemotherapy after first-line EGFR-TKI resistance should be avoided. Combinationtherapy of EGFR-TKI and pemetrexed for advanced NSCLC should be further investigated for prognostic andpredictive factors to find the group with the highest benefit of the combination strategy.     

The efficacy of combination of EGFR TKIs and chemotherapy versus EGFR TKIs monotherapy for first-line treatment of NSCLC with EGFR mutation: A Meta-analysis北大核心CSCD

Objective: To investigate the clinical value of epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) combined with chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation. Methods: Retrieval of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and other databases from the start of the database building to 2017 was conducted to search randomized controlled trial of EGFR-TKI combined with chemotherapy vs EGFR-TKI single drug first-line treatment of EGFR mutant NSCLC. Meta-analysis was performed. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS), the secondary end points were objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) and safety. Results: A total of 4 articles were included in this analysis, with a total of 353 patients. Compared with EGFR-TKI monotherapy, EGFR-TKI in combination with chemotherapy significantly prolonged PFS [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.50-0.84, P= 0.001], as well as in subgroups of EGFR 19 deletion, L858R point mutation, age 5=65 years, performance status (PS) score was 1, female and never smoker (all P < 0.05). However, the combination group did not show significant differences in ORR and DCR compared with EGFR-TKI monotherapy group [relative risk (RR) = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.94-1.22, P = 0.282; RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.96-1.08; P = 0.531]. The combined regimen caused more fatigue, nausea and leukopenia (RR = 2.64, 95% CI: 1.32-5.25, P = 0.006; RR = 6.87, 95% CI: 3.06-15.45, P < 0.001; RR = 10.02, 95% CI: 3.18-31.55, P < 0.001). There were no differences in adverse reactions more than grade 3 between two groups (all P > 0.05). Conclusion: The combination of EGFR-TKI and chemotherapy can prolong the PFS compared with EGFR-TKI alone for the first-line treatment of NSCLC with EGFR mutation, and the adverse reactions were tolerable. Copyright © 2018 by TUMOR. All rights reserved.     

化疗间插联合EGFR-TKIs对比单独化疗一线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的meta分析

背景与目的化疗与表皮生长因子受体酪氨酸激酶抑制剂（epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors, EGFR-TKIs）联合疗法一直是许多研究的焦点,其中间插联合疗法受到了更多研究者的关注。本研究旨在系统评价化疗与EGFR-TKIs间插联合疗法对比单独化疗一线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌（non-small cell lung cancer, NSCLC）的有效性及安全性。方法检索hTe Cochrane Library、PubMed、EMBASE、中国生物医学文献数据库（CBM）、知网和万方等数据库关于化疗间插联合EGFR-TKIs疗法和单独化疗一线治疗晚期NSCLC的随机对照试验（randomized controlled trial, RCT）,分析如下结局指标：无进展生存期（progression-free survival, PFS）、总体生存期（overall survival, OS）、客观缓解率（objective response rate, ORR）、疾病控制率（disease control rate, DCR）以及不良反应发生率。由两名研究者根据Cochrane系统评价手册筛选文献、进行质量评价以及提取并交叉核对数据。应用Stata12.0软件进行meta分析。结果本研究共纳入6个RCT,共计933例晚期NSCLC患者。Meta分析结果表明,在晚期NSCLC患者一线治疗中,与单独化疗相比,间插联合疗法虽然延长了患者的PFS（HR=0.72,95%CI：0.53-0.98, P=0.037）,但并不能提高其OS（HR=0.85,95%CI：0.72-1.01,P=0.060）、ORR（OR=1.59,95%CI：0.86-2.95,P=0.142）和DCR（OR=1.09,95%CI：0.95-1.25,P=0.226）。进一步的亚组分析发现,间插联合疗法提高了女性、腺癌、从不吸烟和EGFR突变等患者的PFS,差异具有统计学意义。在安全性方面,间插联合疗法的主要不良反应为皮疹（OR=7.81,95%CI：3.74-16.34,P<0.001）和腹泻（OR=2.73,95%CI：1.92-3.89,P<0.001）。结论一线接受化疗间插联合EGFR-TKIs治疗的NSCLC患者的PFS明显高于接受单独化疗者,其主要不良事件是皮疹和腹泻。因此,间插联合治疗具有一定优势,但仍需要更多大样本、高质量的RCT进一步验证。     

Efficacy of epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors versus chemotherapy as second-line treatment in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with wild-type EGFR: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials

Background

EGFR mutation status is closely related to the efficacy of EGFR-TKIs in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). EGFR-TKIs have become the standard first-line treatment for advanced EGFR-mutation NSCLC, while for EGFR wild-type tumors, the preferred first-line treatment is chemotherapy. However, the efficacy of EGFR-TKIs as second-line treatment in EGFR wild-type NSCLC remains controversial. We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of EGFR-TKI as second-line treatment in EGFR wild-type NSCLC.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials that compared EGFR-TKIs with chemotherapy in previously treated advanced NSCLC with wild-type EGFR were included. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of EGFR-TKIs compared with standard chemotherapy. The endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR).

Results

Six randomized controlled trials with a total of 990 patients with wild-type EGFR were included: 499 in the EGFR-TKIs group and 491 in the chemotherapy group. The results indicated that in the second-line treatment of EGFR wild-type advanced NSCLC, PFS was significantly inferior in the EGFR-TKIs group versus the chemotherapy group (HR = 1.37, 95% CI = 1.20–1.56, P < 0.00001). However, this significant difference did not translate into OS (HR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.87–1.20, P = 0.81). ORR tended to favor chemotherapy but there was no significant difference compared with EGFR-TKI (RR = 1.77, 95% CI = 0.90–3.50, P = 0.10).

Conclusions

Chemotherapy improves PFS significantly but not OS, compared with EGFR-TKIs as a second-line treatment in advanced NSCLC with wild-type EGFR. Whether EGFR-TKIs should be used in EGFR wild-type patients should be considered carefully.     

PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂对比化疗一线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的Meta分析

 目的 系统评价PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂对比化疗一线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的疗效及安全性。方法 通过Web of science等国内外数据库，ASCO会议摘要及杂志筛选文献，进行Meta分析。结果 纳入7项RCT研究，4 101例患者，荟萃分析显示抑制剂联合化疗对比化疗可显著延长患者的PFS（HR=0.59, 95%CI: 0.50~0.70, P<0.00001）、OS（HR=0.65, 95%CI: 0.46~0.92, P=0.02）及ORR（RR=1.72, 95%CI: 1.13~2.62, P=0.01）。亚组分析显示，抑制剂联合化疗可显著延长PFS及OS，且PD-L1表达程度越高，疗效获益越显著。而单药抑制剂对比化疗在延长晚期NSCLC患者的PFS（HR=0.87, 95%CI: 0.57~1.31, P=0.50）、OS（HR=0.82, 95%CI: 0.65~1.03, P=0.09）及提高ORR（RR=1.12, 95%CI: 0.55~2.28, P=0.76）方面两组差异无统计学意义。与化疗相比，单药抑制剂一线治疗PD-L1高表达的晚期NSCLC患者可显著延长OS，但在延长PFS方面未见明显优势。与化疗组相比，抑制剂联合化疗组3~4级不良反应发生率无明显改善（HR=1.09，95%CI: 0.99~1.20, P=0.09），而单药PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂组3~4级不良反应发生率低（RR=0.43, 95%CI: 0.36~0.52, P<0.00001）。 结论 PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂联合化疗一线治疗晚期NSCLC患者疗效优于化疗方案；PD-L1高表达者单药PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂可作为一线治疗的优先选择，且具有良好的安全性。     

雷莫芦单抗治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌有效性及安全性的Meta分析

[摘要] 目的: Meta分析雷莫芦单抗（ramucirumab）治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌（non-small cell lung cancer, NSCLC）的有效性及安全性。方法: 计算机检索Cochrane 图书馆（2017 年第8 期）、Web of Science、Pubmed、EMbase、万方数据库、中国期刊全文数据库(CNKI)、中国生物医学文献数据库（CBM）、中国科技期刊数据库和ASCO、ESMO主要会议数据库,检索时限均从建库至2017 年9 月1 日。收集雷莫芦单抗治疗晚期NSCLC的临床随机对照试验, 由2 位评价员独立筛选文献、提取数据并评估纳入研究的质量后,采用RevMan5.3 软件进行的实验组与对照组雷莫芦单抗治疗后NSCLC患者的无进展生存期（PFS）、总生存期（OS）、客观反应率（ORR）及不良反应等Meta 分析。结果：最终纳入3 项RCT进行Meta 分析,共计1 545 例NSCLC患者,其中雷莫芦单抗组777例,对照组768 例。试验组NSCLC患者的PFS 和OS均优于对照组[HR=0.77, 95%CI(0.69~0.85), P<0.01; HR=0.88, 95%CI(0.78~0.99), P<0.05];但雷莫芦单抗组和对照组ORR比较差异无统计学意义[RR=1.33, 95%CI(0.68~2.61), P>0.05]。雷莫芦单抗联合多西他赛对比多西他赛单药二线治疗可延长晚期NSCLC患者的PFS 和OS [HR=0.77, 95%CI(0.69~0.86), P<0.01 ; HR=0.86, 95%CI(0.76, 0.98), P<0.05];雷莫芦单抗试验组最严重的不良反应为高血压[RR=3.33,95%CI(1.83~6.05), P<0.01], 而恶心、呕吐、腹泻、食欲减退、疲劳、蛋白尿、中性粒细胞减少、白细胞减少、血小板减少、出血事件等两组差异均无统计学意义（均P>0.05）。结论：雷莫芦单抗治疗可延长晚期NSCLC患者的PFS和OS,其最主要的不良反应为高血压。     

一线EGFR-TKIs联合血管生成抑制剂治疗晚期EGFR突变非小细胞肺癌的疗效分析

目的:比较一线表皮生长因子受体酪氨酸激酶抑制剂(epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors, EGFR-TKIs)联合血管生成抑制剂对比EGFR-TKIs单药治疗晚期EGFR突变非小细胞肺癌(non-small cell lung cancer, NSCLC)的疗效和安全性。方法:对PubMed、Embase、Web of Science和Cochrane Library数据库以及欧洲医学肿瘤学会(ESMO)、美国临床肿瘤学会(ASCO)中会议摘要进行了全面的文献检索。检索时间截止至2020年11月13日。使用STATA V.14.0对相关数据进行统计分析。结果:本meta共纳入6个II/III期RCTs(11篇文章),包括1 537例符合分析条件的NSCLC患者。结果表明,与EGFR-TKIs单药组相比,联合血管生成抑制剂组患者的无进展生存期(progression-free survival, PFS)显著延长(HR=0.62,95%CI 0.54～0.70,P<0.001)。然而,联合治疗并不能改善...     

Efficacy of First-line Chemotherapy Affects the Second-Line Setting Response in Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Background: Chemotherapy is the mainstay of treatment for the majority of patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without driver mutations and many receive therapies beyond first-line. Secondline chemotherapy has been disappointing both in terms of response rate and survival and we know relatively little about the prognostic factors. Materials and Methods: One thousand and eight patients with advanced NSCLC who received second-line chemotherapy after progression were reviewed in Shanghai PulmonaryHospital, China, from September 2005 to July 2010. We analyzed the effects of potential prognostic factors on the outcomes of second-line chemotherapy (overall response rate, ORR; progression free survival, PFS; overall survival, OS). Results: The response and progression free survival of first-line chemotherapy affects the ORR, PFS and OS of second-line chemotherapy (ORR: CR/PR 15.4%, SD 10.1%, PD2.3%, p<0.001; PFS: CR/PR 3.80 months, SD 2.77 months, PD 2.03 months, p<0.001; OS: CR/PR 11.60 months, SD 10.33 months, PD 6.57 months, p=0.578, p<0.001, p<0.001, respectively). On multivariate analysis, better response to first-line therapy (CR/PR: HR=0.751, p=0.002; SD: HR=0.781, p=0.021) and progression within 3-6 months (HR=0.626, p<0.001), together with adenocarcinoma (HR=0.815, p=0.017), without liver metastasis (HR=0.541, p=0.001), never-smoker(HR=0.772, p=0.001), and ECOG PS 0-1 (HR=0.745, p=0.021) were predictors for good OS following secondline chemotherapy. Conclusions: Patients who responded to first-line chemotherapy had a better outcome after second-line therapy for advanced NSCLC, and the efficacy of first-line chemotherapy, period of progression, histology, liver metastasis, smoking status and ECOG PS were independent prognostic factors for OS.     

Predictive value of K-ras and PIK3CA in non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with EGFR-TKIs: a systemic review and meta-analysis

Objective

A meta-analysis was performed to augment the insufficient data on the impact of mutative EGFR downstream phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase (PI3K) and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathways on the clinical efficiency of epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients.

Methods

Network databases were explored in April, 2015. Papers that investigated the clinical outcomes of NSCLC patients treated with EGFR-TKIs according to the status of K-ras and/or PIK3CA gene mutation were included. A quantitative meta-analysis was conducted using standard statistical methods. Odds ratios (ORs) for objective response rate (ORR) and hazard ratios (HRs) for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated.

Results

Mutation in K-ras significantly predicted poor ORR [OR =0.22; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.13-0.35], shorter PFS (HR =1.56; 95% CI, 1.27-1.92), and shorter OS (HR =1.59; 95% CI, 1.33-1.91) in NSCLC patients treated with EGFR-TKIs. Mutant PIK3CA significantly predicted shorter OS (HR =1.83; 95% CI, 1.05-3.20), showed poor ORR (OR =0.70; 95% CI, 0.22-2.18), and shorter PFS (HR =1.79; 95% CI, 0.91-3.53) in NSCLC patients treated with EGFR-TKIs.

Conclusion

K-ras mutation adversely affected the clinical response and survival of NSCLC patients treated with EGFR-TKIs. PIK3CA mutation showed similar trends. In addition to EGFR, adding K-ras and PIK3CA as routine gene biomarkers in clinical genetic analysis is valuable to optimize the effectiveness of EGFR-TKI regimens and identify optimal patients who will benefit from EGFR-TKI treatment.KEYWORDS : Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), targeted therapy, K-ras, PIK3CA, meta-analysis     

贝伐单抗联合化疗一线治疗转移性结直肠癌的Meta分析

目的 评价贝伐单抗（bevacizumab,BEV)联合化疗一线治疗转移性结直肠癌（metastaticcolorectal cancer, mCRC）的有效性和安全性。方法 通过The Cochrane Library、PubMed、EMBASE和中国生物医学文献数据库（CBM）、中国期刊全文数据库（CNKI）、维普数据库（VIP）、万方数据库等检索有关BEV联合化疗一线治疗mCRC的随机对照试验（randomized control trial, RCT）;主要研究指标是无进展生存时间（progression free survival, PFS）和总生存时间（overall survival,OS）,次要研究指标包括有效率（objective response rate, ORR）和不良反应;采用相对危险度（relative risk, RR）和风险比（hazard ratios, HR）为效应量,各效应量以95%置信区间（95%CI）表示,Stata 11.0统计软件进行Meta分析。结果 共纳入9项RCT,共3 930例mCRC患者,Meta分析结果显示,与单纯化疗相比,贝伐单抗(bevacizumb, BEV)联合化疗可以降低疾病进展风险（HR=0.62,P<0.0001, 95%CI: 0.64~0.74）和疾病死亡风险（HR=0.84, P<0.001,95%CI: 0.73~0.95）,提高mCRC的ORR（RR=0.80, P<0.001,95%CI: 0.60~0.93）。亚组分析显示BEV联合双药方案可降低疾病进展风险（HR=0.68, P<0.001, 95%CI: 0.46~0.89）,但并没有降低疾病死亡风险（HR=0.85, P=0.068,95%CI:0.68~1.03）;BEV联合氟尿嘧啶类单药降低疾病进展风险（HR=0.56,P<0.001, 95%CI: 0.47~0.64）和疾病死亡风险（HR=0.83,P<0.001,95%CI:0.68~0.97）。在不良反应方面,B E V 联合化疗没有增加治疗相关死亡率（RR=0.97, P=0.91,95%CI:0.62~1.54）;增加BEV相关不良反应发生率。结论 BEV联合化疗一线治疗能提高mCRC患者PFS、OS和RR。BEV联合不同化疗方案所带来生存获益大小不同。虽然BEV相关不良反应增加,但是可控的。     

多西他赛或表皮生长因子受体酪氨酸激酶抑制剂二线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的临床观察

目的 观察多西他赛或表皮生长因子受体酪氨酸激酶抑制剂（epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors,EGFR-TKIs）二线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌（non-small cell lung cancer,NSCLC）的临床疗效及安全性。 方法 回顾性分析2009年1月至2013年6月接受多西他赛或EGFR-TKIs二线治疗晚期NSCLC患者的临床资料,对符合入组标准的100例进行观察和分析,其中52例接受EGFR-TKIs治疗（TKIs组）,48例接受多西他赛治疗（DOC组）。采用Kaplan-Meier方法计算两组患者的中位无疾病进展生存时间（mPFS） 、中位总生存时间（mOS）,并行Log-rank检验。结果 TKIs组、DOC组患者二线治疗后mPFS分别为6个月、3个月（P=0.021）;mOS分别为16个月、10个月（P=0.068）;客观有效率（ORR）分别为23.1％、6.3％（P=0.038）。DOC组Ⅲ~Ⅳ级白细胞减少、中性粒细胞减少及其引起发热的发生率明显高于TKIs组（P均＜0.001）。结论 临床上对具有EGFR敏感突变潜在临床特征的晚期NSCLC患者进行二线治疗时,EGFR-TKIs比多西他赛治疗能显著延长患者中位无疾病进展生存时间,毒副反应较少,具有更高的安全性。     

对比EGFR-TKIs治疗EGFR突变状态未明晚期NSCLC疗效研究

目的探讨对比表皮生长因子受体酪氨酸激酶抑制剂(epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors,EGFR-TKIs)一线、维持及二线治疗EGFR突变状态未明晚期非小细胞肺癌(non-small-cell lung cancer,NSCLC)的疗效。方法回顾性分析接受EGFR-TKIs治疗的57例EGFR突变状态未明晚期NSCLC,按照接受EGFR-TKIs治疗的时机分为EGFR-TKIs治疗一线组(19例)、维持组(18例)和二线组(20例),按照RECIST标准进行疗效评价。结果一线组、维持组和二线组客观有效率(52.6%vs 38.9%vs 35.0%,P=0.098)、中位无进展生存期(4.0月vs 7.8月vs 2.2月,P=0.417)差异无统计学意义,但一线组患者总生存期较维持组和二线组差(8.7月vs 20.0月vs 19.1月,P=0.009)。结论 EGFR突变状态未明晚期NSCLC EGFR-TKIs一线、维持和二线治疗的客观有效率和中位无进展生存期相似,但EGFR-TKIs一线治疗总生存期较短,建议EGFR-TKIs用于维持或二线治疗EGFR突变状态未明晚期NSCLC。     

Intercalated Chemotherapy and Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Inhibitors for Patients With Advanced Non–Small-cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of concurrent epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) plus chemotherapy for unselected patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) produced negative results. Intercalated administration could avoid the reduction of chemotherapy activity due to G₁ cell-cycle arrest from EGFR-TKIs. A PubMed search was performed in December 2015 and updated in February 2016. The references from the selected studies were also checked to identify additional eligible trials. Furthermore, the proceedings of the main international meetings were searched from 2010 onward. We included RCTs comparing chemotherapy intercalated with an EGFR-TKI versus chemotherapy alone for patients with advanced NSCLC. Ten RCTs were eligible (6 with erlotinib, 4 with gefitinib): 39% of patients had a known EGFR mutational status, 43% of whom EGFR mutation positive. The intercalated combination was associated with a significant improvement in overall survival (OS; hazard ratio [HR], 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-0.95; P = .01), progression-free survival (PFS; HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.53-0.68; P < .00001), and objective response rate (ORR; odds ratio [OR], 2.70; 95% CI, 2.08-3.49; P < .00001). Considering only first-line trials, similar differences were found in OS (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72-1.00; P = .05), PFS (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.55-0.73; P < .00001), and ORR (OR, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.65-2.95; P < .00001). In EGFR mutation-positive patients, the addition of an intercalated EGFR-TKI produced a significant benefit in PFS (129 patients; HR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.16-0.37; P < .00001) and ORR (168 patients; OR, 11.59; 95% CI, 5.54-24.25; P < .00001). In patients with advanced NSCLC, chemotherapy plus intercalated EGFR-TKIs was superior to chemotherapy alone, although a definitive interpretation was jeopardized by the variable proportion of patients with EGFR mutation-positive tumors included.     

表皮生长因子受体突变晚期非小细胞肺癌靶向治疗效果影响因素分析

目的:探讨表皮生长因子受体（EGFR）突变晚期非小细胞肺癌（NSCLC）EGFR-酪氨酸激酶抑制剂（EGFR-TKI）治疗效果的影响因素。方法:收集2015年1月至2019年10月南京医科大学附属无锡第二医院接受EGFR-TKI治疗的104例EGFR突变晚期NSCLC患者的临床资料。分析EGFR突变类型与患者的临床病理...     

EGFR-TKIs或联合化疗一线治疗77例晚期肺腺癌临床分析

目的随着肺癌靶向治疗耐药问题的出现,靶向治疗与传统化疗联合成为研究热点。本研究对比表皮生长因子受体-酪氨酸激酶抑制剂(epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors,EGFR-TKIs)联合化疗或单药一线治疗驱动表皮生长因子受体(epidermal growth factor receptor,EGFR)基因阳性晚期肺腺癌的临床疗效及安全性差异,筛选联合治疗优势人群。方法回顾性收集2016-12-01-2018-12-01河南省人民医院收治的初治晚期EGFR(+)肺腺癌77例,依据治疗方案分为联合组和单药组。联合组36例采用培美曲塞+铂类方案化疗,同步口服靶向药物;单药组41例口服EGFR-TKIs。观察随访其治疗后临床疗效及不良反应。采用Kaplan-Meier法行生存分析,Cox回归模型进行多因素分析。结果治疗3个月后联合组客观有效率(objective response rate,ORR)为66.7%(24/36),与单药组53.7%(22/41)相比,差异无统计学意义,χ^2=1.349,P=0.246。疾病控制率(disease control rate,DCR)联合组为100.0%(36/36),单药组为97.6%(40/41),差异无统计学意义,P=1.000。随访截至2019-06-30,总体中位无进展生存期(median progression-free survival,mPFS)为11.5个月,其中联合组mPFS为12个月(95%CI:9.864~14.136),单药组为8个月(95%CI:2.981~13.019),联合组PFS明显优于单药组,差异有统计学意义,χ^2=4.469,P=0.035。胸腔内转移(M1a期)亚组,2组间mPFS差异有统计学意义(HR=0.389,95%CI:0.173~0.874,χ^2=5.873,P=0.015)。联合组血液系统及消化系统不良反应事件发生率更高,差异有统计学意义,P<0.05。2组不良反应均集中在Ⅰ~Ⅱ级,均可耐受。结论 EGFR(+)肺腺癌一线治疗中,1代EGFR-TKIs同步联合培美曲塞+铂类化疗可改善患者PFS,在转移程度较低的M1a期患者中,这种优势更突出。联合治疗增加不良反应事件发生率,但均符合预期并可耐受。     

全脑放疗时间对EGFR突变非小细胞肺癌脑转移患者生存的影响

背景与目的全脑放疗（whole brain radiotherapy, WBRT）在表皮生长因子受体（epidermal growth factor receptor,EGFR）突变的非小细胞肺癌（non-small cell lung cancer, NSCLC）脑转移患者治疗中何时应用尚无高级别的循证医学证据。本研究旨在探讨WBRT的参与时间对携有EGFR突变的NSCLC脑转移患者生存的影响。方法2009年8月-2015年5月在我院确诊的EGFR突变伴脑转移的晚期NSCLC共78例患者,均接受WBRT及EGFR酪氨酸激酶抑制剂（EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors, EGFR-TKIs）治疗的48例初治患者进入临床分析,采用Cox比例风险模型分析患者颅内无进展生存期（progression-free survival, PFS）及总生存期（overall survival, OS）的影响因素。结果全组患者颅内客观缓解率（objective response rate, ORR）为81.3%,颅内疾病控制率（disease control rate, DCR）为93.8%,中位颅内PFS为10个月,中位OS为18个月。颅内PFS的多因素分析显示,美国东部肿瘤协作组评分（Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, ECOG PS）0分-1分（HR=30.436,95%CI：4.721-196.211,P<0.001）及早期WBRT患者（HR=3.663,95%CI：1.657-8.098,P=0.001）的颅内PFS更佳。OS的多因素分析显示,ECOG PS 0分-1分（HR=57.607,95%CI：6.135-540.953,P<0.001）、早期WBRT（HR=2.757,95%CI：1.140-6.669,P=0.024）及立体定向放射外科（stereotaxic radio surgery, SRS）的应用（HR=5.964,95%CI：1.895-18.767,P=0.002）是患者OS的独立预后因素。结论早期WBRT联合TKIs治疗可改善EGFR突变的NSCLC脑转移患者的预后,尚有待大样本的前瞻性临床试验验证。     

VEGF抑制剂联合酪氨酸激酶抑制剂一线治疗EGFR突变晚期非小细胞肺癌的疗效和安全性

目的:探讨血管内皮生长因子(vascular endothelial growth factor,VEGF)抑制剂联合酪氨酸激酶抑制剂(tyrosine kinase inhibitors,TKI)一线治疗表皮生长因子受体(epidermal growth factor receptor,EGFR)突变晚期非小细胞肺癌...     

联合奥沙利铂或顺铂二线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的临床研究

背景与目的：晚期非小细胞肺癌(non-small cell lung cancer,NSCLC)二线化疗可选择单药多西他赛或培美曲塞,联合铂类能否提高疗效及延长生存尚不明确。本研究比较单药多西他赛或培美曲塞与联合奥沙利铂或顺铂方案二线治疗晚期NSCLC近期疗效、生存期和安全性。方法：经一线联合顺铂或卡铂治疗失败的121例晚期NSCLC患者按3∶2∶1比例随机分组,对照组(n=56)：多西他赛75 mg/m2(所有肺癌)或培美曲塞500 mg/m2(非鳞癌),第1天;顺铂组(n=45)：顺铂25 mg/m2,第1~3天联合多西他赛或培美曲塞;奥沙利铂组(n=20)：奥沙利铂130 mg/m2,第1天联合多西他赛或培美曲塞。3周为1个周期,治疗每个周期评价不良反应,每2个周期评价疗效,回访生存期。结果：3组的治疗疾病反应率、无进展生存期(progression free survival,PFS)、总生存期(overall survival,OS)及不良反应差异均无统计学意义(P＞0.05)。≥60岁老年患者较＜60岁患者PFS更长(HR=0.56,95%CI：0.35~0.90,P=0.015);PS评分0~1分患者PFS和OS更长(HR=1.52,95%CI：1.01~2.30,P=0.048;HR=1.90,95%CI：1.17~3.09,P=0.009)。治疗反应率与PFS和OS相关(HR=2.93,95%CI：2.01~4.26,P=0.000;HR=2.03,95%CI：1.37~3.01,P=0.000)。化疗后发生贫血患者PFS和OS呈缩短趋势(HR=1.59,95%CI：0.97~2.61,P=0.066;HR=1.60,95%CI：0.94~2.75,P=0.085),血小板减少患者OS更短(HR=2.97,95%CI：1.01~8.78,P=0.049)。有神经毒性患者PFS呈缩短趋势(HR=3.36,95%CI：0.92~12.25,P=0.066)。二线治疗失败后接受后续治疗者OS有获益(HR=0.36,95%CI：0.22~0.61,P=0.000)。结论：二线联合奥沙利铂或顺铂治疗NSCLC患者疗效和生存期无提高。疾病反应、PS评分与PFS及OS相关,治疗后发生贫血、血小板减少、神经毒性患者预后可能更差。二线治疗失败后接受后续治疗能延长生存期。     

Efficacy and safety of vandetanib, a dual VEGFR and EGFR inhibitor, in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Vandetanib, an oral inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor and epidermal growth factor receptor signaling, has attracted wide interest in treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to assess its efficacy and safety via a systematic review and meta-analysis.Methods: Trials comparing vandetanib-based therapy and non-vandetanib therapy for advanced NSCLC were identified. Endpoints evaluated were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective tumor response rate (ORR), and toxicity. Results: Seven trials including 4,492 patients were included in the analysis. As compared with placebo, vandetanib yielded a clear benefit for ORR (odds ratio (OR) = 2.04; 95% CI, 1.60-2.61; P < 0.001), and a clinically and statistically significant 25% improvement in PFS (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.66-0.85; P < 0.001). However, these benefits did not translate into a significant improvement in OS (HR = 0.95; 95% CI, 0.88-1.04; P = 0.291). Subgroup analyses showed that vandetanib 100mg/d was associated with greater antitumor activity than 300mg/d when given in combination with chemotherapy. In addition, the pooled results demonstrated no statistically significant difference between vandetanib and single-targeted agents in PFS, ORR or OS. Vandetanib was associated with more frequent adverse events. Conclusions: Vandetanib, as compared with placebo, significantly increases ORR and PFS, but does not improve OS in the treatment of advanced NSCLC. As compared with single-targeted agent, vandetanib does not provide any efficacy advantage. Furthermore grade 3 or greater toxicity proved greater in the vandetanib arm.