EGFR敏感突变的晚期肺腺癌一线化疗与吉非替尼联合治疗的随机对照研究

背景与目的：表皮生长因子受体(epidermal growth factor receptor,EGFR)敏感突变的晚期肺腺癌患者目前标准一线治疗方案为表皮生长因子受体-酪氨酸激酶抑制剂(epithelial growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor,EGFR-TKI)单药治疗。该研究探索化疗联合吉非替尼与单用化疗、单用吉非替尼在EGFR基因敏感突变的晚期肺腺癌一线治疗中的疗效及安全性比较。方法：本研究共纳入了61例EGFR基因敏感突变(19外显子缺失突变或21外显子L858R点突变)、PS 0～1分的初治晚期肺腺癌患者,并用随机数字法随机分成3组。A组20例,给予AC方案化疗(培美曲塞500 mg/m²,第1天;卡铂AUC 5,第1天)联合口服吉非替尼(250 mg/d,第5~21天),每4周为1个周期,最多6个周期,然后每4周进行1次培美曲塞单药联合吉非替尼口服(用药方法及剂量同前)维持治疗;B组20例,给予AC方案化疗(培美曲塞500 mg/m²,第1天;卡铂AUC 5,第1天),每4周为1个周期,最多6个周期,然后每4周进行1次培美曲塞单药维持治疗;C组21例,口服吉非替尼治疗(250 mg/d)。3组的治疗均持续至患者出现疾病进展或出现无法耐受的不良反应或死亡。研究的主要终点为中位无进展生存时间(progression-free survival,PFS)和12个月PFS率,次要终点为总体缓解率、安全性/不良反应。结果：随访中A、C组各失访1例。A组患者中位PFS为20.1个月(95%CI：18.0～22.2个月),B组患者中位PFS为5.5个月(95%CI：3.9～7.2个月),C组患者中位PFS为9.8个月(95%CI：6.8～12.8个月)。A组的12个月PFS率为78.9%,B组为15.0%,C组为40.0%。总体缓解率：A组为84.2%,B组为35.0%,C组为65.0%。安全性方面,严重不良反应的发生率A组为36.8%,B组为30.0%,C组为5.0%。最常见的3～4度不良反应为中性粒细胞减少(A组3例、B组4例)、乏力(A组2例、B组2例)及肝功能损害(A组2例、C组1例)。结论：一线接受化疗与吉非替尼联合治疗的EGFR敏感突变的晚期肺腺癌患者PFS更长。长期的生存结果仍在进一步随访中。     

Second‐line treatments after first‐line gefitinib therapy in advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer

Gefitinib is effective as first‐line therapy for advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, after failure of gefitinib, it is unknown whether any second‐line regimens could lead to better outcomes. To study the influence of different second‐line antitumor regimens on the outcomes of patients with NSCLC after failure of first‐line gefitinib, we carried out a retrospective study in a tertiary referral medical center to investigate the prognosis of patients with NSCLC receiving second‐line antitumor treatment after gefitinib therapy. Clinical data and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutational status of tumors were collected. A total of 195 patients with Stage IIIb or IV NSCLC receiving first‐line gefitinib and at least 1 subsequent line therapy were identified. A second‐line therapy with a platinum‐based combination or taxane‐containing regimen were associated with a higher therapy response, whereas a platinum‐based combination was linked to better overall survival. Ninety‐five patients had tumors with known EGFR mutation status; 61 had EGFR mutations and 34 had wild‐type EGFR. A second‐line therapy with a gemcitabine/platinum combination regimen resulted in better overall survival than erlotinib in patients with EGFR mutations (p = 0.035) but not in patients with wild‐type EGFR (p = 0.785). The study suggested that, after failure of first‐line gefitinib therapy, second‐line platinum‐based combination regimens were associated with a better overall survival than other regimens, including erlotinib. The survival benefit of platinum‐based combination regimens existed in patients with mutant EGFR but not wild‐type EGFR.     

吉非替尼联合化疗治疗靶向治疗失败的EGFR T790M野生型晚期肺腺癌的疗效观察

目的:探讨吉非替尼联合化疗治疗靶向治疗失败的EGFR T790M野生型晚期肺腺癌的疗效和安全性。方法:63例靶向治疗失败的EGFR T790M野生型的晚期肺腺癌患者分为口服吉非替尼（250 mg qd）联合化疗［（培美曲塞（500 mg/m2 d1）+顺铂（75 mg/m2 d1）］组（联合组33例）和培美曲塞（500 mg/m2 d1）+顺铂（75 mg/m2 d1）化疗组（化疗组30例）,21天为一个周期。对患者的近期疗效和毒副反应进行比较。结果:联合组共33例,其中CR 0例,PR 13例,SD 14例,PD 6例;化疗组共30例,其中CR 0例,PR 11例,SD 12例,PD 7例。两组的客观缓解率分别为39.4%和36.7%,两者差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。两组疾病控制率分别为81.8%和76.7%,两者差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。联合组中位无疾病进展期显著高于化疗组（6.2个月 vs 4.6个月,P＜0.05）。两组的血液学毒性和非血液学毒性发生率差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论:吉非替尼联合化疗二线治疗EGFR T790M野生型晚期肺腺癌疗效可靠,毒副反应可耐受。     

不同化疗方案治疗EGFR常见突变肺腺癌疗效的回顾性研究

目的:探究EGFR常见突变的肺腺癌患者最佳化疗方案。方法:回顾性收集2007年6月至2014年6月于广东省肺癌研究所就诊的晚期原发性肺腺癌患者的临床资料,分析不同化疗方案对于携带EGFR常见突变肺癌患者的疗效。结果:205例携带EGFR常见突变的肺腺癌患者纳入研究,接受吉西他滨+铂类、培美曲塞+铂类和紫杉醇类+铂类方案治疗的患者分别为119、60和26例,客观缓解率及无进展生存期分别为25.2%、25.0%、30.8%及5.5、5.2、6.2个月,差异均无统计学意义(P=0.979;P=0.811)。结论:以吉西他滨、培美曲塞和紫杉醇类为基础的含铂化疗方案在携带EGFR常见突变肺腺癌患者中的疗效并无差异。     

EGFR基因敏感突变晚期肺腺癌一线培美曲塞同药维持化疗疗效分析

目的:分析表皮生长因子受体(EGFR)基因敏感突变晚期肺腺癌患者一线培美曲塞维持化疗疗效。方法:对我院2012年6月始至今收治的伴有EGFR基因19或21外显子敏感突变的IIIb-IV期肺腺癌患者,一线接受培美曲塞联合顺铂后同药维持化疗的无进展生存时间(PFS)进行回顾性分析。结果:10例EGFR基因19和/或21外显子敏感突变的IIIb-IV期肺腺癌患者一线接受培美曲塞联合顺铂同药维持治疗,完全缓解(CR) 0例,部分缓解（PR）6例（60%）,稳定（SD）4例（40%）,疾病控制率（DCR）10例（100%）,中位无进展生存时间（PFS）12.0个月（95%可信区间:7.60~16.30）,1年生存率100%。主要毒副反应为骨髓抑制、恶心呕吐、疲劳乏力、神经毒性,安全可耐受。结论:EGFR基因敏感突变晚期肺腺癌患者一线培美曲塞维持化疗可取得较好疗效。     

EGFR野生型肺腺癌患者一线化疗方案选择影响因素分析

目的 晚期肺癌一线化疗方案的有效率无明显差异,而在不良反应和药物经济学方面存在明显区别.本研究探讨晚期表皮生长因子受体(epidermal growth factor receptor,EGFR)野生型肺腺癌患者一线化疗方案应用状况并分析其原因.方法 回顾性分析广州医科大学附属第一医院2009-12-01-2014-11-30收治的738例晚期EGFR野生型肺腺癌患者5种不同一线方案应用状况和影响因素,观察其近期疗效和不良反应.结果 临床常用5种不同一线方案的患者例数分别为:吉西他滨含铂双药(GP组)358例,紫杉醇含铂双药(TP组)157例,多西他赛含铂双药(DP组)99例,培美曲塞含铂双药(PP组)93例,长春瑞滨含铂双药(NP组)31例.5组之间疗效差异无统计学意义,仅PP方案的疾病控制率较其他4个方案为优,x2 =4.01,P=0.038.5种方案不良反应:NP方案在3级以上白细胞减少方面明显高于其他方案,x2 =3.33,P=0.042;TP和DP方案在口腔炎、周围神经炎、3级及以上脱发的发生率方面明显高于其他方案,均P＜0.05;GP方案而在血小板减少及谷丙转氨酶升高方面明显高于其他方案,x2=3.21,P=0.043;PP方案在乏力方面明显高于其他方案,x2 =3.93,P=0.041;而5种方案在贫血、恶心、呕吐、腹泻、血肌酐升高和皮疹不良反应发生率差异无统计学意义.5种不同方案过去5年使用比例由高到低分别为,GP 48.51％＞TP 21.27％＞DP 13.41％＞PP12.60％＞NP 4.20％,这与5位制定化疗方案的主任医师对5个不同一线方案的平均评分排序完全一致.方案选择具体原因分析提示不良反应、使用便捷性、经济原因、医保政策4个因素是影响方案选择的主要原因,而疗效因素由于其本身差异并不明显,故并非是影响方案选择的主要原因.NP方案由于其不良反应和使用便捷性评分较低而总评分最低,而GP方案由于各方面均无明显劣势而总评分最高.结论 过去5年晚期EGFR野生型肺腺癌患者常用的5种一线方案使用率顺序依次为GP＞TP＞DP＞NP＞PP.5种方案疗效未见明显差异,并非是影响方案选择的主要原因.方案的选择与制定方案的具体医生推荐有明显相关性,而具体原因主要集中在不良反应、使用便捷性、经济原因和医保政策4个因素.     

Molecular heterogeneity assessment by next-generation sequencing and response to gefitinib of EGFR mutant advanced lung adenocarcinoma

Cancer molecular heterogeneity might explain the variable response of EGFR mutant lung adenocarcinomas to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). We assessed the mutational status of 22 cancer genes by next-generation sequencing (NGS) in poor, intermediate or good responders to first-line gefitinib. Clinical outcome was correlated with Additional Coexisting Mutations (ACMs) and the EGFR Proportion of Mutated Alleles (PMA). Thirteen ACMs were found in 10/17 patients: TP53 (n=6), KRAS (n=2), CTNNB1 (n=2), PIK3CA, SMAD4 and MET (n=1 each). TP53 mutations were exclusive of poor/intermediate responders (66.7% versus 0, p=0.009). Presence of ACMs significantly affected both PFS (median 3.0 versus 12.3 months, p=0.03) and survival (3.6 months versus not reached, p=0.03). TP53 mutation was the strongest negative modifier (median PFS 4.0 versus 14.0 months). Higher EGFR PMA was present in good versus poor/intermediate responders. Median PFS and survival were longer in patients with EGFR PMA ≥0.36 (12.0 versus 4.0 months, p=0.31; not reached versus 18.0 months, p=0.59). Patients with an EGFR PMA ≥0.36 and no ACMs fared significantly better (p=0.03), with a trend towards increased survival (p=0.06). Our exploratory data suggest that a quantitative (PMA) and qualitative (ACMs) molecular heterogeneity assessment using NGS might be useful for a better selection of patients.     

Outcomes of Malaysian patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma and unknown epidermal growth factor receptor mutation status treated with gefitinib

Aims: To evaluate the response and progression‐free survival (PFS) of Malaysian patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma and unknown epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation status treated with gefitinib. Methods: A retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with EGFR mutation unknown stage III or IV lung adenocarcinoma with EGFR mutation unknown treated with gefitinib until disease progression. Results: Of 71 patients, none had complete response while 26 (36.6%) had partial response and 26 (36.6%) had stable disease. Multivariate analysis showed the independent predictor of response to gefitinib was Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 1 (odds ratio [OR] 5.39, 95% confidence interval [CI 1.64–17.74]P = 0.006). The median PFS was 6.5 months and was significantly longer in female than male patients (39.0 vs 21.2 weeks; P < 0.001), never smokers vs smokers (32.3 vs 8.3 weeks, P = 0.001), and stage III versus stage IV disease (44 vs 24 weeks, P = 0.021). In a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model with age group, gender, ethnicity, smoking history, disease stage, ECOG performance status and prior cytotoxic chemotherapy as covariates, the independent predictors of longer median PFS were female gender (HR 95% CI 0.38 [0.22–0.66]; P < 0.001) and stage III disease (HR 95% CI 0.54 [0.30–0.98], P = 0.042). Conclusion: In our patients with EGFR mutation unknown advanced lung adenocarcinoma treated with gefitinib, the response rate was 36.6% and the median PFS was significantly longer in female patients, never smokers and patients with stage III disease.     

A phase II randomized trial evaluating gefitinib intercalated with pemetrexed/platinum chemotherapy or pemetrexed/platinum chemotherapy alone in unselected patients with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer

Current pemetrexed/platinum chemotherapy does not produce a satisfactory therapeutic response in advanced lung cancer patients. The aim of this study was to determine whether the administration of gefitinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), intercalated with pemetrexed/platinum could improve the efficacy in chemotherapy-naïve patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC without subsequent gefitinib maintenance therapy. Treatment-naïve patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC were randomly assigned to receive pemetrexed (500 mg/m² d1) and either cisplatin (75 mg/m² d1) or carboplatin (AUC = 5 d1) plus gefitinib (250 mg/d on days 3 to 16 of a 3-week cycle) (PC-G) or pemetrexed–platinum (PC) alone. Randomization was stratified according to the tobacco smoking status and EGFR mutational status of the patients. The primary endpoint was the non-progression rate (NPR) at 12 weeks. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and biosafety. The NPR at 12 weeks was 84.5% for the PC-G treatment arm and 83.1% for the PC treatment arm (P = 0.87). Median PFS was 7.9 months for the PC-G arm and 7.0 months for the PC arm (P = 0.57). The ORR was 50.0% for the PC-G arm and 47.4% for the PC arm (P = 0.78). Median survival was 25.4 mo for the PC-G arm and 20.8 mo for the PC arm (P = 0.54). The incidence of adverse events was similar between the two treatment arms, except for a higher incidence of skin rash with PC-G. Predefined subgroup analyses demonstrated that PC-G significantly increased the PFS compared with the PC regimen in patients with EGFR mutations (P = 0.017). Although gefitinib intercalated with pemetrexed/platinum chemotherapy did not improve the NPR at 12 weeks compared with chemotherapy, an improvement in the PFS for the intercalated treatment arm was seen in the subgroup of patients with EGFR mutations.     

晚期肺腺癌EMT和EGFR突变状态的关系及其对吉非替尼治疗疗效的影响

目的：探讨晚期肺腺癌上皮间质转化（EMT）与表皮生长因子（EGFR）突变的关系及其对吉非替尼治疗敏感性的关系。方法通过检测78例晚期肺腺癌EGFR突变情况和E-cadherin/β-catenin表达情况,对EGFR突变的晚期肺腺癌患者一线使用吉非替尼,EGFR未突变的晚期肺腺癌一线化疗失败后二线使用吉非替尼治疗,观察吉非替尼治疗的疗效和无进展生存时间（PFS）。结果晚期肺腺癌EGFR突变患者E-cadherin表达高于EGFR未突变患者。EGFR突变且E-cadherin/β-catenin阳性表达者疾病控制率（DCR）略高于异常表达者,虽差异无统计学意义,但EGFR突变同时E-cadherin/β-catenin阳性表达者显示了更长的PFS。EGFR未突变的晚期肺腺癌二线吉非替尼治疗患者临床获益率低。结论晚期肺腺癌患者EGFR突变者常伴随E-cadherin高表达,同时存在EG-FR突变和E-cadherin/β-catenin高表达者显示更长的PFS;不建议EGFR未突变的晚期肺腺癌病例二线使用吉非替尼。     

吉非替尼一线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的临床观察

目的观察吉非替尼一线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌临床疗效及毒副作用。方法研究2005年11月～2007年5月14例晚期非小细胞肺癌患者,PS≥2,一线口服吉非替尼治疗,250mg/日,观察其近期疗效及毒副作用。结果14例患者中CR 0%(0/ 14),PR 35.7%(5/14),SD 50%(7/14),PD 14.3%(2/14)。临床获益率85.7% (12/14)。毒副作用为唑疮样皮疹42.86%(6/14),皮肤干燥脱屑28.57%(4/14),皮肤瘙痒14.3%(2/14),腹泻35.7(5/14),转氨酶升高14.3%(2/14)。结论吉非替尼一线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌疗效较好,毒副作用轻微,能明显改善患者的生活质量。     

Subtype-specific KRAS mutations in advanced lung adenocarcinoma: A retrospective study of patients treated with platinum-based chemotherapy

BackgroundPlatinum-based chemotherapy is the most common treatment in advanced-stage lung adenocarcinoma. Because the clinical significance of KRAS mutational status in this setting has not yet been clearly determined, a mutation subtype-specific analysis was performed in the so far largest cohort of Caucasian patients with KRAS mutant advanced-stage lung adenocarcinoma treated with platinum-based chemotherapy.Methods505 Caucasian stage III–IV lung adenocarcinoma patients with known amino acid substitution-specific KRAS mutational status and treated with platinum-based chemotherapy were included. The correlations of subtype-specific KRAS mutations with smoking status, progression-free and overall survival (PFS and OS, respectively) and therapeutic response were analysed.ResultsAmong 338 KRAS wild-type, 147 codon 12 mutant and 20 codon 13 mutant patients, there were no mutation-related significant differences in PFS or OS (P values were 0.534 and 0.917, respectively). Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) status and clinical stage were significant independent prognostic factors. KRAS mutation showed a significant correlation with smoking status (P = 0.018). Importantly, however, G12V KRAS mutant patients were significantly more frequent among never-smokers than all other codon 12 KRAS mutant (G12x) subtypes (P = 0.016). Furthermore, this subgroup tended to have a higher response rate (66% versus 47%; P = 0.077). A modestly longer median PFS was also found in the G12V mutant cohort (233 days; versus 175 days in the G12x group; P = 0.145).ConclusionsWhile KRAS mutation status per se is neither prognostic nor predictive in stage III–IV lung adenocarcinoma, subtype-specific analysis may indeed identify clinically relevant subgroups of patients that may ultimately influence treatment decisions.     

Cost-effectiveness of epidermal growth factor receptor mutation testing and first-line treatment with gefitinib for patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the lung

BACKGROUND:

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) testing and first‐line therapy with gefitinib for patients with activating mutations is quickly becoming the standard option for the treatment of advanced lung adenocarcinoma. Yet, to date, little is known about the cost‐effectiveness of this approach.

METHODS:

A decision‐analytic model was developed to determine the cost‐effectiveness of EGFR testing and first‐line treatment with gefitinib for those patients who harbor activating mutations versus standard care, which includes first‐line treatment with chemotherapy followed by gefitinib as second‐line treatment. The model uses clinical and outcomes data from randomized clinical trials and societal costs from Singapore cancer centers. Health effects were expressed as quality‐adjusted life‐years. All costs and cost‐effectiveness ratios were expressed in 2010 Singapore dollars. Sensitivity and different scenarios analyses were conducted.

RESULTS:

EGFR testing and first‐line treatment with gefitinib is a dominant strategy (with lower costs and greater effectiveness) compared with standard care. Because the primary savings result from not providing gefitinib to those who are not likely to benefit, this finding holds regardless of the prevalence of activating mutations. In a secondary analysis, first‐line treatment with gefitinib was also dominant when compared with first‐line chemotherapy in patients with activating EGFR mutations.

CONCLUSIONS:

This strategy can be considered a new standard of care and should be of great interest for health care payers and decision makers in an era in which our greatest challenge is to balance hard‐won and incremental, yet small, improvements in patient outcomes with exponentially rising costs. Cancer 2012;. © 2011 American Cancer Society.     

Brain metastases in lung adenocarcinoma: impact of EGFR mutation status on incidence and survival

Background

The brain represents a frequent progression site in lung adenocarcinoma. This study was designed to analyse the association between the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation status and the frequency of brain metastases (BM) and survival in routine clinical practice.

Patients and methods

We retrospectively analysed the medical records of 629 patients with adenocarcinoma in Slovenia who were tested for EGFR mutations in order to analyse the cumulative incidence of BM, the time from the diagnosis to the development of BM (TDBM), the time from BM to death (TTD) and the median survival.

Results

Out of 629 patients, 168 (27%) had BM, 90 patients already at the time of diagnosis. Additional 78 patients developed BM after a median interval of 14.3 months; 25.8 months in EGFR positive and 11.8 months in EGFR negative patients, respectively (p = 0.002). EGFR mutations were present in 47 (28%) patients with BM. The curves for cumulative incidence of BM in EGFR positive and negative patients demonstrate a trend for a higher incidence of BM in EGFR mutant patients at diagnosis (19% vs. 13%, p = 0.078), but no difference later during the course of the disease. The patients with BM at diagnosis had a statistically longer TTD (7.3 months) than patients who developed BM later (3.1 months). The TTD in EGFR positive patients with BM at diagnosis was longer than in EGFR negative patients (12.6 vs. 6.8, p = 0.005), while there was no impact of EGFR status on the TTD of patients who developed BM later.

Conclusions

Except for a non-significant increase of frequency of BM at diagnosis in EGFR positive patients, EGFR status had no influence upon the cumulative incidence of BM. EGFR positive patients had a longer time to CNS progression. While EGFR positive patients with BM at diagnosis had a longer survival, EGFR status had no influence on TTD in patients who developed BM later during the course of disease.     

Bevacizumab in combination with different platinum‐based doublets in the first‐line treatment for advanced nonsquamous non‐small‐cell lung cancer: A network meta‐analysis

Platinum‐based doublet chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab is the standard treatment for untreated advanced nonsquamous non‐small‐cell lung cancer (NS‐NSCLC). However, adding bevacizumab to chemotherapies other than paclitaxel–carboplatin is, though widely applied clinically, largely unjustified due to the lack of head‐to‐head data. We performed a Bayesian network meta‐analysis (NMA) to address this important issue. Data of 8,548 patients from 18 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) receiving six treatments, including taxane–platinum (Taxane–Pt), gemcitabine–platinum (Gem–Pt), pemetrexed–platinum (Pem–Pt), taxane–platinum + bevacizumab (Taxane–Pt + B), gemcitabine–platinum + bevacizumab (Gem–Pt + B) and pemetrexed–platinum + bevacizumab (Pem–Pt + B), were incorporated into the analyses. Direct and indirect evidence of overall survival (OS) and progression‐free survival (PFS) were synthesized at the hazard ratio (HR) scale and evidence of objective response rate (ORR) and serious adverse events (SAE) were synthesized at the odds ratio (OR) scale. Taxane–Pt + B showed significant advantages in OS (HR = 0.79, p < 0.001), PFS (HR = 0.54, p < 0.001) and ORR (OR = 2.7, p < 0.001) over Taxane–Pt with comparable tolerability (OR = 3.1, p = 0.08). Gem–Pt + B showed no OS benefit compared to any other treatment. No significant differences were detected between Pem–Pt + B and Pem–Pt in four outcomes. In terms of the benefit‐risk ratio, Pem–Pt and Taxane–Pt + B were ranked the first and second, respectively. In conclusion, in the first‐line treatment for advanced NS‐NSCLC, Taxane–Pt and Gem–Pt are the most and least preferable regimens to be used with bevacizumab, respectively. Adding bevacizumab to Pem–Pt remains unjustified because it fails to improve efficacy or tolerability. In terms of the benefit‐risk ratio, Pem–Pt and Taxane–Pt + B are the best and second‐best treatment for this population.     

吉非替尼对比培美曲塞二线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的临床研究

目的：观察吉非替尼与培美曲塞二线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌（non-small cell lung cancer,NSCLC）情况,比较二者对晚期NSCLC患者的治疗效果、安全性的影响。方法将一线化疗治疗失败后的105例晚期NSCLC患者,随机分为吉非替尼组和培美曲塞组,分别接受吉非替尼与培美曲塞二线治疗,比较两组患者的治疗效果和安全性。结果近期疗效比较结果显示,吉非替尼组和培美曲塞组客观有效率（ORR）分别为24.0%和29.1%（P=0.987）,疾病控制率（DCR）分别为64.0%和70.9%（P=0.776）;吉非替尼组和培美曲塞组中位无进展生存时间（PFS）分别为5.2个月和4.1个月（P=0.026）,中位总生存期（OS）分别为7.9个月和6.7个月（P=0.031）,吉非替尼组PFS和OS均优于培美曲塞组。吉非替尼组的不良反应主要为非血液学毒性,培美曲塞组的主要不良反应为血液学毒性。结论吉非替尼及培美曲塞均可用于晚期NSCLC患者的二线治疗,疗效相当,但二者的不良反应各异,可根据患者的个体差异择优选用。     

Overall survival benefits for irinotecan‐containing regimens as first‐line treatment for advanced gastric cancer: An updated meta‐analysis of ten randomized controlled trials

The standard treatment for patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC) is still debated, and the available data on the benefit of irinotecan‐containing regimen as first‐line treatment for those patients are controversial. We performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials to determine the survival benefits of irinotecan‐containing regimens in this setting. A total of 1,837 patients from ten trials were included in the analysis. Our results showed that irinotecan‐containing regimens significantly improved overall survival [OS: hazard ratio (HR) 0.86, 95% CI = 0.78–0.94, p = 0.002] and progression‐free survival [HR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.69–0.97, p = 0.026); however, the improvement of time to failure (HR = 0.90; 95% CI = 0.77–1.04, p = 0.15), 1‐year survival rate [1‐year SR: relative risk (RR) 1.10, 95% CI = 0.97–1.24, p = 0.13] and overall response rate (RR = 1.16, 95% CI = 0.91–1.49, p = 0.24] were nonsignificant. Equivalent frequencies of toxicities were found between the two groups excluding more Grade 3 or 4 fatigue (p = 0.001) in irinotecan‐containing regimens. This updated meta‐analysis provided strong evidence for a survival benefit of irinotecan‐containing regimen as first‐line treatment for AGC. A clear advantage of irinotecan‐containing over nonirinotecan‐containing regimen had not been established. These results should help to inform decisions about patient management and design of future trials.     

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.