기관회원 [로그인]
소속기관에서 받은 아이디, 비밀번호를 입력해 주세요.
개인회원 [로그인]

비회원 구매시 입력하신 핸드폰번호를 입력해 주세요.
본인 인증 후 구매내역을 확인하실 수 있습니다.

회원가입
서지반출
Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of EFGR Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Monotherapy with Standard Second-line Chemotherapy in Previously Treated Advanced Non-small-cell Lung Cancer: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
[STEP1]서지반출 형식 선택
파일형식
@
서지도구
SNS
기타
[STEP2]서지반출 정보 선택
  • 제목
  • URL
돌아가기
확인
취소
  • Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of EFGR Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Monotherapy with Standard Second-line Chemotherapy in Previously Treated Advanced Non-small-cell Lung Cancer: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
  • Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of EFGR Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Monotherapy with Standard Second-line Chemotherapy in Previously Treated Advanced Non-small-cell Lung Cancer: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
저자명
Qi. Wei-Xiang,Shen. Zan,Lin. Feng,Sun. Yuan-Jue,Min. Da-Liu,Tang. Li-Na,He. Ai-Na,Yao. Yang
간행물명
Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP
권/호정보
2012년|13권 10호|pp.5177-5182 (6 pages)
발행정보
아시아태평양암예방학회
파일정보
정기간행물|ENG|
PDF텍스트
주제분야
기타
이 논문은 한국과학기술정보연구원과 논문 연계를 통해 무료로 제공되는 원문입니다.
서지반출

기타언어초록

Purpose: To compare the efficacy and safety of epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitormonotherapy (EFGR-TKIs: gefitinib or erlotinib) with standard second-line chemotherapy (single agent docetaxel or pemetrexed) in previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: We systematically searched for randomized clinical trials that compared EGFR-TKI monotherapy with standard second-line chemotherapy in previously treated advanced NSCLC. The end points were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), 1-year survival rate (1-year SR) and grade 3 or 4 toxicities. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) or risk ratio (RR), with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated employing fixed- or random-effects models depending on the heterogeneity of the included trials. Results: Eight randomized controlled trials (totally 3218 patients) were eligible. Our meta-analysis results showed that EGFR-TKIs were comparable to standard second-line chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC in terms of overall survival (HR 1.00, 95%CI 0.92-1.10; p=0.943), progression-free survival (HR 0.90, 95%CI 0.75-1.08, P=0.258) and 1-year-survival rate (RR 0.97, 95%CI 0.87-1.08, P=0.619), and the overall response rate was higher in patients who receiving EGFR-TKIs(RR 1.50, 95%CI 1.22-1.83, P=0.000). Sub-group analysis demonstrated that EGFR-TKI monotherapy significantly improved PFS (HR 0.73, 95%CI: 0.55-0.97, p=0.03) and ORR (RR 1.96, 95%CI: 1.46-2.63, p=0.000) in East Asian patients, but it did not translate into increase in OS and 1-year SR. Furthermore, there were fewer incidences of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, febrile neutropenia and neutrotoxicity in EGFR-TKI monotherapy group, excluding grade 3 or 4 rash. Conclusion: Both interventions had comparable efficacy as second-line treatments for patients with advanced NSCLC, and EGFR-TKI monotherapy was associated with less toxicity and better tolerability. Moreover, our data also demonstrated that EGFR-TKImonotherapy tended to be more effective in East Asian patients in terms of PFS and ORR compared with standard second-line chemotherapy. These results should help inform decisions about patient management and design of future trials.