Export file:

Format

  • RIS(for EndNote,Reference Manager,ProCite)
  • BibTex
  • Text

Content

  • Citation Only
  • Citation and Abstract

A meta-analysis of the comparing of the first-generation and next-generation TKIs in the treatment of NSCLC

1 Department of Respiration, Shaoxing Municipal Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Shaoxing University, Shaoxing 312000, Zhejiang, China
2 Department of Oncology, The First Hospital of Jiaxing, First Affiliated Hospital of Jiaxing University, Jiaxing 314000, Zhejiang, China
3 Department of Respiration, The First Hospital of Jiaxing, First Affiliated Hospital of Jiaxing University, Jiaxing 314000, Zhejiang, China
4 Division of Science and Education, The First Hospital of Jiaxing, First Affiliated Hospital of Jiaxing University, Jiaxing 314000, Zhejiang, China

Special Issues: Advanced Big Data Analysis for Precision Medicine

Background: The current standard approach to the treatment of patients with non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI)—sensitizing mutations has been the treatment with a first-generation EGFR-TKIs. While, with resistance developed against first-generation EGFR-TKIs, second/third-generation TKIs have attracted all the attention, and replaced first-generation EGFR- TKIs upon disease progression due to the greater efficacy and more favorable tolerability. In the past few years, this strategy has been challenged by clinical evidence when next-generation EGFR-TKIs are used in patients with advanced NSCLC. Objective: In this study, we performed a meta- analysis to investigate the efficacy of next-generation TKIs comparison with first-generation TKIs in the treatment of NSCLC. Methods: The multiple databases including Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane library databases were adopted to search for the relevant studies, and full-text articles involving to comparison of next-generation TKIs and first-generation TKIs were reviewed. After rigorous reviewing on quality, the data was extracted from eligible randomized controlled trial (RCT). Meta-analysis Revman 5.3 software was used to analyze the combined pooled ORs with the corresponding 95% confidence interval using fixed- or random-effects models according to the heterogeneity. Results: A total of 5 randomized controlled trials were included in this analysis. The group of next-generation TKIs did achieved benefit in progression-free survival (PFS) (OR = 0.58, 95%CI = 0.45–0.75, P<0.0001), overall survival (OS) (OR = 0.76, 95%CI = 0.65–0.90, P = 0.001) as well with the objective response rate (ORR) (OR = 1.27, 95%CI = 1.01–1.61, P = 0.04), respectively. In the results of subgroup analysis of PFS with EGFR mutations, there is also significant differences with exon 19 deletion (OR = 0.56, 95%CI = 0.41–0.77, P = 0.0003) and exon 21 (L858R) mutation (OR = 0.60, 95%CI = 0.49–0.75, P<=0.00001). While, the treatment-related severe adverse event (SAE) between the next-generation TKIs and first-generation TKIs did not have statistical significance (OR = 1.48, 95%CI = 0.62–3.55, P = 0.38). Conclusion: The next-generation TKIs significantly improved efficacy outcomes in the treatment of EGFR mutation–positive advanced NSCLC compared with the first-generation TKIs, with a manageable safety profile. These results are potentially important for clinical decision making for these patients.
  Figure/Table
  Supplementary
  Article Metrics

Keywords NSCLC; first-generation EGFR-TKIs; second/third-generation EGFR-TKIs; meta-analysis

Citation: Yongxing Li, Jianye Yang, Yufen Xu, Ming Zhang, Xiaoping Zhang, Wenyu Chen, Xiaodong Lv. A meta-analysis of the comparing of the first-generation and next-generation TKIs in the treatment of NSCLC. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(5): 5687-5696. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019283

References

  • 1. T. J. Lynch, D. W. Bell, R. Sordella, et al., Activating mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor underlying responsiveness of non-small-cell lung cancer to gefitinib, N. Engl. J. Med., 350 (2004), 2129–2139.
  • 2. Y. L. Wu, W. Z. Zhong, L. Y. Li, et al., Epidermal growth factor receptor mutations and their correlation with gefitinib therapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis based on updated individual patient data from six medical centers in mainland China, J. Thorac. Oncol., 2 (2007), 430–439.
  • 3. R. Rosell, E. Carcereny, R. Gervais, et al., Erlotinib versus standard chemotherapy as first-line treatment for European patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (EURTAC): a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial, Lancet Oncol., 13 (2012), 239–246.
  • 4. T. S. Mok, Y. L. Wu, S. Thongprasert, et al., Gefitinib or carboplatin-paclitaxel in pulmonary adenocarcinoma, N. Engl. J. Med., 361 (2009), 947–957.
  • 5. L. V. Sequist, J. C. Yang, N. Yamamoto, et al., Phase III study of afatinib or cisplatin plus pemetrexed in patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma with EGFR mutations, J. Clin. Oncol., 31 (2013), 3327–3334.
  • 6. G. Recondo, F. Facchinetti, K. A. Olaussen, et al., Making the first move in EGFR-driven or ALK-driven NSCLC: first-generation or next-generation TKI?, Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol., 15 (2018), 694–708.
  • 7. K. Park, E. H. Tan, K. O'Byrne, et al., Afatinib versus gefitinib as first-line treatment of patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (LUX-Lung 7): A phase 2B, open-label, randomised controlled trial, Lancet Oncol., 17 (2016), 577–589.
  • 8. L. Paz-Ares, E. H. Tan, K. O'Byrne, et al., Afatinib versus gefitinib in patients with EGFR mutation-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: overall survival data from the phase IIb LUX-Lung 7 trial, Ann. Oncol., 28 (2017), 270–277.
  • 9. A. R. Jadad, R. A. Moore, D. Carroll, et al., Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary?, Control. Clin. Trials, 17 (1996), 1–12.
  • 10. J. P. Higgins and S. G. Thompson, Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis, Stat. Med., 21 (2002), 1539–1558.
  • 11. J. P. Higgins, S. G. Thompson, J. J. Deeks, et al., Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses, BMJ, 327 (2003), 557–560.
  • 12. J. C. Soria, Y. Ohe, J. Vansteenkiste, et al., Osimertinib in untreated EGFR-mutated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, N. Engl. J. Med., 378 (2018), 113–125.
  • 13. T. S. Mok, Y. Cheng, X. Zhou, et al., Improvement in overall survival in a randomized study that compared dacomitinib with gefitinib in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer and EGFR-activating mutations, J. Clin. Oncol., 36 (2018), 2244–2250.
  • 14. Y. L. Wu, Y. Cheng, X. Zhou, et al., Dacomitinib versus gefitinib as first-line treatment for patients with EGFR-mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (ARCHER 1050): A randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial, Lancet Oncol., 18 (2017), 1454–1466.
  • 15. S. Novello, F. Barlesi, R. Califano, et al., Metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up, Ann. Oncol., 27 (2016), v1–v27.
  • 16. H. A. Yu, M. E. Arcila, N. Rekhtman, et al., Analysis of tumor specimens at the time of acquired resistance to EGFR-TKI therapy in 155 patients with EGFR-mutant lung cancers, Clin. Cancer Res., 19 (2013), 2240–2247.
  • 17. S. N. Kazaz and I. Oztop, Treatment after first-generation epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor resistance in non-small-cell lung cancer, Turk. Thorac. J., 18 (2017), 66–71.
  • 18. L. V. Sequist, B. A. Waltman, D. Dias-Santagata, et al., Genotypic and histological evolution of lung cancers acquiring resistance to EGFR inhibitors, Sci. Transl. Med., 3 (2011), 75ra26.
  • 19. C. H. Yun, K. E. Mengwasser, A. V. Toms, et al., The T790M mutation in EGFR kinase causes drug resistance by increasing the affinity for ATP, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 105 (2008), 2070–2075.
  • 20. A. Michalczyk, S. Kluter, H. B. Rode, et al., Structural insights into how irreversible inhibitors can overcome drug resistance in EGFR, Bioorg. Med. Chem., 16 (2008), 3482–3488.
  • 21. M. L. Sos, H. B. Rode, S. Heynck, et al., Chemogenomic profiling provides insights into the limited activity of irreversible EGFR Inhibitors in tumor cells expressing the T790M EGFR resistance mutation, Cancer Res., 70 (2010), 868–874.
  • 22. D. Li, L. Ambrogio, T. Shimamura, et al., BIBW2992, an irreversible EGFR/HER2 inhibitor highly effective in preclinical lung cancer models, Oncogene, 27 (2008), 4702–4711.
  • 23. F. Solca, G. Dahl, A. Zoephel, et al., Target binding properties and cellular activity of afatinib (BIBW 2992), an irreversible ErbB family blocker, J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., 343 (2012), 342–350.
  • 24. D. A. Cross, S. E. Ashton, S. Ghiorghiu, et al., AZD9291, an irreversible EGFR TKI, overcomes T790M-mediated resistance to EGFR inhibitors in lung cancer, Cancer Discov., 4 (2014), 1046–1061.
  • 25. Y. L. Wu, M. J. Ahn, M. C. Garassino, et al., CNS efficacy of osimertinib in patients with t790m-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: data from a randomized phase III trial (AURA3), J. Clin. Oncol., 36 (2018), 2702–2709.
  • 26. O. Romanidou, L. Landi, F. Cappuzzo, et al., Overcoming resistance to first/second generation epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors and ALK inhibitors in oncogene-addicted advanced non-small cell lung cancer, Ther. Adv. Med. Oncol., 8 (2016), 176–187.
  • 27. C. Zhou and L. D. Yao, Strategies to Improve Outcomes of Patients with EGRF-Mutant Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Review of the Literature, J. Thorac. Oncol., 11 (2016), 174–186.
  • 28. H. Shigematsu, L. Lin, T. Takahashi, et al., Clinical and biological features associated with epidermal growth factor receptor gene mutations in lung cancers, J. Natl. Cancer Inst., 97 (2005), 339–346.
  • 29. C. K. Lee, Y. L. Wu, P. N. Ding, et al., Impact of specific epidermal growth factor receptor (egfr) mutations and clinical characteristics on outcomes after treatment with egfr tyrosine kinase inhibitors versus chemotherapy in EGFR-mutant lung cancer: A Meta-analysis, J. Clin. Oncol., 33 (2015), 1958–1965.

 

Reader Comments

your name: *   your email: *  

© 2019 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licese (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

Download full text in PDF

Export Citation

Copyright © AIMS Press All Rights Reserved