Lapatinib versus lapatinib plus capecitabine as second-line treatment in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-amplified metastatic gastro-oesophageal cancer: A randomised phase II trial of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie

2015 ◽  
Vol 51 (5) ◽  
pp. 569-576 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvie Lorenzen ◽  
Jorge Riera Knorrenschild ◽  
Georg-Martin Haag ◽  
Michael Pohl ◽  
Peter Thuss-Patience ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Growth Factor ◽  
Epidermal Growth Factor ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Oesophageal Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Epidermal Growth

scholarly journals Chemotherapy versus erlotinib as second-line treatment in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer and wild-type epidermal growth factor receptor: an individual patient data (IPD) analysis

ESMO Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (6) ◽  
pp. e000327
Author(s):  
Marina Chiara Garassino ◽  
Tomoya Kawaguchi ◽  
Vanesa Gregorc ◽  
Eliana Rulli ◽  
Masahiko Ando ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Growth Factor ◽  
Epidermal Growth Factor ◽  
Individual Patient Data ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Mean Survival Time ◽  
Epidermal Growth

The efficacy of second-line treatment in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) wild-type tumours is still debatable. We assessed the efficacy of a standard second-line chemotherapy compared with erlotinib in an individual patient data approach for meta-analysis. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and secondary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Both were compared by log-rank test. The ‘restricted mean survival time’ (RMST) was estimated in each study and the difference in mean survival time up to the last available time point was calculated. The Cox proportional hazards model was used on survival analyses to provide HRs, to adjust for confounding variables and to test possible interaction with selected factors. Three randomised trials comparing chemotherapy versus erlotinib were analysed, including 587 randomised patients. Overall, 74% of patients included in the original trials were considered. 464 deaths and 570 progressions or deaths were observed. Compared with erlotinib, chemotherapy was associated to a decreased risk of progression (29%; HR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.60 to 0.84, p< 0.0001;) but with no statistical significant reduction in OS (HR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.74 to 1.06; p<0.20). No heterogeneity was found in both analyses. Patients treated with chemotherapy gained an absolute 1.5 and 1.6 months, respectively, in PFS and lifetime (RMST 95% CI: PFS 0.49 to 2.44; OS 95% CI: −1.04 to 4.25). These results showed that patients without a constitutively activated EGFR had better PFS with chemotherapy rather than with erlotinib while no statistical difference was observed in OS.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document