The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Epidermal growth factor receptor mutations in needle biopsy/aspiration samples predict response to gefitinib therapy and survival of patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer
Abstract
Recently, mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene in nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients were reported to correlate with gefitinib response. Less than 30% of NSCLC patients are surgically resectable; however, molecular analysis has to rely on nonsurgical diagnostic tissue samples. The objective of this study is to investigate EGFR mutation analysis on needle biopsy/aspiration samples and its correlations with gefitinib response and patients' survival. EGFR mutation was assessed from DNA of 63 paraffin‐embedded small needle biopsy/aspiration specimens from 62 patients with NSCLC treated with gefitinib. The peripheral blood lymphocyte DNA of the patients was sequenced to verify the EGFR mutation. EGFR mutations were found in 47% of 62 patients (60% of 20 CT‐guided biopsies, 44% of 18 ultrasound‐guided biopsies, 31% of 16 endoscopic biopsies and 44% of 9 effusion cell blocks). EGFR mutations were frequently present in females (p = 0.006) and never smokers (p = 0.04). Patients with EGFR mutations had a significantly better response rate compared to that of the nonmutation group (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that EGFR mutation (p < 0.001) and PS 0–1 (p = 0.02) were independently associated with a better response rate. Cox regression analysis showed that EGFR mutation was the independent prognostic factor for progression‐free survival (p = 0.008) and overall survival (p = 0.03). In conclusion, EGFR mutation analysis is feasible in needle biopsy/aspiration paraffin‐fixed specimens. EGFR mutation is an independent predictor of gefitinib response and survival in patients of advanced NSCLC treated by gefitinib. © 2005 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Lynch, T. J., Bell, D. W., Sordella, R., Gurubhagavatula, S., Okimoto, R. A., Brannigan, B. W., Harris, P. L., Haserlat, S. M., Supko, J. G., Haluska, F. G., et al. (2004) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa040938 · Cited by 11,486
EGFR Mutations in Lung Cancer: Correlation with Clinical Response to Gefitinib Therapy
Paez, J. G., Jänne, P. A., Lee, J. C., Tracy, S., Greulich, H., Gabriel, S., Herman, P., Kaye, F. J., Lindeman, N., Boggon, T. J., et al. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1099314 · Cited by 9,368
Kris, M. G., Natale, R. B., Herbst, R. S., Lynch, Jr., Prager, D., Belani, C. P., Schiller, J. H., Kelly, K., Spiridonidis, H., Sandler, A., et al. (2003) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.290.16.2149 · Cited by 2,517
Cited by
Bean, J., Brennan, C., Shih, J.-Y., Riely, G., Viale, A., Wang, L., Chitale, D., Motoi, N., Szoke, J., Broderick, S., et al. (2007) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0710370104 · Cited by 1,598
Self-citationLung cancer in never smokers – A review
Couraud, S., Zalcman, G., Milleron, B., Morin, F., & Souquet, P.-J. (2012) · European Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2012.03.007 · Cited by 960
Azzoli, C. G., Baker, S., Temin, S., Pao, W., Aliff, T., Brahmer, J., Johnson, D. H., Laskin, J. L., Masters, G., Milton, D., et al. (2009) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2009.23.5622 · Cited by 915
Lung Cancer in Never Smokers: A Review
Subramanian, J., & Govindan, R. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2006.06.8015 · Cited by 655
Arcila, M. E., Oxnard, G. R., Nafa, K., Riely, G. J., Solomon, S. B., Zakowski, M. F., Kris, M. G., Pao, W., Miller, V. A., & Ladanyi, M. (2011) · Clinical Cancer Research · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-10-2277 · Cited by 574
Metadata
- Authors
- Shih, J., Gow, C., Yu, C., Yang, C., Chang, Y., Tsai, M., Hsu, Y., Chen, K., Su, W., & Yang, P.
- Venue
- International Journal of Cancer
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-12-13
- Volume
- 118
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 963-969
- ISSN
- 0020-7136 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0215
- OpenAlex
- W1982397643
- Cited by
- 170
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 13.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.