Cited by 49Lung Cancer Treatments and MutationsBrain Metastases and TreatmentLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment

Preventing and treating brain metastases with three first-line EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors in patients with EGFR mutation-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer

Open access
Su, Po-Lan, Wu, Yi-Lin, Chang, Wei-Yuan, Ho, Chung-Liang, Tseng, Yau-Lin, Lai, Wu-Wei, Su, Wu-Chou, Lin, Chien-Chung +1 more·2018·Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology

Abstract

Introduction: Brain metastases (BM) are common in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and the prognosis is poor with few therapeutic options. This study evaluated the efficacy of three epidermal growth factor receptor–tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) in preventing and treating BM in patients with EGFR mutation-positive advanced NSCLC. Methods: Patients with EGFR mutation-positive advanced NSCLC who visited a tertiary referral center from 1 December 2013 to 30 November 2017 were analyzed retrospectively. They received gefitinib, erlotinib, or afatinib until disease progression, death, or intolerable adverse events. The cumulative incidence of subsequent BM of initial non-BM patients, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) of the BM and non-BM patients were estimated and compared using the Kaplan–Meier and log-rank tests. Results: 306 NSCLC patients were enrolled, with 116, 75, and 115 receiving first-line gefitinib, erlotinib, and afatinib, respectively. The afatinib group had a better PFS [12.7 versus 9.8 months; hazard ratio (HR) 0.59, p = 0.001] and OS (39.1 versus 22.0 months; HR 0.64, p = 0.035) than the gefitinib group. Afatinib tended to provide better BM prevention than gefitinib (BM cumulative incidence, HR 0.49; 95% confidence interval 0.34–0.71, p < 0.001) according to a Cox model adjusted for possible confounders. Patients with initial BM had a shorter PFS ( p < 0.001) and OS ( p = 0.015) than those without initial BM. Among the former, there were no differences in median PFS ( p = 0.34) and median OS ( p = 0.46) in the three EGFR-TKI groups. Conclusions: Our data suggested that, compared with gefitinib, afatinib provided better benefits significantly in terms of PFS and OS. Both had the same effectiveness in preventing subsequent BM.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1758835918797589

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In that real-world study, among patients without baseline brain metastases, after adjusting for confounders, those in the afatinib group had a significantly lower HR for development of subsequent brain metastases than those in the gefitinib group.

    “Another subgroup analysis, involving patients without baseline brain metastases, found that after adjusting for possible confounding factors, those in the afatinib group had a significantly lower HR for the development of subsequent brain metastases than did those in the gefitinib group.”
  • In that real-world study, PFS and OS were similar across the three EGFR TKIs in a subgroup analysis comparing patients with ECOG performance status 0-1 and Del19 mutations.

    “PFS and OS were similar across the three EGFR TKIs in a subgroup analysis comparing patients with an ECOG performance status of 0–1 and Del19 mutations.”
  • In that real-world study, the three treatments showed similar efficacy in patients with baseline brain metastases.

    “However, the three treatments showed similar efficacy in patients with baseline brain metastases.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Su, P.-L., Wu, Y.-L., Chang, W.-Y., Ho, C.-L., Tseng, Y.-L., Lai, W.-W., Su, W.-C., Lin, C.-C., & Yang, S.-C.
Affiliations
National Cheng Kung University Hospital (TW)
Corresponding author
Lin, Chien-Chung
Venue
Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology
Published
2018-01
Volume
10
Pages
1758835918797589-1758835918797589
ISSN
  • 1758-8340 (ISSN-L)
  • 1758-8359
OpenAlex
W2893850807
Cited by
49
References
37
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 7
FWCI
4.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan (MOST 104-2314-B-006-046-MY3, MOST105-2314-B-076- MY2)
  • Ministry of Health and Welfare (MOHW106-TDU-B-211-144-004)
  • National Cheng Kung University Hospital (NCKUH-10503002)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Brain Metastases and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Keywords
brain metastases, EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors, EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer, gefitinib, erlotinib, afatinib, first-line therapy, brain metastasis prevention, progression-free survival, overall survival

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