Virtual Library
Start Your Search
S.H. Lim
Author of
-
+
P3.11 - Poster Session 3 - NSCLC Novel Therapies (ID 211)
- Event: WCLC 2013
- Type: Poster Session
- Track: Medical Oncology
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:
- Coordinates: 10/30/2013, 09:30 - 16:30, Exhibit Hall, Ground Level
-
+
P3.11-036 - Comparison of Clinical Outcome between Gefitinib and Erlotinib treatment in patients with non-small cell lung cancer harboring an epidermal growth factor receptor exon 19 or exon 21 mutations (ID 2599)
09:30 - 09:30 | Author(s): S.H. Lim
- Abstract
Background
Gefitinib and Erlotinib are oral small-molecule kinase inhibitors that inhibit signaling via EGFR and both agents showed dramatic response rate and prolonged PFS in patients harboring activating EGFR mutation. We investigated the clinical outcomes between gefitinib- and erlotinib-treated patients with recurrent or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring EGFR mutations.Methods
A total 375 patients with recurrent or metastatic stage IIIB/IV NSCLC who had either an exon 19 deletion or L858R mutation on exon 21 and received gefitinib(n=228) or erlotinib(n=147) therapy between August 2007 and December 2011 were retrospectively reviewed. By using a matched-pair case-control study design, 121 pairs of gefitinib-treated and erlotinib-treated patients were matched according to sex, smoking history, ECOG performance status, and types of EGFR mutation.Results
The median age of all patients was 58 years(range, 30-84) and more than half of patients were never smokers(63.6%). Most patients had adenocarcinoma (98.3%) and good ECOG performance status (0, 1) (90.9%). The median number of cycles in TKI treatment was 12.7 in gefitinib group and 10.8 in erlotinib group. Of 242 patients, 64(26.4%) received an EGFR TKI as first line therapy. The overall response rates and disease control rates in the gefitinib-treated and erlotinib-treated groups were 85.5% versus 79.8 % (p=.375) and 94.0% versus 89.1%, respectively (p=.242). There was no statistically significant difference noted with regard to OS (median, 22.1 vs 25.2; p=.546) and PFS (median, 12.5 vs 9.9; p=.114) between the gefitinib-treated and erlotinib-treated groups. For a subgroup which patients were treated with TKI as first line therapy, the overall response rates were higher than those of patients who had progressed on prior chemotherapy (90.3% vs 79.9%; p=.063). However, there was no significant differences in PFS (median, 13.1 vs 10.1; p=.082) between subjects with first line TKI therapy and more than second line treatment. Regarding safety and dose adjustment of EGFR TKIs, patients with erlotinib more frequently had G3/4 toxicity than ones with gefitinib and required dose reduction(18.1% vs 1.65%).Conclusion
Both gefitinib and erlotinib showed similar effective activity in selected population of NSCLC that harbored an EGFR mutation and further studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy of EGFR TKI as first line treatment.