Dataset Information

Chemotherapy plus Erlotinib versus Chemotherapy Alone for Treating Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Whether a combination of chemotherapy and erlotinib is beneficial for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains controversial. This study aimed to summarize the currently available evidence and compare the efficacy and safety of chemotherapy plus erlotinib versus chemotherapy alone for treating advanced NSCLC.

Methods

EMBASE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for relevant studies. Our protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42014015015).

Results

Nine randomized controlled trials with a total of 3599 patients were included. Compared to chemotherapy alone, chemotherapy plus erlotinib was superior in PFS (HR = 0.76 [95% CI 0.62, 0.92], P = 0.006), and no statistically significant difference was observed in OS (HR = 0.94 [95% CI 0.86, 1.03], P = 0.16). Intercalated erlotinib plus chemotherapy demonstrated improvements in PFS (HR = 0.67 [95% CI 0.50, 0.91], P = 0.009) and OS (HR = 0.82 [95% CI 0.69, 0.98], P = 0.03). Continuous erlotinib plus chemotherapy treatment failed to demonstrate improvements in PFS (HR = 0.91 [95% CI 0.80, 1.04], P = 0.16) and OS (HR = 0.98 [95% CI 0.89, 1.09], P = 0.75). The association of chemotherapy plus erlotinib with improvement in PFS was significant in never smoking patients (HR = 0.46 [95% CI 0.37, 0.56], P<0.00001) but not in smoking patients (HR = 0.70 [95% CI 0.49, 1.00], P = 0.05). Among patients with EGFR mutant tumors, chemotherapy plus erlotinib demonstrated significant improvements in PFS (HR = 0.31 [95% CI 0.17, 0.58], P = 0.0002) and OS (HR = 0.52 [95% CI 0.30, 0.88], P = 0.01). Among patients with EGFR wild-type tumors, no statistically significant difference was observed with respect to PFS (HR = 0.87 [95% CI 0.70, 1.08], P = 0.21) and OS (HR = 0.78 [95% CI 0.59, 1.01], P = 0.06).

Conclusion

Combination of chemotherapy and erlotinib is a viable treatment option for patients with NSCLC, especially for patients who never smoked and patients with EGFR mutation-positive disease. In addition, intercalated administration is an effective combinatorial strategy.

SUBMITTER: Xu JL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4493135 | biostudies-literature | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Chemotherapy plus Erlotinib versus Chemotherapy Alone for Treating Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.

Xu J L JL Jin B B Ren Z H ZH Lou Y Q YQ Zhou Z R ZR Yang Q Z QZ Han B H BH

PloS one 20150706 7

<h4>Background</h4>Whether a combination of chemotherapy and erlotinib is beneficial for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains controversial. This study aimed to summarize the currently available evidence and compare the efficacy and safety of chemotherapy plus erlotinib versus chemotherapy alone for treating advanced NSCLC.<h4>Methods</h4>EMBASE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for relevant studies. Our protocol was registered in PROSPE ...[more]

PMID: 26147288

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundToripalimab is the first domestic anti-tumor programmed death 1 antibody marketed in China. The CHOICE-01 trial (identifier: NCT03856411) demonstrated that toripalimab plus chemotherapy can significantly improve the clinical outcomes of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. However, whether it is cost-effective remains unknown. Given the high cost of combination therapy, a cost-effectiveness analysis of toripalimab plus chemotherapy (TC) versus chemotherapy alone (PC) for the first-line treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC is required.MethodsA partitioned survival model was adopted to predict the course of disease in advanced NSCLC patients on TC or PC from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system over a 10-year horizon. The survival data were obtained from the CHOICE-01 clinical trial. Cost and utility values were obtained from local hospitals and kinds of literature. Based on these parameters, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of TC vs. PC was measured, and one-way sensitivity analyses, probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA), and scenario analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the model.ResultsIn the base case, TC was associated with an incremental cost of $18510 and an incremental quality-adjusted life year (QALY) of 0.57 compared with PC, resulting in an ICER of $32237/QALY which was lower than the willingness to pay (WTP) threshold ($37654/QALY), TC was cost-effective. The health utility value of progression-free survival, the price of toripalimab, and the cost of best supportive care were factors that significantly influenced the ICER, but no change in any of them could change the model result. TC showed a 90% probability of being a cost-effective option at a WTP threshold of $37,654/QALY. In the 20 and 30-year time horizons, the results remained unchanged and TC remained cost-effective when the second-line treatment was switched to docetaxel.ConclusionAt a WTP threshold of $37,654 per QALY, TC was cost-effective compared to PC for patients with advanced NSCLC in China.

Project description:BackgroundBevacizumab and erlotinib target different tumour growth pathways with little overlap in their toxic-effect profiles. On the basis of promising results from a phase 1/2 trial assessing safety and activity of erlotinib plus bevacizumab for recurrent or refractory non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), we aimed to assess efficacy and safety of this combination in a phase 3 trial.MethodsIn our double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised phase 3 trial (BeTa), we enrolled patients with recurrent or refractory NSCLC who presented to 177 study sites in 12 countries after failure of first-line treatment. Patients were randomly allocated in a one-to-one ratio to receive erlotinib plus bevacizumab (bevacizumab group) or erlotinib plus placebo (control group) according to a computer-generated randomisation sequence by use of an interactive voice response system. The primary endpoint was overall survival in all enrolled patients. Patients, study staff, and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. We assessed safety by calculation of incidence of adverse events and tissue was collected for biomarker analyses. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00130728.FindingsOverall survival did not differ between 317 controls and 319 patients in the bevacizumab group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·97, 95% CI 0·80-1·18, p=0·7583). Median overall survival was 9·3 months (IQR 4·1-21·6) for patients in the bevacizumab group compared with 9·2 months (3·8-20·2) for controls. Progression-free survival seemed to be longer in the bevacizumab group (3·4 months [1·4-8·4]) than in the control group (1·7 months [1·3-4·1]; HR 0·62, 95% CI 0·52-0·75) and objective response rate suggested some clinical activity of bevacizumab and erlotinib. However, these secondary endpoint differences could not be defined as significant because the study prespecified that the primary endpoint had to be significant before testing of secondary endpoints could be done, to control type I error rate. In the bevacizumab group, 130 (42%) of 313 patients with safety data had a serious adverse event, compared with 114 (36%) controls. There were 20 (6%) grade 5 adverse events, including two arterial thromboembolic events, in the bevacizumab group, and 14 (4%) in the control group.InterpretationAddition of bevacizumab to erlotinib does not improve survival in patients with recurrent or refractory NSCLC.FundingGenentech.

Project description:BackgroundThe use of standard cytotoxic chemotherapy seems to have reached a "treatment plateau". The application of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) is a new strategy for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) therapy. We aimed to comprehensively assess the efficacy and safety of anti-EGFR-mAbs plus chemotherapy as first-line therapy for advanced NSCLC.MethodsAccording to inclusion and exclusion criteria, we conducted a comprehensive literature search of electronic databases. From the included trials, information on overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs) was extracted.ResultsThe research showed that compared with chemotherapy alone, anti-EGFR-mAb plus chemotherapy combinations significantly improved OS (HR = 0.88, 95%CI: 0.83-0.94, P < .0001), PFS (HR = 0.89, 95%CI: 0.83-0.95, P = 0.0004) and ORR (OR = 1.39, 95%CI: 1.13-1.69, P = .001). Meta subgroup analyses manifested that the OS of patients with squamous NSCLC treated with anti-EGFR-mAb plus chemotherapy combinations was notably better than that of patients with non-squamous NSCLC treated with the same combinations (HR = 0.82, 95%CI: 0.73-0.92, P = .0005). Compared with the chemotherapy group, combination of chemotherapy and anti-EGFR mAb showed increase in incidences of severe AEs (> = grade 3) that mainly include, leukopenia (OR = 1.53, 95%CI: 1.28-1.82, P < .00001), febrile neutropenia (OR = 1.35, 95%CI: 1.06-1.71, P = .02), hypomagnesemia (OR = 5.68, 95%CI: 3.54-9.10, P < .00001), acneiform rash (OR = 35.88, 95%CI: 17.37-74.10, P < .00001), fatigue (OR = 1.24, 95%CI: 1.02-1.49, P = .03), diarrhea (OR = 1.69, 95%CI: 1.16-2.47, P = .006), and infusion-related reactions (OR = 3.78, 95%CI: 1.93-7.41, P = .0001).ConclusionAdding an anti-EGFR-mAb to the standard platinum-based chemotherapy regimens used for the first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC resulted in statistically notable improvements in OS, PFS, and ORR. In particular, anti-EGFR-mAb and chemotherapy combinations achieved greater survival benefits in patients with squamous NSCLC than in those with non-squamous NSCLC. In addition, the safety profile of chemotherapy plus anti-EGFR-mAb combinations was acceptable compared to that of chemotherapy alone.

Dataset Information

Chemotherapy plus Erlotinib versus Chemotherapy Alone for Treating Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Chemotherapy plus Erlotinib versus Chemotherapy Alone for Treating Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets