Dataset Information

Front-Line Therapy in EGFR Exon 19 Deletion and 21 Leu858Arg Mutations in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of different first-line strategies based on different EGFR mutation types (19 deletion and 21 Leu858Arg mutations).

Methods

We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) by searching and analyzing RCTs on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, ASCO.org, and ESMO.org, from inception to September 30^th, 2020.

Results

Nineteen RCTs involving 5450 patients were finally included in this study, covering 10 different treatment strategies. The Bayesian ranking results suggested that, in terms of PFS, in the overall population and in patients with 19del mutation, osimertinib was most likely to rank the first, with the cumulative probabilities of 41.89% and 45.73%, respectively, while for patients with 21 Leu858Arg mutation, standard of care (SoC, represents first-generation EGFR-TKIs in this NMA) + chemotherapy was most likely to rank the first, with the cumulative probabilities of 30.81% in PFS. Moreover, SoC + chemotherapy provided the best overall survival benefit for the overall population and patients with 19del, with the cumulative probabilities of 57.85% and 33.51%, respectively. In contrast, for patients with 21 Leu858Arg mutation, dacomitinib showed the most favorable overall survival, with the cumulative probabilities of 36.73%.

Conclusions

In this NMA, osimertinib and SoC combined with chemotherapy would be the optimal first-line treatment options for advanced NSCLC patients harboring EGFR 19 deletion mutation and 21 Leu858Arg mutation, respectively. This finding is likely to be adopted in clinical practice and provide guidance for future clinical study design. Systematic review registration: INPLASY2020100059.

SUBMITTER: Xie T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8687779 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIt remains unknown what is the optimal front-line choice for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) fusion.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized phase III clinical trials comparing two or more treatments as the front-line setting for patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC.ResultsNine phase III randomized clinical trials with 2367 patients were included. As to efficacy, lorlatinib had the most favorable progression-free survival [PFS; surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) = 98.4%] in the first-line setting, with noticeable outcome benefits versus chemotherapy [hazard ratio (HR): 0.12; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.08-0.19], crizotinib (HR: 0.28; 95% CI: 0.19-0.41), ceritinib (HR: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.13-0.37), and brigatinib (HR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.35-0.96), as well as beneficial trends when compared with alectinib (HR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.41-1.04) and ensartinib (HR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.36-1.08). Meanwhile, alectinib showed the optimal overall survival (OS; SUCRA = 91.2%), with significant improvements over chemotherapy (HR: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.30-0.72) and crizotinib (HR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.41-0.82). Similarly, brigatinib also displayed prolonged OS compared with crizotinib after adjustment for crossover by the marginal structural model (HR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.31-0.92). In terms of safety, alectinib had the fewest grade 3-5 adverse events (SUCRA = 98.9%), with marked advantages versus crizotinib [odds ratio (OR): 0.67; 95% CI: 0.46-0.97], ceritinib (OR: 0.21; 95% CI: 0.10-0.43), brigatinib (OR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.20-0.69), ensartinib (OR: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.27-0.89), and lorlatinib (OR: 0.30; 95% CI: 0.16-0.54).ConclusionsLorlatinib may have advantageous PFS compared with other agents but a greater risk of severe toxicity. Second-generation inhibitors, including alectinib, brigatinib, and ensartinib, provide major efficacy with less toxicity and remain appropriate regimens in the front-line setting.