Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26004768›Full record

Trial reportTargeted oncology2015

Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) Pathway Biomarkers in the Randomized Phase III Trial of Erlotinib Versus Observation in Ovarian Cancer Patients with No Evidence of Disease Progression after First-Line Platinum-Based Chemotherapy.

Evelyn Despierre, Ignace Vergote, Ryan Anderson, Corneel Coens, Dionyssios Katsaros, Fred R Hirsch, Bram Boeckx, Marileila Varella-Garcia, Annamaria Ferrero, Isabelle Ray-Coquard and 10 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · greenAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Targeted oncology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors at 9 institutions in 6 countries.

Evelyn DespierreGynecologic Oncology and Leuven Cancer Institute, and Department of Oncology, KU Leuven, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Leuven, Belgium. evelyndespierre@gmail.com.
Ignace VergoteGynecologic Oncology and Leuven Cancer Institute, and Department of Oncology, KU Leuven, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Ryan AndersonUniversity of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, Colorado, USA.
Corneel CoensEORTC Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium.
Dionyssios KatsarosAzienda Ospedaliera, Presidio Santa Anna, SCDO 3 Ginecologia Oncologica, Università di Torino, Turin, Italy.
Fred R HirschUniversity of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, Colorado, USA.
Bram BoeckxLaboratory for Translational Genetics, Department of Oncology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Marileila Varella-GarciaUniversity of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, Colorado, USA.
Annamaria FerreroAcademic Division of Gynecological Oncology, Mauriziano Hospital, Turin, Italy.
Isabelle Ray-CoquardDépartement d'Oncologie Médicale Adulte, Centre Leon Bérard, Lyon, France.
Els M J J BernsErasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Antonio CasadoHospital Universitario Clínico San Carlos, Servicio de Oncologia Medica, Madrid, Spain.
Diether LambrechtsLaboratory for Translational Genetics, Department of Oncology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Antonio JimenoUniversity of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, Colorado, USA.
European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Gynaecological Cancer Group (EORTC-GCG)
Groupe d’Investigateurs Nationaux pour les Etudes des Cancers de l’Ovaire (GINECO)
Austrian Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Gynäkologische Onkologie (A-AGO)
National Cancer Research Institute (NCRI)
Australia New Zealand Gynaecological Oncology Group (ANZGOG)
Mario Negri Gynecologic Oncology group (MaNGO)
KU Leuven · BEUniversity of Colorado Denver · USA. O. Ordine Mauriziano di Torino · ITCentre Léon Bérard · FRErasmus MC Cancer Institute · NLEuropean Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer · BEHospital Clínico San Carlos · ESOspedale Sant'Anna · ITUniversity of Colorado Cancer Center · US

Funding

University of Colorado Cancer Center Support Grant - Lung Cancer Patient-Derived Xenografts with Autologous Human Immune SystemsP30CA046934 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI James V Degregori · 1988 to 2026
$117.0M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA046934NCI NIH HHS P30CA046934
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn this work, we aimed to identify molecular epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tissue biomarkers in patients with ovarian cancer who were treated within the phase III randomized European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Gynaecological Cancer Group (EORTC-GCG) 55041 study comparing erlotinib with observation in patients with no evidence of disease progression after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy.

methodsSomatic mutations in KRAS, BRAF, NRAS, PIK3CA, EGFR, and PTEN were determined in 318 (38 %) and expression of EGFR, pAkt, pMAPK, E-cadherin and Vimentin, and EGFR and HER2 gene copy numbers in 218 (26 %) of a total of 835 randomized patients. Biomarker data were correlated with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

resultsOnly 28 mutations were observed among KRAS, BRAF, NRAS, PIK3CA, EGFR, and PTEN (in 7.5 % of patients), of which the most frequent were in KRAS and PIK3CA. EGFR mutations occurred in only three patients. When all mutations were pooled, patients with at least one mutation in KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, PIK3CA, or EGFR had longer PFS (33.1 versus 12.3 months; HR 0.57; 95 % CI 0.33 to 0.99; P = 0.042) compared to those with wild-type tumors. EGFR overexpression was detected in 93 of 218 patients (42.7 %), and 66 of 180 patients (36.7 %) had EGFR gene amplification or high levels of copy number gain. Fifty-eight of 128 patients had positive pMAPK expression (45.3 %), which was associated with inferior OS (38.9 versus 67.0 months; HR 1.81; 95 % CI 1.11 to 2.97; P = 0.016). Patients with positive EGFR fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) status had worse OS (46.1 months) than those with negative status (67.0 months; HR 1.56; 95 % CI 1.01 to 2.40; P = 0.044) and shorter PFS (9.6 versus 16.1 months; HR 1.57; 95 % CI 1.11 to 2.22; P = 0.010). None of the investigated biomarkers correlated with responsiveness to erlotinib.

conclusionsIn this phase III study, increased EGFR gene copy number was associated with worse OS and PFS in patients with ovarian cancer. It remains to be determined whether this association is purely prognostic or is also predictive.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBiomarkers, TumorDisease-Free SurvivalDisease ProgressionErbB ReceptorsErlotinib HydrochlorideFemaleHumansMiddle AgedMutationOrganoplatinum CompoundsOvarian NeoplasmsProtein Kinase InhibitorsBiomarkers, TumorEGFR protein, humanErbB ReceptorsErlotinib HydrochlorideOrganoplatinum CompoundsProtein Kinase InhibitorsProtein Kinases

Identifiers

PMID26004768
PMCPMC4661131
OpenAlexW416320400

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.