Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27083334›Full record

Trial reportThe Lancet. Oncology2016

Afatinib versus gefitinib as first-line treatment of patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (LUX-Lung 7): a phase 2B, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

Keunchil Park, Eng-Huat Tan, Ken O'Byrne, Li Zhang, Michael Boyer, Tony Mok, Vera Hirsh, James Chih-Hsin Yang, Ki Hyeong Lee, Shun Lu and 13 more

3 registry-linked trialsAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Lancet. Oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 673 papers, 14 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
673citing papers in PubMed, 14 pooled it
110.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT01466660 phase2completednot on this map

LUX-Lung 7: A Randomised, Open-label Phase IIb Trial of Afatinib Versus Gefitinib as First-line Treatment of Patients With EGFR Mutation Positive Advanced Adenocarcinoma of the Lung

TypeinterventionalSponsorBoehringer IngelheimRan2011 to 2019Enrolled319ConditionsLung NeoplasmsArmsAfatinib, gefitinib
NCT04619563 phase2unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

A Single-arm Exploratory Clinical Study of Anlotinib Hydrochloride Combined With Docetaxel in EGFR Mutations Advanced Non Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients Who Have Progressed After Targeted Therapy and Chemotherapy

TypeinterventionalSponsorShandong Cancer Hospital and InstituteRan2020 to 2022Enrolled42ConditionsNon Small Cell Lung CancerArmsAnlotinib Hydrochloride plus Docetaxel
NCT04640870 completednot on this map

An Observational Study to Assess the Molecular Epidemiology of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) Mutations in Patients With Advanced EGFR Mutation-positive Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Treated With Afatinib in Real-world Clinical Set-tings in Greece

TypeobservationalSponsorHellenic Cooperative Oncology GroupRan2015 to 2020Enrolled59ConditionsNon Small Cell Lung Cancer, EGF-R Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, EGFR Gene MutationArmsAfatinib
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

673 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 1,159 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

613 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

23 authors at 20 institutions in 12 countries.

Keunchil ParkSamsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea. Electronic address: kpark@skku.edu.
Eng-Huat TanNational Cancer Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
Ken O'ByrnePrincess Alexandra Hospital and Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Li ZhangState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China.
Michael BoyerChris O'Brien Lifehouse, Camperdown, NSW, Australia.
Tony MokKey Laboratory of South China, Department of Clinical Oncology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong Sha Tin, Hong Kong.
Vera HirshMcGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
James Chih-Hsin YangNational Taiwan University Hospital and National Taiwan University Cancer Center, Taipei, Taiwan.
Ki Hyeong LeeChungbuk National University Hospital, Cheongju, Chungbuk, South Korea.
Shun LuShanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai, China.
Yuankai ShiCancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China; Beijing Key Laboratory of Clinical Study on Anticancer Molecular Targeted Drugs, Beijing, China.
Sang-We KimAsan Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea.
Janessa LaskinBC CancerAgency, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Dong-Wan KimSeoul National University Hospital, Seoul, South Korea.
Catherine Dubos ArvisCentre François Baclesse, Oncology, Caen, France.
Karl KölbeckKarolinska University Hospital, Solna, Stockholm, Sweden.
Scott A LaurieThe Ottawa Hospital Cancer Centre, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Chun-Ming TsaiTaipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Mehdi ShahidiBoehringer Ingelheim Ltd UK, Bracknell, Berkshire, UK.
Miyoung KimBoehringer Ingelheim GmbH, Ingelheim, Germany.
Dan MasseyBoehringer Ingelheim Ltd UK, Bracknell, Berkshire, UK.
Victoria ZazulinaBoehringer Ingelheim Ltd UK, Bracknell, Berkshire, UK.
Luis Paz-AresHospital Universitario Doce de Octubre and CNIO, Madrid Spain.
Boehringer Ingelheim (United Kingdom) · GBAsan Medical Center · KRBC Cancer Agency · CABoehringer Ingelheim (Germany) · DECentre François Baclesse · FRChinese University of Hong Kong · HKChris O’Brien Lifehouse · AUChungbuk National University Hospital · KRHospital Universitario 12 De Octubre · ESKarolinska University Hospital · SEMcGill University · CANational Cancer Centre Singapore · SGNational Taiwan University Hospital · TWNational Yang Ming Chiao Tung University · TWOttawa Hospital · CAPeking Union Medical College Hospital · CNPrincess Alexandra Hospital · AUSeoul National University Hospital · KRShanghai Chest Hospital · CNSungkyunkwan University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe irreversible ErbB family blocker afatinib and the reversible EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor gefitinib are approved for first-line treatment of EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of afatinib and gefitinib in this setting.

methodsThis multicentre, international, open-label, exploratory, randomised controlled phase 2B trial (LUX-Lung 7) was done at 64 centres in 13 countries. Treatment-naive patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and a common EGFR mutation (exon 19 deletion or Leu858Arg) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive afatinib (40 mg per day) or gefitinib (250 mg per day) until disease progression, or beyond if deemed beneficial by the investigator. Randomisation, stratified by EGFR mutation type and status of brain metastases, was done centrally using a validated number generating system implemented via an interactive voice or web-based response system with a block size of four. Clinicians and patients were not masked to treatment allocation; independent review of tumour response was done in a blinded manner. Coprimary endpoints were progression-free survival by independent central review, time-to-treatment failure, and overall survival. Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population and safety analyses were done in patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01466660.

findingsBetween Dec 13, 2011, and Aug 8, 2013, 319 patients were randomly assigned (160 to afatinib and 159 to gefitinib). Median follow-up was 27·3 months (IQR 15·3-33·9). Progression-free survival (median 11·0 months [95% CI 10·6-12·9] with afatinib vs 10·9 months [9·1-11·5] with gefitinib; hazard ratio [HR] 0·73 [95% CI 0·57-0·95], p=0·017) and time-to-treatment failure (median 13·7 months [95% CI 11·9-15·0] with afatinib vs 11·5 months [10·1-13·1] with gefitinib; HR 0·73 [95% CI 0·58-0·92], p=0·0073) were significantly longer with afatinib than with gefitinib. Overall survival data are not mature. The most common treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were diarrhoea (20 [13%] of 160 patients given afatinib vs two [1%] of 159 given gefitinib) and rash or acne (15 [9%] patients given afatinib vs five [3%] of those given gefitinib) and liver enzyme elevations (no patients given afatinib vs 14 [9%] of those given gefitinib). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 17 (11%) patients in the afatinib group and seven (4%) in the gefitinib group. Ten (6%) patients in each group discontinued treatment due to drug-related adverse events. 15 (9%) fatal adverse events occurred in the afatinib group and ten (6%) in the gefitinib group. All but one of these deaths were considered unrelated to treatment; one patient in the gefitinib group died from drug-related hepatic and renal failure.

interpretationAfatinib significantly improved outcomes in treatment-naive patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC compared with gefitinib, with a manageable tolerability profile. These data are potentially important for clinical decision making in this patient population.

fundingBoehringer Ingelheim.

Indexed as

AdultAfatinibAgedAged, 80 and overCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungDisease-Free SurvivalDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsErbB ReceptorsFemaleGefitinibHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedMutationProtein Kinase InhibitorsAfatinibEGFR protein, humanErbB ReceptorsGefitinibProtein Kinase InhibitorsQuinazolines

Identifiers

PMID27083334
OpenAlexW2339311613

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.