Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29898592›Full record

ArticleCancer research and treatment2019

Efficacy and Safety of Afatinib for EGFR-mutant Non-small Cell Lung Cancer, Compared with Gefitinib or Erlotinib.

Youjin Kim, Se-Hoon Lee, Jin Seok Ahn, Myung-Ju Ahn, Keunchil Park, Jong-Mu Sun

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer research and treatment, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 64 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
64citing papers in PubMed
9.9field-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.

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

64 citing papers in PubMed, 98 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Real-world first-line afatinib for advancedTranslational lung cancer research · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Real-world clinical evidence of lazertinib use in acquiredTranslational lung cancer research · 2023
    Article
  18. Real-world analysis of first-line afatinib in patients withTranslational lung cancer research · 2023
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Youjin KimDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Se-Hoon LeeDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Jin Seok AhnDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Myung-Ju AhnDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Keunchil ParkDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Jong-Mu SunDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Sungkyunkwan University · KRSamsung Medical Center · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe tried to evaluate whether there are any specific features in treatment outcomes of firstline afatinib in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), compared with gefitinib or erlotinib. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe analyzed patients treated with first-line afatinib, gefitinib, or erlotinib for advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC at Samsung Medical Center between 2014 and 2016.

resultsIn total, 467 patients received first-line afatinib (n=165), gefitinib (n=230), or erlotinib (n=72). Afatinib was used more often in patients with tumors harboring deletion in exon 19 (Del19), whereas the gefitinib group had more elderly, females, and never smokers. The median progression-free survival (PFS) time for afatinib, gefitinib, and erlotinib was 19.1 months, 13.7 months, and 14.0 months, respectively (p=0.001). The superior PFS of afatinib was more remarkable in subgroups of Del19 or uncommon EGFR mutations. Overall toxicity profiles of the three drugs were comparable, though more grade 3 or 4 toxicities were detected in afatinib (7.3%) compared with gefitinib (2.6%) or erlotinib (1.8%). The common grade 3 or 4 toxicities of afatinib included diarrhea (3.0%), paronychia (2.4%), and skin rash (1.8%). Dose modification was more frequently required in patients treated with afatinib (112/165, 68%), compared with gefitinib (5/230, 2%) and erlotinib (4/72, 6%). Interestingly, however, dose reduction in the afatinib group did not impair its efficacy in terms of PFS (dose reduction vs. no reduction group, 23.5 months vs. 12.4 months).

conclusionFirst-line afatinib showed satisfactory efficacy data and manageable toxicity profiles.

Indexed as

MutationAdultAfatinibAgedAntineoplastic AgentsCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungErbB ReceptorsErlotinib HydrochlorideFemaleGefitinibHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedProtein Kinase InhibitorsRetrospective StudiesAfatinibAntineoplastic AgentsEGFR protein, humanErbB ReceptorsErlotinib HydrochlorideGefitinibProtein Kinase InhibitorsAfatinibEpidermal growth factor receptorFirst-line therapyNon-small cell lung carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID29898592
PMCPMC6473268
OpenAlexW2808643725

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.