Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30863108›Full record

ReviewOncoTargets and therapy2019

First-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors in EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: a network meta-analysis.

Marscha S Holleman, Harm van Tinteren, Harry Jm Groen, Maiwenn J Al, Carin A Uyl-de Groot

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in OncoTargets and therapy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Cost-effectiveness analysis of the first-line EGFR-TKIs in patients with non-small cell lung cancer harbouring EGFR mutations.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2020
    Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Green SeaweedMarine drugs · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

5 authors.

Marscha S HollemanErasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, holleman@eshpm.eur.nl.
Harm van TinterenDepartment of Biometrics, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Harry Jm GroenDepartment of Pulmonary Diseases, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Maiwenn J AlErasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, holleman@eshpm.eur.nl.
Carin A Uyl-de GrootErasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, holleman@eshpm.eur.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) including afatinib, dacomitinib, erlotinib, gefitinib, and osimertinib have proven efficacy in terms of progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring EGFR mutations. However, an overall view for comparing efficacy and toxicity on a meta-level is lacking. This study compared efficacy and toxicity of first-line treatment with five different EGFR-TKIs by conducting a network meta-analysis (NMA).

methodsA systematic review was performed, aiming to find eligible literature. Data of PFS, overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events were extracted. An NMA based on Bayesian statistics was established to synthesize the efficacy and toxicity of all treatments.

resultsThirteen randomized controlled trials, including data from 3,539 patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC, were analyzed. Rank probabilities showed that osimertinib had a potentially better efficacy in terms of PFS and OS compared to all other TKIs. For ORR, afatinib and osimertinib showed a trend of superiority compared to the other four TKIs. Furthermore, there was a high risk of diarrhea and rash for patients treated with afatinib or dacomitinib as well as a moderate risk for treatment with erlotinib, gefitinib, and osimertinib.

conclusionOur study showed a favorable efficacy of osimertinib in terms of PFS and OS compared to all other EGFR-TKIs in patients with NSCLC harboring activating EGFR mutations. Furthermore, gefitinib, erlotinib, and osimertinib were associated with fewer toxicities compared to the other TKIs. Therefore, osimertinib is indicated as a preferable first-line TKI in patients with activating EGFR-mutated NSCLC.

Indexed as

afatinibEGFR-TKIerlotinibgefitinibnetwork meta-analysisosimertinib

Identifiers

PMID30863108
PMCPMC6388947

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.