ArticleTranslational oncology2019
Comparison of T790M Acquisition Between Patients Treated with Afatinib and Gefitinib as First-Line Therapy: Retrospective Propensity Score Matching Analysis.
Article in Translational oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparison of T790M Acquisition After Treatment With First- and Second-Generation Tyrosine-Kinase Inhibitors: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Pooled it
- Resistance mechanisms of epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer patients: A meta-analysis.Thoracic cancer · 2021Pooled it
- STAT3 mediates CAF-induced osimertinib resistance via regulating protein secretion in non-small cell lung cancer.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Oncogenic alterations in advanced NSCLC: a molecular super-highway.Biomarker research · 2024Review
- Dynamic Assessment of Tissue and PlasmaInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Optimizing Patient Outcomes Through Sequential EGFR TKI Treatment in Asian Patients WithClinical Medicine Insights. Oncology · 2022Review
- Programmed death-ligand 1 expression level as a predictor of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor efficacy in lung adenocarcinoma.Translational lung cancer research · 2021Article
- Clinical utility of liquid biopsy for EGFR driver, T790M mutation and EGFR amplification in plasma in patients with acquired resistance to afatinib.BMC cancer · 2021Observational
- Real-world implementation of sequential targeted therapies for EGFR-mutated lung cancer.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2021Article
- Clinical Factors Affecting the Response to Osimertinib in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients with An Acquired Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor T790M Mutation: A Long-Term Survival Analysis.Targeted oncology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Afatinib, a second-generation, irreversible pan-HER inhibitor, shows better suppression of T790M-positive lung cancer cells than gefitinib in preclinical studies. However, whether the effect of afatinib on T790M acquisition differs from that of gefitinib when used clinically as first-line therapy remains unclear. To reaffirm the preclinical efficacy of afatinib on T790M-positive lung cancer cells, H1975 cells and established PC-9 cells resistant to gefitinib and erlotinib by T790M were used. In total, 398 patients with second biopsy at progression with stage IIIB/IV non-small cell lung cancer with EGFR mutation, treated with afatinib or gefitinib as first-line therapy, were retrospectively reviewed. Propensity score matching was used to balance covariates. Afatinib inhibited the growth of lung cancer cells with low T790M allele frequencies, which are resistant to gefitinib, but not those with high T790M allele frequencies. Afatinib and gefitinib showed similar efficacy in terms of progression-free survival (PFS) (11.5 vs 13.4 months, P = .08) and overall survival (OS) (29.3 vs 28.5 months, P = .76). T790M patients had better PFS and OS than those without T790M. There was no significant difference in the cumulative T790M acquisition ratio over time between afatinib and gefitinib (48.8% vs 59.3%, P = .317). The median time to acquire T790M was 12.9 months for afatinib and 15.7 months for gefitinib (P = .342). Although afatinib inhibited the growth of lung cancer cells with low T790M allele frequencies in preclinical studies, this could not be translated into clinical efficacy in terms of lowering the rate or delaying the time of T790M acquisition.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.