Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33511076›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2020

Neoadjuvant EGFR-TKI Therapy for EGFR-Mutant NSCLC: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis of Five Prospective Clinical Trials.

Li Sun, Yi-Jia Guo, Jun Song, Yan-Ru Wang, Shu-Ling Zhang, Le-Tian Huang, Jian-Zhu Zhao, Wei Jing, Cheng-Bo Han, Jie-Tao Ma

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
8.8field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 65 citations in OpenAlex.

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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Li SunDepartment of Oncology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Yi-Jia GuoDepartment of Oncology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Jun SongDepartment of Oncology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Yan-Ru WangDepartment of Oncology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Shu-Ling ZhangDepartment of Oncology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Le-Tian HuangDepartment of Oncology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Jian-Zhu ZhaoDepartment of Oncology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Wei JingDepartment of Oncology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Cheng-Bo HanDepartment of Oncology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Jie-Tao MaDepartment of Oncology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
China Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe role of neoadjuvant epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) targeted therapy for patients with EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has not been clarified. A pooled analysis of prospective clinical trials was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant EGFR-TKI therapy.

methodsThe PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases, as well as meeting abstracts were searched for prospective clinical trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant EGFR-TKI for treatment of EGFR-mutant NSCLC. The main outcomes included the objective response rate (ORR), downstaging rate, surgical resection rate (SRR), pathologic complete response (pCR) rate, progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events.

resultsA total of five, phase II, prospective, clinical trials involving 124 patients with resectable or potentially resectable EGFR-mutant NSCLC treated with neoadjuvant erlotinib or gefitinib treatment were included in this pooled analysis. The median neoadjuvant medication time was 42 (range, 21-56) days and the median time of response evaluation was 45 (range, 42-56) days. The pooled ORR was 58.5% [95% confidence interval (CI), 45.5%-71.8%] and the surgical resection and complete resection (R0) rates were 79.9% (95% CI, 65.3%-94.5%) and 64.3% (95% CI, 43.8%-84.8%), respectively. In the stage IIIA subgroup (n = 68), the pooled ORR, SRR, and R0 rate were 51.4%, 72.9%, and 57.0%, respectively, while the downstaging and pCR rates were 14.0% and 0.0%, respectively. The pooled median PFS and overall survival were 13.2 and 41.9 months, respectively. Of the most common grade 3/4 adverse events in the overall group, the incidences of hepatotoxicity and skin rash were 5.3% and 14.7%, respectively. The most commonly reported postoperative complications were lung infection, arrhythmia, and pneumothorax.

conclusionNeoadjuvant EGFR-TKI therapy provides a feasible treatment modality for patients with resectable or potentially resectable EGFR-mutant NSCLC, with satisfactory surgical outcomes and low toxicity. Although further phase III clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings, it is necessary to explore the feasibility of a more effective EGFR-TKI combination neoadjuvant therapy given the modest downgrade and pCR rates for EGFR-TKI alone.

Indexed as

efficacyepidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitorsneoadjuvantnon-small cell lung cancersafety

Identifiers

PMID33511076
PMCPMC7837071
OpenAlexW3119512043

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.