ArticleThoracic cancer2021
Efficacy and dose of afatinib in patients with non-small cell lung cancer after failure of prior gefitinib or erlotinib treatment.
Article in Thoracic cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Cardiovascular disease and lung cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
- Efficacy and dose of afatinib in patients with non-small cell lung cancer after failure of prior gefitinib or erlotinib treatment.Thoracic cancer · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe report a subgroup analysis of afatinib with respect to its efficacy, safety, and the long-term survival of patients in a Named Patient Use program at a single institution.
methodsWe analyzed 60 patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who had been treated with ≥1 line of platinum-based chemotherapy and had activating epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations or disease control for ≥6 months with prior EGFR inhibitors. Afatinib was started on a daily dose of 50 mg, which was decreased according to the adverse events and tolerability.
resultsA total of 13 patients achieved partial remission, whereas 33, 12, and two showed stable disease, had progression, and were not evaluable, respectively, resulting in an objective response rate and disease control rate of 21.7% and 76.7%, respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.4 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.0-7.7) months and median overall survival (OS) was 10.1 (8.5-13.6) months. Toxicities leading to drug discontinuation were experienced by four patients (6.7%). Grade 3 diarrhea occurred in 10 patients (16.7%), and afatinib dose reductions were required in 35 patients. The PFS and OS were significantly longer for patients whose dose was reduced to 40 or 30 mg than for those without dose reduction (7.0 vs 3.1 months and 13.5 vs 8.1 months, respectively, p < 0.05).
conclusionsThe efficacy of afatinib was similar to that identified in the global data without unexpected adverse events. Survival analyses support the currently approved dose of afatinib as first-line treatment for NSCLC.
Indexed as
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.