ArticleCancer management and research2021
Comparison of Different EGFR Gene Mutation Status in Patients with Metastatic Non-Small Lung Cancer After First-Line EGFR-TKIs Therapy and Analyzing Its Relationship with Efficacy and Prognosis.
Article in Cancer management and research, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- The predictive value of circulating lymphocyte subpopulation characteristics for the prognosis of patients with stage III-IV non-small cell lung cancer treated with EGFR-TKI.Biomedical engineering online · 2025Article
- Sinus metastasis of lung adenocarcinoma: a case report.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- A Rare Subtype of Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: Report of 159 Resected Pathological Stage I-IIIA Pulmonary Lymphoepithelioma-Like Carcinoma Cases.Frontiers in surgery · 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study is to compare the different EGFR mutation status in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after first-line EGFR-TKIs therapy and analyze its relationship with efficacy and prognosis. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis study retrospectively analyzed the data of patients with metastatic NSCLC harboring EGFR mutation in the Affiliated Tumor Hospital of Guangxi Medical University from June 2016 to December 2020. Samples were collected before treatment and at the time of disease progression after first-line EGFR-TKIs therapy. Amplification refractory mutation system (ARMS) PCR and next-generation sequencing (NGS) were used to detect EGFR mutation. ORR, DCR, and PFS of different EGFR mutation groups were compared.
resultsThe EGFR mutation rate of re-biopsy was 60.23%. The inconsistency rate of EGFR mutations in the same and different simple types was 72.22% (26/36) and 92.31% (48/52), respectively. Alterations in terms of EGFR mutations were divided into four groups: Group A: EGFR-sensitive mutation negative and T790M negative (39.77%); Group B: EGFR-sensitive mutation positive and T790M negative (18.19%); Group C: EGFR-sensitive mutation negative and T790M positive (36.36%); Group D: EGFR-sensitive mutation positive and T790M positive (5.68%). The differences between the four groups in ORR and DCR were not statistically significant (P>0.05). The median PFS of all patients was 10.65 months. PFS of Group A, B, C, and D was 12.26, 7.96, 10.55, and 13.81 months, respectively, with statistical significance (Log rank P = 0.014).
conclusionEGFR mutation status in metastatic NSCLC patients receiving the first- and second-generation TKIs after disease progression show diversity. Monitoring the EGFR mutation changes is of great importance for subsequent clinical decision-making and exploring the underlying mechanisms of acquired resistance.
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.