ArticleFrontiers in oncology2023
Factors associated with outcomes of second-line treatment for
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) are standard first-line treatments for advanced Materials and methods: From January 2016 to December 2020, we enrolled 242 EGFR-mutant stage IIIB-IV NSCLC patients who progressed on first- or second-generation EGFR-TKI treatments, and 206 of them receive second-line treatments after disease progression. The factors that predict the survival outcomes of different second-line treatments after disease progression were evaluated. Clinical and demographic characteristics, including metastatic sites, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) at first-line progression, and second-line treatment regimens, and whether re-biopsied after disease progression or not, were reviewed for outcome analysis. Results: The univariate analysis showed that the PFS was shorted in male patients (p =0.049), patients with ECOG performance state ≥ 2 (p =0.014), former smokers (p =0.003), patients with brain metastasis (p =0.04), second-line chemotherapy or EGFR-TKIs other than osimertinib (p =0.002), and NLR ≥5.0 (p=0.024). In addition, second-line osimertinib was associated with longer OS compared to chemotherapy and other EGFR-TKI treatment (p =0.001). In the multivariate analysis, only second-line osimertinib was an independent predictor of PFS (p =0.023). Re-biopsy after first-line treatment was associated with a trend of better OS. Patients with NLR ≥5.0 at disease progression had shorter OS than patients with NLR <5.0 (p = 0.008). Conclusion: The benefits of osimertinib necessitate that aggressive re-biopsy after progression on first- or second-generation EGFR-TKI treatment is merited for appropriate second-line treatments to provide better outcomes for these patients.
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.