ArticleThoracic cancer2023
Survival outcomes of east Asian patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with first-line EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors: A network meta-analysis of real-world evidence.
Article in Thoracic cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dacomitinib as a First-Line Therapy for Advanced EGFR-Mutated Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Without Brain Metastases: A Multicenter Retrospective Observational Study.Cancer medicine · 2026Observational
- The Current Consensus on Salvage Surgery after Targeted Therapy for Advanced EGFR-Mutant Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.Journal of chest surgery · 2026Review
- Survival outcomes of east Asian patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with first-line EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors: A network meta-analysis of real-world evidence.Thoracic cancer · 2023Article
- Bilateral keratitis associated with afatinib therapy.Taiwan journal of ophthalmologyArticle
- Comparing the Effectiveness of Afatinib and Osimertinib for Patients With PD-L1-positiveCancer diagnosis & prognosisArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe comparative efficacies of different generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remain largely unknown. Moreover, whether one EGFR-TKI confers superior survival remains unclear, especially in East Asians. We conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) comparing the survival outcomes of East Asian patients with advanced NSCLC treated with first-line EGFR-TKIs.
methodsThe NMA included observational real-world evidence studies on adult patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC who received first (gefitinib and erlotinib), second (afatinib), or third (osimertinib) generation EGFR-TKIs as frontline therapy. Studies were identified through an online bibliographic search of Medline articles in the PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases.
resultsFor overall survival (OS), afatinib had significantly better hazard ratios (HRs) than osimertinib (HR: 0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.23-0.91), gefitinib (HR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.43-0.72), and erlotinib (HR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.54-0.92). For progression-free survival (PFS), afatinib had significantly better HRs than gefitinib (HR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.36-0.56) and erlotinib (HR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.49-0.81). Moreover, afatinib was most likely to achieve the longest OS (81.3%), followed by erlotinib (13%), osimertinib, and gefitinib. Furthermore, afatinib was most likely to achieve the longest PFS (48.3%), followed by osimertinib (34.9%) and erlotinib.
conclusionsThis real-world evidence shows that afatinib confers better survival than other first-line EGFR-TKIs in East Asian patients with advanced 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.