Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39021550›Full record

ArticleEcancermedicalscience2024

Reduced frequency dosing of osimertinib in EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung carcinoma: real world data.

Vanita Noronha, Harsh Sahu, Akhil Kapoor, Vijay Patil, Nandini Menon, Minit Shah, Dilan Davis, Rumeli Roy, Srigadha Vivek, Amit Janu and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecancermedicalscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
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

12 authors.

Vanita NoronhaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai 400012, Maharashtra, India.
Harsh SahuDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai 400012, Maharashtra, India.
Akhil KapoorDepartment of Medical Oncology, Homi Bhabha Cancer Hospital, Varanasi 221001, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Vijay PatilDepartment of Medical Oncology, Hinduja Hospital, Mumbai 400016, Maharashtra, India.
Nandini MenonDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai 400012, Maharashtra, India.
Minit ShahDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai 400012, Maharashtra, India.
Dilan DavisDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai 400012, Maharashtra, India.
Rumeli RoyDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai 400012, Maharashtra, India.
Srigadha VivekDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai 400012, Maharashtra, India.
Amit JanuDepartment of Radiology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai 400012, Maharashtra, India.
Rajiv KaushalDepartment of Pathology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai 400012, Maharashtra, India.
Kumar PrabhashDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai 400012, Maharashtra, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Osimertinib is more efficacious and as safe as first-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-directed tyrosine kinase inhibitors. However, osimertinib is not affordable for most patients in developing nations. Moreover, the minimum biologically effective dose of osimertinib may be less than the approved dose. Materials and methods: This was a retrospective observational multicentric study aimed to describe the efficacy (objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS)) and toxicity of osimertinib 80 mg orally administered less frequently than daily (ranging from every other day to once-a-week) in patients with EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer. Results: Between January 2021 and August 2023, we enrolled 22 patients. Six received osimertinib 80 mg once-a-week, nine received 80 mg once-in-3-days and seven received 80 mg on alternate days. Responses included 0 complete responses, 7 (31.8%) partial responses, 9 (40.9%) stable disease and 5 (22.7%) progressive disease. ORR was 31.8%, and DCR was 72.7%. Median PFS was 9.2 months (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.9-15.7), and median OS was 17.8 months (95% CI, 3.2-32.6). In patients who received reduced frequency osimertinib in the second line and beyond, the ORR was 29.4%, DCR was 70.5%, median PFS was 5.9 months (95% CI, 1.1-10.6) and median OS was 17.6 months (95% CI, 2.9-32.2). Grade 3 and higher toxicities were noted in 8 (36.3%) patients. Conclusion: Less frequent dosing of osimertinib may be a valid treatment option, especially in the second line and beyond setting in patients who cannot afford full dose daily osimertinib. This may provide an additional treatment option with a similar toxicity profile as that of standard dose osimertinib.

Indexed as

EGFRfinancial toxicityLMIClow doseNSCLCosimertinib

Identifiers

PMID39021550
PMCPMC11254406

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.