Observational studyBMC pulmonary medicine2024
Baseline genetic abnormalities and effectiveness of osimertinib treatment in patients with chemotherapy-naïve EGFR-mutated NSCLC based on performance status.
Observational study in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Roles of β-catenin protein in non-small cell lung cancer (Review).Oncology letters · 2025Review
- Stage-specific efficacy of osimertinib in treatment-naïve EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer according to baseline genetic alterations in circulating tumor DNA.Investigational new drugs · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimFor patients treated with osimertinib as first-line therapy, there have been no studies comparing both progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) according to performance status (PS). Furthermore, no studies have examined differences in baseline genetic abnormalities between patients with poor and good PS. Therefore, we aimed to investigate differences in baseline genetic abnormalities and treatment effects between patients with poor and good PS who received osimertinib as the primary treatment. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis is a secondary analysis of the ELUCIDATOR study, which is a multi-center prospective observational study in Japan that assessed mechanisms underlying resistance to osimertinib as first-line treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer with epidermal growth factor receptor mutations.
resultsThere were 153 and 25 patients in the good and poor PS groups, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed no significant between-group differences in PFS (hazards ratio [HR]: 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.52-1.72, p = 0.946). Multivariate analysis of OS revealed that poor PS was a poor prognostic factor (HR: 2.67, 95% CI: 1.43-4.73, p = 0.003). Regarding baseline genetic abnormalities, there was a significant increase in APC-positive cases (20.0% vs. 2.2%, p = 0.009) and a trend toward more CTNNB1-positive cases in the poor PS group than in the good PS group (14.3% vs. 2.9%, p = 0.062).
conclusionThere was no between-group difference in PFS, although OS was significantly inferior in the poor PS group. Additionally, there was a significant increase in APC-positive cases and a trend toward more CTNNB1-positive cases in the poor PS group.
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.