ReviewCurrent oncology reports2025
Who Truly Benefits From First-Line Intensification in EGFR-Mutant NSCLC?
Review in Current oncology reports, 2025. 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.
- Prevalence and Clinical Implications of Somatic and Germline EGFR Mutations in Patients with Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.Cancers · 2026Review
- The Prognostic Significance ofCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- Amivantamab Plus Lazertinib and Platin-Based Chemotherapy Plus Osimertinib in EGFR-Mutant NSCLC: How to Choose Among Them and When Is Monotherapy with Osimertinib Still the Best Option?Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Review
- Lorlatinib and Amivantamab: A Paradigm Shift inOncology research · 2026Review
- Perioperative Immunotherapy for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC).Current oncology reports · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewThe treatment landscape for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with common EGFR mutations has evolved significantly, with osimertinib established as the first-line standard. Two recent phase III trials, FLAURA2 and MARIPOSA, demonstrated that first-line intensification-through osimertinib plus chemotherapy or amivantamab-lazertinib-significantly prolongs overall survival compared to osimertinib alone. The aim of this review was to critically assess whether treatment intensification should be adopted as a new standard and, if so, in which patients. RECENT
findingsWe identified high-risk subgroups more likely to benefit from upfront combination strategies, such as those with brain or liver metastases, L858R mutations, TP53 co-mutations, or detectable ctDNA. However, the improved efficacy comes with increased rates of grade ≥ 3 adverse events and treatment discontinuation, raising concerns about tolerability and quality of life (QoL), particularly in real-world settings with frailer patients. Post-progression strategies are also evolving and may impact the long-term value of upfront intensification. Emerging approaches, including targeted and untargeted therapies, and novel antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), offer promising alternatives that may change future treatment options. Careful patient selection, improved toxicity management, and integration of QoL measures will be critical to ensure that the survival advantage demonstrated in trials can translate into true benefit in routine clinical practice. Future research should focus on identifying robust clinical and molecular markers to guide personalized treatment decisions.
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.