Observational studyCancer science2026
Afatinib Versus Osimertinib for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer With Uncommon EGFR Mutations: Real-World Outcomes.
Observational study in Cancer science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Pharmacological considerations for prescribing of small molecule inhibitors in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) harboring uncommon epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations (UMs) are clinically heterogeneous, and the optimal first-line EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI), as well as the role of subsequent immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based regimens, remains uncertain. We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study including patients with advanced or recurrent non-squamous NSCLC harboring UMs who received first-line afatinib or osimertinib between January 2015 and January 2024 at 29 hospitals in Japan, excluding exon 20 insertions and de novo T790M mutations. Inverse probability of treatment weighting adjusted baseline imbalances, and post-EGFR-TKI treatment patterns were evaluated. Among 162 patients (afatinib, n = 95; osimertinib, n = 67), weighted analyses demonstrated no significant differences in time to treatment failure (hazard ratio [HR], 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-1.77) or overall survival (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.73-2.44). Afatinib was associated with higher response rates and more frequent adverse events requiring dose reduction. Subgroup analyses suggested differential treatment effects according to mutation subtype, with osimertinib favoring L861X mutations and afatinib favoring compound mutations. Among 56 patients who received subsequent systemic therapy, clinical outcomes were comparable between ICI plus platinum doublet and platinum doublet alone. These findings indicate that afatinib and osimertinib provide comparable survival outcomes as first-line therapies for NSCLC with UMs, with treatment effects varying by molecular subtype, while subsequent ICI-based regimens may confer limited additional benefit.
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.