ArticleTargeted oncology2026
Afatinib Versus Osimertinib as First-Line Treatment for Advanced EGFR-Mutant Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A 3-Year Follow-Up Overall Survival Analysis.
Article in Targeted oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo date, there are limited clinical trials comparing the clinical efficacy between second-generation and third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI)s.
objectiveThe objective of this study was to compare the survival outcomes between afatinib and osimertinib as first-line treatments in patients with advanced EGFR-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND
methodsBetween January 2018 and December 2020, we retrospectively enrolled patients with advanced NSCLC harboring an exon 19 deletion or L858R mutation who received afatinib or osimertinib as first-line treatment to analyze the progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).
resultsA total of 128 patients were included in this study, with 81 in the afatinib group and 47 in the osimertinib group. The median follow-up time was 39.9 months for the afatinib group and 37.0 months for the osimertinib group. The median PFS was 13.5 months in the afatinib group and 18.2 months in the osimertinib group (p = 0.240). The median OS was 40.5 months in the afatinib group and 37.0 months in the osimertinib group (p = 0.980). A total of 63% of patients received osimertinib as sequential therapy following progression on afatinib, with a median OS of 41.7 months. Among these patients, the median OS was 41.7 months for those with a detected T790M mutation, 42.0 months for those without the mutation, and 35.6 months for those with unknown T790M mutation status.
conclusionsOur study demonstrated that both afatinib and osimertinib as first-line treatments offer favorable median OS in patients with advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC. In addition, we recommend that patients receiving afatinib as first-line therapy undergo sequential osimertinib treatment, regardless of their T790M mutation status.
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.