SynthesisJournal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute2026
Comparative efficacy and safety of first, second, and third-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors in treatment-naïve EGFR-mutant advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe optimal first-line epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) for EGFR-mutant advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains uncertain due to the availability of multiple generations of TKIs and limited head-to-head comparisons.
methodsA systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted comparing first, second, and third-generation EGFR-TKIs in treatment-naïve EGFR-mutant NSCLC. Databases including PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched. Outcomes included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs). Hazard ratios (HRs) and odds ratios (ORs) were pooled using a frequentist random-effects NMA. Treatments were ranked using P-scores.
resultsNine RCTs were included for PFS and eight for OS and AEs. For OS, dacomitinib (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.59-0.95) and osimertinib (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.67-0.96) showed significant benefit versus first-generation TKIs. For PFS, all evaluated second- and third-generation TKIs significantly improved PFS, with furmonertinib (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.34-0.57) having the highest P-score. In safety analysis, no EGFR-TKI showed a statistically significant difference in grade ≥ 3 adverse events compared with first-generation TKIs. Although befotertinib and dacomitinib had numerically higher odds, all confidence intervals were wide and crossed the null value.
conclusionsWhile several EGFR-TKIs improved efficacy over first-generation agents, no single treatment was clearly superior across all efficacy and safety outcomes. Osimertinib showed consistent efficacy, while its safety advantage became evident in the sensitivity analysis excluding FLAURA China.
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.