For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
27
views
21
references
 Top references
cited by
5
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      473
      similar
       All similar
      OncoTargets and Therapy (submit here)

      This international, peer-reviewed Open Access journal by Dove Medical Press focuses on the pathological basis of cancers, potential targets for therapy and treatment protocols to improve the management of cancer patients. Publishing high-quality, original research on molecular aspects of cancer, including the molecular diagnosis, since 2008. Sign up for email alerts here. 50,877 Monthly downloads/views I 4.345 Impact Factor I 7.0 CiteScore I 0.81 Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) I 0.811 Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR)

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of gefitinib with pemetrexed maintenance after first-line platinum-based doublet chemotherapy in advanced lung adenocarcinoma: single-center experience

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          Both gefitinib and pemetrexed maintenance were effective therapies for advanced lung adenocarcinoma, but which is better is unclear. For patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma, we have no idea whether we should choose gefitinib or pemetrexed maintenance in clinical practice. Here, we assessed the efficacy and tolerability of gefitinib versus pemetrexed maintenance in these patients.

          Patients and methods

          A total of 101 patients were identified and divided into gefitinib (n=53) or pemetrexed (n=48) maintenance. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) status of tumors was analyzed in 67 patients. Disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared between the two groups.

          Results

          The results showed that DCR (79.2% vs 75%, P=0.642) was similar between gefitinib and pemetrexed groups. The PFS of gefitinib was significantly longer than that of pemetrexed (8 months vs 5.4 months, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.520, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.341–0.791, P=0.002); however, the OS was similar (19.9 months vs 18.8 months, HR: 1.006, 95% CI: 0.664–1.525, P=0.977). In EGFR mutation-positive patients, PFS was significantly longer in gefitinib (12 months vs 5.4 months; HR: 0.158, 95% CI: 0.074–0.333, P<0.001), whereas in EGFR wild-type subgroup gefitinib had a significantly shorter PFS than that by pemetrexed (2.5 months vs 5 months; HR: 2.822, 95% CI: 1.137–7.005, P=0.025). Cox multivariate regression analysis of PFS for overall population showed that smoking status ( P=0.001) and maintenance regimens ( P=0.013) were independent prognostic factors for PFS. Both gefitinib and pemetrexed were well tolerated.

          Conclusion

          Gefitinib compared with pemetrexed as maintenance therapy had a significantly longer PFS and a similar OS with good tolerability in patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma. Moreover, for EGFR mutation-positive patients, gefitinib maintenance had a significantly longer PFS; however, pemetrexed maintenance was considered more effective for EGFR wild-type patients.

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Revisions in the International System for Staging Lung Cancer.

          Clifton Mountain (1997)
          Revisions in stage grouping of the TNM subsets (T=primary tumor, N=regional lymph nodes, M=distant metastasis) in the International System for Staging Lung Cancer have been adopted by the American Joint Committee on Cancer and the Union Internationale Contre le Cancer. These revisions were made to provide greater specificity for identifying patient groups with similar prognoses and treatment options with the least disruption of the present classification: T1N0M0, stage IA; T2N0M0, stage IB; T1N1M0, stage IIA; T2N1M0 and T3N0M0, stage IIB; and T3N1M0, T1N2M0, T2N2M0, T3N2M0, stage IIIA. The TNM subsets in stage IIIB-T4 any N M0, any T N3M0, and in stage IV-any T any N M1, remain the same. Analysis of a collected database representing all clinical, surgical-pathologic, and follow-up information for 5,319 patients treated for primary lung cancer confirmed the validity of the TNM and stage grouping classification schema.
          Article 0 comments Cited 396 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Erlotinib as maintenance treatment in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 3 study.

            Federico Cappuzzo, Tudor Ciuleanu, Lilia Stelmakh … (2010)
            First-line chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is usually limited to four to six cycles. Maintenance therapy can delay progression and prolong survival. The oral epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine-kinase inhibitor erlotinib has proven efficacy and tolerability in second-line NSCLC. We designed the phase 3, placebo-controlled Sequential Tarceva in Unresectable NSCLC (SATURN; BO18192) study to assess use of erlotinib as maintenance therapy in patients with non-progressive disease following first-line platinum-doublet chemotherapy. Between December, 2005, and May, 2008, 1949 patients were included in the run-in phase (four cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy). At the end of the run-in phase, 889 patients who did not have progressive disease were entered into the main study, and were randomly allocated using a 1:1 adaptive randomisation method through a third-party interactive voice response system to receive erlotinib (150 mg/day; n=438) or placebo (n=451) until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients were stratified by EGFR immunohistochemistry status, stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, chemotherapy regimen, smoking history, and region. Co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) in all analysable patients irrespective of EGFR status, and PFS in patients whose tumours had EGFR protein overexpression, as determined by immunohistochemistry. This study is registered with www.ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00556712. 884 patients were analysable for PFS; 437 in the erlotinib group and 447 in the placebo group. After a median follow-up of 11.4 months for the erlotinib group and 11.5 months for the placebo group, median PFS was significantly longer with erlotinib than with placebo: 12.3 weeks for patients in the erlotinib group versus 11.1 weeks for those in the placebo group (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.62-0.82; p<0.0001). PFS was also significantly longer in patients with EGFR-positive immunohistochemistry who were treated with erlotinib (n=307) compared with EGFR-positive patients given placebo (n=311; median PFS 12.3 weeks in the erlotinib group vs 11.1 weeks in the placebo group; HR 0.69, 0.58-0.82; p<0.0001). The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events were rash (37 [9%] of 443 patients in the erlotinib group vs none of 445 in the placebo group) and diarrhoea (seven [2%] of 443 patients vs none of 445). Serious adverse events were reported in 47 patients (11%) on erlotinib compared with 34 patients (8%) on placebo. The most common serious adverse event was pneumonia (seven cases [2%] with erlotinib and four [<1%] with placebo). Maintenance therapy with erlotinib for patients with NSCLC is well tolerated and significantly prolongs PFS compared with placebo. First-line maintenance with erlotinib could be considered in patients who do not progress after four cycles of chemotherapy. F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
            Article 0 comments Cited 258 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Maintenance pemetrexed plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care for non-small-cell lung cancer: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study.

              Tudor Ciuleanu, Thomas Brodowicz, Christoph Zielinski … (2009)
              Several studies have shown the efficacy, tolerability, and ease of administration of pemetrexed-an antifolate antineoplastic agent-in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. We assessed pemetrexed as maintenance therapy in patients with this disease. This randomised double-blind study was undertaken in 83 centres in 20 countries. 663 patients with stage IIIB or IV disease who had not progressed on four cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned (2:1 ratio) to receive pemetrexed (500 mg/m(2), day 1) plus best supportive care (n=441) or placebo plus best supportive care (n=222) in 21-day cycles until disease progression. Treatment was randomised with the Simon and Pocock minimisation method. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment. All patients received vitamin B(12), folic acid, and dexamethasone. The primary endpoint of progression-free survival and the secondary endpoint of overall survival were analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00102804. All randomly assigned participants were analysed. Pemetrexed significantly improved progression-free survival (4.3 months [95% CI 4.1-4.7] vs 2.6 months [1.7-2.8]; hazard ratio [HR] 0.50, 95% CI 0.42-0.61, p<0.0001) and overall survival (13.4 months [11.9-15.9] vs 10.6 months [8.7-12.0]; HR 0.79, 0.65-0.95, p=0.012) compared with placebo. Treatment discontinuations due to drug-related toxic effects were higher in the pemetrexed group than in the placebo group (21 [5%] vs three [1%]). Drug-related grade three or higher toxic effects were higher with pemetrexed than with placebo (70 [16%] vs nine [4%]; p<0.0001), specifically fatigue (22 [5%] vs one [1%], p=0.001) and neutropenia (13 [3%] vs 0, p=0.006). No pemetrexed-related deaths occurred. Relatively fewer patients in the pemetrexed group than in the placebo group received systemic post-discontinuation therapy (227 [51%] vs 149 [67%]; p=0.0001). Maintenance therapy with pemetrexed is well tolerated and offers improved progression-free and overall survival compared with placebo in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Eli Lilly.
              Article 0 comments Cited 215 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): Onco Targets Ther
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Onco Targets Ther
                Journal ID (publisher-id): OncoTargets and Therapy
                Title: OncoTargets and therapy
                Publisher: Dove Medical Press
                ISSN (Electronic): 1178-6930
                Publication date Collection: 2016
                Publication date (Electronic): 14 October 2016
                Volume: 9
                Pages: 6305-6314
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Oncology, Panyu Central Hospital
                [2 ]Cancer Institute of Panyu
                [3 ]School of Nursing, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, People’s Republic of China
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Xiaolong Cao, Department of Oncology, Panyu Central Hospital, No 8 Fuyu Road East, Panyu, Guangzhou, Guangdong province, 511400, People’s Republic of China, Tel +86 20 3485 9213, Fax +86 20 3485 8309, Email pyzhl616@ 123456sina.com
                [*]

                These authors contributed equally to this work

                Article
                Publisher ID: ott-9-6305
                DOI: 10.2147/OTT.S113374
                PMC ID: 5072510
                SO-VID: 0145f252-662f-4d5a-a874-e0e9a235edf9
                Copyright © © 2016 Lin et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited
                License:

                The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.

                History
                Categories
                Subject: Original Research

                ScienceOpen disciplines: Oncology & Radiotherapy
                Keywords: gefitinib,pemetrexed,lung adenocarcinoma,maintenance therapy
                Data availability:
                ScienceOpen disciplines: Oncology & Radiotherapy
                Keywords: gefitinib, pemetrexed, lung adenocarcinoma, maintenance therapy

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content473

                See all similar

                Cited by5

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors778

                See all reference authors