The Efficacy of Erlotinib Versus Conventional Chemotherapy for Advanced Nonsmall-Cell Lung Cancer: A PRISMA-Compliant Systematic Review With Meta-Regression and Meta-Analysis. Issue 2 (January 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Ma, Hu; Tian, Xu; Zeng, Xian-Tao; Zhang, Yu; Wang, Yi; Wang, Fei; Zhou, Jian-Guo
• Editors: Xie., Maohua
• Is Part Of: Medicine. Volume 95:Issue 2(2016)
• Page Start: e2495
• Publication Date: 2016-01
• Subjects: Medicine -- Periodicals; Medicine -- Periodicals; Médecine -- Périodiques; Geneeskunde; Medicine; Periodicals; Periodicals; 610.5
• DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000002495
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0025-7974

Abstract

Abstract : Abstract: Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the leading cause of cancer deaths. Erlotinib is the first-generation epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs), the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend it as a first-line agent in patients with sensitizing EGFR mutations. We conducted a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of erlotinib and chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC, and evaluated the efficacy of them to provide references for further clinical practice and research. PubMed, EMBASE, CBM, CNKI, WanFang database, The Cochrane library, and Web of Science, as well as abstracts presented at ASCO conferences and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched to identify relevant studies. HR with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), relative risk (RR) with 95% CIs for objective response rate (ORR) and 1-year survival rate (OSR) were all extracted. If the I 2 was ≤40%, then the trial was considered to be heterogeneous, and a fixed-effects model was selected. Otherwise, a random-effects model was used. Meta-regression and sensitivity analyses were conducted to determine the possible heterogeneity causes and to further identify the influence of the various exclusion criteria on the overall risk estimate. The pooled analysis demonstrated a PFS HR of 0.93 (95% CI = 0.73, 1.19) for erlotinib versus chemotherapy and an ORR of 18.43% versus 22.07%, respectively. The OS HR was 1.02 (95%CI = 0.93, 1.12). The HRs for PFS estimated based on 10 trials involving 1101 patients were 0.22 (95% CI = 0.15, 0.29) and 1.27 (95% CI = 1.04, 1.48) in EGFR mutation-type and wild-type patients, respectively. The HRs for OS calculated from 4 studies including 681 participants were 0.83 (95% CI = 0.61, 1.05) and 0.86 (95% CI = 0.68, 1.04) in EGFR mutation-type and wild-type patients, respectively. The 1-year survival rates were 31.31% and 32.41%, respectively. Overall, the present meta-analysis suggested that erlotinib did not improve the ORR, PFS, OS or the 1-year survival rate for whole patients. However, erlotinib could benefit patients with EGFR mutation in terms of PFS, but the OS does not benefit from it for these patients. Further studies of erlotinib for these subgroup patients are warranted.