The Efficacy of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors for Molecularly Selected Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of 30 Randomized Controlled Trials

Abstract

Objective: To determine the efficacy of first-generation epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) in molecularly selected patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), we performed this pooled analysis.

Method: Randomized trials of EGFR-TKIs as treatment for advanced NSCLC were included for this meta-analysis. We used published hazard ratios (HRs), if available, or derived treatment estimates from other survival data. Pooled estimates of treatment efficacy of EGFR-TKIs in the selected patients by EGFR-mutation status were calculated.

Results: Out of 2134 retrieved articles, 30 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) enrolling more than 4053 patients with wild-type EGFR tumors and 1592 patients with mutant EGFR tumors were identified. For EGFR mutant patients, EGFR-TKIs treatment improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with chemotherapy: the summary HRs were 0.41 (p < 0.00001) for the first-line setting and 0.46 (p = 0.02) for second/third-line setting, respectively. Also, the same superior trend was found with TKIs maintenance over placebo (HR = 0.14, p < 0.00001) and with TKIs combined with chemotherapy over chemotherapy (HR = 0.49, p = .002) in both the first-line and maintenance therapy settings. For EGFR wild-type patients, EGFR-TKIs have fared worse than chemotherapy in the first-line setting (HR = 1.65, p = .03) and in the second/third-line setting (HR = 1.27, p = .005). However, EGFR-TKIs maintenance still produced a reduction of 19 % in the risk of progression over placebo (HR = 0.81, p = .02). Furthermore, EGFR-TKIs added to chemotherapy as first-line treatment resulted in an improvement of PFS over chemotherapy alone in such wild-type EGFR patients (HR = 0.82, p = .03). In overall survival (OS) analysis, only EGFR-TKIs single agent was inferior to chemotherapy in EGFR wild-type patients (HR = 1.13, p = .02). No statistically significant difference in terms of OS was observed in any other subgroup analysis.

Conclusions: For EGFR mutant patients, EGFR-TKIs therapy produced a prominent PFS benefit in all settings. Among EGFR wild-type patients, EGFR-TKIs were inferior to chemotherapy both for first-line treatment and for second/third-line treatment. However, EGFR-TKIs maintenance and addition of EGFR-TKIs to chemotherapy could provide additive benefit over chemotherapy alone in such EGFR wild-type patients.