Time filter

Source Type

Haspinger E.R.,Medical Oncology | Agustoni F.,Medical Oncology | Torri V.,Fondazione Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri | Gelsomino F.,Medical Oncology | And 5 more authors.
Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology | Year: 2015

Three EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors have been compared to standard chemotherapy as up-front treatment in patients with advanced EGFR-positive NSCLC. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis using indirect comparisons to estimate the risk/benefit associated with each drug. EGFR-TKIs fared better than chemotherapy in terms of PFS. The relative probability of overall response was gefitinib versus erlotinib 0.96 (95% CI 0.69-1.34), gefitinib versus afatinib 0.91 (95% CI 0.67-1.23), erlotinib versus afatinib 0.94 (95% CI 0.65-1.35). Indirect comparisons for safety showed the RR for diarrhea gefitinib versus erlotinib 0.80 (95% CI 0.63-1.01), gefitinib versus afatinib 0.29 (95% CI 0.20-0.41), erlotinib versus afatinib 0.36 (95% CI 0.25-0.54); for rash gefitinib versus erlotinib 1.00 (95% CI 0.82-1.22), gefitinib versus afatinib 0.41(95% CI 0.25-0.65), erlotinib versus afatinib 0.41 (95% CI 0.25-0.66); for hypertransaminasemia gefitinib versus erlotinib 2.29 (95% CI 1.63-3.23).Our analysis showed that all treatments had similar efficacy but they differ for toxicities. © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. Source

Discover hidden collaborations