Epidemiological and clinical burden of EGFR Exon 20 insertion in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic literature review.
Americas
/ epidemiology
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
Asia
/ epidemiology
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung
/ drug therapy
Cohort Studies
ErbB Receptors
/ genetics
Europe
/ epidemiology
Exons
Gene Expression
Humans
Incidence
Lung Neoplasms
/ drug therapy
Mutagenesis, Insertional
Mutation Rate
Prognosis
Protein Kinase Inhibitors
/ therapeutic use
Survival Analysis
Treatment Outcome
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
06
11
2020
accepted:
09
02
2021
entrez:
8
3
2021
pubmed:
9
3
2021
medline:
8
9
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The burden of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) exon 20 insertion mutation (Exon 20ins) in non-small cell lung cancer is not well understood. A systematic review was conducted to identify evidence on mutation frequency, prognostic impact, clinical, patient-reported, and economic outcomes associated with Exon 20ins. Searches were conducted in Embase and Medline and supplemented with recent conference proceedings. Included studies were not limited by intervention, geography, or publication year. Seventy-eight unique studies were included; 53 reporting mutation frequency, 13 prognostic impact, 36 clinical outcomes, and one humanistic burden. No economic burden data were identified. The frequency of Exon 20ins mutation ranged from 0.1% to 4% of all NSCLC cases and 1% to 12% of all EGFR mutations. Data on the prognostic impact of Exon 20ins were heterogeneous but highlighted poorer outcomes in patients with Exon 20ins mutation compared with patients with other EGFR mutations and EGFR wildtype across a wide range of therapies and treatment lines. Comparative evidence on the clinical efficacy and safety of currently available therapies were limited, as were sample sizes of studies reporting on real-world effectiveness. Nine single-arm trials and 27 observational studies reported clinical outcomes for patients with Exon 20ins. Trends towards better survival and response were observed for chemotherapy compared with TKIs as first-line treatments. For subsequent treatment lines, novel targeted therapies provided encouraging preliminary responses while results for chemotherapy were less favorable. Limited safety data were reported. One conference abstract described the symptom burden for Exon 20ins patients with fatigue and pain being most common. Findings of the systematic review show a high unmet need for safe and efficacious treatments for patients with Exon 20ins as well and need for further evidence generation to better understand the patient-level and economic impact for these patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33684140
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247620
pii: PONE-D-20-35023
pmc: PMC7939356
doi:
Substances chimiques
Protein Kinase Inhibitors
0
EGFR protein, human
EC 2.7.10.1
ErbB Receptors
EC 2.7.10.1
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0247620Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have read the journal’s policy and have the following competing interests: HB, HE, and NS are paid employees of Evidera, a consultancy which provides consulting and other research services to pharmaceutical, medical device, and other organizations. In their salaried positions, they work with a variety of companies and are precluded from receiving payment or honoraria directly from these organizations for services rendered. Evidera received funding from Janssen for the involvement of their employees in this research. TL and PM are paid employees of Janssen. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. There are no patents, products in development or marketed products associated with this research to declare. CC has no conflicts to disclose.
Références
Int J Mol Sci. 2019 Mar 21;20(6):
pubmed: 30901844
Lung Cancer. 2017 Aug;110:56-62
pubmed: 28676220
Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2019 Mar 8;4:5
pubmed: 30854234
Br J Cancer. 2016 Dec 6;115(12):1504-1512
pubmed: 27875527
J Thorac Oncol. 2018 Oct;13(10):1560-1568
pubmed: 29981927
Lancet Oncol. 2015 Jul;16(7):830-8
pubmed: 26051236
Ann Oncol. 2018 Oct 1;29(Suppl 4):iv192-iv237
pubmed: 30285222
Lung Cancer (Auckl). 2019 Jan 29;10:1-10
pubmed: 30774491
Cancer Res Treat. 2019 Apr;51(2):623-631
pubmed: 30049203
Onco Targets Ther. 2017 Jun 09;10:2903-2908
pubmed: 28652772
Clin Cancer Res. 2011 Jun 1;17(11):3812-21
pubmed: 21531810
Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2020 Oct;9(5):1853-1861
pubmed: 33209607
Ann Oncol. 2018 Oct 1;29(10):2092-2097
pubmed: 30351341
Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2016 Jun;5(3):288-300
pubmed: 27413711
BMC Cancer. 2019 Jun 17;19(1):595
pubmed: 31208370
Ann Surg Oncol. 2014 Dec;21 Suppl 4:S490-6
pubmed: 24419753
Sci Transl Med. 2013 Dec 18;5(216):216ra177
pubmed: 24353160
Mol Cancer Ther. 2013 Feb;12(2):220-9
pubmed: 23371856
Lung Cancer. 2017 Dec;114:96-102
pubmed: 29173773
Cancer. 2015 Sep 15;121(18):3212-3220
pubmed: 26096453
Clin Lung Cancer. 2019 Nov;20(6):e620-e630
pubmed: 31327643
Ann Intern Med. 2015 Jun 2;162(11):777-84
pubmed: 26030634
J Thorac Oncol. 2020 Dec 14;:
pubmed: 33333327
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Oct 3;10:ED000142
pubmed: 31643080
Lung Cancer. 2018 Nov;125:265-272
pubmed: 30429031
Onco Targets Ther. 2016 Jul 08;9:4181-6
pubmed: 27468240
Oncotarget. 2016 Nov 29;7(48):78985-78993
pubmed: 27738317
Thorac Cancer. 2021 Jan;12(2):218-226
pubmed: 33210451
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005 Mar 2;97(5):339-46
pubmed: 15741570
J Thorac Oncol. 2013 Feb;8(2):179-84
pubmed: 23328547