Bevacizumab and erlotinib in EGFR wild type NSCLC patients
Author | Phase | Line of treatment | Pts | Treatment | Response rate(%) | Progression-free survival (months) | Overall survival (months) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Herbst et al. [17] | I/II | Second line | 40 | Erlotinib + Bevacizumab | 20 95% CI: 7.6-32.4% | 7.0; 1-year PFS = 38.0%, 95% CI: 24.3-59.6% | 12.6; 1-year OS = 54.2%,95% CI: 40.0%-73.4% |
Herbst et al. [18] | II | Second line | 120 | Bevacizumab + CT | 12.5 vs. 17.9 vs. 12.2 | 4.8 vs. 4.4 vs. 3.0 HR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.38-1.16 HR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.42-1.23 | 12.6 vs. 13.7 vs. 8.6 HR: 0.71,95% CI: 0.41-1.21 HR: 0.78,95% CI: 0.46-1.31 |
Herbst et al. BeTa trial [19] | III | Second line | 636 | Erlotinib + Bevacizumab vs. Erlotinib + placebo | 14 vs. 7 | 3.4 vs.1.7 HR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.52-0.75 | 9.3 vs. 9.2 HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.80-1.18, P = 0.7583 |
Wang et al. [20] | III | Second line | 297 | Erlotinib + Bevacizumab + Panitumumab vs. Erlotinib + placebo | 38 vs.15 P = 0.014 | 4.6 vs. 1.9 P = 0.003 | 10.4 vs. 8.9 P = 0.031 |
Besse et al. BRAIN trial [21] | II | Second line | 24 | Erlotinib + Bevacizumab | 12.5 95% CI: 2.7-32.4 | 6.3 95% CI: 3.0-8.4 | 12.0 95% CI: 8.9-20.2 |
Johnson et al. ATLAS trial [22] | III | Maintenance after I line | 745 | Erlotinib + Bevacizumab vs. Bevacizumab alone | - | 4.8 vs. 3.7, HR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.58-0.86 P < 0.001 | 14.4 vs. 13.3 HR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.7-1.21 P = 0.5341 |
Dingemans et al. [23] | II | First line | 47 | Erlotinib + Bevacizumab | 25 | 3.8 (95% CI: 2.3-5.4) | 6.9 (95% CI: I 5.5-8.4) |
Zappa et al. trial SAKK 19/05 [24] | II | First line | 101 | Erlotinib + Bevacizumab | 17.8 | 4.1 (95% CI: 2.9-5.5) | 14.1 (95% CI: 10.7-19.0) |
Ciuleanu et al. TASK trial [25] | II | First line | 200 | Erlotinib + Bevacizumab vs. Chemo + Bevacizumab | 23.8 vs. 34.4, P = 0.19 | 18.4 vs. 25 weeks HR 2.05, 95% CI: 1.11-3.77 | 16.4 vs. n.r HR:1.24, 95% CI: 0.75-2.05 |
Thomas et al. INNOVATIONS [26] | II | First line | 224 | Erlotinib + Bevacizumab vs. Cisplatin + Gemcitabine + Bevacizumab | 12 vs. 36, P < 0.0001 | 3.5 vs. 6.9 HR: 1.85; 95% CI:1.39-2.45 P < 0.0001 | 12.6 vs.17.8 HR: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.01-1.97 P = 0.04 |
Docetaxel or erlotinib; n.r: not reached
GP and AM conceived the paper and prepared the majority of the first draft, while the other authors contributed further sections. All authors contributed to manuscript revision, read and approved the submitted version.
AM declares the following speakers’ bureau: Roche, Takeda, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, MSD Oncology, BMS. The other authors declare that no conflicts of interest.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
© The Author(s) 2020.