Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: Approximately 3%-5% of lung adenocarcinoma is driven by anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) fusion oncogene, whose activity can be suppressed by multiple ALK inhibitors. Crizotinib and ceritinib have demonstrated superior efficacy to platinum-based chemotherapy as front-line treatment for patients with ALK-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the direct comparison between them in the front-line setting remains lacking.
Methods: A total of 48 patients with ALK-positive, previously untreated advanced NSCLC, who received crizotinib and ceritinib as front-line treatment were retrospectively investigated. The efficacy and pattern of disease progression were analyzed.
Results: Patients receiving ceritinib treatment were significantly younger than those receiving crizotinib treatment (52.0 vs. 63.0, P = 0.016). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly longer with ceritinib than with crizotinib treatment (32.3 vs. 12.9 months; log-rank P = 0.020); the hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.27 (95% CI, 0.08-0.90; P = 0.033). An objective response was noted in all patients in the ceritinib group and in 23 patients in the crizotinib group (74.2%; 95% CI, 59.0 to 88.5). The rate of systemic progression was significantly lower over time with ceritinib treatment compared to crizotinib treatment (cause-specific hazard ratio, 0.21; 95% CI 0.06-0.73; P = 0.014). Serious adverse events were noted in one (2.9%) patient showing elevated liver function in the crizotinib group and three (23.1%) patients showing diarrhea in the ceritinib group. Dose reduction was needed in five out of 13 (38.5%) patients receiving ceritinib treatment.
Conclusion: Ceritinib showed higher efficacy associated with a better control of systemic progression compared to crizotinib for the front-line treatment of ALK-positive advanced NSCLCs.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6885427 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1759-7714.13221 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!