Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Comparison of adverse events and efficacy between gefitinib and erlotinib in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer: a retrospective analysis

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Medical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Previous studies have demonstrated that both gefitinib and erlotinib are markedly effective for the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with somatic activating mutations of the epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR-mt). These agents are considered to act on EGFR through the same mechanism. However, the efficacy of these agents against EGFR wild-type (-wt) NSCLC remains unclear, and the frequency of adverse events (AEs) appears to differ between them at each approved dose. Here, we conducted a retrospective analysis of AEs and drug efficacy in patients with NSCLC whose EGFR mutation status had been confirmed and who all received 250 mg gefitinib or 150 mg erlotinib once daily. The erlotinib group (n = 35) had more AEs, including rash, fatigue, stomatitis, anorexia and constipation. On the other hand, liver dysfunction and nail change were more frequent in the gefitinib group (n = 107). AEs of ≥grade 2, including rash, fatigue and nausea, were more frequent in the erlotinib group. The erlotinib group also showed more of a tendency to require dose reduction due to AEs. With regard to treatment efficacy for patients with EGFR-wt, there was no significant difference in progression-free survival between the two drug groups. However, this study has several limitations as of the nature of retrospective design; our data suggest that gefitinib and erlotinib might have almost equal efficacy for patients with EGFR-wt NSCLC, as is the case for patients with EGFR-mt tumors, although erlotinib appears to have higher toxicity than gefitinib at each approved dose.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Paez JG, Janne PA, Lee JC, et al. EGFR mutations in lung cancer: correlation with clinical response to gefitinib therapy. Science. 2004;304:1497–500.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Lynch TJ, Bell DW, Sordella R, et al. Activating mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor underlying responsiveness of non-small-cell lung cancer to gefitinib. N Engl J Med. 2004;350:2129–39.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Maemondo M, Inoue A, Kobayashi K, et al. Gefitinib or chemotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer with mutated EGFR. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:2380–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Mitsudomi T, Morita S, Yatabe Y, et al. Gefitinib versus cisplatin plus docetaxel in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer harbouring mutations of the epidermal growth factor receptor (WJTOG3405): an open label, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:121–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Zhou C, Wu YL, Chen G, et al. Erlotinib versus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (OPTIMAL, CTONG-0802): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12:735–42.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Rosell R, Carcereny E, Gervais R, et al. Erlotinib versus standard chemotherapy as first-line treatment for European patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (EURTAC): a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13:239–46.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Mok TS, Wu YL, Thongprasert S, et al. Gefitinib or carboplatin-paclitaxel in pulmonary adenocarcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:947–57.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Shepherd FA, Rodrigues Pereira J, Ciuleanu T, et al. Erlotinib in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:123–32.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Thatcher N, Chang A, Parikh P, et al. Gefitinib plus best supportive care in previously treated patients with refractory advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: results from a randomised, placebo-controlled, multicentre study (Iressa Survival Evaluation in Lung Cancer). Lancet. 2005;366:1527–37.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Nagai Y, Miyazawa H, Huqun, et al. Genetic heterogeneity of the epidermal growth factor receptor in non-small cell lung cancer cell lines revealed by a rapid and sensitive detection system, the peptide nucleic acid-locked nucleic acid PCR clamp. Cancer Res. 2005;65:7276–82.

  11. Kosaka T, Yatabe Y, Endoh H, et al. Mutations of the epidermal growth factor receptor gene in lung cancer: biological and clinical implications. Cancer Res. 2004;64:8919–23.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Li J, Karlsson MO, Brahmer J, et al. CYP3A phenotyping approach to predict systemic exposure to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98:1714–23.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Tan AR, Yang X, Hewitt SM, et al. Evaluation of biologic end points and pharmacokinetics in patients with metastatic breast cancer after treatment with erlotinib, an epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:3080–90.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Yeo WL, Riely GJ, Yeap BY, et al. Erlotinib at a dose of 25 mg daily for non-small cell lung cancers with EGFR mutations. J Thorac Oncol. 2010;5:1048–53.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lind JS, Postmus PE, Heideman DA, et al. Dramatic response to low-dose erlotinib of epidermal growth factor receptor mutation-positive recurrent non-small cell lung cancer after severe cutaneous toxicity. J Thorac Oncol. 2009;4:1585–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Takeda M, Okamoto I, Fukuoka M, et al. Successful treatment with erlotinib after gefitinib-related severe hepatotoxicity. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:e273–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kijima T, Shimizu T, Nonen S, et al. Safe and successful treatment with erlotinib after gefitinib-induced hepatotoxicity: difference in metabolism as a possible mechanism. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:e588–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. UMIN Clinical Trials Registry. http://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr/ctr.cgi?function=brows&action=brows&type=summary&recptno=R000002455&language=J.

Download references

Conflict of interest

None declared.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kazuhiko Yamada.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yoshida, T., Yamada, K., Azuma, K. et al. Comparison of adverse events and efficacy between gefitinib and erlotinib in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer: a retrospective analysis. Med Oncol 30, 349 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-012-0349-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-012-0349-y

Keywords

Navigation