Clinical lung cancer
-
Clinical lung cancer · Mar 2015
Meta AnalysisImpact of smoking status on EGFR-TKI efficacy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer in EGFR mutants: a meta-analysis.
The strong association between smoking history and the presence of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations has been proven in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), which explains the favorable response to EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) therapy in nonsmoking NSCLC patients. However, few studies directly focus on the relationship between EGFR-TKI's efficacy and smoking history in NSCLC EGFR-mutant patients. ⋯ For advanced NSCLC patients with EGFR mutations, nonsmoking is associated with longer PFS than ever smoking after EGFR-TKIs treatment. Smoking history should be considered an essential factor in studies regarding EGFR-targeted agents toward EGFR-mutant patients.
-
Clinical lung cancer · Mar 2012
Meta AnalysisNegative predictive value of positron emission tomography and computed tomography for stage T1-2N0 non-small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis.
Nodal staging of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is crucial in evaluation of prognosis and determination of therapeutic strategy. This study aimed to determine the negative predictive value (NPV) of combined positron emission tomography and computed tomography (PET-CT) in patients with stage I (T1-2N0) NSCLC and to investigate the possible risk factors for occult nodal disease. ⋯ Although overall occult nodal metastases in clinical stage T1-2N0 NSCLC is not infrequent, combined PET and CT provide a favorable NPV for mediastinal metastases in T1N0 NSCLC, suggesting a low yield from routine invasive staging procedures for this subgroup of patients.
-
Clinical lung cancer · Sep 2007
Meta Analysis Comparative StudySafety of irinotecan/cisplatin versus etoposide/cisplatin for patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: a metaanalysis.
The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety of patients with extensive small-cell lung cancer treated with irinotecan/cisplatin (IP) versus etoposide/cisplatin (EP). ⋯ Current clinical studies might confirm that fewer patients receiving IP experienced grade 3/4 leukopenia, grade 3 anemia, grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia, and grade 3/4 neutropenia, compared with patients receiving EP, but more experienced grade 3 vomiting/nausea and grade 3/4 diarrhea. There was no significant difference between the group receiving IP and the group receiving EP with regard to infection. Although there is convincing evidence to confirm the results mentioned herein, they still need to be confirmed by large-sample, multicenter, randomized, controlled trials.