Current Evidence of the Efficacy and Safety of Neoadjuvant EGFR-TKIs for Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

Front Oncol. 2021 May 24:11:608608. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2021.608608. eCollection 2021.

Abstract

Purpose: Epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) have been indicated to be an effective treatment for advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC. However, the neoadjuvant application of EGFR-TKIs in resectable NSCLC needs further investigation. Here, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant EGFR-TKIs for lung cancer.

Methods: Published studies on neoadjuvant EGFR-TKIs in NSCLC were identified in PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE until June 1, 2020. Data on surgical rates, objective response rates (ORRs), pathologic responses, and adverse event (AE) rates were retrieved for proportional meta-analysis.

Results: In total, 7 enrolled studies involving 129 EGFR-TKI-sensitive NSCLC patients were included in this analysis. The overall surgical rate in these studies was 95% (95% CI: 83% to 100%), with an ORR of 48% (95% CI: 39% to 57%) in the population with EGFR-TKI-sensitive mutations, whereas the ORR including wild-type EGFR patients was 28% (95% CI: 14% to 44%). The rate of grade 1-2 AEs was 69% (95% CI: 41% to 91%) but with an acceptable rate of grade 3-4 AEs of 0% (95% CI: 0% to 5%). The pooled rates of rash and diarrhea were 56% (95% CI: 31% to 79%) and 25% (95% CI: 6% to 51%), respectively. The impact of neoadjuvant EGFR-TKIs on survival remains inconclusive.

Conclusions: Neoadjuvant EGFR-TKIs showed objective responses in approximately half of EGFR-sensitive NSCLC patients with a tolerable adverse effect profile. The favorable impact of neoadjuvant EGFR-TKIs on NSCLC needs more evidence for validation, such as the comparison of survival improvement between EGFR-TKIs and chemotherapy. The efficacy of neoadjuvant next-generation EGFR-TKIs in clinical trials remains unclear.

Keywords: EGFR-TKI; NSCLC; meta-analysis; neoadjuvant therapy; surgery.

Publication types

  • Systematic Review