Page 86 - 中国药房2023年10期
P. 86
·药物与临床·
埃克替尼对比吉非替尼治疗EGFR突变型晚期NSCLC的临床观
察
Δ
1, 2
1
1
吴方雨 ,陈卫东 ,夏盼盼 ,张旭东 ,沈爱宗 1, 3 # [1.安徽中医药大学药学院,合肥 230012;2.省部共建安徽道
1*
地中药材品质提升协同创新中心,合肥 230012;3.中国科学技术大学附属第一医院(安徽省立医院)药剂科,
合肥 230001]
中图分类号 R979.1 文献标志码 A 文章编号 1001-0408(2023)10-1228-05
DOI 10.6039/j.issn.1001-0408.2023.10.14
摘 要 目的 比较埃克替尼与吉非替尼治疗表皮生长因子受体(EGFR)突变型晚期非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)的疗效和安全性。
方法 回顾性分析2015年12月-2021年9月我院就诊的EGFR突变型晚期NSCLC患者资料146例,按用药的不同分为埃克替尼
组(73例)和吉非替尼组(73例)。埃克替尼组患者单用盐酸埃克替尼片(125 mg,每日3次,口服)或联合常规化疗;吉非替尼组患
者单用吉非替尼片(0.25 g,每日1次,口服)或联合常规化疗。观察两组患者的近期临床疗效、无进展生存期(PFS),采用Cox回归
模型分析影响患者预后的因素,记录两组患者的不良反应发生情况。结果 两组患者的客观缓解率,疾病控制率,1~2级、3~4级
不良反应总发生率比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);埃克替尼组患者的中位PFS显著优于吉非替尼组(P=0.048)。基于患
者基本资料的PFS亚组分析结果显示,与吉非替尼组比较,埃克替尼组中女性[HR=0.57,95%CI(0.34,0.96),P=0.031]和非脑转
移患者[HR=0.58,95%CI(0.36,0.91),P=0.017]的 PFS 显著延长。回归模型分析结果显示,EGFR19 exon Del 突变[HR=0.50,
95%CI(0.25,1.00),P=0.049]、EGFR21 exon L858R 突变[HR=0.44,95%CI(0.21,0.89),P=0.022]和埃克替尼治疗[HR=0.65,
95%CI(0.44,0.96),P=0.030]为影响患者预后的因素。结论 埃克替尼与吉非替尼治疗EGFR突变型晚期NSCLC的近期临床疗
效和安全性均相当,但埃克替尼可以显著延长患者的PFS;EGFR19 exon Del和EGFR21 exon L858R突变及接受埃克替尼治疗是
影响患者预后的因素。
关键词 吉非替尼;埃克替尼;表皮生长因子受体突变;晚期非小细胞肺癌;疗效;安全性
Clinical observation of icotinib versus gefitinib in the treatment of EGFR-mutated advanced non-small cell
lung cancer
1
1, 3
1, 2
WU Fangyu ,CHEN Weidong ,XIA Panpan ,ZHANG Xudong ,SHEN Aizong [1. School of Pharmacy,
1
1
Anhui University of Chinese Medicine, Hefei 230012, China;2. MOE-Anhui Joint Collaborative Innovation
Center for Quality Improvement of Anhui Genuine Chinese Medicinal Materials, Hefei 230012, China;3. Dept.
of Pharmacy, the First Affiliated Hospital of University of Science and Technology of China (Anhui Provincial
Hospital), Hefei 230001, China]
ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE To compare the efficacy and safety of icotinib and gefitinib in the treatment of epidermal growth
factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS The data of 146 patients with EGFR-
mutant advanced NSCLC of our Hospital from December 2015 to September 2021 were retrospectively analyzed and divided into
the gefitinib group (73 cases) and the icotinib group (73 cases) according to the drug use. Patients in the gefitinib group were
given 0.25 g of gefitinib tablets once a day orally by single drug or combined with conventional chemotherapy, while patients in the
icotinib group were given 125 mg of icotinib hydrochloride tablets three times a day orally by single drug or combined with
conventional chemotherapy. Short-term efficacy, progression-free survival (PFS) were observed; Cox regression model was used to
analyze the factors affecting the prognosis of patients; the occurrence of ADR were observed in the two groups. RESULTS There
was no statistically significant difference in the objective
Δ 基金项目 重大新药创制科技重大专项课题(No.2020ZX09201-
remission rate, disease control rate, and the incidence of grade
004);安徽省高校协同创新项目
1-2 and grade 3-4 adverse drug reactions between the two
*第一作者 硕士研究生。研究方向 :临床药剂学。E-mail:
3286947924@qq.com groups (P>0.05); median PFS was significantly better in the
# 通信作者 主任药师,硕士生导师,硕士。研究方向:临床药学、 icotinib group than in the gefitinib group (P=0.048). Results
药物经济学。E-mail:shenaizong@ustc.edu.cn of subgroup analysis based on patients basic information
· 1228 · China Pharmacy 2023 Vol. 34 No. 10 中国药房 2023年第34卷第10期