Abstract
Objective
To elucidate the potential benefits of combining radiotherapy and epidermal growth factor receptor‐tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR‐TKIs) for individuals with Stage IV lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) harboring either exon 19 deletion (19‐Del) or exon 21 L858R mutation (21‐L858R).
Methods
In this real‐world retrospective study, 177 individuals with Stage IV LUAD who underwent EGFR‐TKIs and radiotherapy at Shandong Cancer Hospital from June 2012 to August 2017 were included. The main focus of this real‐world study was overall survival (OS).
Results
The clinical characteristics of patients with Stage IV LUAD harboring 19‐Del were similar to those harboring 21‐L858R (p > 0.05). Overall, the patients had a median OS (mOS) of 32.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 28.6–35.5). Subsequently, multivariate analysis indicated that both EGFR mutations and thoracic radiotherapy were independent predictors of OS (p = 0.001 and 0.013). Furthermore, subgroup analysis highlighted a longer OS for the 19‐Del group compared to the 21‐L858R group, especially when EGFR‐TKIs were combined with bone metastasis or thoracic radiotherapy (mOS: 34.7 vs. 25.1 months and 51.0 vs. 29.6 months; p = 0.0056 and 0.0013, respectively). However, no significant differences were found in OS when considering patients who underwent brain metastasis radiotherapy (mOS: 34.7 vs. 25.1 months; p = 0.088).
Conclusions
Patients with Stage IV LUAD harboring 19‐Del experience a notably prolonged OS following combined therapy with EGFR‐TKIs and radiotherapy, while this OS benefit is observed despite the absence of substantial differences in the clinical characteristics between the 19‐Del and 21‐L858R groups.
Keywords: epidermal growth factor receptor‐tyrosine kinase inhibitor, exon 19 deletion, exon 21 L858R mutation, radiotherapy, Stage IV lung adenocarcinoma
1. INTRODUCTION
It is widely acknowledged that lung cancer is the leading reason for cancer‐related mortality in China and globally. Approximately 80%–85% of these cases are attributed to non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). 1 , 2 Specifically, lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) represents approximately 60% of NSCLC cases. 3 , 4 Individuals with NSCLC have a relatively low 5‐year survival rate because approximately 75% of them are diagnosed when surgical intervention is no longer feasible. Recent studies have revealed an increase in the overall survival (OS) rates of individuals with advanced NSCLC who fulfill the criteria for immunotherapy, including programmed cell death 1 (PD‐1) and programmed cell death ligand‐1 (PD‐L1), or targeted therapy using epidermal growth factor receptor‐tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR‐TKIs). Over 5 years, these rates have increased by approximately 15%–50%. 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 Unfortunately, most clinical studies on immunotherapy did not include patients harboring EGFR mutations.
At present, targeted therapy remains a prominent treatment approach for individuals with advanced NSCLC and EGFR mutations, particularly for those with advanced LUAD. 3 , 10 , 11 In NSCLC, approximately 85% of EGFR mutations are either exon 19 deletion (19‐Del) or exon 21 L858R mutation (21‐L858R). 12 , 13 Brain and bone metastases encompass some of the primary contributors to treatment failure in patients with LUAD and EGFR mutations. These metastases often manifest during the initial diagnosis. 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 In clinical settings, individuals with advanced LUAD and EGFR mutations who present with symptoms of brain or bone metastasis generally receive a treatment regimen involving radiotherapy combined with EGFR‐TKIs. This approach is consistent with several studies that have revealed that the combination of EGFR‐TKIs and radiotherapy, which is applied to the primary or metastatic lesions in advanced LUAD with EGFR mutations, yields a remarkably longer OS duration compared with only using EGFR‐TKIs. 18 , 19 , 20 Furthermore, some studies have confirmed that the Asian population has a higher frequency of EGFR mutations in LUAD. 4 , 21 , 22 Therefore, in this real‐world retrospective study, we investigated the therapeutic effectiveness of combining EGFR‐TKIs with radiotherapy in the prognosis of individuals with Stage IV LUAD harboring either 19‐Del or 21‐L858R mutation.
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS
2.1. Patients
Patients diagnosed with clinical Stage IV LUAD at Shandong Cancer Hospital between June 2012 and August 2017 were included. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (I) patients aged ≥18 years with Karnofsky performance status ≥70; (II) initial diagnosis of LUAD with 19‐Del or 21‐L858R and confirmed diagnosis via histopathology; (III) presence of brain or/and bone metastasis, as evidenced by magnetic resonance imaging, computer tomography (CT), emission CT, x‐ray, or positron emission tomography‐CT; (IV) received EGFR‐TKIs (as first‐line or second‐line therapy) without restrictions on treatment taboos; (V) received thoracic radiotherapy for residual primary lesions, and radiotherapy for bone or/and brain metastases with clinical symptoms based on the clinicians' assessment of the potential benefits of EGFR‐TKIs; (VI) absence of a history of malignant tumors and other life‐threatening diseases; and (VII) availability of all vital clinical information. This retrospective study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Shandong Cancer Hospital. Informed consent was obtained from all individuals before receiving treatments.
2.2. Treatment characteristics and follow‐up
Patients received EGFR‐TKIs, including first‐generation EGFR‐TKIs (such as gefitinib, erlotinib, and icotinib) or osimertinib, as first‐ or second‐line treatment until intolerable toxicity, disease progression, or death. The radiotherapy regimen included thoracic conventional fractionation radiotherapy, whole‐brain radiotherapy (WBRT), or boost radiotherapy for local brain metastasis, and palliative radiotherapy for bone metastasis. The radiotherapy dose was 30 Gy/10 fraction or 40 Gy/20 fraction for brain metastasis, and 30 Gy/10 fraction, 24 Gy/6 fraction, or 8 Gy/1 fraction for bone metastasis. Radiation administration, target volume delineation, and organs at risk were according to the guidelines of the Radiotherapy and Oncology Group. Some patients received bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy (platinum, pemetrexed, gemcitabine, vinorelbine, docetaxel, or albumin paclitaxel) as additional systemic treatments. The first‐line chemotherapy regimens for most patients were pemetrexed plus platinum or pemetrexed plus docetaxel. Furthermore, the doses of EGFR‐TKIs, chemotherapy regimens, and bevacizumab were according to the guidelines of the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network for NSCLC. Probable treatment‐associated adverse events (AEs) were graded and analyzed using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. OS was the primary end point of this study. It was computed from the initiation of EGFR‐TKI therapy or radiotherapy to either death from any cause or the designated cutoff date.
2.3. Statistical analysis
Clinical characteristics of individuals between the 19‐Del and 21‐L858R groups were compared using the chi‐square test. The Cox regression model was utilized to evaluate the hazard ratio and confidence interval (CI) to investigate the effect of the clinical characteristics on OS. Survival data were evaluated using the Kaplan–Meier method. The effect of different clinical characteristics on the OS between both groups was compared using the log‐rank test. IBM SPSS Statistics 26.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL) and GraphPad Prism software version 7.0 (GraphPad Software, Inc, USA) were used to perform statistical analyses. A two‐sided p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
3. RESULTS
3.1. Patients characteristics
One hundred and seventy‐seven individuals with Stage IV LUAD who received radiotherapy combined with EGFR‐TKIs were included in this real‐world study. 19‐Del was detected in 88 individuals (49.7%), whereas the 21‐L858R was detected in 89 individuals (50.3%). Notably, 174 patients received first‐generation EGFR‐TKIs such as gefitinib, erlotinib, and icotinib. Among them, 17 received osimertinib after receiving first‐generation EGFR‐TKIs owing to disease progression, whereas only three received osimertinib as first‐line therapy. Table 1 summarizes the clinical characteristics of the individuals. No distinguishing traits were observed between the clinical characteristics of the 19‐Del and 21‐L858R groups (all p > 0.05).
TABLE 1.
Baseline characteristics of all Stage IV lung adenocarcinomas between exon 19‐Del and 21‐L858R (N = 177).
| Characteristics | Total | 19‐Del | 21‐L858R | χ 2 | p‐value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N = 88 (%) | N = 89 (%) | ||||
| Gender | |||||
| Male | 57 | 29 (33.0) | 28 (31.5) | 0.045 | 0.832 |
| Female | 120 | 59 (67.0) | 61 (68.5) | ||
| Age (years) | |||||
| Median | 55 | 52 | 1.013 | 0.314 | |
| Range | 32–77 | 33–87 | |||
| <60 | 117 | 55 (62.5) | 62 (69.7) | ||
| ≥60 | 60 | 33 (37.5) | 27 (30.3) | ||
| Smoking status | |||||
| Never | 140 | 71 (80.7) | 69 (77.5) | 0.266 | 0.606 |
| Former/current | 37 | 17 (19.3) | 20 (22.5) | ||
| Brain metastasis | |||||
| No | 51 | 30 (34.1) | 21 (23.6) | 2.376 | 0.123 |
| Yes | 126 | 58 (65.9) | 68 (76.4) | ||
| Bone metastasis | |||||
| No | 38 | 19 (21.6) | 19 (21.3) | 0.002 | 0.969 |
| Yes | 139 | 69 (78.4) | 70 (78.7) | ||
| Brain + bone metastasis | |||||
| No | 84 | 46 (52.3) | 38 (42.7) | 1.627 | 0.202 |
| Yes | 93 | 42 (47.7) | 51 (57.3) | ||
| EGFR TKIs drugs | |||||
| First generation | 174 | 87 (98.9) | 87 (97.8) | 0.328 | 0.567 |
| Osimertinib | 3 | 1 (1.1) | 2 (1.5) | ||
| EGFR TKIs therapy | |||||
| First‐line | 111 | 56 (63.6) | 55 (61.8) | 0.064 | 0.800 |
| Second‐line | 66 | 32 (36.4) | 34 (38.2) | ||
| Thoracic radiotherapy | |||||
| No | 91 | 42 (47.7) | 49 (55.1) | 0.951 | 0.329 |
| Yes | 86 | 46 (52.3) | 40 (44.9) | ||
| Chemotherapy | |||||
| No | 42 | 20 (22.7) | 22 (24.7) | 0.097 | 0.755 |
| Yes | 135 | 68 (77.3) | 67 (75.3) | ||
Abbreviations: EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; TKIs, tyrosine kinase inhibitors.
3.2. Survival and prognostic analyses of the patients
The cutoff date was April 2, 2020. And the median follow‐up duration was 45.1 (2.2–107.6) months. Till the cutoff date, 46 patients, 30 in the 19‐Del group and 16 in the 21–L858R group were still alive. All patients had a median OS (mOS) of 32.0 months (95% CI: 28.6–35.5 months) (Figure 1A). Furthermore, the 1‐, 3‐, and 5‐year OS rates of all individuals were 93.2%, 42.9%, and 27.7%, respectively. No remarkable variations were observed in the OS of the patient groups based on factors such gender, age, smoking status, presence of brain metastasis, presence of bone metastasis, EGFR‐TKIs treatment line, and chemotherapy application (all p > 0.05) (Figure S1A–G). Next, we used a Cox regression model to further explore the correlations between clinical characteristics and OS. In univariate analysis, we observed a significant association between EGFR mutations and thoracic radiotherapy and OS (p = 0.001 and 0.013, respectively) (Table 2). Furthermore, in multivariate analysis, both EGFR mutations and thoracic radiotherapy were identified as independent predictors of OS for individuals with Stage IV LUAD and either 19‐Del or 21‐L858R (p = 0.001 and 0.006, respectively). The patients in the 19‐Del group experienced a remarkably longer OS duration than those in the 21‐L858R group (mOS: 35.7 vs. 25.1 months; p = 0.0004) (Figure 1B). Moreover, the OS was significantly improved for patients with Stage IV LUAD who received thoracic radiotherapy compared with those who did not receive thoracic radiotherapy (mOS: 36.6 vs. 27.6 months; p = 0.0058) (Figure 1C).
FIGURE 1.
Overall survival of the all Stage IV lung adenocarcinomas patients (A) who underwent EGFR‐TKIs plus radiotherapy stratified according to EGFR mutations (B), and thoracic radiotherapy (C).
TABLE 2.
Univariable and multivariable analyses of covariable associated with OS in all Stage IV lung adenocarcinomas harboring exon 19‐Del or 21‐L858R.
| Variables | Univariable analysis | Multivariable analysis | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95% CI | p‐value | HR | 95% CI | p‐value | |
| Gender (male vs. female) | 0.999 | 0.694–1.437 | 0.995 | |||
| Age (years) (<60 vs. ≥60) | 0.804 | 0.555–1.165 | 0.248 | |||
| Smoking status (never vs. former/current) | 1.197 | 0.793–1.808 | 0.391 | |||
| Brain metastasis (no vs. yes) | 1.331 | 0.899–1.970 | 0.153 | |||
| Bone metastasis (no vs. yes) | 1.338 | 0.852–2.101 | 0.206 | |||
| EGFR mutations (19‐Del vs. 21‐L858R) | 1.360 | 1.142–1.619 | 0.001 | 1.338 | 1.123–1.594 | 0.001 |
| EGFR TKIs therapy (first‐line vs. second‐line) | 0.989 | 0.696–1.406 | 0.952 | |||
| Thoracic radiotherapy (no vs. yes) | 0.613 | 0.432–0.872 | 0.006 | 0.641 | 0.450–0.912 | 0.013 |
| Brain metastasis Radiotherapy (no vs. yes) | 1.186 | 0.837–1.681 | 0.338 | |||
| Bone metastasis radiotherapy (no vs. yes) | 1.269 | 0.898–1.793 | 0.178 | |||
| Chemotherapy (no vs. yes) | 0.878 | 0.572–1.346 | 0.551 | |||
3.3. Subgroup analysis of individuals with LUAD in the 19‐Del and 21‐L858R groups
The differences in the prognosis and clinical characteristics of individuals with LUAD harboring 19‐Del or 21‐L858R still remain controversial. 5 , 7 , 8 , 23 , 24 Therefore, we performed subgroup analysis to investigate the clinical differences between the 19‐Del and 21‐L858R groups as well as the differences in prognosis after receiving targeted therapy and radiotherapy. Owing to differences in clinical presentations, not all patients with LUAD underwent radiotherapy for metastatic lesions in this real‐world study. Ninety‐eight patients (98/126) with bone metastasis‐induced oppressive symptoms and pain received radiotherapy for bone metastasis, whereas 85 patients (85/139) with brain metastasis‐induced intracranial hypertension and neurological symptoms received radiotherapy for brain metastasis. Interestingly, the clinical characteristics of the patients in the 19‐Del and 21‐L858R groups were similar (all p > 0.05) (Table 3). The mOS of individuals with Stage IV LUAD who received EGFR‐TKIs combined with radiotherapy (brain metastasis, bone metastasis, or thoracic radiotherapy) was 30.7, 31.9, and 36.6 months, respectively (Figure 2A,C,E). Moreover, a comparison of the 1‐, 3‐, and 5‐year OS rates of individuals with LUAD revealed that the 19‐Del group (96.6%, 50%, and 34.1%, respectively) significantly outperformed the 21‐L858R group (90.0%, 34.8%, and 18.0%, respectively). The patients harboring 19‐Del group had a significantly longer OS than those harboring 21‐L858R (mOS: 35.7 vs. 25.1 months; 95% CI: 0.3862–0.7754; p = 0.0004) (Figure 1B), while no remarkable variations were observed in the OS between the 19‐Del and 21‐L858R groups for patients with Stage IV LUAD who received EGFR‐TKIs combined with radiotherapy for brain metastasis (mOS: 34.7 vs. 25.1 months; p = 0.0880) (Figure 2B). Furthermore, patients with Stage IV LUAD and 19‐Del who received EGFR‐TKIs along with radiotherapy for bone metastasis achieved a longer OS duration than those with the 21‐L858R mutation (mOS: 34.7 vs. 25.1 months; 95% CI: 0.3915–0.8397; p = 0.0056) (Figure 2D). A similar trend was observed for individuals who received EGFR‐TKIs combined with thoracic radiotherapy (mOS: 51.0 vs. 29.6 months; 95% CI, 0.2677–0.7065; p = 0.0013) (Figure 2F).
TABLE 3.
Baseline characteristics of Stage IV lung adenocarcinomas underwent EGFR‐TKIs plus brain metastasis radiotherapy (N = 98) or bone metastasis radiotherapy (N = 85) between exon 19‐Del and 21‐L858R.
| Characteristics | Total | 19‐Del | 21‐L858R | χ 2 | p‐value | Total | 19‐Del | 21‐L858R | χ 2 | p‐value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N = 41 (%) | N = 57 (%) | N = 41 (%) | N = 44 (%) | |||||||
| Gender | ||||||||||
| Male | 32 | 15 (36.6) | 17 (29.8) | 0.496 | 0.481 | 24 | 12 (29.3) | 12 (27.3) | 0.042 | 0.838 |
| Female | 66 | 26 (63.4) | 40 (70.2) | 61 | 29 (70.7) | 32 (72.7) | ||||
| Age (years) | ||||||||||
| Median | 54 | 52 | 0.470 | 0.493 | 58 | 52 | 0.852 | 0.356 | ||
| Range | 32–77 | 33–81 | 32–77 | 34–87 | ||||||
| <60 | 73 | 32 (78.0) | 41 (71.9) | 54 | 24 (58.5) | 30 (68.2) | ||||
| ≥60 | 25 | 9 (22.0) | 16 (28.1) | 31 | 17 (41.5) | 14 (31.8) | ||||
| Smoking status | ||||||||||
| Never | 76 | 32 (78.0) | 44 (77.2) | 0.010 | 0.920 | 68 | 32 (78.0) | 36 (81.8) | 0.188 | 0.664 |
| Former/current | 22 | 9 (22.0) | 13 (22.8) | 17 | 9 (22.0) | 8 (18.2) | ||||
| EGFR TKIs therapy | ||||||||||
| First‐line | 54 | 20 (48.8) | 34 (59.6) | 1.139 | 0.286 | 24 | 31 (75.6) | 30 (68.2) | 0.578 | 0.447 |
| Second‐line | 44 | 21 (51.2) | 23 (40.4) | 61 | 10 (24.4) | 14 (31.8) | ||||
| Thoracic radiotherapy | ||||||||||
| Yes | 45 | 21 (51.2) | 24 (42.1) | 0.798 | 0.372 | 33 | 15 (36.6) | 18 (40.9) | 0.167 | 0.683 |
| No | 53 | 20 (48.8) | 33 (57.9) | 52 | 26 (63.4) | 26 (59.1) | ||||
| Chemotherapy | ||||||||||
| Yes | 73 | 33 (80.5) | 40 (70.2) | 1.335 | 0.248 | 65 | 32 (78.0) | 33 (75.0) | 0.110 | 0.741 |
| No | 25 | 8 (19.5) | 17 (29.80 | 20 | 9 (22.0) | 11 (25.0) | ||||
Abbreviations: EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; TKIs, tyrosine kinase inhibitors.
FIGURE 2.
Overall survival of Stage IV lung adenocarcinomas patients harboring EGFR 19 deletion or 21 L858R underwent brain metastasis radiotherapy (A, B) or bone metastasis radiotherapy (C, D) or thoracic radiotherapy (E, F).
3.4. Toxicity
We recorded various treatment‐associated side effects, including skin rash, radiation‐induced brain injury, radiation‐induced pneumonia, neutropenia, fatigue, anorexia, nausea, and vomiting. However, the severity of these toxicities decreased after symptomatic treatment. Importantly, we did not observe any severe (G3 or G4) toxicities or other significant acute or late toxicities.
4. DISCUSSION
Recently, immune checkpoint inhibitors such as PD‐1 or PD‐L1 have exhibited effectiveness against NSCLC. Notably, EGFR plays a role in immune escape by activating and enhancing PD‐L1 expression in lung cancer cells. This emphasizes the functional importance of NSCLC harboring EGFR mutations. 25 However, in clinical settings, PD‐L1/1 for patients with NSCLC and EGFR mutations has exhibited disappointing results, as described by Gainor et al. 26 A phase II clinical trial on PD‐L1 inhibitors revealed that the objective response rate (ORR) was 12.2% among individuals with NSCLC and EGFR mutations who exhibited PD‐L1 expression in at least 25% of their tumor cells. In contrast, the ORR was noted to be 3.6% for individuals with PD‐L1 expression less than 25%. 27 Considering the limitations of immunotherapy in treating NSCLC individuals harboring EGFR mutations, EGFR‐TKIs remain the preferred treatment modality for individuals with this cancer type. Previous research has revealed that EGFR mutations, particularly 19‐Del and 21‐L858R, are more prominent in women, individuals with adenocarcinoma, nonsmokers, and the East Asian population. Globally, China continues to have the largest number of NSCLC patients harboring EGFR mutations. 4 , 21 , 22 Patients with Stage IV LUAD and EGFR mutations substantially benefit from EGFR‐TKI therapy. However, local radiotherapy also helps alleviate symptoms and improve the quality of life. 18 , 19 , 20 Therefore, we explored whether the addition of radiotherapy to EGFR‐TKI therapy can improve the survival outcomes of individuals with Stage IV LUAD carrying either 19‐Del or 21‐L858R. In this real‐world study, OS was noted to be strongly associated with EFGR mutations and thoracic radiotherapy in individuals with Stage IV LUAD carrying EGFR mutations. Nevertheless, no discernible variations were observed in the clinical characteristics between the individuals in the 19‐Del and 21‐L858R groups. In addition, subgroup analysis revealed that patients harboring 19‐Del who received EGFR‐TKIs combined with radiotherapy (either for bone metastasis or thoracic radiotherapy) experienced a longer OS duration than those harboring 21‐L858R. However, when considering radiotherapy for brain metastases, this distinction was not statistically significant.
In a previous study involving the American population, individuals with 19‐Del and 21‐L858R mutations exhibited no remarkable differences in the clinical characteristics of individuals with metastatic NSCLC. 23 We confirmed this finding in this study and observed no differences between the two mutation groups in the Chinese population. Nevertheless, many other studies have revealed that individuals with NSCLC carrying 19‐Del and 21‐L858R mutations can have two separate diseases with differing underlying sensitivities to EGFR‐TKIs. In a small‐sample study involving 36 individuals with NSCLC and EGFR mutation who received gefitinib or erlotinib therapy, a marked dissimilarity was observed in the mOS of individuals with 19‐Del and those with 21‐L858R (38 vs. 17 months; p = 0.04). 24 Lin et al. have reported that individuals with metastatic LUAD harboring EGFR mutations in exon 19 experience a better OS status after receiving EGFR‐TKIs (mOS: 33.6 vs. 23.9 vs. 27.0, month). This trend is contradictory to the findings observed for patients with EGFR mutations in exons 18 and 21. 5 By combining the data from clinical trials involving individuals from LUX‐Lung 3 and LUX‐Lung 6, it was observed that individuals with Stage IIIB or IV LUAD harboring the 19‐Del mutation and receiving afatinib therapy exhibited considerable improvements in mOS compared with those harboring the 21‐L858R mutation (LUX‐Lung 3: 33.3 vs. 27.6 months; LUX‐Lung 6: 31.7 vs. 22.1 months; combined analysis, 31.7 vs. 22.1 months). 7 , 8 In this study, all individuals received both EGFR‐TKI therapy and radiotherapy. This contrasts with the findings of previous studies in which patients only received EGFR‐TKI therapy. This significant difference in treatment may play a vital role in the observed disparity between the OS of individuals with the 19‐Del and 21‐L858R mutations (mOS: 35.7 vs. 25.1 months; p = 0.0004). Interactions between radiotherapy and targeted therapy are considered intricate and include aspects such as changes in tumor radiosensitivity, oxygenation, cell cycle redistribution, and suppression of neovascularization. 28 , 29 Furthermore, local radiotherapy can boost tumor antigenicity (distant effect) and prevent and delay drug resistance emergence. 30 , 31 Many preclinical studies have also verified that EGFR‐TKIs can enhance radiosensitivity while decreasing AEs. 28 , 32 , 33 , 34 Recently, individuals with advanced LUAD and EGFR mutations have considerably benefited from the curative outcomes acquired using EGFR‐TKIs combined with radiotherapy for primary or metastatic lesions. 35 , 36 A single‐arm clinical study has suggested that individuals with advanced NSCLC and EGFR mutations who receive thoracic radiotherapy combined with EGFR‐TKIs can control their primary lung tumors for a prolonged duration. 37 Yen et al. have reported that patients with unresectable Stage IIIB–IV LUAD and EGFR mutations who receive the combination of thoracic radiotherapy and EGFR‐TKI therapy exhibit a significantly better OS than those who only receive EGFR‐TKIs (p = 0.0002). 18 Furthermore, in a study conducted by the West Japan Oncology Group 6911L, the combination of gefitinib and concurrent thoracic radiotherapy was explored in 27 patients with unresectable locally advanced NSCLC harboring EGFR mutations. This regimen exhibited moderate toxicity levels and achieved specific curative outcomes (mOS: 61.1 months). 19 In addition, the SINDAS trial in China revealed that patients with synchronous oligometastatic NSCLC and EGFR mutations who receive EGFR‐TKIs combined with radiotherapy (thoracic or metastasis radiotherapy) can achieve a longer OS than those who only receive EGFR‐TKIs (mOS: 25.5 vs. 17.4 months; p < 0.01). 20 However, our study findings suggest that thoracic radiotherapy is markedly associated with OS. In contrast, radiotherapy for brain and/or bone metastases is not significantly correlated with OS. This may be because all patients were diagnosed with Stage IV LUAD, leading to metastasis radiotherapy being administered only to those individuals with metastases and clinical symptoms.
Patients with Stage IV LUAD should receive palliative radiotherapy, possibly improving their quality of life and prolonging their survival time. Prospective nonrandomized studies have verified that radiotherapy for primary tumors (primary focus + metastatic lymph nodes in the drainage area) can improve the survival of some patients. 38 , 39 In a prospective study involving 26 individuals with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC, EGFR‐TKI therapy combined with individualized thoracic radiotherapy exhibited a favorable safety profile and achieved promising outcomes (mOS: 21.8 months). 33 In another study involving 25 Asian individuals with EGFR‐TKI‐sensitive advanced lung cancer, the early administration of thoracic radiotherapy combined with targeted therapy substantially prolonged the drug resistance onset time. This approach not only prolonged the OS (3‐year OS rate, 62.5%) but also helped effectively manage well‐tolerated toxicities. 40 The clinical and treatment characteristics of the patients may be possible explanations for the minor OS discrepancies between the aforementioned and present studies. To maintain the long‐term control of primary lung tumors, the approach of combining thoracic radiotherapy and targeted therapy should be employed. In subgroup analysis, we observed a difference in the survival durations of individuals with the 19‐Del mutation and those with the 21‐L858R mutation (mOS: 51.0 vs. 30.15 months; p = 0.0013). This variation may be attributed to the differing sensitivities to targeted therapy and radiotherapy among the patients.
Brain metastasis is the most prevalent type of distant metastasis in individuals with NSCLC and EGFR mutations. When analyzing clinical data, Shin et al. noted the presence of brain metastasis in 64.7% of 314 patients with LUAD and EGFR mutations. 41 The combination of EGFR‐TKIs with WBRT or stereotactic radiotherapy (SRS) can not only improve the survival of patients with Stage IV LUAD and EGFR mutations but also maintain good tolerance. A previous retrospective study involving 78 patients with LUAD, EGFR mutations, and brain metastasis revealed that the mOS of the individuals who received the combination of EGFR‐TKIs and WBRT/SRS was longer than those who only received EGFR‐TKIs (36 vs. 23 months, p = 0.363). 42 Moreover, researchers have reported that individuals with NSCLC, EGFR mutations, and brain metastasis can experience stronger improvements after receiving both icotinib and WBRT/SRS compared with icotinib alone (31.9 vs. 27.9 months, p = 0.237). Notably, subgroup analysis revealed that the benefits of combination therapy were more pronounced in patients with the 19‐Del mutation than in those with the 21‐L858R mutation (32.7 vs. 27.4 months, p = 0.037). 43 In this study, the mOS of patients was comparable with that reported in previous studies. However, subgroup analysis (34.7 vs. 25.1 months, p = 0.088) revealed no differences in mOS between the 19‐Del and 21‐L858R groups when EGFR‐TKIs were combined with radiotherapy for brain metastasis. Moreover, radiotherapy for brain metastasis was not associated with OS in all patient analyses. This may be because various EGFR‐TKIs have varying degrees of blood–brain barrier‐crossing efficacy; however, these differences were not accounted for in this study.
Aside from the brain, the bone is another common location of distant metastasis in NSCLC; this negatively affects the quality of life of people. The application of local radiotherapy is one of the most prevalent ways of avoiding and postponing AEs in the bone in individuals with lung cancer and bone metastasis. 44 In a previous clinical study, individuals with oligometastatic NSCLC received SRS at all disease sites and the original tumor and metastatic regions and achieved satisfactory survival results. 45 Furthermore, a retrospective study has revealed that individuals with Stage IV LUAD and EGFR mutations gain benefits from radiotherapy for brain or bone metastasis. 46 Subsequently, LUAD with EGFR mutations responds well to thoracic radiotherapy or radiotherapy for brain/bone metastasis. Notably, individuals with the 19‐Del mutation who received EGFR‐TKIs combined with thoracic or bone metastasis radiotherapy exhibited greater benefits compared with those with the 21‐L858R mutation (mOS: 51.0 vs. 30.15 months, p = 0.0013; 34.7 vs. 25.15 months, p = 0.0056, respectively). One possible explanation is that complicated mutations, including MET mutations, tend to occur in tandem with 21‐L858R but not with 19‐Del; this increases the risk of poor prognosis. 47 , 48 Moreover, 19‐Del is more prone to developing T790 mutations, which are more responsive to radiotherapy than 21‐L858R mutations. 30 , 49 , 50
All patients had a mOS of 32.0 months, with tolerable toxicity, as well as 1‐, 3‐, and 5‐year OS rates of 93.2%, 42.9%, and 27.7%, respectively. These promising survival data support the hypothesis that EGFR‐TKIs combined with radiotherapy can effectively manage systemic metastases. In addition, these results emphasize the vital role of radiotherapy in delaying the progression of localized malignancies. Compared with radiotherapy for brain or bone metastasis, the combination of EGFR‐TKIs and thoracic radiotherapy not only significantly improved mOS predictability but also increased the OS period in patients (36.6 vs. 30.7 vs. 31.7 months). However, this study has several limitations, which should be addressed. First, this retrospective, single‐center study primarily focused on patients with Stage IV LUAD, making it challenging to mitigate potential selection bias. Second, we did not investigate the effects of various EGFR‐TKI types on OS. Third, research on how various treatment modalities and multisite radiotherapy affect OS outcomes is lacking. Therefore, more substantial evidence regarding the efficacy of combining radiotherapy and EGFR‐TKIs for patients with NSCLC and EGFR mutation could be forthcoming from various current prospective trials, including NCT02788058, NCT00973310, NCT03727867, and NCT02893332.
5. CONCLUSIONS
Despite the study limitations, we observed a correlation between EGFR mutations and thoracic radiotherapy and OS among individuals with Stage IV LUAD and EGFR mutations who received combination therapy with EGFR‐TKIs and radiotherapy. The differences in the clinical characteristics between the 19‐Del and 21‐L858R groups were insignificant. Moreover, among the individuals receiving EGFR‐TKIs combined with thoracic radiotherapy or radiotherapy for bone metastasis, those harboring the 19‐Del mutation exhibited better OS than those harboring the 21‐L858R mutation. In conclusion, the combination of EGFR‐TKIs and radiotherapy can serve as a safe and efficacious therapeutic approach for individuals with Stage IV LUAD and EGFR mutations.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
Shuai Liang: Data curation (equal); formal analysis (equal); methodology (equal); resources (equal); software (equal); validation (equal); writing – original draft (equal); writing – review and editing (equal). Hanyu Wang: Data curation (equal); formal analysis (equal); methodology (equal); validation (equal); writing – original draft (equal); writing – review and editing (equal). Yingyun Zhang: Data curation (equal); methodology (equal); validation (equal). Haixia Tian: Data curation (equal); software (equal); validation (equal). Chengming Li: Conceptualization (equal); data curation (equal); resources (equal); supervision (equal); writing – review and editing (equal). Dong Hua: Conceptualization (equal); data curation (equal); supervision (equal); writing – original draft (equal).
CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
ETHICS STATEMENT
Approval for the study protocol was granted by the Ethics Committee at Shandong Cancer Hospital. Participants willingly provided written consent to partake in the research. Additionally, permission was acquired from the individual(s) for the release of any potentially identifiable information in this publication.
Supporting information
Figure S1.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was supported by the Top Medical Expert Team of the 2021 Taihu Talent Plan Project, the Medical Innovation Team of Wuxi (CXTD2021001), Cohort and Clinical Research Program of Wuxi Medical Center, Nanjing Medical University (Number WMCC202313), and Major Program of Wuxi Medical Center, Nanjing Medical University (Number WMCM202308).
Liang S, Wang H, Zhang Y, Tian H, Li C, Hua D. Prognostic implications of combining EGFR‐TKIs and radiotherapy in Stage IV lung adenocarcinoma with 19‐Del or 21‐L858R mutations: A real‐world study. Cancer Med. 2024;13:e7208. doi: 10.1002/cam4.7208
Shuai Liang and Hanyu Wang have contributed equally.
Contributor Information
Chengming Li, Email: chengming0401@163.com.
Dong Hua, Email: wx89211@163.com.
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
Data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
REFERENCES
- 1. Xia C, Dong X, Li H, et al. Cancer statistics in China and United States, 2022: profiles, trends, and determinants. Chin Med J. 2022;135(5):584‐590. doi: 10.1097/CM9.0000000000002108 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Wagle NS, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2023. CA Cancer J Clin. 2023;73(1):17‐48. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Ettinger DS, Wood DE, Aggarwal C, et al. NCCN guidelines insights: non‐small cell lung cancer, version 1.2020. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2019;17(12):1464‐1472. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2019.0059 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Herbst RS, Morgensztern D, Boshoff C. The biology and management of non‐small cell lung cancer. Nature. 2018;553(7689):446‐454. doi: 10.1038/nature25183 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Lin JJ, Cardarella S, Lydon CA, et al. Five‐year survival in EGFR‐mutant metastatic lung adenocarcinoma treated with EGFR‐TKIs. J Thorac Oncol. 2016;11(4):556‐565. doi: 10.1016/j.jtho.2015.12.103 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Garon EB, Hellmann MD, Rizvi NA, et al. Five‐year overall survival for patients with advanced non–small‐cell lung cancer treated with pembrolizumab: results from the phase I KEYNOTE‐001 study. J Clin Oncol. 2019;37(28):2518‐2527. doi: 10.1200/JCO.19.00934 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Wu YL, Zhou C, Hu CP, et al. Afatinib versus cisplatin plus gemcitabine for first‐line treatment of Asian patients with advanced non‐small‐cell lung cancer harbouring EGFR mutations (LUX‐lung 6): an open‐label, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(2):213‐222. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70604-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Yang JC, Wu YL, Schuler M, et al. Afatinib versus cisplatin‐based chemotherapy for EGFR mutation‐positive lung adenocarcinoma (LUX‐lung 3 and LUX‐lung 6): analysis of overall survival data from two randomised, phase 3 trials. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16(2):141‐151. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)71173-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Sequist LV, Yang JC, Yamamoto N, et al. Phase III study of afatinib or cisplatin plus pemetrexed in patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma with EGFR mutations. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(27):3327‐3334. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.44.2806 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Blakely CM, Watkins TBK, Wu W, et al. Evolution and clinical impact of co‐occurring genetic alterations in advanced‐stage EGFR‐mutant lung cancers. Nat Genet. 2017;49(12):1693‐1704. doi: 10.1038/ng.3990 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Zhao Y, Liu J, Cai X, et al. Efficacy and safety of first line treatments for patients with advanced epidermal growth factor receptor mutated, non‐small cell lung cancer: systematic review and network meta‐analysis. BMJ. 2019;367:l5460. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l5460 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Sharma SV, Bell DW, Settleman J, Haber DA. Epidermal growth factor receptor mutations in lung cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2007;7(3):169‐181. doi: 10.1038/nrc2088 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Passaro A, Leighl N, Blackhall F, et al. ESMO expert consensus statements on the management of EGFR mutant non‐small‐cell lung cancer. Ann Oncol. 2022;33(5):466‐487. doi: 10.1016/j.annonc.2022.02.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Hendriks LE, Smit EF, Vosse BA, et al. EGFR mutated non‐small cell lung cancer patients: more prone to development of bone and brain metastases? Lung Cancer. 2014;84(1):86‐91. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2014.01.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Planchard D, Popat S, Kerr K, et al. Metastatic non‐small cell lung cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow‐up. Ann Oncol. 2018;29(Suppl 4):iv192‐iv237. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdy275 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Kuchuk M, Kuchuk I, Sabri E, Hutton B, Clemons M, Wheatley‐Price P. The incidence and clinical impact of bone metastases in non‐small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer. 2015;89(2):197‐202. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2015.04.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Riihimäki M, Hemminki A, Fallah M, et al. Metastatic sites and survival in lung cancer. Lung Cancer. 2014;86(1):78‐84. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2014.07.020 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Yen YC, Hsu HL, Chang JH, et al. Efficacy of thoracic radiotherapy in patients with stage IIIB‐IV epidermal growth factor receptor‐mutant lung adenocarcinomas who received and responded to tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment. Radiother Oncol. 2018;129(1):52‐60. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2018.03.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Akamatsu H, Murakami H, Harada H, et al. Gefitinib with concurrent thoracic radiotherapy in unresectable locally advanced NSCLC with EGFR mutation; West Japan Oncology Group 6911L. J Thorac Oncol. 2021;16(10):1745‐1752. doi: 10.1016/j.jtho.2021.05.019 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Wang XS, Bai YF, Verma V, et al. Randomized Trial of First‐Line Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor With or Without Radiotherapy for Synchronous Oligometastatic EGFR‐Mutated Non‐Small Cell Lung Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2023;115(6):742‐748. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djac015 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Yatabe Y, Kerr KM, Utomo A, et al. EGFR mutation testing practices within the Asia Pacific region: results of a multicenter diagnostic survey. J Thorac Oncol. 2015;10(3):438‐445. doi: 10.1097/JTO.0000000000000422 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Shi Y, Au JS, Thongprasert S, et al. A prospective, molecular epidemiology study of EGFR mutations in Asian patients with advanced non‐small‐cell lung cancer of adenocarcinoma histology (PIONEER). J Thorac Oncol. 2014;9(2):154‐162. doi: 10.1097/JTO.0000000000000033 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Riely GJ, Pao W, Pham D, et al. Clinical course of patients with non‐small cell lung cancer and epidermal growth factor receptor exon 19 and exon 21 mutations treated with gefitinib or erlotinib. Clin Cancer Res. 2006;12(3 Pt 1):839‐844. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-1846 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Jackman DM, Yeap BY, Sequist LV, et al. Exon 19 deletion mutations of epidermal growth factor receptor are associated with prolonged survival in non‐small cell lung cancer patients treated with gefitinib or erlotinib. Clin Cancer Res. 2006;12(13):3908‐3914. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-0462 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Akbay EA, Koyama S, Carretero J, et al. Activation of the PD‐1 pathway contributes to immune escape in EGFR‐driven lung tumors. Cancer Discov. 2013;3(12):1355‐1363. doi: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-13-0310 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Gainor JF, Shaw AT, Sequist LV, et al. EGFR mutations and ALK rearrangements are associated with low response rates to PD‐1 pathway blockade in non‐small cell lung cancer: a retrospective analysis. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22(18):4585‐4593. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-3101 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27. Garassino MC, Cho BC, Kim JH, et al. Durvalumab as third‐line or later treatment for advanced non‐small‐cell lung cancer (ATLANTIC): an open‐label, single‐arm, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19(4):521‐536. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30144-X [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Chinnaiyan P, Huang S, Vallabhaneni G, et al. Mechanisms of enhanced radiation response following epidermal growth factor receptor signaling inhibition by erlotinib (Tarceva). Cancer Res. 2005;65(8):3328‐3335. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-3547 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Baumann M, Krause M. Targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor in radiotherapy: radiobiological mechanisms, preclinical and clinical results. Radiother Oncol. 2004;72(3):257‐266. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2004.07.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30. Das AK, Sato M, Story MD, et al. Non‐small‐cell lung cancers with kinase domain mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor are sensitive to ionizing radiation. Cancer Res. 2006;66(19):9601‐9608. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-2627 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Verheij M, Vens C, van Triest B. Novel therapeutics in combination with radiotherapy to improve cancer treatment: rationale, mechanisms of action and clinical perspective. Drug Resist Updat. 2010;13(1–2):29‐43. doi: 10.1016/j.drup.2010.01.002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. Li X, Wang Y, Wang J, et al. Enhanced efficacy of AZD3759 and radiation on brain metastasis from EGFR mutant non‐small cell lung cancer. Int J Cancer. 2018;143(1):212‐224. doi: 10.1002/ijc.31303 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33. Wang J, Xia TY, Wang YJ, et al. Prospective study of epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors concurrent with individualized radiotherapy for patients with locally advanced or metastatic non‐small‐cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;81(3):e59‐e65. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.12.035 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34. Xu Y, Zhang Y, Ma S. EGFR inhibitors with concurrent thoracic radiation therapy for locally advanced non‐small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer. 2011;73(3):249‐255. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2011.04.017 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35. Weickhardt AJ, Scheier B, Burke JM, et al. Local ablative therapy of oligoprogressive disease prolongs disease control by tyrosine kinase inhibitors in oncogene‐addicted non‐small‐cell lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol. 2012;7(12):1807‐1814. doi: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e3182745948 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36. Al‐Halabi H, Sayegh K, Digamurthy SR, et al. Pattern of failure analysis in metastatic EGFR‐mutant lung cancer treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors to identify candidates for consolidation stereotactic body radiation therapy. J Thorac Oncol. 2015;10(11):1601‐1607. doi: 10.1097/JTO.0000000000000648 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37. Zheng L, Wang Y, Xu Z, et al. Concurrent EGFR‐TKI and thoracic radiotherapy as first‐line treatment for stage IV non‐small cell lung cancer harboring EGFR active mutations. Oncologist. 2019;24(8):1031‐1612. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2019-0285 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38. Su S, Li T, Lu B, et al. Three‐dimensional radiation therapy to the primary tumor with concurrent chemotherapy in patients with stage IV non‐small cell lung cancer: results of a multicenter phase 2 study from PPRA‐RTOG, China. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015;93(4):769‐777. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.08.012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39. Su SF, Hu YX, Ouyang WW, et al. Overall survival and toxicities regarding thoracic three‐dimensional radiotherapy with concurrent chemotherapy for stage IV non‐small cell lung cancer: results of a prospective single‐center study. BMC Cancer. 2013;13:474. doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-13-474 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40. Chang CC, Chi KH, Kao SJ, et al. Upfront gefitinib/erlotinib treatment followed by concomitant radiotherapy for advanced lung cancer: a mono‐institutional experience. Lung Cancer. 2011;73(2):189‐194. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2010.12.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41. Shin DY, Na II, Kim CH, Park S, Baek H, Yang SH. EGFR mutation and brain metastasis in pulmonary adenocarcinomas. J Thorac Oncol. 2014;9(2):195‐199. doi: 10.1097/JTO.0000000000000069 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42. Chen Y, Wei J, Cai J, Liu A. Combination therapy of brain radiotherapy and EGFR‐TKIs is more effective than TKIs alone for EGFR‐mutant lung adenocarcinoma patients with asymptomatic brain metastasis. BMC Cancer. 2019;19(1):793. doi: 10.1186/s12885-019-6005-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43. Fan Y, Xu Y, Gong L, et al. Effects of icotinib with and without radiation therapy on patients with EGFR mutant non‐small cell lung cancer and brain metastases. Sci Rep. 2017;7:45193. doi: 10.1038/srep45193 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44. D'Antonio C, Passaro A, Gori B, et al. Bone and brain metastasis in lung cancer: recent advances in therapeutic strategies. Ther Adv Med Oncol. 2014;6(3):101‐114. doi: 10.1177/1758834014521110 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45. Collen C, Christian N, Schallier D, et al. Phase II study of stereotactic body radiotherapy to primary tumor and metastatic locations in oligometastatic nonsmall‐cell lung cancer patients. Ann Oncol. 2014;25(10):1954‐1959. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdu370 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46. Qu BL, Cai BN, Yu W, et al. Radiotherapy effects on brain/bone metastatic adenocarcinoma lung cancer and the importance of EGFR mutation test. Neoplasma. 2016;63(1):158‐162. doi: 10.4149/neo_2016_019 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47. Hong S, Gao F, Fu S, et al. Concomitant genetic alterations with response to treatment and epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors in patients with EGFR‐mutant advanced non‐small cell lung cancer. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(5):739‐742. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.0049 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48. Barnet MB, O'Toole S, Horvath LG, et al. EGFR‐co‐mutated advanced NSCLC and response to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors. J Thorac Oncol. 2017;12(3):585‐590. doi: 10.1016/j.jtho.2016.09.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49. Rosell R, Moran T, Queralt C, et al. Screening for epidermal growth factor receptor mutations in lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(10):958‐967. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0904554 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50. Ke EE, Zhou Q, Zhang QY, et al. A higher proportion of the EGFR T790M mutation may contribute to the better survival of patients with exon 19 deletions compared with those with L858R. J Thorac Oncol. 2017;12(9):1368‐1375. doi: 10.1016/j.jtho.2017.05.018 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Figure S1.
Data Availability Statement
Data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.