Table 3.
Comparison of neoadjuvant trials in lung cancer
| Trial | Phase | TNM | Population | Regimen | Sample | RR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chemotherapy | ||||||
| Roth 1994 [21] | II | IIIA | Total | CEP | 28 | 35 % |
| Rosell 1994 [20] | II | IIIA | Total | MIC | 30 | – |
| Scagliotti 2012 [19] (CHEST) | III | I-IIIA | Total | GC | 129 | 35.4 % |
| TKI | ||||||
| Lara-Guerra 2009 [13] | II | I | Total | G | 36 | 11 % |
| II | I | Mut EGFR | G | 6 | 50 % | |
| Schaake 2012 [14] | II | I-IIIA | Total | E | 60 | 5 % |
| II | I-IIIA | Enriched | E | 29 | 34 % | |
| Chemo-TKI | ||||||
| Lu 2013 [22] (CTONG 1101) | II | IIIA-N2 | Enriched | E + GC | 39 | 46 % |
| Bio-maker guided | ||||||
| Zhong 2014 (CSLC 0702) | II | IIIA-N2 | Total | E or GC | 24 | 42 % |
| II | IIIA-N2 | Mut EGFR | E | 12 | 58.3 % | |
| II | IIIA-N2 | WT-EGFR | GC | 12 | 25 % |
CEP cyclophosphamide/etoposide/cisplatin, MIC mitomycin/ifosfamide/cisplatin, GC gemcitabine/carboplatin, E erlotinib, G gefitinib, TKI tyrosine kinase inhibitor, RR response rate, EGFR epidermal growth factor receptor, Mut mutant, WT wild type