Abstract
Objective:
To analyze the correlation between expression of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and adverse reactions after chemotherapy of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
Methods:
A total of 120 NSCLC patients who were treated in our hospital from August 2009 to September 2011 were selected as an observation group, and another 120 healthy subjects were selected as a control group. EGFR expressions in both groups were detected. The observation group was subjected to combination chemotherapy, and their shorter- and long-term prognostic outcomes, adverse reactions and mortality were recorded. Meanwhile, correlation analysis was performed.
Results:
The observation group had significantly higher percentage and positive rate in EGFR expression than those of the control group (P<0.05). With increasing stage and lymphatic metastasis, the positive expression rate of EGFR rose significantly (P<0.05). In the observation group, the response rate of treatment was 62.5%, and the incidence rate of adverse reactions after chemotherapy was 28.3% (34/120). The 1-, 2- and 3-year survival rates were 38.3%, 15.0% and 10.0% respectively. Multiple Logistic regression analysis showed that TNM stage, lymphatic metastasis and positive EGFR expression were the main independent risk factors for post-chemotherapy adverse reactions (P<0.05).
Conclusion:
Advanced NSCLC was commonly accompanied by high EGFR expression. Although chemotherapy was able to improve the prognosis and survival rate, adverse reactions were also induced, being associated with the pathological characteristics and EGFR expressions of patients.
KEY WORDS: Epidermal growth factor receptor, Advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, Chemotherapy, Adverse reaction, Correlation
INTRODUCTION
Lung cancer has become one of the most common malignant tumors worldwide, with the highest morbidity and mortality rates among males as well as the highest morality rate and the second highest morbidity rate among females.1,2 In most cases, lung cancer originates from bronchial mucous epithelia or glands, for which non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounts over 80%.3,4 NSCLC is a worldwide health problem and a leading cause of cancer-related deaths. The prognosis of NSCLC is poor, which was mainly due to the later diagnosis of this cancer in almost 40% of the NSCLC patients.5 And the response rate to platinum-based regimen of advanced NSCLC was less than 30%, which is lower than that for ovarian cancer, esophageal cancer and head and neck cancer.6 When diagnosed, most patients with lung cancer are in the advanced stage due to insidious onset, lack of specific diagnostic protocol and susceptibility to invasion and metastasis, so the mortality rate is often high.7,8 Given the lack of surgical indications, patients with advanced lung cancer are mostly given chemotherapy. Although platinum-containing two-agent combination regimens can increase the survival rate of NSCLC patients, adverse reactions, including hematologic and non-hematologic toxicities, are inevitable. Meanwhile, adjuvant chemotherapy requires high tolerance.9
Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is a member of the ErbB family that mediates the signal transduction pathways of phosphatidylinositol-3 kinase, mitogen-activated protein kinase, together with signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 and 5. All the pathways are involved in cell proliferation, apoptosis escape and angiogenesis, with which malignant tumors are associated.10 Biologically speaking, EGFR is a glycoprotein receptor on the surface of cell membrane, with its expression determined by specific differentiation.11 It has been well-documented that EGFR is highly expressed on tumor cell surfaces. Generally, EGF first binds EGFR to form a dimer and phosphorylates the latter, thereby initiating the intracellular signal transduction system.12 Abnormally transduced in tumors mostly, EGFR has been paid particular attention in clinical examination and recent antitumor therapy.13,14 Therefore, it is necessary to reveal the differences between EGFR expression by observing post-chemotherapy adverse reactions. In this study, we explored the correlation between EGFR expression and adverse reactions after chemotherapy of advanced NSCLC.
METHODS
Subjects
This study was been approved by the ethics committee of Weifang People’s Hospital. Written consent was obtained from all subjects. A total of 120 NSCLC patients who were treated from August 2009 to September 2011 were selected as an observation group, and another 120 healthy subjects were selected as a control group.
Section preparation and staining
The pathological specimens of the control and observation groups were collected, fixed in 10% formalin, embedded in paraffin, cut into 3 µm thick sections and stained. Antibody for EGFR: Rabbit anti-human EGFR monoclonal antibody (ZA-0505, Beijing Zhongshan Golden Bridge Biotechnology Co., Ltd.).
Inclusion criteria
Pathologically diagnosed as NSCLC; with complete follow-up data; suitable for chemotherapy; 20-80 years old; prognostic survival time≥ 6 months; with normal hematological indices, liver and kidney functions; without receiving any chemotherapy or radiotherapy before diagnosis.
Exclusion criteria
With undefined histological types; diagnosed as SCLC. The observation group comprised 68 males and 52 females, aged 43-78 years old (63.22±5.10 in average). The disease courses ranged from 3 months to 7 years, 3.22±1.89 in average.
Histological typing
80 cases were of adenocarcinoma and 40 cases of squamous-cell carcinoma. TNM staging: 87 cases were of Stage III and 34 cases of Stage IV. Lymphatic metastasis: 80 cases had metastasis. The control group consisted of 66 males and 54 females, aged 44-79 years old (63.54±5.21 in average). The gender ratio and age of the two groups were similar (P>0.05).
Treatment Methods
All NSCLC patients were administered platinum/vinorelbine. Vinorelbine tartrate injection was intravenously infused on the 1st and 8th days at the dose of 20-25 mg/m2, and cisplatin was intravenously infused on the 1st to 3rd days at the dose of 20-30 mg/m2. They were treated for 4 cycles, 21 days for each cycle.
Observation Indices
Evaluation on therapeutic effects: Baseline tumor foci were subjected to regular imaging examination after treatment and the therapeutic effects were evaluated based on the changes of solid tumors as complete response (CR), partial response (PR), stable disease (SD) and progressive disease (PD). CR: All foci disappeared, without new ones. PR: The sum of major axes was shortened by ≥30%, or without new foci. SD: The sum of major axes was shortened by <30%, or without new foci. PD: The sum of major axes increased by ≥20%, or with one or multiple new foci. Response rate (RR), which was expressed as (CR + PR)/total case number, was used as the evaluation index.
Adverse reactions
Adverse reactions, including gastrointestinal reactions, nervous system damage, allergic reactions, liver and kidney damages and blood diseases, were graded into 0-4.
The 1-, 2- and 3-year survival rates were observed.
Detection of EGFR expression
Immunohistochemical analysis was performed for the pathological specimens collected before and after treatment by using rabbit anti-human EGFR monoclonal antibody (ZA-0505, Beijing Zhongshan Golden Bridge Biotechnology Co., Ltd.), immunohistochemical assay kit (SP-9001, Beijing Zhongshan Golden Bridge Biotechnology Co., Ltd.) and concentrated DAB kit (ZLI-9017, Sangon Biotech (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.). Labeled streptavidin-biotin technique was employed to conduct immunohistochemical staining. Primary antibody was replaced with PBS as the negative control, and known positive sample was used as the positive control. The proportion of positive cells was calculated according to the brownish yellow particles in the cytoplasm and on the cell membrane.
Detection of EGFR expressions in peripheral blood
Fasting whole bloods (3 ml) of all patients were collected in the morning before chemotherapy, anticoagulated with heparin sodium, centrifuged at 3000 r/minutes for 10 minutes, from which the plasma was separated and subpackaged into 1.5 ml centrifuge tubes and stored at -80°C. For detection, the plasma sample (0.5 ml) was placed in a 1.5 ml centrifuge tube without anticoagulant, centrifuged at 12000 r/minutes for 10 minutes, from which the supernatant (300 µl) was collected and placed in a 10 ml centrifuge tube. Afterwards, 200 µl of 5% perchloric acid solution was added, and the mixture was shaken for 5 minutes, centrifuged at 12000 r/min for 20 min. The resulting supernatant (15 µl) was analyzed by using Agilent 1100 HPLC system (USA).
Statistical Analysis
All data were analyzed by SPSS18.0. Stratified univariate analysis was performed by Chi-square test, and multivariate analysis was conducted by logistic regression. Inter-groups comparisons were carried out by using Chi-square test and t test. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS
EGFR Expressions
EGFR was positively expressed in the cytoplasm and on the cell membrane. The observation group had significantly higher percentage and positive rate in EGFR expression than those of the control group (P<0.05) (Table-I, Fig. 1 & 2). Besides, the expression of EGFR was up-regulated after chemotherapy treatment (Fig. 3 & 4).
Table-I.
EGFR expressions.
| Group | Case No. (n) | Percentage (%) | Positive rate (n) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Observation | 120 | 58.45±25.44 | 76 (63.3%) |
| Control | 120 | 4.55±1.22 | 3 (2.5%) |
| χ² or t | 78.234 | 67.442 | |
| P | P<0.05 | P<0.05 |
Fig.1.
EGFR was negatively expressed in the control group (×100).
Fig.2.
EGFR was positively expressed in the observation group (×100).
Fig.3.
EGFR expression before chemotherapy (×100).
Fig.4.
EGFR expression after chemotherapy (×100).
Correlation between EGFR expression & pathological characteristics of advanced NSCLC
With increasing TNM stage and lymphatic metastasis, the positive expression rate of EGFR rose significantly (P<0.05) (Table-II).
Table-II.
Correlation between EGFR expression & pathological characteristics of advanced NSCLC (n).
| Pathological characteristic | Case No. (n=120) | Positive expression rate (n=76) | χ² | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lymphatic metastasis | ||||
| Yes | 80 | 68 (85.0%) | 16.442 | <0.05 |
| No | 40 | 8 (20.0%) | ||
| TNM stage | ||||
| III | 87 | 48 (61.5%) | 4.398 | <0.05 |
| IV | 34 | 28 (82.3%) | ||
Prognostic RR and adverse reactions
In the observation group, there were 35 CR cases, 40 PR cases, 30 SD cases and 15 PD cases, so RR was 62.5%. The incidence rate of adverse reactions after chemotherapy was 28.3% (34/120), including 12 cases of gastrointestinal reactions, 10 cases of nervous system damage, 8 cases of liver and kidney damages, 3 cases of allergic reactions and 1 case of blood disease (Table-III).
Table-III.
Correlation between EGFR expressions in peripheral blood and post-chemotherapy adverse reactions (
±s).
| Adverse reaction | Case No. | EGFR (µg/L) | r value | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gastrointestinal reactions | 12 | 0.212 | 0.004 | |
| Grade I | 6 | 1.323±0.644 | ||
| Grade II | 5 | 2.094±0.323 | ||
| Grade III | 1 | 2.435±0.114 | ||
| Nervous system damage | 10 | 0.541 | 0.001 | |
| Grade I | 7 | 1.453±0.432 | ||
| Grade II | 2 | 2.321±0.773 | ||
| Grade III | 1 | 2.785±0.195 | ||
| Liver and kidney damages | 8 | 0.723 | 0.000 | |
| Grade I | 6 | 2.003±0.174 | ||
| Grade II | 2 | 2.121±0.913 | ||
| Grade III | 0 | 2.792±0.934 | ||
| Allergic reactions | 3 | 0.551 | 0.002 | |
| Grade I | 2 | 2.003±0.174 | ||
| Grade II | 1 | 2.121±0.913 | ||
| Grade III | 0 | 2.792±0.934 | ||
| Blood disease | 1 | 0.227 | 0.006 | |
| Grade I | 1 | 3.123±0.432 | ||
| Grade II | 0 | 3.725±0.674 | ||
| Grade III | 0 | 4.241±0.872 |
Survival Rates
The 1-, 2- and 3-year survival rates of 120 patients were 38.5% (46/120), 15.0% (18/120) and 10.0% (12/120) respectively.
Correlation between EGFR expression and post-chemotherapy adverse reactions
Univariate log-rank test showed that TNM stage, lymphatic metastasis, positive EGFR expression, age and smoking were possible risk factors for post-chemotherapy adverse reactions. Then multiple Logistic regression analysis showed that TNM stage, lymphatic metastasis and positive EGFR expression were the main independent risk factors (P<0.05) (Table-IV).
Table-IV.
Correlation between EGFR expression and post-chemotherapy adverse reactions.
| Variable | OR | 95%CI | P |
|---|---|---|---|
| TNM stage | 0.472 | 0.288-0.775 | <0.05 |
| Lymphatic metastasis | 0.302 | 0.198-0.465 | <0.05 |
| Positive EGFR expression | 1.782 | 1.187-2.543 | <0.05 |
Correlation between EGFR expression and basic physical conditions
The correlation between EGFR expression and basic physical conditions is summarized in Table-V.
Table-V.
Correlation between EGFR expression and basic physical conditions (
±s).
| Item | Case No. | EGFR (µg/L) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | 0.344 | ||
| Male | 68 | 4.372±0.673 | |
| Female | 52 | 3.595±0.367 | |
| Age | 0.557 | ||
| <50 | 54 | 2.953±0.432 | |
| >50 | 66 | 3.321±0.773 | |
| TNM stage | 0.041 | ||
| I-II | 35 | 1.614±0.219 | |
| III-IV | 85 | 5.787±0.135 | |
| Lymphatic metastasis | 0.037 | ||
| No | 40 | 2.113±0.191 | |
| Yes | 80 | 7.012±0.045 |
DISCUSSION
Lung cancer is the most dangerous malignant tumor that threatens human health and life and kills about 500 thousand people in China,15 among which NSCLC accounted for over 80% cases. Despite considerable research progress, 80% of lung cancer patients cannot be surgically treated upon diagnosis owing to insidious onset and lack of early diagnostic protocols. As a result, they have to receive chemotherapy, with unsatisfactory outcomes and low 3-year survival rates also.16 Mainly existing on the cell membrane, EGFR binds EGF and enters the cytoplasm through invagination and pinocytosis to transmit biological signals. Then EGFR is recycled onto the cell membrane after degradation of lysosomes. Generally, EGFR is highly expressed in tissues of gastric, esophageal and hepatic tumors, whereas it is barely expressed in corresponding normal tissues, suggesting that overexpression of EGFR may be related with tumor onset and progression.17
Compared with combination chemotherapy, multidisciplinary treatment for NSCLC can eliminate micrometastatic and residual foci, minimize the chance of recurrence, and improve long-term survival. Vinorelbine, as a cell-cycle specific plant-derived antitumor drug, is able to block tubulin polymerization and to induce its depolymerization, thus exerting remarkable killing effects on tumor cells.18 When combined with cisplatin, it improves prognosis by shrinking tumors, enhancing local blood supply and decreasing hypoxic cells. In this study, there were 35 CR cases, 40 PR cases, 30 SD cases and 15 PD cases in the observation group, so RR was 62.5%. The 1-, 2- and 3-year survival rates were 38.5% (46/120), 15.0% (18/120) and 10.0% (12/120) respectively.
Patients are bound to be affected by chemotherapy, mainly undergoing gastrointestinal, nervous system and allergic reactions. Commonly occurring immediately after several minutes of infusion, allergic reactions are manifested as rash in mild cases and chest distress, pain, shortness of breath in severe ones. The main symptoms of gastrointestinal reactions include hiccups, vomiting, diarrhea, inflammation of the upper digestive tract and intestinal ischemia. Skin reactions include local and systemic skin damages, mainly manifested as phlebitis, pain, erythema, as well as drug extravasation-induced skin shedding and necrosis. Moreover, hematopoietic system reactions mainly involve myelosuppression, and especially, neutropenia is closely associated with the dose and toxicity of chemotherapeutic agents.19
In this study, the incidence of adverse reactions after chemotherapy was 28.3% (34/120), including 12 cases of gastrointestinal reactions, 10 cases of nervous system damage, 8 cases of liver and kidney damages, 3 cases of allergic reactions and one case of blood disease. Accordingly, vinorelbine in combination with cisplatin mainly led to mild gastrointestinal reactions together with nervous system, liver and kidney damages which were alleviated thereafter.
Being a glycoprotein receptor, EGFR has the activity of tyrosine kinase, comprising 23 hydrophobic amino acid residues in the transmembrane region and 542 in the intracellular region. Binding between EGF and EGFR forms a dimer that is phosphorylated or transphosphorylated to produce biological signals, then activating several downstream signal transduction pathways and transducing them inside cell nuclei.20 It has previously been reported that EGFR is highly expressed in malignant tumors instead of in normal tissues.21 Similarly, the observation group herein had significantly higher percentage and positive rate in EGFR expression than those of the control group (P<0.05). In the meantime, the positive expression rate of EGFR rose significantly with increasing TNM stage and lymphatic metastasis (P<0.05). In general, tumors have higher growth and proliferative capacities and are more malignant with decreasing degree of differentiation and increasing TNM stage. EGFR can promote the metastasis of tumor cells partially by regulating integrin expression and functional subunit recombination, and it is invasion and metastasis that mainly result in the failure of lung cancer treatment and final death.22
Then multiple Logistic regression analysis herein showed that TNM stage, lymphatic metastasis and positive EGFR expression were the main independent risk factors (P<0.05). Since low degree of differentiation and absence of lymphatic metastasis benefit post-chemotherapy survival and reduce adverse reactions, TNM staging is indispensable before treatment.23 Furthermore; positive EGFR expression indirectly reflects the controlling of tumor pathological changes by drugs, the changes of which may predict the therapeutic effects of chemotherapy and post-treatment adverse reactions. The currently available EGFR-targeted drugs, including EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors and monoclonal antibodies, can augment the activities of corresponding inhibitors and the susceptibility to gefitinib.24
In summary, advanced NSCLC was usually accompanied by high EGFR expression. Chemotherapy was capable of improving the prognosis and survival rate, but adverse reactions were also triggered, being related with the pathological characteristics and EGFR expressions of patients.
Footnotes
Declaration of interest: None.
Authors’ Contributions
ZRH and JHZ designed this study and prepared the manuscript.
CYT and FTY collected and analyzed the data.
REFERENCES
- 1.Fu ZZ, Gu T, Zhang SH, Cao XY, Zhang QH, Zhang YQ, et al. Clinical three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy research using repeated computed tomography scans for field reduction in older non-small-cell lung cancer patients. Genet Mol Res. 2014;13(3):5343–5349. doi: 10.4238/2014.July.24.13. doi:10.4238/2014.July.24.13. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Gadgeel SM, Gandhi L, Riely GJ, Chiappori AA, West HL, Azada MC, et al. Safety & activity of alectinib against systemic disease and brain metastases in patients with crizotinib-resistant ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (AF-002JG): results from the dose-finding portion of a phase 1/2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(10):1119–1128. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70362-6. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70362-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Zhao C, Li X, Li J, Zhang Y, Ren S, Chen X, et al. Detecting ALK, ROS1 and RET fusion genes in cell block samples. Transl Oncol. 2014;7(3):363–367. doi: 10.1016/j.tranon.2014.04.013. doi:10.1016/j.tranon.2014.04.013. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Jean-Philippe AS. Correlation of EGFR expression in colorectal cancer outcome prognosis. Annals of oncology. Abstract Book of the 27th Congress. Nice, France. 2012;13(5):72–73. [Google Scholar]
- 5.Nawaz I, Qiu X, Wu H, Li Y, Fan Y, Hu LF, et al. Development of a multiplex methylation specific PCR suitable for (early) detection of non-small cell lung cancer. Epigenetics. 2014;9(8):1138–1148. doi: 10.4161/epi.29499. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Yuli Y, Zhe S, Xia W, Siqing L, Zhenxuan W, Yu-Hua Z, et al. XPG is a novel biomarker of clinical outcome in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Pak J Med Sci. 2013;29(3):762–767. doi: 10.12669/pjms.293.3664. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Shien K, Yamamoto H, Soh J, Miyoshi S, Toyooka S. Drug Resistance to EGFR Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors for Non-small Cell Lung Cancer. Acta Med Okayama. 2014;68(4):191–200. doi: 10.18926/AMO/52785. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Kabbinavar F, Fehrenbacher L, Hainsworth J, Kasubhai S, Kressel B, Marsland T, et al. Biomarker Analyses from a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Phase IIIb Trial Comparing Bevacizumab with or without Erlotinib as Maintenance Therapy for the Treatment of Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (ATLAS) J Thorac Oncol. 2014;9(9):1411–1412. doi: 10.1097/JTO.0000000000000274. doi:10.1097/JTO.0000000000000274. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Zhu K, Fang W, Chen Y, Lin S, Chen X. TNF-related apoptosis-inducing ligand enhances vinorelbine-induced apoptosis and antitumor activity in a preclinical model of non-small cell lung cancer. Oncol Rep. 2014;32(3):1234–1242. doi: 10.3892/or.2014.3324. doi:10.3892/or.2014.3324. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Cui L, Liu XX, Jiang Y, Liu JJ, Zhou XR, He XJ, et al. Phase II study on dose escalating schedule of paclitaxel concurrent with radiotherapy in treating patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2014;15(4):1699–1702. doi: 10.7314/apjcp.2014.15.4.1699. doi:10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.4.1699. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Marciniak DJ, Moragoda L, Mohammad RM, Yu Y, Nagothu KK, Aboukameel A, et al. Epidermal growth factor receptor-related protein: a potential therapeutic agent for colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology. 2003;124(5):1337–1347. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5085(03)00264-6. doi:10.1016/S0016-5085(03)00264-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Dong L, Han ZF, Feng ZH, Jia ZY. Comparison of pemetrexed & docetaxel as salvage chemotherapy for the treatment for nonsmall-cell lung cancer after the failure of epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors. J Int Med Res. 2014;42(1):191–197. doi: 10.1177/0300060513505808. doi:10.1177/0300060513505808. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Carrizosa DR, Mileham KF, Haggstrom DE, Brouse GM, Induru R, Kim ES. New Targets & New Mechanisms in Lung Cancer. Oncology (Williston Park) 2013;27(5):112–114. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Harai PM, Huang SM. Modulation of molecular targets to enhance radiation. Clin Cancer Res. 2000;6(2):323–329. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Cortot AB, Jänne PA. Molecular mechanisms of resistance in epidermal growth factor receptor-mutant lung adenocarcinomas. Eur Respir Rev. 2014;23(133):356–366. doi: 10.1183/09059180.00004614. doi:10.1183/09059180.00004614. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Douillard JY, Rosell R, Delena M, Legroumellec A, Torres A, Carpagnano F. ANITA: Phase III adjuvant vinorelbine and cisplatin versus observation in completely, resected (stage I-III) non-small cell lung cancer patients: final results after 70-month median follow-up. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(16):7013. [Google Scholar]
- 17.Flynn AA, Pedley RB, Green AJ, Dearling JL, El-Emir E, Boxer GM, et al. The nonuniformity of antibody distribution in the kidney and its influence on dosimetry. Radiat Res. 2003;159(2):182–189. doi: 10.1667/0033-7587(2003)159[0182:tnoadi]2.0.co;2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Khozin S, Blumenthal GM, Jiang X, He K, Boyd K, Murgo A, et al. U.S. Food & Drug Administration approval summary: Erlotinib for the first-line treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer with epidermal growth factor receptor exon 19 deletions or exon 21 (L858R) substitution mutations. Oncologist. 2014;19(7):774–778. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2014-0089. doi:10.1634/theoncologist.2014-0089. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Okubo S, Kobayashi N, Taketsuna M, Kaneko N, Enatsu S, Nishiuma S. Safety & effectiveness of pemetrexed in patients with non-small cell lung cancer in Japan - analysis of post-marketing surveillance. Gan To Kagaku Ryoho. 2014;41(4):475–481. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Kroeber V, Nagel S, Schuette W, Blankenburg T. A Prospective Phase I/II Study: Combination Chemotherapy with Docetaxel & Pemetrexed as Second-Line Treatment in Patients with Stage IIIB/IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Case Rep Oncol. 2014;7(2):435–434. doi: 10.1159/000365323. doi:10.1159/000365323. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Li X, Ren R, Ren S, Chen X, Cai W, Zhou F, et al. Peripheral blood for epidermal growth factor receptor mutation detection in non-small cell lung cancer patients. Transl Oncol. 2014;7(3):341–348. doi: 10.1016/j.tranon.2014.04.006. doi:10.1016/j.tranon.2014.04.006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Arriagada R, Bergman B, Dunant A, Le Chevalier T, Pignon JP, Vansteenkiste J. Cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy in patients IV in completely resected non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;350(4):351–360. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa031644. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa031644. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Wislez M, Malka D, Bennouna J, Mortier L, Bensadoun RJ, Sicard J, et al. A new perspective in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Role of afatinib: An oral and irreversible ErbB family blocker. Bull Cancer. 2014;101(6):647–652. doi: 10.1684/bdc.2014.1986. doi:10.1684/bdc.2014.1986. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Yilmaz A, Mohamed N, Patterson KA, Tang Y, Shilo K, Villalona-Calero MA, et al. Clinical & Metabolic Parameters in Non-Small Cell Lung Carcinoma and Colorectal Cancer Patients with & without KRAS Mutations. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2014;11(9):8645–8660. doi: 10.3390/ijerph110908645. doi:10.3390/ijerph110908645; [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]