Table 3.
Results of EGFR testing in selected centers in 2014a
| EGFR, n (%) | Non-diagnostic | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WT | Mut exon 18 | Mut exon 19 | Mut exon 20 | Mut exon 21 | ||
| Croatia (Zagreb) | 561 (85.9) | 8 (1.2) | 46 (7) | 8 (1.2) | 30 (4.6) | 11 |
| Czech (Prague) | 154 (90.6) | 4 (2.4) | 6 (3.5) | 2 (1.2) | 4 (2.2) | 15 |
| Czech (Hradec Kralove) | 234 (90.0) | 0 | 15 (5.8) | 2 (0.8) | 9 (3.5) | 6 |
| Hungary (Budapest, Timár) | 350 (85.6) | 4 (1.0) | 22 (5.4) | 14 (3.9) | 19 (4.6) | 57 |
| Hungary (Budapest, Toth) | 251 (93.3) | 0 | 9 (3.3) | 1 (0.4) | 8 (3.1) | 2 |
| Hungary (Budapest, Kovalszky) | 500 (88.5) | 6 (1.1) | 27 (4.8) | 0 | 32 (5.7) | – |
| Hungary (Debrecen) | 760 (89.6) | 0† | 61 (7.2) | 0† | 27 (3.2) | 13 |
| Hungary (Pécs) | 112 (86.8) | 0 | 10 (7.8) | 0 | 7 (5.4) | – |
| Hungary (Szeged) | 617 (92.6) | 4 (0.6) | 27 (4.1) | 2 (0.3) | 16 (2.4) | 71 |
| Slovakia | 361 (87.6) | 1 (0.2) | 30 (7) | 2 (0.5) | 16 (3.8) | – |
| Slovenia | 464 (86) | 5 (0.9) | 39 (7.2) | 8 (1.5) | 25 (4.6) | 57 |
| Turkey (Cerrahpaşa) | 714 (87.9) | 17 (2.1) | 52 (6.4) | 3 (0.4) | 26 (3.2) | 38 |
EGFR epidermal growth factor receptor, WT wild-type
aNote that these numbers cannot be compared directly because of the different criteria for selection of samples to test
†Exons 18 and 20 not tested