Skip to main content
. 2018 Dec 27;12(3):502–512. doi: 10.1016/j.tranon.2018.12.003

Table 3.

EGFR Status Subgroup Analysis of the Clinical Features of Study Patients

EGFR Negative
(N = 13)
EGFR Positive
(N = 28)
P
Sex, N (%) .460
 Male 9 (69.2) 16 (57.1)
 Female 4 (30.8) 12 (42.9)
Median age (range), years 66 (51-85) 57 (36-82) .147
KRAS status, N (%) .026
 Wild type 9 (69.2) 9 (32.1)
 Mutated 4 (30.8) 19 (67.9)
Tumor sidedness 1.000
 Left side 12 (92.3) 24 (85.7)
 Right side 1 (7.7) 4 (14.3)
UGT1A1 status .765
 6/6 11 (84.6) 22 (78.6)
 6/7 2 (15.4) 5 (17.9)
 7/7 0 (0.0) 1 (3.6)
Irinotecan dose, N (%), mg/m2 .880
 260 3 (23.1) 4 (14.3)
 240 2 (15.4) 3 (10.7)
 210 1 (7.7) 2 (7.1)
 180 7 (53.8) 18 (64.3)
120 0 (0.0) 1 (3.6)
Best objective response, N (%) .027
 PR 3 (23.1) 1 (3.6)
 SD 8 (61.5) 12 (42.9)
 PD 2 (15.4) 15 (53.6)
DCR, N (%) 11 (84.6) 13 (46.4) .021
AEs .055
 Grade ≧3 11 (84.6) 15 (46.4)
 Grade <3 2 (15.4) 13 (53.6)

EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; PR, partial response; SD, stable disease; PD, progressive disease; DCR, disease control rate; AEs, adverse events.