Skip to main content
. 2021 Jul 22;27(19):5258–5271. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-21-0273

Table 1.

Clinical trials reporting PFS outcomes data for TKI monotherapies and antiangiogenic/TKI combinations by EGFR-activating mutation.

Ex19del Ex21L858R
Study Geography Size (N) CNSc (%) Median PFS vs. control (months) Δ mPFS HR (95% CI) 1-year PFS rates vs. control Median PFS vs. control (months) Δ mPFS HR (95% CI) 1-year PFS rates vs. control
TKI monotherapy
 FLAURAa (Ph3 osimertinib vs. gefitinib or erlotinib; ref. 38) Global 556 19/23 21.4 vs. 11.0 10.4 0.43 (0.32–0.56) 70% vs. 43% 14.4 vs. 9.5 4.9 0.51 (0.36–0.71) 59% vs. 38%
 ARCHER 1050a (Ph3 dacomitinib vs. gefitinib; ref. 39) East Asia/EU 452 Excl 16.5 vs. 9.2 7.3 0.55 (0.41–0.75) 59% vs. 35% 12.3 vs. 9.8 2.5 0.63 (0.44–0.88) 51% vs. 38%
 LUX-Lung 3 (Ph3 afatinib vs. cisplatin plus pemetrexed; ref. 40) Global 345 NR 13.8 vs. 5.6 8.1 0.28 (0.18–0.44) NA 10.8 vs. 8.1 2.7 0.75 (0.48–1.19) NA
 LUX-Lung 6 (Ph3 afatinib vs. cisplatin plus gemcitabine; ref. 41) East Asia 364 NR 13.1 vs. 5.6 8.1 0.20 (0.13–0.33) NA 9.6 vs. 5.6 4.0 0.31 (0.19–0.52) NA
 LUX-Lung 7 (RPh2 afatinib vs. gefitinib; ref. 42) International 319 16/15 12.7 vs. 11.0 1.7 0.76 (0.55–1.06) 51% vs. 42% 10.9 vs. 10.8 0.1 0.71 (0.47–1.06) 42% vs. 39%
 WJTOG3404 (Ph3 gefitinib vs. cisplatin plus docetaxel; ref. 43) Japan 177 NR 9.0 vs. 6.0 3.0 0.45 (0.27–0.77) NA 9.6 vs. 6.7 2.9 0.51 (0.29–0.90) NA
 EURTACa (erlotinib vs. cisplatin plus docetaxel or gemcitabine; ref. 44) EU 173 10/13 11.0 vs. 4.6 6.4 0.30 (0.18–0.50) 47% vs. 11% 8.4 vs. 6.0 2.4 0.55 (0.29–1.02) 29% vs. 10%
Antiangiogenics + TKI
 RELAYb (RPh3 ramucirumab ± erlotinib; ref. 19) Global 449 Excl 19.6 vs. 12.5 7.1 0.65 (0.47–0.90) 74% vs. 54% 19.4 vs. 11.2 8.2 0.62 (0.44–0.87) 70% vs. 47%
 NEJ.026a (Ph3 erlotinib ± bevacizumab; Japan; ref. 17) Japan 228 32/32 16.6 vs. 12.4 4.2 0.69 (0.41–1.16) 71% vs. 46% 17.4 vs. 13.7 3.7 0.57 (0.33–0.97) 70% vs. 58%
 JO25567a (RPh2 erlotinib ± bevacizumab; ref. 16) Japan 154 Excl 18.0 vs. 10.3 7.7 0.41 (0.24–0.72) 78% vs. 29% 13.9 vs. 7.1 6.8 0.67 (0.38–1.18) 75% vs. 39%
 CTONG.1509a,b (Ph3 erlotinib ± bevacizumab; ref. 18) China 311 28/30 18.0 vs. 12.6 5.4 0.63 (0.44–0.92) 79% vs. 60% 18.0 vs. 9.7 8.3 0.50 (0.34–0.74) 75% vs. 37%

Abbreviations: Excl, excluded; mPFS, median progression-free survival; NA, not available; NR, not reported.

a1-year PFS rates estimated from published Kaplan–Meier survival curves.

bInvestigator-assessed PFS.

cCNS metastasis as presented at baseline.