4.4 Article

The relationship between drug exposure and clinical outcomes of non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with gefitinib

Journal

MEDICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 28, Issue 3, Pages 697-702

Publisher

HUMANA PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1007/s12032-010-9541-0

Keywords

Non-small cell lung cancer; Gefitinib; Drug exposure; Clinical outcomes

Categories

Funding

  1. Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province, China [07001532]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objective of this study was to explore the relationship between gefitinib exposure and clinical outcome in gefitinib-treated patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Thirty patients participated in this pharmacokinetic study and received 250-mg oral doses of gefitinib once daily. Blood samples were collected before dosing and on days 7, 14, 21, and 28. The plasma concentrations of gefitinib were evaluated using a validated high-performance liquid chromatographic method with tandem mass spectrometric detection. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine predictive factors for response and survival of patients. EGFR mutations were analyzed retrospectively. Median survival time (MST) was 9.97 months (95%CI 2.79-17.14 months). The geometric mean trough gefitinib plasma concentration (C (min) (ss) ) was 266 ng/ml (range 94-538 ng/ml). In the multivariate analysis, only skin rash was associated with gefitinib-induced disease control (P = 0.017); Adenocarcinoma, skin rash, and 'high' C (min) (ss) (C (min) (ss) a parts per thousand yen 200 ng/ml) were independently associated with overall survival (P = 0.004, 0.028,0.007, respectively). MST of EGFR wild-type patients with 'high' C (min) (ss) was longer than that with 'low' C (min) (ss) (P = 0.002). Our study results show that pharmacokinetic variability may also account for the different outcomes following treatment with gefitinib for patients with wild-type EGFR. Further studies are needed to confirm these results.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available