4.5 Article

Clinical outcome in patients with leptomeningeal metastasis from non-small cell lung cancer: Okayama Lung Cancer Study Group

期刊

LUNG CANCER
卷 77, 期 1, 页码 134-139

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2012.03.002

关键词

Leptomeningeal metastasis; Lung cancer; Non-small cell; Outcome; Epidermal growth factor receptor; Tyrosine kinase inhibitor; Mutation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: We examined the prognosis of patients with leptomeningeal metastasis (LM) from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and that stratified by epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation status in LM patients receiving EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Methods: We retrospectively analyzed a series of 91 consecutive NSCLC patients with LM between 2001 and 2010. Results: Most of the LM patients had adenocarcinoma histology and a poor performance status (PS). The median survival time (MST) for all patients was 3.6 months. Adenocarcinoma and TKI treatment were associated with a better prognosis. Among the patients, 51 received EGFR-TKIs. Of these, the EGFR mutation status was assessed in 30 patients; 7 (23%) showed no mutation (group 1), 10 (33%) had a mutation in exon 21 (group 2), and 13 (43%) had deletions in exon 19 (group 3). Interestingly, PS was significantly improved in groups 2 and 3 but not in group 1. The MST in these subgroups was 1.4, 7.1. and 11.0 months in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively (p < 0.001). The median time to progression or symptom deterioration was 0.9, 2.0, and 7.8 months for groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively (p < 0.001). A multivariate analysis showed that EGFR-mutant tumors were associated with a better prognosis in patients receiving EGFR-TKIs. Conclusions: The prognosis for patients with LM from NSCLC was still poor. Survival after the initiation of EGFR-TKI treatment differed according to the type of EGFR mutation, suggesting the potential benefit of TKIs for patients with EGFR mutations, even though they suffered from LM. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据