0 94

Cited 18 times in

Lazertinib Versus Gefitinib as First-Line Treatment in Patients With EGFR-Mutated Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results From LASER301

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.author조병철-
dc.date.accessioned2023-11-28T03:32:50Z-
dc.date.available2023-11-28T03:32:50Z-
dc.date.issued2023-09-
dc.identifier.issn0732-183X-
dc.identifier.urihttps://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/196847-
dc.description.abstractPurpose: Lazertinib is a potent, CNS-penetrant, third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor. This global, phase III study (LASER301) compared lazertinib versus gefitinib in treatment-naïve patients with EGFR-mutated (exon 19 deletion [ex19del]/L858R) locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and methods: Patients were 18 years and older with no previous systemic anticancer therapy. Neurologically stable patients with CNS metastases were allowed. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to lazertinib 240 mg once daily orally or gefitinib 250 mg once daily orally, stratified by mutation status and race. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) by RECIST v1.1. Results: Overall, 393 patients received double-blind study treatment across 96 sites in 13 countries. Median PFS was significantly longer with lazertinib than with gefitinib (20.6 v 9.7 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.45; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.58; P < .001). The PFS benefit of lazertinib over gefitinib was consistent across all predefined subgroups. The objective response rate was 76% in both groups (odds ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.59). Median duration of response was 19.4 months (95% CI, 16.6 to 24.9) with lazertinib versus 8.3 months (95% CI, 6.9 to 10.9) with gefitinib. Overall survival data were immature at the interim analysis (29% maturity). The 18-month survival rate was 80% with lazertinib and 72% with gefitinib (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.51 to 1.08; P = .116). Observed safety of both treatments was consistent with their previously reported safety profiles. Conclusion: Lazertinib demonstrated significant efficacy improvement compared with gefitinib in the first-line treatment of EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC, with a manageable safety profile.-
dc.description.statementOfResponsibilityrestriction-
dc.languageEnglish-
dc.publisherAmerican Society of Clinical Oncology-
dc.relation.isPartOfJOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY-
dc.rightsCC BY-NC-ND 2.0 KR-
dc.subject.MESHCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung* / drug therapy-
dc.subject.MESHCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung* / genetics-
dc.subject.MESHCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung* / pathology-
dc.subject.MESHErbB Receptors / genetics-
dc.subject.MESHGefitinib / therapeutic use-
dc.subject.MESHHumans-
dc.subject.MESHLung Neoplasms* / drug therapy-
dc.subject.MESHLung Neoplasms* / genetics-
dc.subject.MESHLung Neoplasms* / pathology-
dc.subject.MESHMutation-
dc.subject.MESHProtein Kinase Inhibitors / adverse effects-
dc.titleLazertinib Versus Gefitinib as First-Line Treatment in Patients With EGFR-Mutated Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results From LASER301-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.contributor.collegeCollege of Medicine (의과대학)-
dc.contributor.departmentDept. of Internal Medicine (내과학교실)-
dc.contributor.googleauthorByoung Chul Cho-
dc.contributor.googleauthorMyung-Ju Ahn-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJin Hyoung Kang-
dc.contributor.googleauthorRoss A Soo-
dc.contributor.googleauthorThanyanan Reungwetwattana-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJames Chih-Hsin Yang-
dc.contributor.googleauthorIrfan Cicin-
dc.contributor.googleauthorDong-Wan Kim-
dc.contributor.googleauthorYi-Long Wu-
dc.contributor.googleauthorShun Lu-
dc.contributor.googleauthorKi Hyeong Lee-
dc.contributor.googleauthorYong-Kek Pang-
dc.contributor.googleauthorAnastasia Zimina-
dc.contributor.googleauthorChin Heng Fong-
dc.contributor.googleauthorElena Poddubskaya-
dc.contributor.googleauthorAhmet Sezer-
dc.contributor.googleauthorSoon Hin How-
dc.contributor.googleauthorPongwut Danchaivijitr-
dc.contributor.googleauthorYuKyung Kim-
dc.contributor.googleauthorYeji Lim-
dc.contributor.googleauthorTaewon An-
dc.contributor.googleauthorHana Lee-
dc.contributor.googleauthorHae Mi Byun-
dc.contributor.googleauthorBojan Zaric-
dc.identifier.doi10.1200/JCO.23.00515-
dc.contributor.localIdA03822-
dc.relation.journalcodeJ01331-
dc.identifier.eissn1527-7755-
dc.identifier.pmid37379502-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO.23.00515-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameCho, Byoung Chul-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor조병철-
dc.citation.volume41-
dc.citation.number26-
dc.citation.startPage4208-
dc.citation.endPage4217-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationJOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, Vol.41(26) : 4208-4217, 2023-09-
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Internal Medicine (내과학교실) > 1. Journal Papers

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.