Retrospective analysis shows improved overall survival and objective response rate with endostatin in patients with EGFR mutant NSCLC.
Third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) are standard first-line options in advanced or metastatic EGFR mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of third generation EGFR-TKIs combined with recombinant human endostatin (Endostar) versus EGFR-TKIs alone in previously untreated advanced epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutant NSCLC patients. A total of 118 untreated advanced EGFR-sensitive-mutant NSCLC patients from a single center were retrospectively included in the study. Of the patients, 71 received third-generation EGFR-TKIs (the T group) and 47 received combination of Endostar and third-generation EGFR-TKIs therapy (the E + T group). Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), the objective response rate (ORR), the disease control rate (DCR), and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated. Compared to the T group, the E + T group had a significantly higher ORR (91.5% vs. 77.5%; P=0.047), and improved PFS (20.2 vs. 17.6 months; P=0.002) and OS (41.5 vs. 33.8 months; P=0.04). However, there was no significant difference in the DCR between the two groups (97.9% vs. 97.2%; P>0.99). Multivariate analysis identified the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG-PS) score, brain metastasis, EGFR co-mutation, and treatment regimen as independent prognostic factors. Subgroup analysis showed that the E + T group had greater clinical benefits for patients with ≥2 distant metastatic organs (P=0.01) and EGFR/TP53 co-mutations (P=0.01). The incidence of AEs of any level was higher in the E + T group than the T group (53.2% vs. 45.1%, P=0.39). In this real-world study, the combination of recombinant human endostatin and third-generation EGFR-TKIs significantly improved the ORR, PFS, and OS in previously untreated advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients and thus represents a promising treatment option that requires further prospective evaluation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: