The reasons why re-biopsies were not performed after failure with EGFR-TKI

التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
العنوان: The reasons why re-biopsies were not performed after failure with EGFR-TKI
المؤلفون: Natsuki Takano, Tomoaki Sonoda, Ryo Ariyasu, Shingo Nishikawa, Noriko Yanagitani, Satoru Kitazono, Fumiyoshi Ohyanagi, Atsushi Horiike, Makoto Nishio, Tomoyo Oguri, Masafumi Saiki, Junji Koyama
المصدر: Journal of Clinical Oncology. 35:e20540-e20540
بيانات النشر: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), 2017.
سنة النشر: 2017
مصطلحات موضوعية: Oncology, Cancer Research, medicine.medical_specialty, Egfr tki, Repeat biopsy, business.industry, Internal medicine, medicine, business, respiratory tract diseases
الوصف: e20540 Background: Repeat biopsy becomes important to determine subsequent treatment after failure of EGFR-TKI. However, some patients did not receive re-biopsy in real world. Here we retrospectively analyzed the reasons why the patients did not receive re-biopsy. Methods: We reviewed medical records of 235 patients treated with EGFR-TKI at our institution between January 2014 and September 2016 and analyzed the treatment, the progression site after failure of EGFR-TKI and the reasons why they did not receive re-biopsy. Results: 127 of 235 (54%) patients had tumor progression after treatment with EGFR-TKI and 93 (73.2%) of 127 patients received re-biopsy and 34 (26.8%) patients didn’t. The characteristics of 34 patients who did not received re-biopsy were; the median age, 67 years (29-83), male/ female: 12/22, PS0-1/2 ≥:27/7, stage IV/recurrence/other:20/10/4, smoking history never/ex/current: 15/17/2, histology : adeno/other 34/0, EGFR mutation type; 19del/L858R/Other = 13/15/6, prior EGFR-TKI; Gefitinib/Erlotinib/Afatinib/other: 22/9/2/1. The commonest reason why they did not receive re-biopsy was no target lesion to get biopsy (n = 13,38%). CT scans of these patients were retrospectively evaluated and it was confirmed that there were no lesions that could be accessed safely at that time. Central nervous system lesions, multiple small pulmonary lesions and bone metastasis were unaccessible lesions. Although 21 patients had accessible lesions including lung, superficial lymph nodes, pleural effusion, liver, they did not receive re-biopsy because of patient refusal (n = 9), worsening of general condition (n = 3), need for other therapy immediately (ex: chemotherapy, radiotherapy) (n = 3), old age (n = 2), existence of de novo T790M (n = 2), complications (n = 1) and physician’s choice (n = 1). Conclusions: Some patients who did not recieve re-biopsy had some target lesions and it could be increase the re-biopsy rate.
تدمد: 1527-7755
0732-183X
الوصول الحر: https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_________::2f1f51aab8039163253f675294bf402fTest
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2017.35.15_suppl.e20540Test
رقم الانضمام: edsair.doi...........2f1f51aab8039163253f675294bf402f
قاعدة البيانات: OpenAIRE