PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: Anlotinib and apatinib, both vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGFR-TKIs), are clinically established in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in China, with anlotinib emerging as a standard treatment strategy. This study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of apatinib and anlotinib, and to compare their differences in treating patients with advanced NSCLC.
UNASSIGNED: We retrospectively analyzed the data of patients with advanced NSCLC treated with apatinib or anlotinib at a hospital in Eastern China from January 2017 to December 2021. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), while secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), and safety profile.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 145 patients were included in this study. Median PFS (mPFS) was 3.53 months for the apatinib group and 5.3 months for the anlotinib group (HR = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.41-0.84; P = 0.004), and median OS (mOS) was 7.6 months versus 15.6 months (HR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.46-1.00; P = 0.048), which all showed significant differences after adjusting for confounders (P < 0.05). Subgroup analysis revealed that the presence or absence of bone metastases significantly influenced PFS in both treatment groups. The ORR was 3.03% in the anlotinib group versus 10.13% in the apatinib group (P = 0.12), the DCR was 72.73% versus 51.90% (P = 0.21). No unanticipated adverse events (AEs) were observed. The incidence of grade 3-4 AEs was significantly higher in the apatinib group (31.65% vs 13.64%, P < 0.05).
UNASSIGNED: Anlotinib demonstrated greater efficacy and safety compared to apatinib in the treatment of advanced NSCLC, particularly in patients with bone metastases and EGFR(-).
UNASSIGNED: We retrospectively analyzed the data of patients with advanced NSCLC treated with apatinib or anlotinib at a hospital in Eastern China from January 2017 to December 2021. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), while secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), and safety profile.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 145 patients were included in this study. Median PFS (mPFS) was 3.53 months for the apatinib group and 5.3 months for the anlotinib group (HR = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.41-0.84; P = 0.004), and median OS (mOS) was 7.6 months versus 15.6 months (HR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.46-1.00; P = 0.048), which all showed significant differences after adjusting for confounders (P < 0.05). Subgroup analysis revealed that the presence or absence of bone metastases significantly influenced PFS in both treatment groups. The ORR was 3.03% in the anlotinib group versus 10.13% in the apatinib group (P = 0.12), the DCR was 72.73% versus 51.90% (P = 0.21). No unanticipated adverse events (AEs) were observed. The incidence of grade 3-4 AEs was significantly higher in the apatinib group (31.65% vs 13.64%, P < 0.05).
UNASSIGNED: Anlotinib demonstrated greater efficacy and safety compared to apatinib in the treatment of advanced NSCLC, particularly in patients with bone metastases and EGFR(-).
摘要：
■安洛替尼和阿帕替尼，血管内皮生长因子受体-酪氨酸激酶抑制剂（VEGFR-TKIs），在中国临床上已经确立了晚期非小细胞肺癌（NSCLC）的治疗方法，随着安洛替尼成为标准治疗策略。本研究旨在评估阿帕替尼和安洛替尼的疗效和安全性。并比较它们在治疗晚期NSCLC患者中的差异。
■我们回顾性分析了2017年1月至2021年12月在华东地区某医院接受阿帕替尼或安洛替尼治疗的晚期非小细胞肺癌患者的资料。主要终点是无进展生存期（PFS），次要终点包括客观反应率（ORR），疾病控制率（DCR），总生存期（OS），和安全概况。
■本研究共纳入145名患者。阿帕替尼组的平均PFS（mPFS）为3.53个月，安洛替尼组为5.3个月（HR=0.59，95％CI：0.41-0.84；P=0.004），和中位OS（mOS）分别为7.6个月和15.6个月（HR=0.68，95％CI：0.46-1.00;P=0.048），校正混杂因素后，差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。亚组分析显示，在两个治疗组中，骨转移的存在或不存在均显着影响PFS。安洛替尼组的ORR为3.03%，阿帕替尼组的ORR为10.13%(P=0.12)，DCR分别为72.73%和51.90%(P=0.21)。未观察到意外不良事件（AE）。阿帕替尼组的3-4级不良事件发生率明显较高(31.65%vs13.64%,P<0.05)。
■与阿帕替尼相比，安洛替尼在治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌方面表现出更高的疗效和安全性，特别是在骨转移和EGFR（-）的患者中。
■我们回顾性分析了2017年1月至2021年12月在华东地区某医院接受阿帕替尼或安洛替尼治疗的晚期非小细胞肺癌患者的资料。主要终点是无进展生存期（PFS），次要终点包括客观反应率（ORR），疾病控制率（DCR），总生存期（OS），和安全概况。
■本研究共纳入145名患者。阿帕替尼组的平均PFS（mPFS）为3.53个月，安洛替尼组为5.3个月（HR=0.59，95％CI：0.41-0.84；P=0.004），和中位OS（mOS）分别为7.6个月和15.6个月（HR=0.68，95％CI：0.46-1.00;P=0.048），校正混杂因素后，差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。亚组分析显示，在两个治疗组中，骨转移的存在或不存在均显着影响PFS。安洛替尼组的ORR为3.03%，阿帕替尼组的ORR为10.13%(P=0.12)，DCR分别为72.73%和51.90%(P=0.21)。未观察到意外不良事件（AE）。阿帕替尼组的3-4级不良事件发生率明显较高(31.65%vs13.64%,P<0.05)。
■与阿帕替尼相比，安洛替尼在治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌方面表现出更高的疗效和安全性，特别是在骨转移和EGFR（-）的患者中。
