Systematic Review of Observational Studies on the use of Erlotinib and Gefitinib in the Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Introduction: Evaluating the use of drugs on a large scale is part of the technology lifecycle. Since the introduction of gefitinib and erlotinib for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer into the National Health System of Brazil in 2013, no reviews with real-world data have been published. Obj...
| Autores: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2024 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Institución: | Instituto Nacional de Câncer José Alencar Gomes da Silva (INCA) |
| Repositorio: | Revista Brasileira de Cancerologia (Online) |
| Idioma: | portugués inglés español |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:rbc.inca.gov.br:article/4656 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://rbc.inca.gov.br/index.php/revista/article/view/4656 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Cloridrato de Erlotinib Gefitinibe Neoplasias Pulmonares/tratamento farmacológico Resultado do Tratamento Revisão Sistemática Erlotinib Hydrochloride Gefitinib Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy Treatment Outcome Systematic Review Clorhidrato de Erlotinib Neoplasias Pulmonares/tratamiento farmacológico Resultado del Tratamiento Revisión Sistemática |
| Sumario: | Introduction: Evaluating the use of drugs on a large scale is part of the technology lifecycle. Since the introduction of gefitinib and erlotinib for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer into the National Health System of Brazil in 2013, no reviews with real-world data have been published. Objective: To evaluate data on the efficacy, safety, quality of life, and adherence of erlotinib and gefitinib in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer based on a systematic review of observational studies. Method: A systematic review protocol was registered. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, LILACS and CINAHL were searched for evidence. Two investigators selected the studies, extracted the data and assessed the methodological quality independently. The risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute list of critical appraisal items for cohort and cross-sectional studies. Results: Eight cohort studies were included. Higher median overall survival and progression-free survival were observed for gefitinib and erlotinib compared to chemotherapy. The studies showed a low incidence of adverse events, good quality of life and high adherence rates among patients taking the drugs evaluated. When assessing the risk of bias, it was noticed that all the studies had some type of bias or unmet quality criteria. Conclusion: Clinical benefit was identified in a real-world context for the drugs gefitinib and erlotinib incorporated into Brazil’s National Health System. |
|---|