gefitinib
Fuentes regulatorias consultadas
Indicaciones aprobadas
- Primera línea del cáncer de pulmón no microcítico metastásico con deleción del exón 19 de EGFR o mutación L858R del exón 21 confirmada por una prueba aprobada. La ficha CIMA también contempla enfermedad localmente avanzada o metastásica con mutaciones activadoras de EGFR.
Contraindicaciones
Absolutas
- CIMA: hipersensibilidad al principio activo o excipientes y lactancia; la etiqueta FDA no establece contraindicaciones formales.
Advertencias clínicas
- Ante disnea, tos o fiebre nuevas o peores, interrumpe e investiga inmediatamente; suspende definitivamente si se confirma enfermedad pulmonar intersticial. Controla periódicamente la función hepática. — OpenFDA, set_id 0afc12dd-12f8-4def-9027-f38412a862b9
- Vigila diarrea, perforación gastrointestinal, queratitis y otros trastornos oculares, y reacciones cutáneas ampollosas o exfoliativas. — OpenFDA, set_id 0afc12dd-12f8-4def-9027-f38412a862b9
Interacciones medicamentosas
- SeveraModuladores potentes de CYP3A4
Mecanismo: Los inductores reducen y los inhibidores aumentan la exposición a gefitinib.
Recomendación: Con un inductor potente, aumenta a 500 mg/día y vuelve a 250 mg 7 días después de retirarlo; con inhibidores potentes, vigila toxicidad.
OpenFDA, set_id 0afc12dd-12f8-4def-9027-f38412a862b9
- SeveraSupresores del ácido gástrico
Mecanismo: El aumento del pH gástrico reduce la exposición a gefitinib.
Recomendación: Evita IBP; si son imprescindibles, separa gefitinib 12 horas. Separa antagonistas H2 o antiácidos 6 horas antes o después.
OpenFDA, set_id 0afc12dd-12f8-4def-9027-f38412a862b9
- SeveraWarfarina
Mecanismo: Puede aumentar el INR y el riesgo hemorrágico.
Recomendación: Controla periódicamente tiempo de protrombina e INR.
OpenFDA, set_id 0afc12dd-12f8-4def-9027-f38412a862b9
Eventos adversos
Comunes (≥1%)
reacciones cutáneas · diarrea · vómitos · náuseas · estomatitis
Embarazo y lactancia
Puede causar daño fetal. Las mujeres deben usar anticoncepción durante el tratamiento y 2 semanas después. No amamantes durante el tratamiento. Puede afectar la fertilidad femenina.
Bibliografía reciente (PubMed)
Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is a WHO grade IV glioma and the most common malignant, primary brain tumor with a 5-year survival of 7.2%. Its highly infiltrative nature, genetic heterogeneity, and protection by the blood brain barrier (BBB) have posed great treatment challenges. The standard treatment for GBMs is surgical resection followed by chemoradiotherapy. The robust DNA repair and self-renewing capabilities of glioblastoma cells and glioma initiating cells (GICs), respectively, promote resistance against all current treatment modalities. Thus, durable GBM management will require the invention of innovative treatment strategies. In this review, we will describe biological and molecular targets for GBM therapy, the current status of pharmacologic therapy, prominent mechanisms of resistance, and new treatment approaches. To date, medical imaging is primarily used to determine the location, size and macroscopic morphology of GBM before, during, and after therapy. In the future, molecular and cellular imaging approaches will more dynamically monitor the expression of molecular targets and/or immune responses in the tumor, thereby enabling more immediate adaptation of tumor-tailored, targeted therapies.
To evaluate the risk of cardiovascular adverse events associated with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors in patients with EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Systematic review and network meta-analysis. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and three clinical trial registries, from inception to 20 November 2024. Randomised controlled trials comparing EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapy with placebo or other treatments in patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC. Pairs of reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. A random effects network meta-analysis using a frequentist approach compared adverse drug reactions across different treatments. Certainty of evidence was evaluated using the confidence in network meta-analysis approach. Pairwise meta-analyses were done to compare the three generations of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors. The network meta-analysis comprised 89 randomised controlled trials involving 29 813 participants, mean follow-up 2.18 years. Compared with placebo, both first generation (odds ratio 1.51, 95% confidence interval 1.01 to 2.26; high certainty; pooled incidence 3.2%) and third generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (2.18, 1.46 to 3.27; high certainty; 9.5%) were associated with increased risks of cardiac adverse events. Among third generation inhibitors, osimertinib (2.53, 1.53 to 4.19; high certainty; 8.9%) and lazertinib (2.84, 1.17 to 6.91; moderate certainty; 2.7%) were associated with cardiac adverse events. Combined therapies, such as antiangiogenesis with erlotinib or gefitinib, were associated with vascular adverse events (high certainty), whereas antiangiogenesis with osimertinib was associated with cardiovascular adverse events (moderate to high certainty). Also, the risk of arrhythmias was significantly higher with third generation inhibitors (3.26, 1.83 to 5.81; high certainty; 7.3%), such as osimertinib alone (3.35, 1.75 to
Aumolertinib (formerly almonertinib; HS-10296) is a novel third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved in China. This double-blind phase III trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of aumolertinib compared with gefitinib as a first-line treatment for locally advanced or metastatic EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03849768). Patients at 53 sites in China were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either aumolertinib (110 mg) or gefitinib (250 mg) once daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) per investigator assessment. A total of 429 patients who were naïve to treatment for locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC were enrolled. PFS was significantly longer with aumolertinib compared with gefitinib (hazard ratio, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.60; P < .0001). The median PFS with aumolertinib was 19.3 months (95% CI, 17.8 to 20.8) versus 9.9 months with gefitinib (95% CI, 8.3 to 12.6). Objective response rate and disease control rate were similar in the aumolertinib and gefitinib groups (objective response rate, 73.8% and 72.1%, respectively; disease control rate, 93.0% and 96.7%, respectively). The median duration of response was 18.1 months (95% CI, 15.2 to not applicable) with aumolertinib versus 8.3 months (95% CI, 6.9 to 11.1) with gefitinib. Adverse events of grade ≥ 3 severity (any cause) were observed in 36.4% and 35.8% of patients in the aumolertinib and gefitinib groups, respectively. Rash and diarrhea (any grade) were observed in 23.4% and 16.4% of patients who received aumolertinib compared with 41.4% and 35.8% of those who received gefitinib, respectively. Aumolertinib is a well-tolerated third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor that could serve as a treatment option for EGFR-mutant NSCLC in the first-line setting.
Adding radiotherapy (RT) to systemic therapy improves progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in oligometastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Whether these findings translate to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated NSCLC remains unknown. The SINDAS trial (NCT02893332) evaluated first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy for EGFR-mutated synchronous oligometastatic NSCLC and randomized to upfront RT vs no RT; we now report the prespecified interim analysis at 68% accrual. Inclusion criteria were biopsy-proven EGFR-mutated adenocarcinoma (per amplification refractory mutation system or next generation sequencing), with synchronous (newly diagnosed, treatment naïve) oligometastatic (≤5 metastases; ≤2 lesions in any one organ) NSCLC without brain metastases. All patients received a first-generation TKI (gefitinib, erlotinib, or icotinib), and randomization was between no RT vs RT (25-40 Gy in 5 fractions depending on tumor size and location) to all metastases and the primary tumor/involved regional lymphatics. The primary endpoint (intention to treat) was PFS. Secondary endpoints included OS and toxicities. All statistical tests were 2-sided. A total of 133 patients (n = 65 TKI only, n = 68 TKI with RT) were enrolled (2016-2019). The median follow-up was 23.6 months. The respective median PFS was 12.5 months vs 20.2 months (P < .001), and the median OS was 17.4 months vs 25.5 months (P < .001) for TKI only vs TKI with RT. Treatment yielded no grade 5 events and a 6% rate of symptomatic grade 3-4 pneumonitis in the TKI with RT arm. Based on the efficacy results of this prespecified interim analysis, the ethics committee recommended premature cessation of this trial. As compared with a first-line TKI alone, addition of upfront local therapy using RT statistically significantly improved PFS and OS for EGFR-mutated NSCLC.
Ectopic pregnancy, that is, a blastocyst occurring outside the endometrial cavity of the uterus, affects nearly 2% of pregnancies. The treatment of ectopic pregnancy is surgical or pharmacological. Since surgical management is associated with numerous serious side effects, conservative treatment is sought. The treatment of choice in the majority of cases is based on pharmacotherapy with methotrexate (MTX) in a single- or multi-dose regimen. Although the efficacy of methotrexate reaches between 70 and 90%, its use requires specific conditions regarding both the general condition of the patient and the characteristic features of the ectopic pregnancy. Moreover, MTX can cause severe adverse effects, including stomatitis, hepatotoxicity and myelosuppression. Therefore, clinicians and researchers are still looking for a less toxic, more effective treatment, which could prevent surgeries as a second-choice treatment. Some studies indicate that other substances might constitute a good alternative to methotrexate in the management of ectopic pregnancies. These substances include aromatase inhibitors, especially letrozole. Another promising substance in EP treatment is gefitinib, an inhibitor of EGFR tyrosine domain which, combined with MTX, seems to constitute a more effective alternative in the management of tubal ectopic pregnancies. Other substances for local administration include KCl and absolute ethanol. KCl injections used in combination with MTX may be used when foetal heart function is detected in cervical ectopic pregnancies, as well as in heterotopic pregnancy treatment. Absolute ethanol injections proved successful and safe in caesarean scar pregnancies management. Thus far, little is known about the use of those substances in the treatment of ectopic pregnancies, but already conducted studies seem to be promising.