본문으로 건너뛰기
← 뒤로

Encorafenib plus binimetinib versus dabrafenib plus trametinib for the first-line treatment of patients with BRAF-mutant metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: a matching-adjusted indirect treatment comparison.

ESMO open 2026 Vol.11(2) p. 106051

Planchard D, Mazières J, Grouin JM, Le Reun C, Luttenauer H, Boussahoua M, Macabeo B

📝 환자 설명용 한 줄

[BACKGROUND] The first-line (1L) standard of care for B-Raf proto-oncogene (BRAF)-mutant metastatic non-small cell lung cancer is BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib with MEK inhibitor trametinib (D + T).

🔬 핵심 임상 통계 (초록에서 자동 추출 — 원문 검증 권장)
  • p-value P = 0.01
  • p-value P = 0.06
  • 95% CI 0.26-0.85
  • OR 0.35
  • HR 0.55

이 논문을 인용하기

BibTeX ↓ RIS ↓
APA Planchard D, Mazières J, et al. (2026). Encorafenib plus binimetinib versus dabrafenib plus trametinib for the first-line treatment of patients with BRAF-mutant metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: a matching-adjusted indirect treatment comparison.. ESMO open, 11(2), 106051. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esmoop.2025.106051
MLA Planchard D, et al.. "Encorafenib plus binimetinib versus dabrafenib plus trametinib for the first-line treatment of patients with BRAF-mutant metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: a matching-adjusted indirect treatment comparison.." ESMO open, vol. 11, no. 2, 2026, pp. 106051.
PMID 41604820

Abstract

[BACKGROUND] The first-line (1L) standard of care for B-Raf proto-oncogene (BRAF)-mutant metastatic non-small cell lung cancer is BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib with MEK inhibitor trametinib (D + T). Combination therapy with encorafenib and binimetinib (E + B) has recently demonstrated clinical benefit in this setting in the single-arm, phase II PHAROS trial. We evaluated the relative efficacy and safety of E + B versus D + T in 1L using an unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison.

[MATERIAL AND METHODS] Individual patient data for E + B from PHAROS were matched on validated adjustment factors to aggregate data for D + T from Study BRF113928. The relative efficacy and safety of E + B versus D + T were assessed using weighted Cox proportional hazards models for overall survival and progression-free survival (PFS) and logistic regression models for objective response rate, grade 3-4 adverse events, serious adverse events (SAEs) and treatment discontinuation.

[RESULTS] Compared with D + T, E + B was associated with a statistically significant improvement in PFS [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.47; 95% CI 0.26-0.85; P = 0.01] and non-significant improvements in overall survival (HR = 0.55; 95% CI 0.30-1.01; P = 0.06) and objective response rate [odds ratio (OR) = 1.81; 95% CI 0.71-4.59, P = 0.21]. E + B was also associated with a statistically significant reduction in SAEs versus D + T (OR = 0.35; 95% CI 0.14-0.85; P = 0.02); reductions in grade 3-4 adverse events (OR = 0.93; 95% CI 0.37-2.32; P = 0.87) and treatment discontinuations (OR = 0.71; 95% CI 0.24-2.06; P = 0.53) were not statistically significant. Unadjusted indirect treatment comparisons and sensitivity analysis results were consistent with matching-adjusted indirect comparison findings.

[CONCLUSIONS] This analysis suggests that E + B was associated with statistically significantly longer PFS and fewer SAEs compared with D + T, and may offer an alternative option for the 1L treatment of BRAF-mutant metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

MeSH Terms

Humans; Pyridones; Lung Neoplasms; Pyrimidinones; Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf; Female; Male; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Benzimidazoles; Sulfonamides; Oximes; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Middle Aged; Carbamates; Aged; Imidazoles; Mutation; Proto-Oncogene Mas; Adult; Neoplasm Metastasis; Treatment Outcome

같은 제1저자의 인용 많은 논문 (2)