A phase II study of capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and cetuximab with or without bevacizumab as frontline therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. A Fox Chase extramural research study

Pulmonary haemorrhage and haemoptysis associated with bevacizumab-related treatment regimens: a retrospective, pharmacovigilance study using the FAERS database

Background: Bevacizumab (BV) is widely used in routine cancer treatment and clinical therapy in combination with many other agents. This study aims to describe and analyse post-market cases of pulmonary haemorrhage and haemoptysis reported with different BV treatment regimens by mining data from the United States Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. Methods: Data were collected from the FAERS database between 2004 Q1 and 2023 Q1. Disproportionality analysis including the reporting odds ratio (ROR) was employed to quantify the signals of disproportionate reporting of pulmonary haemorrhage and haemoptysis adverse events (AEs) associated with BV-related treatment regimens. The demographic characteristics, time to onset and outcomes were further clarified. Results: A total of 55,184 BV-associated reports were extracted from the FAERS database, of which 497 reports related to pulmonary haemorrhage and haemoptysis. Overall, the median onset time of pulmonary haemorrhage and haemoptysis AEs was 43 days (interquartile range (IQR) 15-117 days). In the subgroup analysis, BV plus targeted therapy had the longest median onset time of 90.5 days (IQR 34-178.5 days), while BV plus chemotherapy had the shortest of 40.5 days (IQR 14-90.25). BV plus chemotherapy disproportionately reported the highest percentage of death (148 deaths out of 292 cases, 50.68%). Moreover, the BV-related treatments including four subgroups in our study demonstrated the positive signals with the association of disproportionate reporting of pulmonary haemorrhage and haemoptysis. Notably, BV plus chemotherapy showed a significant higher reporting risk in pulmonary haemorrhage and haemoptysis signals of disproportionate reporting in comparison to BV monotherapy (ROR 5.35 [95% CI, 4.78-6.02] vs. ROR 4.19 [95% CI, 3.56-4.91], p = 0.0147). Conclusion: This study characterized the reporting of pulmonary haemorrhage and haemoptysis, along with the time to onset and demographic characteristics among different BV-related treatment options. It could provide valuable evidence for further studies and clinical practice of BV.

Effectiveness of bevacizumab in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the benefit of bevacizumab under the comprehensive treatment strategy and its advantages over other drugs, so as to provide reference for the formulation of clinical plans.

METHODS

As of October 1, 2022, the randomized controlled clinical trials of bevacizumab in combination with metastatic colorectal cancer published in PubMed, Cochrane Library and Medline databases were searched. The odds ratio (OR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to evaluate the short-term disease control effect and long-term survival of the treatment strategy.

RESULTS

21 RCTs (6665 patients; 3356 patients in the experimental group and 3309 patients in the control group; average age, 55-75 years) were treated with bevacizumab as the experimental group for metastatic colorectal cancer. BEV has stronger anti-tumor activity than the single treatment scheme (OR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.11-1.52). And Benefits of the BEV group were 0.73 (0.55, 0.96), 1.26 (0.71, 2.24), 1.63 (0.92, 2.87) and 0.07 (0.02, 0.25) compared with CET, VAN, CED and PAN respectively. The disease control of BEV combined therapy was better (OR = 1.36, 95% CI: 1.04-1.78). The same as compared with cediranib (OR = 1.94, 95% CI: 1.06-3.55). However, the long-term prognosis of BEV, including the overall survival (HRs = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.84-1.15) and progression-free survival (HRs = 1.05,95% CI: 0.97-1.13) were not prolonged. The survival benefits of cetuximab and panitumumab were not reflected.

CONCLUSION

The addition of BEV can enhance the anti-tumor ability and disease control, while cetuximab and panitumumab may have stronger ability. However, it did not effectively improve the survival of patients. A more reasonable and effective treatment plan needs more clinical experimental support.

Risks of hypertension and thromboembolism in patients receiving bevacizumab with chemotherapy for colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Guidelines show that for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), a combination of three-drug regimens, fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin and bevacizumab (BVZ), is one of the first-line standard therapies. BVZ is generally well tolerated; however, it is associated with infrequent, life-threatening side effects such as severe hypertension (HTN) (5%-18%), Grade ≥3 arterial thromboembolism (ATE) (2.6%), Grade ≥3 hemorrhagic events (1.2%-4.6%), and gastrointestinal perforation (0.3%-2.4%). This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the additive risk of BVZ-induced severe HTN and thromboembolism when BVZ is combined with a standard chemotherapy regime in patients with mCRC.

METHODS

Our search was conducted from January 29, 2022, to February 22, 2022, through databases of PubMed, clinicaltrial.gov, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Data analysis from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and clinical trials was conducted using Review Manager V.5.4, comparing BVZ-chemotherapy to chemotherapy only, focusing on cardiovascular AE such as HTN and arterial and venous thromboembolism.

RESULTS

The analysis from 26 clinical trials and RCTs showed that the odds of HTN were about four times higher, and ATE subgroup analysis of 11 studies showed over two times higher odds of ATE in patients being treated with BVZ compared to the chemotherapy-only group.

CONCLUSION

BVZ, when added to the standard chemotherapy regimen for mCRC, was associated with higher odds of developing HTN and thromboembolism, specifically ATE, than the chemotherapy-only group. Our findings are significant as they provide vital information in analyzing the risk-benefit ratio of adding BVZ to the standard chemotherapy regime in patients with mCRC, especially in patients with vascular comorbidities.

Efficacy and Safety of Systemic Treatments Among Colorectal Cancer Patients: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Systemic treatments, namely, either monotherapy or combination therapy, are commonly administered to patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). This study aimed to provide the complete efficacy and safety profiles and ranking of systemic therapies for the treatment of unresectable advanced or metastatic CRC.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception until June 30, 2021, and also the bibliographies of relevant studies. Randomized controlled trials comparing two or more treatments, namely, at least capecitabine, 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, bevacizumab, cetuximab, oxaliplatin, or panitumumab were investigated. A network meta-analysis using the Bayesian approach was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of treatments. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was calculated for the probability of each treatment as the most effective. The overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), adverse events (AEs) grade ≥3, and serious adverse events (SAEs) were evaluated.

RESULTS

One hundred two publications with 36,147 participants were assigned to 39 different treatments. Among 11 treatments with full information on six outcomes, FOLFIRI/FOLFOX/FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab significantly improved both the ORR and DCR, compared to FOLFIRI. Although FOLFOX and FOLFIRI/FOLFOX + cetuximab significantly prolonged both OS and PFS, treatments were comparable in terms of AEs grade ≥3 and SAEs. The top highest SUCRA values were observed in the FOLFOXIRI + panitumumab group for ORR (96%) and DCR (99%), FOLFIRI + bevacizumab + panitumumab group for OS (62%) and PFS (54%), and FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab group for AEs grade ≥3 (59%) and SAEs (59%) outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest an available range of systemic treatment therapies with different efficacy and safety profiles with patients. Further investigations of the side effects and mutation status are required to confirm our findings.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42019127772.

Risk of bleeding associated with antiangiogenic monoclonal antibodies bevacizumab and ramucirumab: a meta-analysis of 85 randomized controlled trials

Aim

Bevacizumab and ramucirumab are antiangiogenic monoclonal antibodies, which target vascular endothelial growth factor-A and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2, respectively, used in various cancers. Bleeding events have been described with these two agents. We conducted an up-to-date meta-analysis to determine the relative risk (RR) associated with the use of antiangiogenic monoclonal antibodies, bevacizumab and ramucirumab.

Methods

This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was performed after searching PubMed, American Society for Clinical Oncology Abstracts, European Society for Medical Oncology Abstracts, and the proceedings of major conferences for relevant clinical trials. RR and 95% CIs were calculated by random-effects or fixed-effects models for all-grade and high-grade bleeding events related to the angiogenesis inhibitors.

Results

Eighty-five randomized controlled trials were selected for the meta-analysis, covering 46,630 patients. The results showed that antiangiogenic monoclonal antibodies significantly increased the risk of all-grade (RR: 2.38, 95% CI: 2.09–2.71, p<0.00001) and high-grade (RR: 1.71, 95% CI: 1.48–1.97, p<0.00001) bleeding compared with control arms. In the subgroup analysis, bevacizumab significantly increased the risk of all-grade (RR: 2.73, 95% CI: 2.24–3.33, p<0.00001) and high-grade bleeding (RR: 1.98, 95% CI: 1.68–2.34, p<0.00001), but ramucirumab only increased the risk of all-grade bleeding (RR: 1.94, 95% CI: 1.76–2.13, p<0.00001) and no difference was observed for the risk of high-grade bleeding (RR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.78–1.39, p=0.79) compared with the control group. For lung cancer patients, bevacizumab significantly increased the risk of all-grade (RR: 4.72, 95% CI: 1.99–11.19, p=0.0004) and high-grade pulmonary hemorrhage (RR: 3.97, 95% CI: 1.70–9.29, p=0.001), but no significant differences in the risk of all-grade (RR: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.76–1.57, p=0.64) and high-grade (RR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.35–4.21, p=0.75) pulmonary hemorrhage were observed for ramucirumab. The increased risk of all-grade and high-grade bleeding was also observed in colorectal cancer or non-colorectal tumors and low-dose or high-dose angiogenesis inhibitors.

Conclusion

Antiangiogenic monoclonal antibodies are associated with a significant increase in the risk of all-grade and high-grade bleeding. Ramucirumab may be different from bevacizumab in terms of the risk of high-grade bleeding and the risk of all-grade and high-grade pulmonary hemorrhage in lung cancer patients.

Beyond second-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review

Background

The optimal chemotherapeutic regimen for use beyond the second line for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains unclear.

Materials and methods

We systematically searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE and Medline for records published between January 2002 and May 2017, and cancer congress databases for records published between January 2014 and June 2017. Eligible studies evaluated the efficacy, safety and patient-reported outcomes of monotherapies or combination therapies at any dose and number of treatment cycles for use beyond the second line in patients with mCRC. Studies were assessed for design and quality, and a qualitative data synthesis was conducted to understand the impact of treatment on overall survival and other relevant cancer-related outcomes.

Results

The search yielded 938 references of which 68 were included for qualitative synthesis. There was limited evidence to support rechallenge with chemotherapy, targeted therapy or both. Compared with placebo, an overall survival benefit for trifluridine/tipiracil (also known as TAS-102) or regorafenib has been shown for patients previously treated with conventional chemotherapy and targeted therapy. There was no evidence to suggest a difference in efficacy between these treatments. Patient choice and quality of life at this stage of treatment should also be considered when choosing an appropriate therapy.

Conclusions

These findings support the introduction of an approved agent such as trifluridine/tipiracil or regorafenib beyond the second line before any rechallenge in patients with mCRC who have failed second-line treatment.

Bevacizumab-based first-line chemotherapy in elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: an individual patient data based meta-analysis

Background

The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate efficacy and safety of first-line chemotherapy with or without a monoclonal antibody in elderly patients (≥ 70 years) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), since they are frequently underrepresented in clinical trials.

Results

Individual data from 10 studies were included. From a total of 3271 patients, 604 patients (18%) were ≥ 70 years (median 73 years, range 70-88). Of these, 335 patients were treated with a bevacizumab-based first-line regimen and 265 were treated with chemotherapy only. The median PFS was 8.2 vs. 6.5 months and the median OS was 16.7 vs. 13.0 months in patients treated with and without bevacizumab, respectively. The safety profile of bevacizumab in combination with first-line chemotherapy did not differ from published clinical trials.

Materials and Methods

PubMed and Cochrane Library searches were performed on 29 April 2013 and studies published to this date were included. Authors were contacted to request progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) data, patient data on treatment regimens, age, sex and potential signs of toxicity in patients ≥ 70 years of age.

Conclusions

This meta-analysis suggests that the addition of bevacizumab to standard first-line chemotherapy improves clinical outcome in elderly patients with mCRC and is well tolerated.

Targeted first-line therapies for advanced colorectal cancer: a Bayesian meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer is common and deadly. First-line treatments for patients with metastatic disease include FOLFIRI and FOLFOX, which have been combined with anti-EGFR or anti-VEGF antibodies to achieve benefit in selected populations. However, optimal therapy remains unclear.

RESULTS

Fifteen publications on 10 trials were identified. There was a lack of decisive evidence that FOLFIRI or FOLFOX impact efficacy of either anti-EGFR or anti-VEGF, across mutational status groups. On the other hand, evidence suggests both anti-EGFR and anti-VEGF may be more effective for KRAS WT than MT patients. KRAS WT results provided evidence that anti-EGFR treatments may be more effective than anti-VEGF treatments when combined with FOLFIRI or FOLFOX. Further, evidence suggests that both anti-EGFR and anti-VEGF therapies, when combined with FOLFIRI or FOLFOX, may be harmful as compared to chemotherapy for KRAS MT patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Literature was searched for randomized trials comparing anti-EGFR or anti-VEGF antibodies, paired with FOLFIRI or FOLFOX, as first-line therapy for advanced colorectal cancer. Meta-estimates were generated via Bayesian hierarchical log-linear model. The primary endpoint was overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Further studies examining impact of all-RAS mutation status, left or right side location of primary tumor, and combination anti-VEGF with modern bolus fluoropyrimidine are needed.

Inclusion of elderly or frail patients in randomized controlled trials of targeted therapies for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: A systematic review

Treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has been modified since the launching of targeted therapies. Colorectal cancer (CRC) is common in elderly patients; their representation in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is thus crucial. This study aimed to evaluate and quantify the inclusion of elderly/frail patients in RCTs of targeted therapies in mCRC. A systematic review using Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Database and ISI Web of Science was performed to identify all phase II/III RCTs of bevacizumab, cetuximab, panitumumab, regorafenib and aflibercept in mCRC until January 2015. Two reviewers independently performed studies selection, and data extraction. The protocol was registered in Prospero (CRD42015016163). Among 1,369, identified publications, 54 RCTs were selected. Nine RCTs (17%) excluded elderly patients; median age of the included population was <65years old in 50 RCTs (93%). Twenty RCTs (37%) excluded frail patients, and many RCTs excluded patients with uncontrolled hypertension or heart failure, patients treated with specific drugs (mainly anticoagulants), and patients with inadequate creatinine clearance. Elderly/frail patients are underrepresented in RCTs studying targeted therapies in mCRC, and those elderly patients included in RCTs do not reflect well the general elderly population with mCRC because of the exclusion criteria. RCTs results concerning targeted therapies can be inferred only to relatively healthy elderly subjects.

Bevacizumab significantly increases the risks of hypertension and proteinuria in cancer patients: A systematic review and comprehensive meta-analysis

Published data regarding the overall risks and incidence of hypertension and proteinuria associated with bevacizumab were still unclear. To quantify the precise risks and incidence, we performed this comprehensive meta-analysis of 72 published clinical trials including 21902 cases and 20608 controls. The overall incidence, risk ratios (RRs), and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using a fixed or random-effect model based on the heterogeneity. The incidence of all-grade and high-grade hypertension were 25.3% (95% CI: 21.5%−29.5%) and 8.2% (95% CI: 7%−9.8%) for patients treated with bevacizumab. And the incidence of all-grade and high-grade proteinuria were 18% (95% CI: 11.7%−26.6%) and 2.4% (95% CI: 1.8%−3.2%), respectively. Compared with controls, bevacizumab significantly increased the risks of all-grade (RR: 3.595, 95% CI: 2.952−4.378) and high-grade hypertension (RR: 5.173, 95% CI: 4.188−6.390). Obviously increased risks of all-grade (RR: 3.369, 95% CI: 2.492−4.556) and high-grade proteinuria (RR: 5.494, 95% CI: 3.991−7.564) were also observed. In the subgroup analysis, the risks of hypertension and proteinuria may significantly vary with bevacizumab dosage, cancer types and concomitant drugs. Whereas, no obvious difference were discovered when stratified based on phase of trials, age of patients, treatment line and duration. So, close monitor and effective management were highly recommended for the safe use of bevacizumab.

Increased risk of hemorrhage in metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with bevacizumab: An updated meta-analysis of 12 randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

As an important antivascular endothelial growth factor monoclonal antibody, bevacizumab has been administrated for the treatment of cancer patients. Hemorrhage, one of the common adverse events of angiogenesis inhibitors, sometimes is also fatal and life-threatening. We aimed at determining the incidence and risk of hemorrhage associated with bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Web of Science databases for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The overall incidence, overall relative risk (RR), and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated by using a random-effects or fixed-effects model based on the heterogeneity of selected trials.

RESULTS

A total of 10,555 mCRC patients from 12 RCTs were included in our study. The overall incidence of hemorrhage was 5.8% (95% CI 3.9%-7.8%). Bevacizumab significantly increased the overall risk of hemorrhage with an RR of 1.96 (95% CI 1.27-3.02). The RR of all-grade hemorrhage was 2.39 (95% CI 1.09-5.24) and 1.41 (95% CI 1.01-1.97) for high-grade hemorrhage. The risk of hemorrhage associated with bevacizumab was dose-dependent with an RR of 1.73 (95% CI 1.15-2.61) for 2.5 mg/kg/wk and 4.67 (95% CI 2.36-9.23) for 5 mg/kg/wk. More importantly, the RR of hemorrhage for treatment duration (<= 6 months and > 6 months) based on subgroup analysis was 4.13 (95% CI 2.58-6.61) and 1.43 (95% CI 0.96-2.14), respectively.

CONCLUSION

The addition of bevacizumab to concurrent antineoplastic in patients with mCRC significantly increased the risk of hemorrhage. The dose of bevacizumab may contribute to the risk of hemorrhage. And the 1st 6 months of treatment may be a crucial period when hemorrhagic events occur.

Promises and pitfalls for recombinant oligoclonal antibodies-based therapeutics in cancer and infectious disease

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have revolutionized the diagnosis and treatment of many human diseases and the application of combinations of mAbs has demonstrated improved therapeutic activity in both preclinical and clinical testing. Combinations of antibodies have several advantages such as the capacities to target multiple and mutating antigens in complex pathogens and to engage varied epitopes on multiple disease-related antigens (e.g. receptors) to overcome heterogeneity and plasticity. Oligoclonal antibodies are an emerging therapeutic format in which a novel antibody combination is developed as a single drug product. Here, we will provide historical context on the use of oligoclonal antibodies in oncology and infectious diseases and will highlight practical considerations related to their preclinical and clinical development programs.

Thromboembolic Events Associated with Bevacizumab plus Chemotherapy for Patients with Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Bevacizumab is a recombinant, humanized monoclonal antibody that hinders the proliferation of new blood vessels required for malignant progression. The drug is considered safe and tolerable; however, some controversy remains about whether it is linked to venous and arterial thromboembolic events (TEEs).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the risk for overall, venous, and arterial TEEs in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) who are administered bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

We searched PubMed and CENTRAL databases to extract reports of relevant trials that were published in English between January 1, 2003, and December 31, 2014. All RCTs in which bevacizumab plus chemotherapy was compared with standard chemotherapy or with placebo plus chemotherapy for the treatment of CRC, and TEEs were reported, were included in a meta-analysis. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of TEEs were calculated for each RCT. Because the between-study heterogeneities (I2) were insignificant, a fixed-effect model was used to determine the effect size of each TEE. A funnel plot was created to assess publication bias, and 2 forms of sensitivity analyses were performed for each outcome.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included 22 RCTs with a total of 13,185 patients. Overall, compared with the control groups, patients with CRC who received bevacizumab were at significant risk for overall TEEs (RR, 1.334; 95% CI, 1.191-1.494; P <.001; I2 = 1.37%). Regarding venous TEEs, a significant risk was observed for patients who received bevacizumab versus control patients (RR, 1.244; 95% CI, 1.091-1.415; P = .001; I2 = 0.0%). Similarly, the risk for arterial TEEs was significant in bevacizumab-treated patients (RR, 1.627; 95% CI, 1.162-2.279; P = .005; I2 = 0.0%). Sensitivity analyses did not affect the level of significance of the effect size for each outcome, and no significant publication bias was observed.

CONCLUSION

In all the studies reviewed in this meta-analysis, the risk for venous or arterial TEEs was associated with bevacizumab use in patients with CRC. Healthcare providers are encouraged to consider thromboprophylaxis agents, periodically monitor their patients who receive bevacizumab, and carefully manage patients who are at increased risk for those complications.

The use of combinations of monoclonal antibodies in clinical oncology

Treatment with monoclonal antibodies is becoming increasingly important in clinical oncology. These antibodies specifically inhibit signaling pathways in tumor growth and/or induce immunological responses against tumor cells. By combining monoclonal antibodies several pathways may be targeted simultaneously, potentially leading to additive or synergistic effects. Theoretically, antibodies are very suitable for use in combination therapy, because of limited overlapping toxicity and lack of pharmacokinetic interactions. In this article an overview is given of preclinical and clinical data on twenty-five different combinations of antibodies in oncology. Some of these combinations have proven clinical benefit, for example the combination of trastuzumab and pertuzumab in HER2-positive breast cancer, which exemplifies an additive or synergistic effect on antitumor activity in clinical studies and the combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab, which results in significant increases in progression-free and overall survival in patients with advanced melanoma. However, other combinations may lead to unfavorable results, such as bevacizumab with cetuximab or panitumumab in advanced colorectal cancer. These combinations result in shorter progression-free survival and increased toxicity compared to therapy with a single antibody. In summary, the different published studies showed widely varying results, depending on the combination of antibodies, indication and patient population. More preclinical and clinical studies are necessary to unravel the mechanisms behind synergistic or antagonistic effects of combining monoclonal antibodies. Most research on combination therapies is still in an early stage, but it is expected that for several tumor types the use of combination therapy of antibodies will become standard of care in the near future.

Efficacy and Safety Assessment of the Addition of Bevacizumab to Adjuvant Therapy Agents in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab in the adjuvant cancer therapy setting within different subset of patients.

METHODS & DESIGN/ RESULTS

PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane and Clinical trials.gov databases were searched for English language studies of randomized controlled trials comparing bevacizumab and adjuvant therapy with adjuvant therapy alone published from January 1966 to 7th of May 2014. Progression free survival, overall survival, overall response rate, safety and quality of life were analyzed using random- or fixed-effects models according to the PRISMA guidelines. We obtained data from 44 randomized controlled trials (30,828 patients). Combining bevacizumab with different adjuvant therapies resulted in significant improvement of progression free survival (log hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.84-0.89), overall survival (log hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.94-0.98) and overall response rate (relative risk, 1.46; 95% CI: 1.33-1.59) compared to adjuvant therapy alone in all studied tumor types. In subgroup analyses, there were no interactions of bevacizumab with baseline characteristics on progression free survival and overall survival, while overall response rate was influenced by tumor type and bevacizumab dose (p-value: 0.02). Although bevacizumab use resulted in additional expected adverse drug reactions except anemia and fatigue, it was not associated with a significant decline in quality of life. There was a trend towards a higher risk of several side effects in patients treated by high-dose bevacizumab compared to the low-dose e.g. all grade proteinuria (9.24; 95% CI: 6.60-12.94 vs. 2.64; 95% CI: 1.29-5.40).

CONCLUSIONS

Combining bevacizumab with different adjuvant therapies provides a survival benefit across all major subsets of patients, including by tumor type, type of adjuvant therapy, and duration and dose of bevacizumab therapy. Though bevacizumab was associated with increased risks of some adverse drug reactions such as hypertension and bleeding, anemia and fatigue were improved by the addition of bevacizumab.

The efficacy and safety of adding bevacizumab to cetuximab- or panitumumab-based therapy in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): a meta-analysis from randomized control trials

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the efficacy and safety of adding bevacizumab to cetuximab- or panitumumab-based therapy in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), using a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

A literature search for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) was performed through Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science (up to May 22, 2014). The outcome measures were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events. Two investigators identified eligible studies and extracted data independently. The quality of the included studies was assessed by the Jadad score. Hazard ratios (HR), risk ratio (RR), and 95% confidence intervals (Cls) were calculated and pooled.

RESULTS

A total of 4 RCTs with 2069 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The addition of bevacizumab to cetuximab- or panitumumab-based therapy did not significantly prolonged PFS, when compared with antibody alone. The subgroup analysis of adding bevacizumab to cetuximab-based therapy also suggested no significant benefit in PFS or in OS. Patients who received the combined therapy did not have a higher ORR (RR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.89-1.07; P = 0.608). The incidence of grade 3/4 adverse events was not significantly higher in the bevacizumab and cetuximab/panitumumab group.

CONCLUSION

The addition of bevacizumab to cetuximab- or panitumumab-based therapy did not improve PFS and OS resulting in better ORR. Thus, the combined therapy of bevacizumab with cetuximab or panitumumab is not recommended for the treatment of mCRC. However, larger scale RCTs are needed to confirm these findings.

A Comprehensive Review of Clinical Trials on EGFR Inhibitors Such as Cetuximab and Panitumumab as Monotherapy and in Combination for Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Metastatic colorectal cancer is the fourth most common cause of death due to cancer after those of lung, stomach, and liver. Anti epidermal growth factor receptor drugs as a targeting therapy seem to be good candidates for curing metastatic colorectal cancer. Two available anti epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibodies are cetuximab and panitumumab which have been approved for metastatic colorectal cancer treatment. Through the available literature on NCBI and clinical trials, 31 clinical trials in which cetuximab or panitumumab as monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy were used for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer patients in different line settings and 12 clinical trials in which bevacizumab was used for being compared with anti epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibodies or chemotherapy were chosen for reviewing and comparing the results of overall survival, progression free survival and adverse effects. Cetuximab and panitumumab are well accepted for the treatment of mCRC patients at all stages in different line settings. Although cetuximab administration in metastatic colorectal cancer patients is mostly associated with better overall survival and panitumumab results in better progression free survival, to confirm the superiority of each of them in the treatment protocol of epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibodies, more clinical trials with larger sample size are needed. Through current available data from clinical studies, it can be concluded that the best treatment outcome is achieved by a combination of anti epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibodies with conventional chemotherapy.

Dual EGFR inhibition in combination with anti-VEGF treatment in colorectal cancer

Preclinical studies demonstrate that epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) signals through both kinase-dependent and independent pathways and that combining a small-molecule EGFR inhibitor, EGFR antibody, and/or anti-angiogenic agent is synergistic. We conducted a dose-escalation, phase I study combining erlotinib, cetuximab, and bevacizumab. The subset of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer was analyzed for safety and antitumor activity. Forty-one patients with heavily pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer received treatment on a range of dose levels. The most common treatment-related grade ≥2 adverse events were rash (68%), hypomagnesemia (37%), and fatigue (15%). Thirty of 34 patients (88%) treated at the full FDA-approved doses of all three drugs tolerated treatment without drug-related dose-limiting effects. Eleven patients (27%) achieved stable disease (SD) ≥6 months and three (7%) achieved a partial response (PR) (total SD>6 months/PR= 14 (34%)). Of the 14 patients with SD≥6 months/PR, eight (57%) had received prior sequential bevacizumab and cetuximab, two (5%) had received bevacizumab and cetuximab concurrently, and four (29%) had received prior bevacizumab but not cetuximab or erlotinib (though three had received prior panitumumab). The combination of bevacizumab, cetuximab, and erlotinib was well tolerated and demonstrated antitumor activity in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

Malignant ascites: pathophysiology and treatment

Malignant ascites (MA) accompanies a variety of abdominal and extra-abdominal tumors. It is a primary cause of morbidity and raises several treatment challenges. MA has several symptoms, producing a significant reduction in the patient's quality of life: loss of proteins and electrolyte disorders cause diffuse oedema, while the accumulation of abdominal fluid facilitates sepsis. Treatment options include a multitude of different procedures with limited efficacy and some degree of risk. A Pubmed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library review of medical, interventional and surgical treatments of MA has been performed. Medical therapy, primarily paracentesis and diuretics, are first-line treatments in managing MA. Paracentesis is widely adopted but it is associated with significant patient discomfort and several risks. Diuretic therapy is effective at the very beginning of the disease but efficacy declines with tumor progression. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy and radioisotopes are promising medical options but their clinical application is not yet completely elucidated, and further investigations and trials are necessary. Peritoneal-venous shunts are rarely used due to high rates of early mortality and complications. Laparoscopy and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) have been proposed as palliative therapy. Literature on the use of laparoscopic HIPEC in MA includes only reports with small numbers of patients, all showing successful control of ascites. To date, none of the different options has been subjected to evidence-based clinical trials and there are no accepted guidelines for the management of MA.