Effectiveness and prognostic factors of apatinib treatment in patients with recurrent or advanced cervical carcinoma: A retrospective study.

Abstract

BackgroundApatinib is an oral anti‐angiogenic drug, its efficacy and prognosis in cervical carcinoma are unclear. This study evaluates the effectiveness and prognostic factors of apatinib in the treatment of recurrent or advanced cervical carcinoma.MethodsPatients with recurrent or advanced cervical cancer, who agreed to take apatinib, were recruited into this single‐center and retrospective study, and administrated apatinib with or without combination of chemo‐ or radio‐therapy until progressive disease (PD) or unacceptable toxicity.ResultsFrom March 2017 to February 2019, 53 patients were reviewed. Among them, 2 (3.77%) patients occurred complete response, 16 (30.19%) patients showed partial response, 27 (50.95%) patients had stable disease, and 8 (15.09%) patients had PD. The objective response rate and disease control rate (DCR) of these patients were 33.96% and 84.91%, respectively. The DCR of patients younger than 50, nonsquamous carcinoma, first‐line apatinib therapy, combined radiotherapy, lesions within radiation field, surgical history, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status score of 0 or 1 were significantly higher than other patients (p < 0.05). The median progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 6.0 months (95% CI: 4.43–7.57) and 8.0 months (95% CI: 6.52–9.48), respectively. The univariable and multivariable analysis showed that the patients with an ECOG performance status score of 2 and further line therapy were associated with poor prognosis in both PFS and OS (PFS: HR =8.35, p = 0.000; HR =6.66, p = 0.001; OS: HR = 7.40, p = 0.000; HR = 3.24, p = 0.039), respectively. The most common adverse effects (AEs) were hand‐foot syndrome (35.58%), hypertension (18.87%) and fatigue (15.09%). No grade 3 AEs and drug‐related death occurred.ConclusionThe efficacy and prognosis of patients who are in good general condition and first‐line apatinib combination therapy may be better than other patients. But further phase III clinical trials should be taken to prove this hypothesis.