Aflibercept Research Articles

A multicenter, prospective, phase II trial of second-line aflibercept plus FOLFIRI in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to an anti-EGFR antibody: HGCSG1801.

Aflibercept (AFL) plus FOLFIRI prolongs overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, there is limited evidence on the efficacy and safety of AFL plus FOLFIRI previously treated with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) agents. Therefore, we conducted a prospective open-label phase II trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of AFL plus FOLFIRI in Japanese patients with mCRC failing a prior oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy plus an anti-EGFR agent. AFL (4 mg/kg iv) followed by FOLFIRI (irinotecan 180 mg/m2, leucovorin 200 mg/m2 iv, bolus 5-fluorouracil [5-FU] 400 mg/m2, and infusional 5-FU 2400 mg/m2/46 h) was given every 2 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicities. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months. Forty three patients were enrolled between November 2019 and October 2022. The primary endpoint was met: 6-month PFS rate was 58.8% (90% confidence interval [CI], 45.7%-72.0%). Median PFS and OS were 7.3 months (95% CI, 5.5-11.0 months) and 18.8 months (95% CI, 12.9-26.6 months), respectively. The overall response rate was 20.9% (95% CI, 10.0-36.0%) and disease control rate was 88.4% (95% CI, 74.9-96.1%). The main grade ≥3 adverse events included hypertension (62.8%), neutropenia (55.8%), leukopenia (25.6%), febrile neutropenia (11.6%), fatigue (9.3%), anorexia (9.3%), proteinuria (9.3%), and diarrhea (7.0%). No deaths and no new safety signals with a causal relation to the study treatment were observed. This study suggests that AFL plus FOLFIRI shows a high response rate and a manageable safety profile in Japanese patients with mCRC who failed prior oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy plus an anti-EGFR agent.

Psychophysical, electrofunctional, and morphological evaluation in naïve neovascular AMD patients treated with intravitreal anti-VEGF.

The aim of this study was to investigate the retinal morpho-functional characteristics of patients with neovascular wet age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) treated with intravitreal injection (IV) of aflibercept (AFL). The study was conducted on 35 patients previously diagnosed with type 1 nAMD who received a fixed-dosing regimen of aflibercept injections over 12 months. The goal was to assess trends in visual abilities over time by measuring visual acuity (VA), contrast sensitivity (CS), visual evoked potentials (VEPs), and spectral domain-optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT). The same psychophysical, electro-functional, and morphological tests administered at baseline (T0) were repeated 4 to 8 weeks after the last aflibercept injection (Tn), resulting in a total of six examinations. At Tn, all subjects exhibited improved VA for both far and near distances compared to values detected at T0. Similarly, VEP amplitude and latency values at Tn showed a greater P100 improvement than those observed at T0. Additionally, the CS examination at Tn demonstrated improvement, particularly at high spatial stimulation frequencies. The Tn SD-OCT results highlighted a reduction in macular thickness compared to T0 values. This exploratory research indicates that intravitreal injections of AFL, following a fixed-dosing regimen, represent a valuable therapeutic approach for enhancing visual performance. This conclusion is supported by comprehensive statistical analysis of psychophysical, electro-functional, and morphological examinations within the same group of patients with nAMD, as demonstrated for the first time.

Effects of aflibercept and bevacizumab on cell viability, cell metabolism and inflammation in hypoxic human Müller cells.

Anti-VEGF (vascular endothelial growth factor) drugs such as aflibercept (AFL) and bevacizumab (BVZ) inhibit pathological neo-angiogenesis and vascular permeability in retinal vascular diseases. As cytokines and growth factors are produced by Müller glial cells under stressful and pathological conditions, we evaluated the in vitro effect of AFL (Eylea®, 0.5 mg/mL) and BVZ (Avastin®, 0.5 mg/mL) on cell viability/metabolism, and cytokine/growth factor production by Müller cells (MIO-M1) under cobalt chloride (CoCl2)-induced hypoxia after 24h, 48h and 72h. Cell viability/metabolism were analyzed by Trypan Blue and MTT assays and cytokine/growth factors in supernatants by Luminex xMAP-based multiplex bead-based immunoassay. Cell viability increased with AFL at 48h and 72h and decreased with BVZ or hypoxia at 24h. BVZ-treated cells showed lower cell viability than AFL at all exposure times. Cell metabolism increased with AFL but decreased with BVZ (72h) and hypoxia (48h and72h). As expected, AFL and BVZ decreased VEGF levels. AFL increased PDGF-BB, IL-6 and TNF-α (24h) and BVZ increased PDGF-BB (72h). Hypoxia reduced IL-1β, -6, -8, TNF-α and PDGF-BB at 24h, and its suppressive effect was more prominent than AFL (EGF, PDGF-BB, IL-1β, IL-6, IL-8, and TNF-α) and BVZ (PDGF-BB and IL-6) effects. Hypoxia increased bFGF levels at 48h and 72h, even when combined with anti-VEGFs. However, the stimulatory effect of BVZ predominated over hypoxia for IL-8 and TNF-α (24h), as well as for IL-1β (72h). Thus, AFL and BVZ exhibit distinct exposure times effects on MIO-M1 cells viability, metabolism, and cytokines/growth factors. Hypoxia and BVZ decreased MIO-M1 cell viability/metabolism, whereas AFL likely induced gliosis. Hypoxia resulted in immunosuppression, and BVZ stimulated inflammation in hypoxic MIO-M1 cells. These findings highlight the complexity of the cellular response as well as the interplay between anti-VEGF treatments and the hypoxic microenvironment.

HGCSG1801: A multicenter, prospective, phase II trial of second-line FOLFIRI plus aflibercept in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) refractory to anti-EGFR antibodies.

113 Background: Aflibercept (AFL) combined with FOLFIRI prolongs overall survival (OS) in patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who failed a prior oxaliplatin-based regimen. However, there is limited evidence on the efficacy and safety of AFL plus FOLFIRI in RAS / BRAF wild type pts previously treated with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) agents. Therefore, we conducted a phase II trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of AFL plus FOLFIRI in Japanese pts with mCRC failing a prior oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy combined with an anti-EGFR agent. Methods: This was a prospective open-label phase II trial. AFL (4 mg/kg iv) followed by FOLFIRI (irinotecan 180 mg/m2, leucovorin 200 mg/m2 iv, bolus 5-FU 400 mg/m2 and infusional 5-FU 2400 mg/m2/46 h) was given every 2 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicities. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months; secondary endpoints included OS, PFS, overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), adverse events, and relative dose intensity (RDI) for each drug. Given a PFS rate threshold at 6 months of 38.9% and an expected PFS rate of 58.4% with AFL plus FOLFIRI, a sample size of 41 pts was required (two-sided alpha, 0.1; beta, 0.2). Analyses were conducted in the full analysis set (FAS) of pts satisfying eligibility criteria. Results: Forty-three patients were enrolled between November 2019 and October 2022, and 43 were analyzed (median age 68 years (range 27-80); male, 69.8%; ECOG PS 0/1, 72.1%/27.9%; left sided primary tumor, 90.7%). The primary endpoint was met: 6-month PFS rate was 58.7% (90%CI, 45.5%-71.9%). Median PFS and OS were 7.3 months (95%CI, 5.5-11.0 months) and 18.8 months (95%CI, 12.9-26.6 months), respectively. The ORR was 23.3 % (95%CI, 11.8-38.6%) and DCR was 88.4% (95%CI, 74.9- 96.1%). Mean RDI of AFL, irinotecan, bolus 5-FU and infusional 5-FU were 75.3% (SD, 26.2), 50.6% (SD, 12.5), 31.6% (SD, 26.6), and 58.7% (SD, 7.21), respectively. The main grade ≥3 adverse events included hypertension (62.8%), neutropenia (55.8%), leukopenia (25.6%), febrile neutropenia (11.6%), fatigue (9.3%), anorexia (9.3%), proteinuria (9.3%) and diarrhea (7.0%). No deaths and no new safety signals with a causal relation to the study treatment were observed. Conclusions: Results of this prospective phase II study suggest that AFL plus FOLFIRI shows a high response rate and a manageable safety profile in Japanese pts with mCRC who failed a first-line oxaliplatin-based plus anti-EGFR regimen. Clinical trial information: jRCTs011190006 .

Biosimilar SB15 versus reference aflibercept in neovascular age-related macular degeneration: 1-year and switching results of a phase 3 clinical trial

Background/aimsTo evaluate efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics (PK) and immunogenicity of SB15 versus reference aflibercept (AFL), and switching from AFL to SB15 in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD).DesignProspective, double-masked, randomised, phase 3...

Current Status of Angiogenesis Inhibitors as Second-Line Treatment for Unresectable Colorectal Cancer.

Colorectal cancer is the third most common disease and the second most common cause of death around the world. The drug for second-line treatment depends on the drugs used in first-line treatment and the biomarker status. As biomarkers, the RAS gene, BRAF gene, and dMMR/MSI-H, TMB-H, and HER2 statuses have been established in clinical practice, and the corresponding molecularly targeted therapeutic agents are selected based on the biomarker status. Given the frequency of biomarkers, it is assumed that when patients move on to second-line treatment, an angiogenesis inhibitor is selected in many cases. For second-line treatment, three angiogenesis inhibitors, bevacizumab (BEV), ramucirumab (RAM), and aflibercept (AFL), are available, and one of them is combined with cytotoxic agents. These three angiogenesis inhibitors are known to inhibit angiogenesis through different mechanisms of action. Although no useful biomarkers have been established for the selection of angiogenesis inhibitors, previous biomarker studies have suggested that angiogenesis-related factors such as VEGF-A and VEGF-D might be predictors of the therapeutic efficacy of angiogenesis inhibitors. These biomarkers are measured as protein levels in plasma and are considered to be promising biomarkers. We consider that the rationale for selecting among these three angiogenesis inhibitors should be clarified to benefit patients.

Production of a biosimilar version of aflibercept to improve VEGF blocker cytotoxicity on endothelial cells

This project aimed to produce a biosimilar version of aflibercept (AFL) and evaluate the effect of the co-treatment of AFL with other vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) blocker drugs. For this purpose, the optimized gene was inserted into the pCHO1.0 plasmid and transfected into the CHO-S cell line. The final concentration of biosimilar-AFL for the selected clone was 782 mg/L. Results revealed that the inhibition potential of the biosimilar-AFL on HUVEC cells was significant at 10 and 100 nM concentrations and in a dose-dependent manner. Furthermore, co-treatment of biosimilar-AFL with Everolimus (EVR), Lenvatinib (LEN), and Sorafenib (SOR) could reduce HUVEC cell viability/proliferation, more than when used alone. When LEN and SOR were co-treated with biosimilar-AFL, their cytotoxicity increased 10-fold. The most and least efficient combination was seen when biosimilar-AFL combined with LEN and EVR, respectively. Finally, biosimilar-AFL may improve the efficiency of LEN, EVR, and SOR in reducing the VEGF effect on endothelial cells.

Efficacy and Safety of the Aflibercept Biosimilar SB15 in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration

Aflibercept biosimilars can expand available treatment options in retinal diseases and have the potential to improve patient access to safe and effective therapy. To establish equivalence in efficacy and similarity in safety, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity of SB15 and reference aflibercept (AFL) in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). This was a randomized double-masked parallel group phase 3 trial conducted at 56 centers in 10 countries from June 2020 to March 2022, including follow-up through 56 weeks. Of 549 screened participants, 449 participants 50 years and older with treatment-naive nAMD were included and randomly assigned to SB15 (n = 224) or AFL (n = 225). Key exclusion criteria included considerable scarring, fibrosis, atrophy, and hemorrhage. This report includes results up to the end of the parallel group period at week 32. Of the 449 randomized participants, 438 (97.6%) completed week 32 follow-up. Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive 2 mg of SB15 or AFL every 4 weeks for the first 12 weeks (3 injections), followed by dosing every 8 weeks up to week 48, with final assessments at week 56. The primary end point was the change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline to week 8 with predefined equivalence margins of -3 letters to 3 letters. Other key end points were changes in BCVA and central subfield thickness up to week 32, safety, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity. The mean (SD) age among the 449 included participants was 74.0 (8.1) years, and 250 participants (55.7%) were female. Baseline demographic characteristics and most disease characteristics were comparable between treatment groups. The least squares mean change in BCVA from baseline to week 8 in the SB15 group was equivalent to that in the AFL group (6.7 letters vs 6.6 letters, respectively; difference, 0.1 letters; 95% CI, -1.3 to 1.4). Comparable efficacy between treatment groups was maintained up to week 32 (least squares mean change from baseline in BCVA: SB15, 7.6 letters vs AFL, 6.5 letters; least squares mean change from baseline in central subfield thickness: SB15, -110.4 μm vs AFL, -115.7 μm). No clinically relevant differences were observed in the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) (SB15, 107/224 [47.8%] vs AFL, 98/224 [43.8%]) and ocular TEAEs in the study eye (SB15, 41/224 [18.3%] vs AFL, 28/224 [12.5%]). The serum concentration profiles and cumulative incidences of overall antidrug antibody positive participants were comparable. In this phase 3 randomized clinical trial, SB15 and AFL showed equivalent efficacy and comparable safety, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity in participants with nAMD. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04450329.

Aflibercept versus ranibizumab for diabetic macular edema: A meta-analysis.

The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of aflibercept (AFL) versus ranibizumab (RAN) for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME). The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and CNKI databases were searched up to September 2022 to identify prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing AFL with RAN for the treatment of DME. Review Manager 5.3 software was used for data analysis. We used the GRADE system to evaluate the quality of the evidence for each outcome. A total of 8 RCTs involving 1067 eyes (939 patients) were included; there were 526 eyes in the AFL group and 541 eyes in the RAN group. Meta-analysis revealed that there was no significant difference between RAN and AFL in the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of DME patients at 6 months (WMD: -0.05, 95% CI = -0.12 to 0.01, moderate quality) and 12 months after injection (WMD: -0.02, 95% CI = -0.07 to 0.03, moderate quality). Additionally, there was no significant difference between RAN and AFL in the reduction of central macular thickness (CMT) at 6 months (WMD: -0.36, 95% CI = -24.99 to 24.26, very low quality) and 12 months after injection (WMD: -6.36, 95% CI = -16.30 to 3.59, low quality). Meta-analysis showed that the number of intravitreal injections (IVIs) for AFL was significantly lower than that for RAN (WMD: -0.47, 95% CI = -0.88 to -0.05, very low quality). There were fewer adverse reactions to AFL than to RAN, but the difference was not significant. This study found that there was no difference in BCVA, CMT or adverse reactions between AFL and RAN at 6 and 12 months of follow-up, but AFL needed fewer IVIs than RAN.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Ranibizumab Biosimilar for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration in Japan.

Neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) is the world's leading cause of blindness in elderly people. While anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatments are used as the first option for patients with nAMD, they are generally expensive and need repeated injections. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of anti-VEGF therapies, focusing on the newly launched ranibizumab biosimilar (RBZ BS) in patients with nAMD from a Japanese societal perspective. A Markov model was developed to simulate the lifetime transitions of a cohort of treatment-naïve patients with nAMD through health states that were based on the involvement of nAMD (single eye vs. both eyes), the treatment status of the patients, and decimal best-corrected visual acuity. The model compared RBZ BS with branded RBZ, aflibercept (AFL), and AFL as loading dose switched to RBZ BS in maintenance in the treat-and-extend (TAE) regimen (RBZ TAE, AFL TAE, and AFL to RBZ BS TAE, respectively), and with branded RBZ in the pro re nata (PRN) regimen, as well as best supportive care (BSC). All processes were validated by five clinical experts. When TAE regimens were compared, RBZ BS was dominant (higher quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and lower total cost) to AFL TAE and AFL to RBZ TAE. The result was robust regardless of whether the clinical data were taken from the direct head-to-head clinical trial or from indirect treatment comparison. RBZ BS TAE was cost-saving compared to RBZ TAE. RBZ BS TAE was estimated to be dominant to BSC owing to a lower societal cost. Like TAE regimens, RBZ BS was cost-saving compared to RBZ PRN and was dominant to BSC in PRN regimens. This study suggests that RBZ BS is dominant to other anti-VEGF treatments in patients with nAMD in both TAE and PRN regimens and BSC from a Japanese societal perspective.

Reduced Incidence of Intravitreal Injection-Related Endophthalmitis With Prefilled Syringes.

Purpose: To evaluate the incidence and clinical characteristics of intravitreal injection-related endophthalmitis cases with antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) medications manufactured as prefilled syringes or non-prefilled preparations. Methods: This retrospective chart review comprised eyes that received intravitreal anti-VEGF at a single-specialty retina practice from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2019. Eyes diagnosed with injection-related endophthalmitis were identified. Demographic and clinical data were abstracted from medical records, including the type of anti-VEGF agent, baseline and follow-up corrected visual acuity (VA), and microbiologic findings. Results: The review identified 88 cases of intravitreal anti-VEGF injection-related endophthalmitis and 325 990 total injections. Total injections included 32 045 (9.8%) bevacizumab (BEV), 93 073 (28.6%) ranibizumab (RAN), 122 947 (37.7%) aflibercept (AFL), and 77 925 (23.9%) ranibizumab prefilled syringe (RANPFS). Ten of the endophthalmitis cases were related to BEV, 21 to RAN, 45 to AFL, and 12 to RANPFS. The endophthalmitis rate was lowest for RANPFS (0.0154%) (BEV, 0.0312%; RAN, 0.0226%; AFL, 0.0366%) (P = .030). Thirty-four (41.5%) of 82 samples were culture positive. RANPFS had a significantly lower rate of culture-proven postinjection endophthalmitis than the other agents (P = .003). The mean VA for endophthalmitis cases related to RANPFS vs non-prefilled agents was similar at presentation (Snellen 20/2092 vs 20/2327) and at the 3-month follow-up (Snellen 20/201 vs 20/272) (both P > .05). Conclusions: Anti-VEGF medications in prefilled syringes may reduce the risk for medication contamination during injection preparation. RANPFS was associated with a lower rate of injection-related endophthalmitis than non-prefilled anti-VEGF medications.

Study protocol for HGCSG1801: A multicenter, prospective, phase II trial of second-line FOLFIRI plus aflibercept in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to anti-EGFR antibodies.

The first-line chemotherapy for patients with RAS and BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) commonly involves cytotoxic regimens, such as FOLFOX and FOLFIRI, combined with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibodies. When progression occurs following anti-EGFR antibody-combined chemotherapy, anti-angiogenic inhibitors can be used as second-line treatment. Although randomized controlled trials have shown that anti-angiogenic inhibitors [bevacizumab, ramucirumab, and aflibercept (AFL)] carry survival benefit when combined with FOLFIRI as second-line chemotherapy, such trials did not provide data on patients with mCRC refractory to anti-EGFR antibody-combined chemotherapy. Therefore, our group planned a multicenter, nonrandomized, single-arm, prospective, phase II study to investigate the safety and efficacy of FOLFIRI plus AFL as a second-line chemotherapy for patients with mCRC refractory to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy combined with anti-EGFR antibodies. FOLFIRI (irinotecan 180 mg/m2, l-leucovorin 200 mg/m2, bolus 5-FU 400 mg/m2, and infusional 5-FU 2400 mg/m2/46h) and AFL (4 mg/kg) will be administered every 2 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicities occur. The primary endpoint will be the 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate, whereas the secondary endpoints will include overall survival, PFS, response rate, disease control rate, adverse events, and relative dose intensity for each drug. A sample size of 41 participants will be required. This study will be sponsored by the Non-Profit Organization Hokkaido Gastrointestinal Cancer Study Group and will be supported by a grant from Sanofi. There is only an observational study reporting data on FOLFIRI plus AFL for patients with mCRC who previously received anti-EGFR antibodies; therefore, a prospective clinical trial is needed. This study will prospectively evaluate the efficacy and safety of FOLFIRI plus AFL in patients with mCRC who are resistant to anti-EGFR antibodies and have limited data. Moreover, this study will reveal predictive biomarkers for AFL-based chemotherapy. Japan Registry of Clinical Trials, jRCTs011190006. Registered 19 November, 2019, https://jrct.niph.go.jp/latest-detail/jRCTs011190006.

Treat and extend regimen for diabetic macular oedema-a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Various treatment regimens are currently practiced in the treatment of CI-DMO (centre-involving diabetic macular oedema). In recent years, there has been a growing body of evidence supporting a treat and extend (T&E) regimen for DMO which offers the promise of comparable visual and anatomical outcomes while reducing injection burden. This meta-analysis was hence performed to evaluate the aforementioned outcomes in the treatment of DMO. Ten studies met the inclusion criteria. A search of PubMed, MEDLINE, Current Contents, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases was performed. We employed the terms 'treat AND extend AND (diabetic AND macular AND edema OR oedema)' to ensure a comprehensive search. The search workflow adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. The pooled analysis of the mean number of injections in 1year for T&E-aflibercept (AFL), T&E-ranibizumab (RBZ) and collectively was 9.1 (95% CI: 7.63-10.63), 10.0 (95% CI: 9.55-10.47) and 9.6 (95% CI: 8.62-10.49), respectively. Improvements in vision at 1year for T&E-AFL, T&E-RBZ and collectively were 6.26 (95% CI: 3.24-9.29), 7.14 (95% CI: 4.76-9.52) and 7.08 (95% CI: 5.32-8.84) letters, respectively. The improvements in central subfield thickness at 1year for T&E-AFL, T&E-RBZ and collectively were 131.94 (95% CI: 100.29-163.60), 108.64 (95% CI: 82.82-134.46) and 121.32 (95% CI: 102.89-139.75) microns, respectively. The meta-analysis of T&E for DMO did not show a clear advantage in reducing the number of injections compared to landmark clinical trials with pro-re-nata (PRN) treatment regimens in the first year of treatment with limited gains in visual and anatomical outcomes. However, the T&E approach offers the potential for fewer patient visits, thereby reducing treatment burden. Longer term studies on T&E with a standardised protocol would be required to assess the longevity of the vision gain in the first year despite a likely reduced treatment burden compared to the PRN trials.

P-34 Does the chemotherapeutic efficacy of trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab change depend on pre-treatment vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors?

Trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) plus bevacizumab (BEV) is widely used as one of salvage line treatment options in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. In Japan, three vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors, BEV, ramucirumab (RAM), and aflibercept (AFL), are approved for mCRC patients with second-line chemotherapy including irinotecan. It remains unclear the effect of the difference of pretreatment VEGF inhibitors in clinical outcomes of FTD/TPI plus BEV.

Real-world data analysis of antiangiogenic targeted treatments in second-line following anti-EGFR antibodies and FOLFOX in first-line for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

43 Background: Three antiangiogenic (AA) drugs, bevacizumab (BEV), ramucirumab (RAM) and aflibercept (AFL) are recommended as the second-line (2L) treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in the CRC treatment guidelines of multiple countries and regions including the US, EU and Japan. However, little evidence of 2L RAM and AFL after anti-EGFR antibodies (EGFRab) in first- line (1L) has been reported. This study assessed treatment sequence for mCRC patients who received 2L irinotecan-based chemotherapy with AA drug after FOLFOX + EGFRab in 1L, treatment duration from the start of 2L to the end of last treatment line (treatment duration from 2L) and factors associated with the treatment duration from 2L. Methods: This is a real-world observational study using a hospital-based claims database of 393 hospitals in Japan. The mCRC patients who started 1L treatment with FOLFOX + EGFRab between May 2016 and Sep 2019 (identification period) and further treated with irinotecan-based chemotherapy + AA drug were enrolled. The key outcomes were the treatment sequence, treatment duration from 2L by AA drug, and factors associated with the treatment duration from 2L. Survival curves were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Associated factors were investigated using Cox regression analysis. Results: Among 2,453 patients with 1L FOLFOX + EGFRab during the identification period, 506 patients who received the intended 2L therapies were enrolled in this study (mean age 63.5 years, male 66.6%). Number (%) of patients who used BEV, RAM and AFL in 2L was 345 (68.2), 120 (23.7) and 41 (8.1), respectively. Patient characteristics involving tumor location, metastatic site and prior anti-tumor therapy before starting 2L were similar among BEV, RAM and AFL. The treatment duration from 2L (median month and its 95%CI) was 11.1 (10.2-12.5) in the overall population and was similar among the patients who received BEV (10.8 [9.9-13.1]), RAM (11.2 [10.0-14.2]) and AFL (12.8 [6.9-NA]) in 2L. The treatment duration from 2L (median month and its 95%CI) for the patients who took or didn’t take proteinuria tests during 2L was 12.5 (11.1-15.2) and 8.5 (6.5-11.2), respectively. Factors positively associated with treatment duration from 2L were left-sided CRC (HR [95%CI] = 0.71 [0.53-0.96]) and ≥6 months of 1L duration (0.72 [0.56-0.93]); having renal disease (1.92 [1.28-2.88]) or received NSAIDs (1.63 [1.25-2.13]) within 60 days before starting 2L were associated negatively. Conclusions: The real-world data revealed that treatment duration were similar among BEV, RAM and AFL in 2L after EGFRab. Tumor location and 1L duration were associated with the treatment duration from 2L positively, while negative association was observed with renal disease and received NSAIDs. Treatment management was important for treatment continuation.

Real-life outcomes of intravitreal ranibizumab, aflibercept, and dexamethasone implant administrations in patients with treatment-naïve diabetic macular edema.

PURPOSE:To investigate optical coherence tomography (OCT) biomarker data on visual recovery in treatment-naïve diabetic macular edema (DME) and follow the results of intravitreal ranibizumab (RNB), aflibercept (AFL), and dexamethasone (DEX) implant administration within the 1st year of the pro re nata treatment regimen.METHODS:One hundred and twenty eyes of 102 patients were enrolled in the study. The patients medical records were analyzed retrospectively. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), type of DME, presence of subretinal fluid, number and localization of hyperreflective dots, vitreomacular interface disorders, disorganization of the retinal inner layer (DRIL), inner segment/outer segment (IS/OS) junction-external limiting membrane (ELM) status, intraretinal cyst diameter and localization, and subfoveal choroidal thickness were examined in all patients.RESULTS:A statistically significant increase in BCVA and a decrease in CMT were detected in all treatment groups. When cases were evaluated in terms of BCVA before and after treatment, statistically significant differences were observed in the RNB and AFL groups at 1 and 4 months and in the DEX group during the 1st year. In terms of OCT biomarkers, visual recovery was obtained in cases of intact IS/OS-ELM and non-DRIL patients. In the serous macular detachment group, more visual gain was achieved with the RNB (1 and 4 months) and AFL (1, 4, and 6 months) agents compared to the DEX implant. On the other hand, in the group with cystoid macular edema, more visual gain was achieved with RNB compared to the DEX implant in all months, but more visual gain was achieved only in the 1st month with AFL administration.CONCLUSION:Significant improvement was achieved for both BCVA and CMT in all treatment groups. We expect that OCT-based prognostic factors will become more important in the treatment of DME and will be determining factors in the choice of treatment.

Bevacizumab and aflibercept in second-line metastatic colorectal cancer: 12years of experience.

To evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab and aflibercept in second-line treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in real-life clinical practice. Retrospective observational study of patients treated with second-line bevacizumab (BFIR) and aflibercept (AFIR) in mCRC, associated with a FOLFIRI scheme, in the last 12years (January 2009-January 2021) in a tertiary hospital. Patients with prior oxaliplatin-based treatment were included. previous chemotherapy, treatment time (TT), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS). To assess toxicity, adverse effects that caused delay in cycle administration were recorded. The lost cycles/month of treatment (CP/MT) were also calculated. Eighty-four patients [40 (47.6%) AFIR and 44 (52.4%) BFIR]. Average age: 60.2 ± 10.7years. In 79.8% the previous scheme was FOLFOX type. Efficacy of AFIR vs BFIR: median HR of TT (95% CI) = 0.816 (0.527-1.266); p = 0.365, PFS HR (95% CI) = 0.674 (0.389-1.117); p = 0.159, OS HR (95% CI) = 0.566 (0.342-0.936); p = 0.026. The main reason for the delay in administration was neutropenia (28.7% AFIR vs 24.7% BFIR), and the greatest difference found was thrombopenia (13.9% AFIR vs 2.5% BFIR), without observing large differences between the rest of adverse reactions. Mean CP/MT: 0.49 ± 0.46 cycles with AFIR and 0.33 ± 0.27 with BFIR; p = 0.046. Although no statistically significant differences have been found in TT or PFS, it would be more advisable to use BFIR scheme due to its better results in OS and toxicity profile.

Costs comparison of treating diabetic macular edema with aflibercept, ranibizumab or dexamethasone at 1 year in France (INVICOST study).

Purpose:INVICOST, a medico-economic analysis, compared costs of managing treatment-naive patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) receiving intravitreal injections (IVIs) of aflibercept (AFL), dexamethasone implant (DXI) or ranibizumab (RAN) over 1 year.Methods:Healthcare resource use and associated costs were estimated using individual patient data from INVICTUS, a prospective, open-label, monocentric study. Healthcare costs comprised direct medical costs such as drug acquisition and administration, consultations and ophthalmological procedures. Costs were assessed from the French National Health Insurance perspective using published national tariffs expressed in 2019 euros.Results:Of the 60 treated eyes, 48 had no treatment switch; 14 received AFL, 19 received DXI and 15 received RAN. AFL-treated eyes received an average of 6.5 IVIs, DXI-treated patients received 2 IVIs and RAN-treated received 6.8 IVIs. All treated eyes received an initial prescription for adjunctive ocular medications and 349 follow-up procedures were performed including an average of 3.9 optical coherence tomography and 3.2 retinography procedures per eye. Average total direct cost of per-eye treatment was €4516 (€1128–€8257). Average cost was €5782 for eyes treated with AFL, €2779 with DXI and €5536 with RAN. Drug therapy was the cost driver: €4394 (76%) for AFL, €1915 for DXI (69%) and €4268 (77%) for RAN.Conclusion:The difference in total treatment cost is largely explained by the significantly lower frequency of IVI and annual cost of therapy with DXI, compared with AFL and RAN. INVICOST is the first study comparing treatment costs with AFL, DXI and RAN in France in current clinical practice.

Long-term outcomes of ranibizumab vs. aflibercept for neovascular age-related macular degeneration and polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy

To evaluate the long-term outcomes of ranibizumab (RBZ) vs. aflibercept (AFL) in treatment-naïve eyes with typical neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) and polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV). This multicenter, retrospective, matched-cohort analysis was conducted on data up to 4 years of follow-ups. The primary outcome was the visual acuity (VA) change from baseline. The secondary outcomes included the number of injections, proportion of eyes without a yearly injection, and the number of eyes with treatment switching. Subgroup analyses were performed for typical nAMD and PCV. Typical nAMD was defined as nAMD other than PCV. We included VA-matched 215 eyes of 209 patients (131 and 84 eyes with RBZ and AFL, respectively). The crude mean VA changes from baseline were + 6.7 vs. + 2.6, + 2.1 vs. − 0.4, − 1.3 vs. − 1.8, and − 2.2 vs. − 5.0 letters in the RBZ and AFL groups, at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years, respectively (p > 0.05). The adjusted predicted VA by linear mixed model, proportion of eyes stratified by VA, and the survival curve for significant vision loss were comparable during the 4-year follow-up (p > 0.05). The mean number of injections were similar between the RBZ and AFL groups (2.9 vs. 3.0, respectively, p = 0.692). The subgroup analysis for typical nAMD and PCV showed similar results between the groups. The visual outcomes did not differ between RBZ and AFL during 4 years with comparable numbers of injections. Our study reflects the long-term, real-world clinical practice and treatment pattern of two treatments for typical nAMD and PCV.

Real-World Evidence on Second-Line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Using Fluoropyrimidine, Irinotecan, and Angiogenesis Inhibitor

BackgroundCombination therapy comprised of fluoropyrimidine plus irinotecan with an angiogenesis inhibitor is widely used as a second-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Patients and MethodsThis retrospective study evaluated the efficacy and safety of fluorouracil and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) plus ramucirumab (RAM); FOLFIRI plus aflibercept (AFL); irinotecan and S-1 (IRIS) plus bevacizumab (BEV); and capecitabine and irinotecan (CAPIRI) plus BEV, with FOLFIRI plus BEV serving as the control among mCRC patients who failed treatment with fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin plus BEV. Data were collected from a medical claim database provided by Medical Data Vision Co., Ltd. (Tokyo, Japan). The primary outcome was time to treatment failure (TTF). Secondary outcomes were time to first subsequent therapy (TFST), overall survival (OS), and safety. ResultsAmong 3,136 patients assessed, TTF was significantly shorter with FOLFIRI plus RAM (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.26-1.56; P < .001) and FOLFIRI plus AFL (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.09-1.66; P = .002), and significantly longer with IRIS plus BEV (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.70-0.92; P = .002). TFST was significantly shorter with FOLFIRI plus RAM (HR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.17-1.49; P < .001); no significant difference in OS was observed. The incidences of neutropenia requiring granulocyte colony-stimulating factor were significantly lower with IRIS plus BEV and CAPIRI plus BEV. ConclusionRegarding TTF, BEV seemed to be a favorable option compared with RAM and AFL when combined with FOLFIRI, and IRIS might be preferable compared to FOLFIRI when combined with BEV for patients who failed to respond to fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, and BEV.