Bevacizumab In First-line Therapy Research Articles

Bevacizumab in first-line therapy in lung metastases of colorectal cancer: An ARCAD pooled analysis.

118 Background: Anti-VEGF is widely used in the treatment (trt) of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Only studies with bevacizumab (BEV) have shown survival benefit (bnf) in first line trt. The magnitude of bnf might differ based on the metastatic (met) site and the chemotherapy regimen (CTR) with which BEV is partnered. ARCAD database contains individual patient data (IPD) of randomized trials that evaluated BEV+ CT. In this pooled analysis, we aimed to evaluate BEV bnf in mCRC with lung metastases (mets) either as single or multiple sites. Methods: IPD from four trials (AVF2107g, N016966, AVF2192g, AGITG) comparing CT +/- BEV were pooled. The primary endpoint, overall survival (OS), was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method and prognostic value of lung mets was evaluated by stratified Cox models according to number and type of met sites and CTRs, oxaliplatin or irinotecan (OX/IRI) based. The predictive bnf of BEV was evaluated by interaction test (int) between trt and lung mets status in subgroups and considered as significant (sig) with a P < 0.1. Results: 2728 patients (pts) with known met sites and survival data were pooled. 1020 pts had single met site, 133 had only lung mets. 1708 pts had multiple met sites, 1008 had lung mets. Pts characteristics were well balanced. Sig OS bnf of BEV was observed in the whole population. In pts subgroup according to the presence or absence of lung mets, sig bnf of BEV were observed with a non-sig int ( Pint=.590). Non-sig bnf of BEV was observed in pts with single site regardless of met site (lung or no lung) or CTR. Sig bnf of BEV was observed in pts with multiple sites without lung mets whatever the CTRs. While sig bnf of BEV was observed in pts with multiple sites with lung mets, we found a sig int between BEV and OX/IRI-based regimens ( Pint=.022). The bnf of BEV was observed with IRI-based regimen but not in OX-based regimen. The bnf of BEV appears greater in multiple sites without lung mets than with lung mets with a sig stratified log-rank test ( PLRT<.001). Conclusions: In pts with multiple sites mCRC, a statistically sig OS bnf of BEV added to CT was observed mainly among pts without lung mets. The overall effect of CT partner choice when combined with BEV can be different. In pts with single site, BEV did not seem to improve OS but the evaluation of efficacy of BEV in presence or absence lung mets was based on small number of pts and needs to be evaluated in trials with larger pts sample, especially trials including pts with single site lung mets. [Table: see text]

Role of the Prognostic Nutritional Index in Predicting Survival in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated with Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab

Introduction: The prognostic nutritional index (PNI) is a multiparametric score introduced by Onodera based on the blood levels of lymphocytes and albumin in patients with gastrointestinal neoplasms. Regarding hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), its prognostic role has been shown in patients treated with sorafenib and lenvatinib. The aim of this real-world study was to investigate the association between clinical outcomes and PNI in patients being treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. Methods: The overall cohort of this multicentric study included 871 consecutive HCC patients from 5 countries treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in first-line therapy. The PNI was calculated as follows: 10 × serum albumin concentration (g/dL) + 0.005 × peripheral lymphocyte count (number/mm³). Results: Data regarding lymphocyte counts and albumin levels were available for 773 patients; therefore, these patients were included in the final analysis. The cut-off point of the PNI was determined to be 41 by receiver operating characteristic analysis. 268 patients (34.7%) were categorized as the PNI-low group, while the remaining 505 (65.3%) patients as the PNI-high group. At the univariate analysis, high PNI was associated with longer overall survival (OS) (22.5 vs. 10.1 months, HR 0.34, p <0.01) and progression-free survival (PFS) (8.7 vs. 5.8 months, HR 0.63, p <0.01) compared to patients with low PNI. At the multivariate analysis, high versus low PNI resulted as an independent prognostic factor for OS (HR 0.49, p <0.01) and PFS (HR 0.82, p = 0.01). There was no difference in objective response rate between the two groups (high 26.1% vs. low 19.8%, p = 0.09), while disease control rate was significantly higher in the PNI-high group (76.8% vs. 66.4%, p = 0.01). Conclusion: PNI is an independent prognostic factor for OS and PFS in HCC patients on first-line treatment with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab.

Weekly versus tri-weekly paclitaxel with carboplatin for first-line treatment in women with epithelial ovarian cancer.

Epithelial ovarian cancer is the sixth most common cancer worldwide: 295,414 new cases were diagnosed in 2018, with 184,799 deaths. The lack of an effective screening strategy has led to the majority of women being diagnosed at an advanced stage. For these women, intravenous carboplatin combined with paclitaxel for six cycles is widely accepted as the standard first-line treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer, in combination with debulking surgery. However, there is conflicting evidence regarding the optimal dosing schedule of paclitaxel when combined with carboplatin in this setting. To compare the efficacy and tolerability of intravenous weekly paclitaxel with that of tri-weekly paclitaxel, in combination with intravenous carboplatin, as first-line treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer (defined as epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal and fallopian tube cancer). We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase databases for relevant studies up to 15 November 2021, using keywords and MeSH terms. We additionally handsearched conference libraries, online clinical trial databases and screened through lists of retrieved references. We Included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing weekly paclitaxel in combination with carboplatin versus tri-weekly paclitaxel in combination with carboplatin, for treatment of newly-diagnosed epithelial ovarian cancer. We used the hazard ratio (HR) to estimate the primary efficacy outcomes progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). We used the risk ratio (RR) to estimate the primary toxicity outcome of severe neutropenia and secondary outcomes of quality of life (QoL) and treatment-related adverse events. Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias, using standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We included individual participant data (IPD) from one of the included studies, ICON-8, provided by the study team. We analysed data using a random-effects model in Review Manager 5.4 software. Additionally, we reconstructed IPD for PFS and OS data from published Kaplan-Meier curves from all studies and subsequently pooled these to analyse the two primary efficacy outcomes. From 2469 records, we identified four eligible RCTs with data for 3699 participants. All eligible studies were included in the main meta-analysis and reported on PFS and OS. There was likely a slight improvement in PFS when paclitaxel was dosed weekly compared to tri-weekly (HR 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 0.98; 4 studies, 3699 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We found little to no improvement in OS when paclitaxel was dosed weekly compared to tri-weekly (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.06; 4 studies, 3699 participants; high-certainty evidence). There was likely little to no difference in high-grade (grade 3 or 4) neutropenia when paclitaxel was dosed weekly compared to tri-weekly (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.43; 4 studies, 3639 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). However, weekly paclitaxel increased high-grade (grade 3 or 4) anaemia when compared to tri-weekly dosing (RR 1.57, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.20; 4 studies, 3639 participants; high-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference in high-grade neuropathy when paclitaxel was dosed weekly compared to tri-weekly (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.94; 4 studies, 3639 participants; low-certainty evidence). The overall risk of detection bias and performance bias was low for OS, but was unclear for other outcomes, as treatments were not blinded. The risk of bias in other domains was low or unclear. We note that OS data were immature for three of the included studies (GOG-0262, ICON-8 and MITO-7). Weekly paclitaxel combined with carboplatin for first-line treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer likely improves PFS slightly (moderate-certainty evidence) but not OS (high-certainty evidence), compared to tri-weekly paclitaxel combined with carboplatin. However, this was associated with increased risk for high-grade anaemia, treatment discontinuation, dose delays and dose omissions (high- to low-certainty evidence). Our findings may not apply to women receiving bevacizumab in first-line therapy, those receiving treatment in the neo-adjuvant setting, or those with rare subtypes of clear cell or mucinous ovarian cancer.

Bevacizumab, Aflibercept or Ramucirmab combined with chemotherapy as second-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer following progression with Bevacizumab in first-line therapy: A systematic review and indirect comparison.

e14601 Background: After progression with Bevacizumab plus chemotherapy (chemo) in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), adding Bevacizumab (B) or Aflibercept (A) or Ramucirm...

First- and second-line bevacizumab in addition to chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: a United States-based cost-effectiveness analysis.

The addition of bevacizumab to fluorouracil-based chemotherapy is a standard of care for previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. Continuation of bevacizumab beyond progression is an accepted standard of care based on a 1.4-month increase in median overall survival observed in a randomized trial. No United States-based cost-effectiveness modeling analyses are currently available addressing the use of bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer. Our objective was to determine the cost effectiveness of bevacizumab in the first-line setting and when continued beyond progression from the perspective of US payers. We developed two Markov models to compare the cost and effectiveness of fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin with or without bevacizumab in the first-line treatment and subsequent fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan with or without bevacizumab in the second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. Model robustness was addressed by univariable and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Health outcomes were measured in life-years and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Using bevacizumab in first-line therapy provided an additional 0.10 QALYs (0.14 life-years) at a cost of $59,361. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $571,240 per QALY. Continuing bevacizumab beyond progression provided an additional 0.11 QALYs (0.16 life-years) at a cost of $39,209. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $364,083 per QALY. In univariable sensitivity analyses, the variables with the greatest influence on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were bevacizumab cost, overall survival, and utility. Bevacizumab provides minimal incremental benefit at high incremental cost per QALY in both the first- and second-line settings of metastatic colorectal cancer treatment.

942TiP - Encourage: the Use in Routine Practice of Bevacizumab in First-Line Therapy for Patients with Ovarian Cancer– a Gineco Prospective Cohort Study

ABSTRACT Background: The two phase III first-line trials GOG 218 and ICON 7 met their primary progression free survival endpoint, leading to an European Union approval in december 2011 of bevacizumab in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel during 6 cycles, followed by a maintenance period for a total time of 15 months for the treatment of patients with FIGO IIIb-IV stage ovarian cancer. The ENCOURAGE prospective, multicenter cohort study has been developped to describe bevacizumab administration in ovarian cancer, in the daily practice, outside of trials with their usual patient selections and specific follow-up methods Trial design: A total number of 500 patients with ovarian cancer, treated with bevacizumab in first-line, in 100 French centers, will be included. Investigators will record the reasons why they indicate or exclude bevacizumab administration in the first-line treatment strategy of each of their patients with ovarian cancer. The primary endpoint is to report the cardio-vascular, renal and digestive toxicity of bevacizumab delivered in a wide scape of French centers (academic or not hospitals, private clinics, anticancer centers). The secondary endpoints include evaluation in real life of bevacizumab use in ovarian cancer treatment in first-line (the characteristics of the treated population, the reason of non administration of bevacizumab in first line), the modalities of use and the monitoring pratices. At last, the efficacy of the bevacizumab treatment strategy will be also evaluated by analysing the progression free survival in both first line and relapse with or without bevacizumab. From April 2013, to April 2014, more than 200/500 patients have been registered. Disclosure: I.L. Ray-Coquard: Roche, Pharmamar, Amgen, AstraZeneca board and lecture; A. Floquet: Investigator fees and congress participation support in Roche Clinical Studies; J. Alexandre: I am a member of an advisory board concerning bevacizumab. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

A multicenter phase II study of docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab in first-line therapy for unresectable locally advanced or metastatic non-squamous cell histology non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

Platinum-based doublets are standard of care for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The combination of docetaxel and oxaliplatin has shown acceptable toxicity and encouraging activity. This phase II study aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of this doublet with bevacizumab as first-line treatment for stage IIIB/IV NSCLC. Newly diagnosed patients ≥18 years with histologically proven non-squamous NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) ≤2 received six 21-day cycles of docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab followed by single-agent bevacizumab for a total of 1 year. Primary efficacy end point was radiographically documented progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end points included objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), time to treatment failure, and safety. Fifty-three patients were enrolled. Median age was 62.0 years, 71.7 % male, 79.2 % Caucasian. A total of 88.7 % had stage IV or recurrent disease; 94.3 % adenocarcinoma; and 94.3 % ECOG PS 0 or 1. Efficacy results are as follows: median PFS 5.6 months, ORR 30.2 % (complete response 1.9 %, partial response 28.3 %); 37.7 % stable disease; and OS 14.0 months. At least one adverse event (AE) was reported in all patients (n = 52); 98.1 % of AEs were treatment related. The most common treatment-emergent grade ≥3 AEs were neutropenia (15.4 %), diarrhea (13.5 %), and fatigue (11.5 %). A serious AE was present in 32.7 %; the most common were pneumonia (7.7 %) and abdominal pain (5.8 %). Dehydration, diarrhea, febrile neutropenia, sepsis, and supraventricular tachycardia each occurred in 3.8 %. The addition of bevacizumab to docetaxel/oxaliplatin is effective with an acceptable safety profile in patients with chemotherapy-naïve advanced NSCLC.

Prospective investigation of risk factors for gastrointestinal adverse events in a phase III randomized trial of bevacizumab in first-line therapy of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer, primary peritoneal cancer or fallopian tube cancer: A Gynecologic Oncology Group study

Objective: The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate potential risk factors (RFs) for the development of gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events (AEs) in patients enrolled in a double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial of bevacizumab (BEV) in first-line therapy of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), primary peritoneal cancer (PPC) or fallopian tube cancer (FTC).

Adding cetuximab to a standard chemotherapy regimen containing bevacizumab in first-line therapy for colorectal cancer decreases efficacy: Results from the CAIRO2 trial

Introduction: The medical treatment options for advanced colorectal cancer have greatly increased in the past decade, with conventional chemotherapeutics (eg, oxaliplatin and irinotecan) and targeted agents (eg, the vascular endothelial growth factor [VEGF] antibody bevacizumab and the endothelial growth factor receptor [EGFR] antibodies cetuximab and panitumumab) becoming integrated in standard treatment algorithms. Although it is well established that adding one targeted agent to chemotherapy can enhance the effi cacy of therapy compared with chemotherapy alone, little information is available on combining both targeted approaches (ie, combining bevacizumab with an EGFR antibody). Data from a randomized phase 2 trial in a salvage therapy setting showed intriguing results for the dual antibody combination with or without irinotecan [1], so testing dual antibodies (added to standard chemotherapy in the fi rst-line setting) appear to be warranted. Recent data on the predictive value of KRAS mutations for the activity of EGFR antibodies [2] made a detailed subgroup analysis of any trial testing cetuximab or panitumumab mandatory.