FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab as a first-line treatment for Japanese patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a JACCRO CC-03 multicenter phase II study

Purpose

The purpose of this multicenter phase II study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a combination of irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), and leucovorin (FOLFIRI) plus bevacizumab as first-line chemotherapy in Japanese patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

Methods

Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer were eligible for enrollment. On day 1 of a 14-day cycle, patients received bevacizumab 5 mg/kg, irinotecan 150 mg/m², and l-leucovorin 200 mg/m² as an intravenous infusion, followed by 5-FU 400 mg/m² as an intravenous bolus and then 5-FU 2,400 mg/m² as an 46-h intravenous infusion. This treatment cycle was repeated. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS).

Results

We enrolled 40 patients, but one withdrew consent before starting treatment. The remaining 39 patients received a total of 509 cycles of FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab (median 11 per patient; range 1–30). The median PFS was 11.5 months, the median overall survival (OS) was 22.0 months, and the 1-year OS rate was 81.8 %. All 39 patients had adverse events. Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia and stomatitis occurred in 21 (53.9 %) and 4 (10.3 %) patients, respectively.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab is a clinically effective regimen with a manageable toxicity profile as first-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.     

贝伐珠单抗联合FOLFOX或FOLFIRI方案治疗转移性结直肠癌的临床研究

目的 观察贝伐珠单抗联合FOLFOX或FOLFIRI方案用于转移性结直肠癌一线及二线治疗的临床疗效和毒副反应。方法 回顾性分析2005年11月至2012年8月接受贝伐珠单抗联合FOLFOX或FOLFIRI方案作为一线及二线治疗的57例转移性结直肠癌患者的临床资料。采用RECIST 1.1版评价疗效,用NCI-CTC 3.0版评价不良反应,用Kaplan-Meier法进行生存分析。结果 57例结直肠癌患者中,19例（33.3％）获PR,28例（49.2％）获SD,有效率（RR）为33.3％,疾病控制率（DCR）为82.5％。贝伐珠单抗联合化疗用于一线与二线治疗患者的RR或DCR差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）;贝伐珠单抗联合FOLFOX方案与FOLFIRI方案的RR或DCR差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。57例患者的无进展生存期（PFS）及总生存期（OS）分别为8.83个月及14.80个月。一线与二线治疗及贝伐珠单抗联合FOLFOX方案与FOLFIRI方案的中位PFS或OS差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。主要不良反应包括白细胞减少、血小板减少及恶心呕吐。贝伐珠单抗相关的不良反应主要包括高血压3例,蛋白尿1例,鼻衄2例,均为1～2级,药物可以控制。结论 贝伐珠单抗联合化疗治疗转移性结直肠癌能够提高治疗疗效,不良反应可以耐受。     

Randomized phase II trial of TEGAFIRI (tegafur/uracil,oral leucovorin,irinotecan) compared with FOLFIRI (folinic acid, 5‐fluorouracil,irinotecan) in patients with unresectable/recurrent colorectal cancer

Irinotecan‐based chemotherapy with bevacizumab is one of the first‐line standard therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). TEGAFIRI (UFT/LV + irinotecan) is an irinotecan‐based chemotherapy regimen. Currently, few clinical data regarding TEGAFIRI are available. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of TEGAFIRI in Japanese patients with mCRC. This is a multicenter, randomized, phase II study. The major inclusion criteria were previously untreated patients with mCRC (age: 20–75 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status: 0–1). Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either FOLFIRI ± bevacizumab or TEGAFIRI ± bevacizumab. The primary endpoint was progression‐free survival (PFS). The secondary endpoints were response rate, overall survival, dose intensity and toxicity. From November 2007 to October 2011, 36 and 35 patients assigned to the FOLFIRI and TEGAFIRI groups were included in the primary analysis. No significant difference in PFS was observed between the groups {median PFS: TEGAFIRI 9.9 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 6.5–14.7], FOLFIRI 10.6 months [95% CI, 7.7–16.5]; Hazard ratio, 0.98, 95% CI, 0.57–1.66, p = 0.930}. The response rates in the FOLFIRI and TEGAFIRI groups were 56% and 66%, respectively. Relative dose intensity was similar between the groups. The most common Grade 3/4 adverse event was diarrhea (26%) in TEGAFIRI group and neutropenia (39%) in the FOLFIRI group. The results of the present study indicate that TEGAFIRI ± bevacizumab is an effective and tolerable first‐line treatment regimen for mCRC.     

Combination chemotherapy with bevacizumab and S-1 for elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (BASIC trial)

BackgroundChemotherapeutic regimens for elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), such as bevacizumab combined with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and leucovorin, often exclude oxaliplatin and irinotecan owing to the risk of toxicity. However, treatment with infusional 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin requires percutaneous port-catheter placement and other precautions, causing unnecessary stress for patients as well as healthcare workers.MethodsWe conducted a phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab plus S-1 in elderly patients with previously untreated mCRC. Bevacizumab was given intravenously every two weeks, and S-1 was administered orally on days 1–28 of a 42-day cycle. The primary end-point was progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary end-points were time to treatment failure, response rate (RR), overall survival (OS), treatment completion status and safety.ResultsFrom October 2007 through March 2010, 56 patients were enroled. The median PFS was 9.9 months, the median OS was 25.0 months, and the RR was 57%. The main adverse events of grade 3 or higher were hypertension (11%), diarrhoea (9%) and neutropenia (7%).ConclusionOur results suggest that combination chemotherapy with S-1 and bevacizumab can be administered safely and continuously on an outpatient basis and is therapeutically effective in elderly patients with mCRC.     

Bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy in the second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: results from the phase II BEVACOLOR study

BackgroundThis prospective phase II study assessed the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy regimens commonly used in the second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).MethodsPatients with mCRC who progressed or relapsed after first-line oxaliplatin-based or irinotecan-based treatment received bevacizumab 2.5 mg/kg/week plus chemotherapy until disease progression. The primary endpoint was disease-control rate (DCR). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety.ResultsFifty-three patients (66% men; median age, 62 years old) received second-line bevacizumab plus folinic acid, fluorouracil, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI; 57%), folinic acid, fluorouracil, oxaliplatin (FOLFOX; 26%), irinotecan (15%), or capecitabine plus irinotecan (XELIRI; 2%). The DCR was 87% (95% CI, 77%-97%); ORR was 32% (95% CI, 19%-46%). Median PFS was 6.5 months (95% CI, 5.8-7.8 months) and median OS 19.3 months, (95% CI, 14.2-25.1 months).The most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events included neutropenia (21%), diarrhea (15%), asthenia, and vomiting (9% each). Five patients (9%) had grade 3/4 targeted toxicities: grade 3 hypertension (n = 2), grade 3 venous thromboembolism (n = 2), and grade 4 arterial thromboembolism (n = 1). None of these events led to death during the study.ConclusionBevacizumab plus standard second-line chemotherapy is highly active in patients with mCRC and has an acceptable safety profile.     

Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Initially Treated with FOLFOX–Bevacizumab or FOLFIRI–Bevacizumab: Results From ARIES,a Bevacizumab Observational Cohort Study

Background.

The Avastin® Registry: Investigation of Effectiveness and Safety (ARIES) study is a prospective, community-based observational cohort study that evaluated the effectiveness and safety of first-line treatment patterns, assessing the impact of chemotherapy choice and treatment duration.

Methods.

The ARIES study enrolled patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) receiving first-line chemotherapy with bevacizumab and followed them longitudinally. The protocol did not specify treatment regimens or assessments. Analyses included all patients who initiated bevacizumab in combination with either first-line oxaliplatin with infusional 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (FOLFOX) or irinotecan with infusional 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (FOLFIRI). Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) times were estimated using Kaplan–Meier methods. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated with multivariate Cox regression analysis, adjusting for potential confounding factors.

Results.

In total, 1,550 patients with first-line mCRC were enrolled (median follow-up, 21 months) and most received FOLFOX–bevacizumab (n = 968) or FOLFIRI–bevacizumab (n = 243) as first-line therapy. The baseline characteristics and median treatment duration were generally similar between subgroups. There were no significant differences in the median PFS (10.3 months vs. 10.2 months) or OS (23.7 months vs. 25.5 months) time between the FOLFOX–bevacizumab and FOLFIRI–bevacizumab subgroups, respectively, by unadjusted analyses. Multivariate analyses showed FOLFIRI–bevacizumab resulted in a similar PFS (HR, 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88–1.21) and OS (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.78–1.16) outcome as with FOLFOX–bevacizumab. The incidence proportions of bevacizumab-associated adverse events were similar for FOLFOX- and FOLFIRI-based therapies.

Conclusions.

In first-line mCRC patients, the FOLFOX–bevacizumab and FOLFIRI–bevacizumab regimens were associated with similar treatment patterns and clinical outcomes.     

Efficacy and safety of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in Chinese patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase III ARTIST trial

The efficacy and safety of bevacizumab with modified irinotecan, leucovorin bolus, and 5-fluorouracil intravenous infusion (mIFL) in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has not been well evaluated in randomized clinical trials in Chinese patients. We conducted a phrase III trial in which patients with previously untreated mCRC were randomized 2:1 to the mIFL [irinotecan (125 mg/m(2)), leucovorin (20 mg/m(2)) bolus, and 5-fluorouracil intravenous infusion (500 mg/m(2)) weekly for four weeks every six weeks] plus bevacizumab (5 mg/kg every two weeks) group and the mIFL group, respectively. Co-primary objectives were progression-free survival (PFS) and 6-month PFS rate. In total, 214 patients were enrolled. Our results showed that addition of bevacizumab to mIFL significantly improved median PFS (4.2 months in the mIFL group vs. 8.3 months in the bevacizumab plus mIFL group, P < 0.001), 6-month PFS rate (25.0% vs. 62.6%, P < 0.001), median overall survival (13.4 months vs. 18.7 months, P = 0.014), and response rate (17% vs. 35%, P = 0.013). Grades 3 and 4 adverse events included diarrhea (21% in the mIFL group and 26% in the bevacizumab plus mIFL group) and neutropenia (19% in the mIFL group and 33% in the bevacizumab plus mIFL group). No wound-healing complications or congestive heart failure occurred. Our results suggested that bevacizumab plus mIFL is effective and well tolerated as first-line treatment for Chinese patients with mCRC. Clinical benefit and safety profiles were consistent with those observed in pivotal phase III trials with mainly Caucasian patients.     

Real-world treatment patterns and effectiveness among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with ziv-aflibercept in community oncology practices in the USA

Routine clinical practice data often differ from clinical trials. This study describes real-world treatment patterns and effectiveness among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) receiving ziv-aflibercept in non-academic, community oncology practices in the USA. De-identified electronic medical records from Vector Oncology and Altos Solutions databases were analysed. We identified 218 patients diagnosed with mCRC who had received prior oxaliplatin therapy and initiated ziv-aflibercept as part of second-line or later-line therapy. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated using Kaplan–Meier analysis. Mean age was 62.8 years at ziv-aflibercept initiation. Most patients (91.7%) received bevacizumab before ziv-aflibercept, 95.4% initiated ziv-aflibercept with FOLFIRI or another irinotecan-based regimen, and 59.6% had received prior irinotecan. Overall, 24.8% of patients initiated ziv-aflibercept in second line, 31.7% in third line, 21.6% in fourth line and 22.0% in later lines of therapy. Mean duration of ziv-aflibercept treatment was 5.3 months. For patients initiating ziv-aflibercept in second-, third- and fourth-line therapy, median OS was 11.9 (95% confidence interval 5.1–16.2), 11.1 (6.9–16.7) and 8.1 (5.2–11.4) months, respectively, and median PFS was 4.4 (2.8–6.5), 4.3 (2.9–6.3) and 3.4 (2.2–5.2) months, respectively. Common adverse events (AEs) (any grade) included gastrointestinal disorders (64.7%) and asthenia/fatigue (63.3%). In routine clinical practice, ziv-aflibercept was frequently initiated in third line or later lines of therapy. Although patients receiving ziv-aflibercept were more heavily pretreated and potentially less robust compared with the VELOUR trial, median OS for patients receiving second-line ziv-aflibercept was comparable. AE rates were similar to or lower than the VELOUR trial.     

Primary tumor location and bevacizumab effectiveness in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

BackgroundThere is an unmet need for predictive markers for the antiangiogenic agent bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We aimed to assess whether the location of the primary tumor is associated with bevacizumab effectiveness when combined with capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPEOX) in the first-line treatment of patients with mCRC.Patients and methodsA cohort of 667 consecutive patients with mCRC from the general community treated from 2006 to 2011 with CAPEOX and bevacizumab as standard first-line therapy was compared with a cohort of 213 patients treated with CAPEOX from 2003 to 2006, before bevacizumab was approved. Main outcome measures were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Differences in outcome were tested using Kaplan–Meier curves and log-rank tests, and multivariate analyses were carried out using Cox Proportional Hazards models.ResultsPatients treated with CAPEOX and bevacizumab with primary tumors originating in the sigmoid colon and rectum had a significantly better outcome than patients with primary tumors originating from the cecum to the descending colon, both for PFS (median PFS 9.3 versus 7.2 months; hazard ratio (HR) 0.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56–0.82) and for OS (median OS 23.5 versus 13.0 months; HR 0.47, 95% CI 0.38–0.57). This difference was confirmed in multivariate analyses after adjustment for other potentially prognostic factors. For patients treated with CAPEOX, there was no association between primary tumor location and outcome, neither in unadjusted nor adjusted analyses.ConclusionsThe addition of bevacizumab to CAPEOX in first-line treatment of patients with mCRC may primarily benefit patients with primary tumors originating in the rectum and sigmoid colon. This hypothesis needs to be validated in data from completed randomized trials.ClinicalTrials.gov identification numberNCT00212615.     

Safety and efficacy of first-line bevacizumab with FOLFOX,XELOX, FOLFIRI and fluoropyrimidines in metastatic colorectal cancer: the BEAT study

BackgroundBevacizumab significantly improves survival when added to chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The Bevacizumab Expanded Access Trial (BEAT) evaluated the safety and efficacy of bevacizumab plus first-line chemotherapy in a general cohort of patients with mCRC.Patients and methodsPatients with unresectable mCRC received chemotherapy (physician's choice) plus bevacizumab [5 mg/kg every 2 weeks (5-fluorouracil regimens) or 7.5 mg/kg every 3 weeks (capecitabine regimens)]. The primary end point was safety, including prospective data collection in patients receiving unanticipated surgery during the study. Secondary objectives were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).ResultsThe final analysis comprised 1914 assessable patients (male 58%; median age 59 years). Chemotherapy included 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV) + oxaliplatin (29%), irinotecan plus 5-FU/LV (26%), capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (18%) and monotherapy (16%). Serious/grade 3–5 adverse events of interest for bevacizumab included bleeding (3%), gastrointestinal perforation (2%), arterial thromboembolism (1%), hypertension (5.3%), proteinuria (1%) and wound-healing complications (1%). Sixty-day mortality was 3%. Median PFS was 10.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 10.4–11.3 months] and median OS reached 22.7 months (95% CI 21.7–23.8 months).ConclusionsThe BEAT study shows that the efficacy and safety profile of bevacizumab in routine clinical practice is consistent with results observed in prospective randomised clinical trials and another large observational study in the United States (BRiTE study).     

FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab as first-line treatment in BRAF mutant metastatic colorectal cancer

BackgroundBRAF V600E mutation plays a negative prognostic role in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), leading to a median Progression Free Survival (PFS) of 4–6 months with first-line conventional treatments. Our group recently reported in a retrospective exploratory analysis of a phase II trial that FOLFOXIRI (5-FU/LV+Oxaliplatin+Irinotecan) plus bevacizumab might allow to achieve remarkable results in terms of PFS and Overall Survival (OS) also in this poor-prognosis subgroup. The aim of this work was to prospectively validate our retrospective finding.Patients and methodsThis phase II trial was designed to detect an increase in 6 month-Progression Free Rate (6 m-PFR) from 45% to 80% in a population of BRAF mutant mCRC patients treated with first-line FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab. Secondary end-points were PFS, OS, response rate (RR) and the analysis of outcome parameters in the pooled population consisting of both retrospectively and prospectively included patients. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01437618.ResultsTwo-hundred-fourteen potentially eligible mCRC patients were screened for BRAF mutational status. Fifteen BRAF mutant patients (7%) were included in the validation cohort. At a median follow up of 25.7 months, 6 m-PFR was 73%. Median PFS and OS were 9.2 and 24.1 months, respectively. In the pooled population, at a median follow up of 40.4 months, 6 m-PFR was 84%. Median PFS and OS were 11.8 and 24.1 months, respectively. Overall RR and disease control rate were 72% and 88%, respectively.ConclusionLacking randomised trials in this specific molecular subgroup, FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab might be a reasonable option for the first-line treatment of BRAF mutant mCRC patients.     

Prognosis and chemosensitivity of deficient MMR phenotype in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: An AGEO retrospective multicenter study

Mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) and/or microsatellite instability-high (MSI) colorectal cancers (CRC) represent about 5% of metastatic CRC (mCRC). Prognosis and chemosensitivity of dMMR/MSI mCRC remain unclear. This multicenter study included consecutive patients with dMMR/MSI mCRC from 2007 to 2017. The primary endpoint was the progression-free survival (PFS) in a population receiving first-line chemotherapy. Associations between chemotherapy regimen and survival were evaluated using a Cox regression model and inverse of probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) methodology in order to limit potential biases. Overall, 342 patients with dMMR/MSI mCRC were included. Median PFS and overall survival (OS) on first-line chemotherapy were 6.0 and 26.3 months, respectively. For second-line chemotherapy, median PFS and OS were 4.4 and 21.6 months. Longer PFS (8.1 vs. 5.4 months, p = 0.0405) and OS (35.1 vs. 24.4 months, p = 0.0747) were observed for irinotecan-based chemotherapy compared to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. The association was no longer statistically significant using IPTW methodology. In multivariable analysis, anti-VEGF as compared to anti-EGFR was associated with a trend to longer OS (HR = 1.78, 95% CI 1.00–3.19, p = 0.0518), whatever the backbone chemotherapy used. Our study shows that dMMR/MSI mCRC patients experienced short PFS with first-line chemotherapy with or without targeted therapy. OS was not different according to the chemotherapy regimen used, but a trend to better OS was observed with anti-VEGF. Our study provides some historical results concerning chemotherapy in dMMR/MSI mCRC in light of the recent nonrandomized trials with immune checkpoint inhibitors.     

First-line XELOX plus bevacizumab followed by XELOX plus bevacizumab or single-agent bevacizumab as maintenance therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: the phase III MACRO TTD study

Purpose.

The aim of this phase III trial was to compare the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab alone with those of bevacizumab and capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) as maintenance treatment following induction chemotherapy with XELOX plus bevacizumab in the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

Patients and Methods.

Patients were randomly assigned to receive six cycles of bevacizumab, capecitabine, and oxaliplatin every 3 weeks followed by XELOX plus bevacizumab or bevacizumab alone until progression. The primary endpoint was the progression-free survival (PFS) interval; secondary endpoints were the overall survival (OS) time, objective response rate (RR), time to response, duration of response, and safety.

Results.

The intent-to-treat population comprised 480 patients (XELOX plus bevacizumab, n = 239; bevacizumab, n = 241); there were no significant differences in baseline characteristics. The median follow-up was 29.0 months (range, 0–53.2 months). There were no statistically significant differences in the median PFS or OS times or in the RR between the two arms. The most common grade 3 or 4 toxicities in the XELOX plus bevacizumab versus bevacizumab arms were diarrhea, hand–foot syndrome, and neuropathy.

Conclusion.

Although the noninferiority of bevacizumab versus XELOX plus bevacizumab cannot be confirmed, we can reliably exclude a median PFS detriment >3 weeks. This study suggests that maintenance therapy with single-agent bevacizumab may be an appropriate option following induction XELOX plus bevacizumab in mCRC patients.     

The efficacy of bevacizumab in Chinese patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and its effect in different line setting

Objective:We aimed to evaluate the ef ect of bevacizumab in the pal iative treatment of Chinese metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and its ef icacy in dif erent lines. Methods:Patients of mCRC treated with bevacizumab or not at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center from 2005 to 2013 were recruited as the study group and control group. The endpoints were objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), overal survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS). The OS and PFS of first-, second-and third-line treatment groups were compared between study group and control group. Re-sults:The median PFS of the study and the control group were 8.2 months (7.0-9.4 months), 5.7 months (4.7-6.6 months), P=0.001;OS were 26 months (5.4-130.5 months), 18 months (16.6-19.4 months), P<0.001, respectively. The ORR and DCR of first-, second-and third-line were 30.3%(20/66), 20%(6/30), 17.6%(3/17) and 97%(64/66), 86.7%(26/30), 100%(17/17). In the first-line chemotherapy group, the OS of the study group and the control group were 22.9 (5.4-96.7) months and 18 (16.6-19.4) months (P<0.001);PFS were 9.4 (8.4-10.4) months and 5.7 (4.7-6.6) months (P<0.001), respectively. While in the second-and third-line setting, only OS were statistical y dif erent, PFS had no significant dif erence. Conclusion:The combination of bevacizumab and chemotherapy had a promising short-term and long-term ef icacy in Chinese mCRC patients than those without bevacizumab regimens, and the ef ect could be better reflected in the first-line treatment.     

Combining bevacizumab and panitumumab with irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil,and leucovorin (FOLFIRI) as second-line treatment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

Bevacizumab and panitumumab are human monoclonal antibodies with different targeting antigens, vascular endothelial growth factor, and epidermal growth factor receptor. This study examined the efficacy and safety of combining bevacizumab and panitumumab plus fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) as the second-line therapy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Patients with mCRC, and previously failed with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy, were given bevacizumab (3 mg/kg) and panitumumab (3 mg/kg) plus FOLFIRI every other week. From September 2008 to July 2012, 173 patients were included in the study. The response rate was 42.3 %, and the disease-controlled rate was 65.7 %. The median progression-free survival was 6.5 months, and the median overall survival was 15.4 months. Various adverse events (AE) including those known toxicities associated with antibody therapy were recorded. The overall AE rate was 64.5 % for grade 3–4. The treatment of combining bevacizumab and panitumumab plus FOLFIRI is effective and safe as a second-line therapy for patients with mCRC.     

The efficacy and safety of capecitabine plus bevacizumab combination as first-line treatment in elderly metastatic colorectal cancer patients

Aim

The optimal treatment in older persons with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is complicated by a lack of general agreement. The aim of this study was to evaluate the activity of bevacizumab plus capecitabine combination in elderly mCRC patients who were not suitable for chemotherapy with irinotecan and oxaliplatin-containing regimens.

Materials and methods

Seventy years and older patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma were included in this retrospective study. Bevacizumab was administered at a dose of 7.5 mg/kg on day 1 as an intravenous (IV) infusion over 30–90 min every 21 days, and capecitabine was prescribed at 1000 mg/m² twice daily on days 1–14 of the same 21-day schedule.

Results

Eighty-two consecutive patients (47 men, 35 women) were included in the study. The mean age was 75.5 (SD 3.9, range 70–87). Half of the patients were older than 75 years. There were 55 patients (67.1 %) with a good Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS: 0–1) and the remaining 27 patients (32.9 %) had a poor ECOG performance status (PS: 2). With a median follow-up period of 18.5 months, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 10 months (95 % CI, 7.8–12.1) and the median OS was 25 months (95 % CI, 18.6–31.3). The main toxicities recorded were non-hematological. Thirty-one patients (37 %) experienced grade 3/4 adverse events, the most common being hand–foot syndrome (9.8 %). No fatal toxicity resulting from this regimen was recorded.

Conclusions

Considering the toxicity profile and survival outcomes, the combination regimen of capecitabine and bevacizumab is a potentially feasible treatment option in elderly mCRC patients.

     

Bevacizumab-related arterial hypertension as a predictive marker in metastatic colorectal cancer patients

Purpose  

Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) receiving all three active drugs (irinotecan, oxaliplatin, fluorouracil) achieve the best outcome. Bevacizumab added to chemotherapy further improves progression-free (PFS) survival and overall survival. As arterial hypertension has been reported in all studies involving bevacizumab, we retrospectively analysed the correlation between the modifications of arterial blood pressure and response rate (RR) and PFS in mCRC patients treated with bevacizumab.     

FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab as second-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer after first-line bevacizumab plus oxaliplatin-based therapy: the randomized phase III EAGLE study

BackgroundA targeted agent combined with chemotherapy is the standard treatment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The present phase III study was conducted to compare two doses of bevacizumab combined with irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (FOLFIRI) in the second-line setting after first-line therapy with bevacizumab plus oxaliplatin-based therapy.Patients and methodsPatients were randomly assigned to receive FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab 5 or 10 mg/kg in 2-week cycles until disease progression. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS), and secondary end points included overall survival (OS), time to treatment failure (TTF), and safety.ResultsThree hundred and eighty-seven patients were randomized between September 2009 and January 2012 from 100 institutions in Japan. Baseline patient characteristics were well balanced between the two groups. Efficacy was evaluated in 369 patients (5 mg/kg, n = 181 and 10 mg/kg, n = 188). Safety was evaluated in 365 patients (5 mg/kg, n = 180 and 10 mg/kg, n = 185). The median PFS was 6.1 versus 6.4 months (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.75–1.21; P = 0.676), and median TTF was 5.2 versus 5.2 months (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI 0.81–1.25; P = 0.967), respectively, for the bevacizumab 5 and 10 mg/kg groups. Follow-up of OS is currently ongoing. Adverse events, including hypertension and hemorrhage, occurred at similar rates in both groups.ConclusionBevacizumab 10 mg/kg plus FOLFIRI as the second-line treatment did not prolong PFS compared with bevacizumab 5 mg/kg plus FOLFIRI in patients with mCRC. If bevacizumab is continued after first-line therapy in mCRC, a dose of 5 mg/kg is appropriate for use as second-line treatment.Clinical trial identifierUMIN000002557.     

Analyses of Multiple Factors for Determination of “Selected Patients” Who Should Receive Rechallenge Treatment in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: a Retrospective Study from Turkey

Background: Repeating a prior chemotherapy (rechallenge therapy) is an option for selected patients withmetastatic colorectal cancer, but there is very little evidence in the literature for this approach. Thus, we reviewedour registry to evaluate prognostic factors and survival of patients who received irinotecan and oxaliplatinbasedregimens as rechallenge third and fourth-line therapy. Materials and Methods: Patients who receivedirinotecan-based or oxaliplatin-base regimen as first-line had been rechallenged with third-line or fourth-linetherapy. These patients were selected from the database of Turkish mCRC registry archives between October2006 and June 2013 and evaluated retrospectively for factors effecting progression free survival (PFS) and overallsurvival (OS) by the Kaplan-Meire and Cox-regression methods. Results: Thirty-nine patients were enrolled. Themedian duration of follow-up was 36 months (14-68 months). Thirty-one patients (76%) died during follow-up.In terms of rechallenge treatments, 29 patients had received third-line and 10 patients had received fourth-line.Response rate (RR) was found to be 12.9%, with stable disease in 19 (48.7%) patients. The median PFS was 6months (95%CI=4.64-7.35 months) and the median OS was 11 months (95%CI=8.31-13.68 months). The factorseffecting survival (PFS and OS) were only being PFS after first-line chemotherapy ≥12 months (p=0.007, 95%CI=1.75-35.22 and p=0.004, 95%CI=1.44-7.11), both in univariate and multivariate analyses. Conclusions: Thisstudy indicates that rechallenge treatment could be a good option as a third or later line therapy in patients whohad ≥12 months PFS onreceiving first line therapy.     

XEL¿RI-bevacizumab versus FOLFIRI-bevacizumab as first-line treatment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group phase III trial with collateral biomarker analysis

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The aim was to compare two standard chemotherapy regimens combined with bevacizumab as first-line treatment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: Patients previously untreated for metastatic disease were randomized in: group A (irinotecan, capecitabine, bevacizumab, every 3 weeks; XELIRI-bevacizumab) and group B (irinotecan, leucovorin, fluorouracil, bevacizumab, every 2 weeks; FOLFIRI-bevacizumab). Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Plasma concentrations of nitric oxide, osteopontin, TGF-1 and VEGF-A were measured at baseline and during treatment. RESULTS: Among 285 eligible patients, 143 were randomized to group A and 142 to group B. Fifty-five patients (38.5%) in group A and 57 (40.1%) in group B responded (p=0.81). After a median follow-up of 42 months, median PFS was 10.2 and 10.8 months (p=0.74), while median OS was 20.0 and 25.3 months (p=0.099), for groups A and B, respectively. Most frequent grade 3-4 toxicities (group A vs group B) were neutropenia (13% vs 22%, p=0.053) and diarrhea (19% vs 11%, p=0.082). Baseline plasma osteopontin concentrations demonstrated prognostic significance for both PFS and OS. CONCLUSIONS: This trial did not show significant differences in efficacy between the groups. However, the toxicity profile was different. Baseline plasma osteopontin concentrations demonstrated independent prognostic significance. (Registration number: ACTRN12610000270011).