Trifluridine-Tipiracil and Bevacizumab in Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: In a previous phase 3 trial, treatment with trifluridine-tipiracil (FTD-TPI) prolonged overall survival among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Preliminary data from single-group and randomized phase 2 trials suggest that treatment with FTD-TPI in addition to bevacizumab has the potential to extend survival. METHODS: We randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, adult patients who had received no more than two previous chemotherapy regimens for the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer to receive FTD-TPI plus bevacizumab (combination group) or FTD-TPI alone (FTD-TPI group). The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points were progression-free survival and safety, including the time to worsening of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance-status score from 0 or 1 to 2 or more (on a scale from 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating greater disability). RESULTS: A total of 246 patients were assigned to each group. The median overall survival was 10.8 months in the combination group and 7.5 months in the FTD-TPI group (hazard ratio for death, 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49 to 0.77; P<0.001). The median progression-free survival was 5.6 months in the combination group and 2.4 months in the FTD-TPI group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.54; P<0.001). The most common adverse events in both groups were neutropenia, nausea, and anemia. No treatment-related deaths were reported. The median time to worsening of the ECOG performance-status score from 0 or 1 to 2 or more was 9.3 months in the combination group and 6.3 months in the FTD-TPI group (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer, treatment with FTD-TPI plus bevacizumab resulted in longer overall survival than FTD-TPI alone. (Funded by Servier and Taiho Oncology; SUNLIGHT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04737187; EudraCT number, 2020-001976-14.).

Aflibercept Monotherapy or Bevacizumab First for Diabetic Macular Edema.

BACKGROUND: In eyes with diabetic macular edema, the relative efficacy of administering aflibercept monotherapy as compared with bevacizumab first with a switch to aflibercept if the eye condition does not improve sufficiently (a form of step therapy) is unclear. METHODS: At 54 clinical sites, we randomly assigned eyes in adults who had diabetic macular edema involving the macular center and a visual-acuity letter score of 24 to 69 (on a scale from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better visual acuity; Snellen equivalent, 20/320 to 20/50) to receive either 2.0 mg of intravitreous aflibercept or 1.25 mg of intravitreous bevacizumab. The drug was administered at randomization and thereafter according to the prespecified retreatment protocol. Beginning at 12 weeks, eyes in the bevacizumab-first group were switched to aflibercept therapy if protocol-specified criteria were met. The primary outcome was the mean change in visual acuity over the 2-year trial period. Retinal central subfield thickness and visual acuity at 2 years and safety were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 312 eyes (in 270 adults) underwent randomization; 158 eyes were assigned to receive aflibercept monotherapy and 154 to receive bevacizumab first. Over the 2-year period, 70% of the eyes in the bevacizumab-first group were switched to aflibercept therapy. The mean improvement in visual acuity was 15.0 letters in the aflibercept-monotherapy group and 14.0 letters in the bevacizumab-first group (adjusted difference, 0.8 letters; 95% confidence interval, -0.9 to 2.5; P = 0.37). At 2 years, the mean changes in visual acuity and retinal central subfield thickness were similar in the two groups. Serious adverse events (in 52% of the patients in the aflibercept-monotherapy group and in 36% of those in the bevacizumab-first group) and hospitalizations for adverse events (in 48% and 32%, respectively) were more common in the aflibercept-monotherapy group. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial of treatment of moderate vision loss due to diabetic macular edema involving the center of the macula, we found no evidence of a significant difference in visual outcomes over a 2-year period between aflibercept monotherapy and treatment with bevacizumab first with a switch to aflibercept in the case of suboptimal response. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; Protocol AC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03321513.).

Can low-dose intravenous bevacizumab be as effective as high-dose bevacizumab for cerebral radiation necrosis?

Although intravenous bevacizumab (IVBEV) is the most promising treatment for cerebral radiation necrosis (CRN), there is no conclusion on the optimal dosage. Our retrospective study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of high-dose with low-dose IVBEV in treating CRN associated with radiotherapy for brain metastases (BMs). This paper describes 75 patients who were diagnosed with CRN secondary to radiotherapy for BMs, treated with low-dose or high-dose IVBEV and followed up for a minimum of 6 months. The clinical data collected for this study include changes in brain MRI, clinical symptoms, and corticosteroid usage before, during, and after IVBEV treatment. At the 3-month mark following administration of IVBEV, a comparison of two groups revealed that the median percentage decreases in CRN volume on T2-weighted fluid-attenuated inversion recovery and T1-weighted gadolinium contrast-enhanced image (T1CE), as well as the signal ratio reduction on T1CE, were 65.8% versus 64.8% (p = 0.860), 41.2% versus 51.9% (p = 0.396), and 37.4% versus 35.1% (p = 0.271), respectively. Similarly, at 6 months post-IVBEV, the median percentage reductions of the aforementioned parameters were 59.5% versus 62.0% (p = 0.757), 39.1% versus 31.3% (p = 0.851), and 35.4% versus 28.2% (p = 0.083), respectively. Notably, the incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events was higher in the high-dose group (n = 4, 9.8%) than in the low-dose group (n = 0). Among patients with CRN secondary to radiotherapy for BMs, the administration of high-dose IVBEV did not demonstrate superiority over low-dose IVBEV. Moreover, the use of high-dose IVBEV was associated with a higher incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events compared with low-dose IVBEV.

Germline predictors for bevacizumab induced hypertensive crisis in ECOG-ACRIN 5103 and BEATRICE.

BACKGROUND: Bevacizumab is a beneficial therapy in several advanced cancer types. Predictive biomarkers to better understand which patients are destined to benefit or experience toxicity are needed. Associations between bevacizumab induced hypertension and survival have been reported but with conflicting conclusions. METHODS: We performed post-hoc analyses to evaluate the association in 3124 patients from two phase III adjuvant breast cancer trials, E5103 and BEATRICE. Differences in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and overall survival (OS) between patients with hypertension and those without were compared. Hypertension was defined as systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≥ 160 mmHg (n = 346) and SBP ≥ 180 mmHg (hypertensive crisis) (n = 69). Genomic analyses were performed to evaluate germline genetic predictors for the hypertensive crisis. RESULTS: Hypertensive crisis was significantly associated with superior IDFS (p = 0.015) and OS (p = 0.042), but only IDFS (p = 0.029; HR = 0.28) remained significant after correction for prognostic factors. SBP ≥ 160 mmHg was not associated with either IDFS or OS. A common single-nucleotide polymorphism, rs6486785, was significantly associated with hypertensive crisis (p = 8.4 × 10-9; OR = 5.2). CONCLUSION: Bevacizumab-induced hypertensive crisis is associated with superior outcomes and rs6486785 predicted an increased risk of this key toxicity.

Trifluridine/Tipiracil Plus Bevacizumab for Vulnerable Patients With Pretreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Retrospective Study (WJOG14520G).

BACKGROUND: Trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) plus bevacizumab has shown clinical benefit for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) refractory to standard therapy. However, few data have been available for patients with pretreated mCRC who are intolerant of intensive therapy (vulnerable). METHODS: We performed a multicenter retrospective study (WJOG14520G; TWILIGHT) of FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab for vulnerable patients with pretreated mCRC. Eligibility criteria included previous chemotherapy (although patients treated with all key cytotoxic agents, a fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan, were excluded) and intolerance of full-dose combination therapy with oxaliplatin or irinotecan at the start of FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab. RESULTS: The median age of 93 evaluable patients was 79 years (range, 21-90). Intolerance of intensive therapy was attributable to an older age in 60 (65%) patients, serious concomitant disease in 24 (26%) patients, and a poor performance status in 19 (20%) patients. FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab was administered as second-line treatment in 74 (80%) patients and as third- or fourth-line treatment in 19 (20%) patients. The objective response rate was 4.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4%-12.2%), and the disease control rate was 67.9% (95% CI, 56.6%-77.8%). With a median follow-up time of 21.6 months, median overall survival and progression-free survival were 18.6 months (95% CI, 12.1-23.2) and 6.3 months (95% CI, 5.0-8.3), respectively. Neutropenia of grade ≥3 developed in 50 (54%) patients, whereas 2 (2%) patients experienced febrile neutropenia, and no treatment-related death was observed. CONCLUSION: Our data show the potential efficacy and acceptable safety profile of FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab for vulnerable patients with pretreated mCRC.

Efficacy and Safety of Trifluridine/Tipiracil-Containing Combinations in Colorectal Cancer and Other Advanced Solid Tumors: A Systematic Review.

We performed a systematic literature review to identify and summarize data from studies reporting clinical efficacy and safety outcomes for trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) combined with other antineoplastic agents in advanced cancers, including metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We conducted a systematic search on May 29, 2021, for studies reporting one or more efficacy or safety outcome with FTD/TPI-containing combinations. Our search yielded 1378 publications, with 38 records meeting selection criteria: 35 studies of FTD/TPI-containing combinations in mCRC (31 studies second line or later) and 3 studies in other tumor types. FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab was extensively studied, including 19 studies in chemorefractory mCRC. Median overall survival ranged 8.6-14.4 months and median progression-free survival 3.7-6.8 months with FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab in refractory mCRC. Based on one randomized and several retrospective studies, FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab was associated with improved outcomes compared with FTD/TPI monotherapy. FTD/TPI combinations with chemotherapy or other targeted agents were reported in small early-phase studies; preliminary data indicated higher antitumor activity for certain combinations. Overall, no safety concerns existed with FTD/TPI combinations; most common grade ≥ 3 adverse event was neutropenia, ranging 5%-100% across all studies. In studies comparing FTD/TPI combinations with monotherapy, grade ≥ 3 neutropenia appeared more frequently with combinations (29%-67%) vs. monotherapy (5%-41%). Discontinuation rates due to adverse events ranged 0%-11% for FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab and 0%-17% with other combinations. This systematic review supports feasibility and safety of FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab in refractory mCRC. Data on non-bevacizumab FTD/TPI combinations remain preliminary and need further validation.

A randomized phase II study of metronomic cyclophosphamide and methotrexate (CM) with or without bevacizumab in patients with advanced breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Metronomic chemotherapy has the potential to offer tumor control with reduced toxicity when compared to standard dose chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer. As metronomic chemotherapy may target the tumor microvasculature, it has the potential for synergistic effects with antiangiogenic agents such as the VEGF-A inhibitor bevacizumab. METHODS: In this randomized phase II study, patients with metastatic breast cancer were randomized to receive metronomic oral cyclophosphamide and methotrexate (CM) combined with bevacizumab (Arm A) or CM alone (Arm B). The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety and tolerability. RESULTS: A total of 55 patients were enrolled, with 34 patients treated on Arm A and 21 patients treated on Arm B. The ORR was modestly higher in Arm A (26%) than in Arm B (10%); neither met the 40% cutoff for further clinical evaluation. The median time to progression (TTP) was 5.52 months (3.22-13.6) on Arm A and 1.82 months (1.54-6.70) on Arm B (log-rank p = 0.008). The median OS was 29.6 months (17.2-NA) on Arm A and 16.2 months (15.7-NA) on Arm B (log-rank p = 0.7). Common all-grade adverse events in both arms included nausea, fatigue, and elevated AST. CONCLUSION: The combination of metronomic CM with bevacizumab significantly improved PFS over CM alone, although there was no significant difference in OS. Oral metronomic chemotherapy alone has limited activity in advanced breast cancer. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Identifier: NCT00083031. Date of Registration: May 17, 2004.

Pharmacogenetic and clinical risk factors for bevacizumab-related gastrointestinal hemorrhage in prostate cancer patients treated on CALGB 90401 (Alliance).

The objective of this study was to discover clinical and pharmacogenetic factors associated with bevacizumab-related gastrointestinal hemorrhage in Cancer and Leukemia Group B (Alliance) 90401. Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer received docetaxel and prednisone ± bevacizumab. Patients were genotyped using Illumina HumanHap610-Quad and assessed using cause-specific risk for association between single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and gastrointestinal hemorrhage. In 1008 patients, grade 2 or higher gastrointestinal hemorrhage occurred in 9.5% and 3.8% of bevacizumab (n = 503) and placebo (n = 505) treated patients, respectively. Bevacizumab (P < 0.001) and age (P = 0.002) were associated with gastrointestinal hemorrhage. In 616 genetically estimated Europeans (n = 314 bevacizumab and n = 302 placebo treated patients), grade 2 or higher gastrointestinal hemorrhage occurred in 9.6% and 2.0% of patients, respectively. One SNP (rs1478947; HR 6.26; 95% CI 3.19-12.28; P = 9.40 × 10-8) surpassed Bonferroni-corrected significance. Grade 2 or higher gastrointestinal hemorrhage rate was 33.3% and 6.2% in bevacizumab-treated patients with the AA/AG and GG genotypes, versus 2.9% and 1.9% in the placebo arm, respectively. Prospective validation of these findings and functional analyses are needed to better understand the genetic contribution to treatment-related gastrointestinal hemorrhage.

Contribution of plasma levels of VEGF-A and angiopoietin-2 in addition to a genetic variant in KCNAB1 to predict the risk of bevacizumab-induced hypertension.

Bevacizumab-induced hypertension poses a therapeutic challenge and identifying biomarkers for hypertension can enhance therapy safety. Lower plasma levels of VEGF-A, angiopoietin-2, and rs6770663 in KCNAB1 were previously associated with increased risk of bevacizumab-induced hypertension. This study investigated whether these factors independently contribute to grade 2-3 bevacizumab-induced hypertension risk in 277 cancer patients (CALGB/Alliance 90401). Multivariable analyses assessed the independent association of each factor and hypertension. Likelihood ratio test (LRT) evaluated the explanatory significance of combining protein levels and rs6770663 in predicting hypertension. Boostrap was employed to assess the mediation effect of protein levels on the rs6770663 association with hypertension. Lower protein levels and rs6770663 were independently associated with increased hypertension risk. Adding rs6770663 to protein levels improved the prediction of hypertension (LRT p = 0.0002), with no mediation effect observed. Protein levels of VEGF-A, angiopoietin-2 and rs6770663 in KCNAB1 are independent risk factors and, when combined, may improve prediction of bevacizumab-induced hypertension. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00110214.

Ramucirumab for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in the current real world: a Japanese single-arm study post-REACH-2 (The R-evolution study).

This study aimed to complement the results of the REACH-2 study by prospectively evaluating the safety and efficacy of ramucirumab in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in a real-world setting. This was an open-label, nonrandomized, multicenter, prospective study conducted at 13 institutions in Japan (jRCTs031190236). The study included Child-Pugh Class A patients with advanced HCC who had received pretreatment with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) or lenvatinib. Ramucirumab was introduced as a second-line treatment after Atez/Bev or lenvatinib and as a third-line treatment after Atez/Bev and lenvatinib. Between May 2020 and July 2022, we enrolled 19 patients, including 17 who received ramucirumab. Additionally, seven patients received lenvatinib, another seven patients received Atez/Bev, and three patients received Atez/Bev followed by lenvatinib as prior treatment. The primary endpoint was a 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate, which was 14.3%. The median PFS and overall survival were 3.7 and 12.0 months, respectively. The most common grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs) were hypertension (23.5%), proteinuria (17.6%), and neutropenia (11.8%). The discontinuation rate due to AEs was 29.4%. Six patients progressed from Child-Pugh A to B after treatment with ramucirumab. Thirteen patients were eligible for post-ramucirumab treatment, including systemic therapy. Despite the limited number of patients, the efficacy of ramucirumab was comparable to that observed in the REACH-2 study when used after lenvatinib and Atez/Bev. However, the incidence of AEs was higher than that in the REACH-2 study.

Phase I study of trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) plus irinotecan in combination with bevacizumab as a second-line therapy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: This phase I trial is to determine the recommended dose of the TAS-102, irinotecan plus bevacizumab regimen and assess its safety and efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin treatment. METHODS: A 3 + 3 designed dose escalation was performed. Patients were administered TAS-102 (30-35 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-5) and irinotecan (150-165 mg/m2 on day 1) combined with a fixed dose of bevacizumab (5 mg/kg on day 1) every two weeks. The primary endpoint was the determination of the recommended phase II dose. RESULTS: Eighteen patients were enrolled: 6 at the Level 1 (TAS-102 30 mg/m2 twice daily, irinotecan 150 mg/m2 plus bevacizumab 5 mg/kg), six at the Level 2 (TAS-102 35 mg/m2 twice daily, irinotecan 150 mg/m2 plus bevacizumab 5 mg/kg), and six at the Level 3 (TAS-102 30 mg/m2 twice daily, irinotecan 165 mg/m2 plus bevacizumab 5 mg/kg). Five dose-limiting toxicities occurred: one observed at Level 1 (thrombocytopenia), two at Level 2 (neutropenia and diarrhea), and two at Level 3 (fatigue and neutropenia). The RP2D was established as TAS-102 30 mg/m2 twice daily and irinotecan 150 mg/m2 plus bevacizumab 5 mg/kg. The most frequent grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (33.3%), diarrhea (16.7%), and thrombocytopenia (11.1%). No treatment-related death occurred. Two patients (11.1%) experienced partial responses and 14 (77.8%) had stable disease. CONCLUSION: The regimen of TAS-102, irinotecan, and bevacizumab is tolerable with antitumor activity for metastatic colorectal cancer patients refractory to first-line fluoropyrimidines and oxaliplatin treatment.

Predictors for the Development of Thromboembolic Events in Cancer Patients Treated with Bevacizumab, Ramucirumab, and Aflibercept: A Single-Institution Retrospective Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The risk of thromboembolic events developing limits the dose of antiangiogenic agents, thereby reducing their efficacy. This retrospective study therefore sought to identify predictors for the development of antiangiogenic agent-induced thromboembolic events and to elucidate whether differences in the likelihood of thromboembolic events exist between different antiangiogenic agents or cancer types, to guide future strategies for optimizing safety, efficacy, and quality of life in patients receiving chemotherapy. METHODS: This study retrospectively investigated 468 cancer patients who received chemotherapy with bevacizumab, ramucirumab, or aflibercept at our outpatient chemotherapy center between December 2016 and April 2022. Variables related to the development of thromboembolic events were extracted from the medical records, and multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictors for the development of thromboembolic events. The Wilcoxon/Kruskal-Wallis test was used to detect significant differences between groups. RESULTS: Significant factors included serum albumin level (odds ratio [OR] = 0.363, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.193-0.685; p = 0.0017) and diabetes mellitus (OR = 5.356, 95% CI = 1.711-16.769; p = 0.0039). Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (OR = 0.307) had low OR, although it was not significant. No difference in the development of thromboembolic events was evident between cancer types (p = 0.0781), but differences were identified between the three antiangiogenic agents (p = 0.0132). Ramucirumab was associated with a lower likelihood of thromboembolic events. CONCLUSION: Serum albumin level and diabetes mellitus were identified as significant predictors for the development of antiangiogenic agent-induced thromboembolic events. In addition, the likelihood of thromboembolic events did not differ between cancer types but differed between antiangiogenic agents.

Anlotinib alone or in combination with bevacizumab in the treatment of recurrent high-grade glioma: a prospective single-arm, open-label phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: Anlotinib is a multi-target tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR), platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR), fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR), and c-Kit. This phase II study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of anlotinib, either alone or in combination with bevacizumab (Bev) for recurrent high-grade glioma (rHGG) (NCT04822805, 30/03/2021). METHODS: Eligible patients had a histological diagnosis of rHGG with first or subsequent recurrences. All patients received oral anlotinib 12 mg or 10 mg on days 1-14 (repeated every 21 days). In cases where brain magnetic resonance imaging examination revealed an increase in peritumoral edema without worsening of symptoms, patients received a temporary treatment of intravenous bevacizumab 10 mg/kg to alleviate edema. The primary endpoint was the median progression-free survival (mPFS), and the secondary endpoints included median overall survival (mOS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and safety. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients with rHGG were included in the efficacy and safety assessments. Eighteen patients received anlotinib alone, and seven patients received anlotinib in combination with Bev. For all patients, the mPFS and mOS were 5.0 months and 13.6 months, respectively. The ORR was 32%, and the DCR was 96%. It is noteworthy that the survival and response data of recurrent glioblastoma (rGBM) exhibit similarities to those of rHGG. For rGBM patients, there were no significant differences in mPFS, mOS, ORR, or DCR between the anlotinib alone and anlotinib + Bev groups. However, the incidence of treatment-related adverse events of any grade was higher in the anlotinib + Bev group compared to the anlotinib alone group (100% vs. 78%, p = 0.041). CONCLUSIONS: Both anlotinib alone and its combination with Bev demonstrated good efficacy and safety in the treatment of rHGG.

Clinical activity and safety of sintilimab, bevacizumab, and TMZ in patients with recurrent glioblastoma.

PURPOSE: There are limited and no standard therapies for recurrent glioblastoma. We herein report the antitumour activity and safety of sintilimab, bevacizumab and temozolomide (TMZ) in recurrent glioblastoma. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed eight patients with recurrent glioblastoma treated with sintilimab (200 mg) every three weeks + bevacizumab (10 mg/kg) every three weeks + TMZ (200 mg/m²orally) (5 days orally every 28 days for a total of four weeks). The primary objective was investigator-assessed median progression-free survival(mPFS). Secondary objectives were to assess the 6-month PFS, objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DOR) accroding to RANO criteria. RESULTS: The mPFS time for 8 patients was 3.340 months (95% CI: 2.217-4.463), The longest PFS was close to 9 months. Five patients were assessed to have achieved partial response (PR), with an overall remission rate of 62.5%, Four patients experienced a change in tumour volume at the best response time of greater than 60% shrinkage from baseline, and one patient remained progression free upon review, with a DOR of more than 6.57 months. The 6-month PFS was 25% (95% CI: 5.0-55.0%). Three patients had a treatment-related adverse events, though no grade 4 or 5 adverse events occurred. CONCLUSION: In this small retrospective study, the combination regimen of sintilimab, bevacizumab and TMZ showed promising antitumour activity in treatment of recurrent glioblastoma, with a good objective remission rate.

Safety of first-line systemic therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety of first-line systemic therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer through network meta-analysis. METHODS: The literature from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases was searched from the inception of the databases to August 15, 2023, and strict inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to screen studies. The Cochrane Bias Risk Assessment Tool (RoB 2.0) was used to evaluate the quality of the included literature. Network meta-analysis was conducted using Stata 15.0 and R4.3.1 software to compare the incidence of adverse events (AEs) among different treatment regimens. RESULTS: A total of 53 randomized controlled trials, involving 17,351 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), were ultimately included, encompassing 29 different therapeutic approaches. According to SUCRA rankings, the CAPOX regimen is most likely to rank first in terms of safety, while the FOLFOXIRI + panitumumab regimen is most likely to rank last. In terms of specific AEs, the CAPOX regimen, whether used alone or in combination with targeted drugs (bevacizumab and cetuximab), is associated with a reduced risk of neutropenia and febrile neutropenia, as well as an increased risk of thrombocytopenia and diarrhea. The FOLFOX regimen, with or without bevacizumab, is linked to an increased risk of neutropenia and peripheral sensory neuropathy. The FOLFIRI/CAPIRI + bevacizumab regimen is associated with a reduced risk of peripheral sensory neuropathy. S-1 and S-1 + oxaliplatin are well-tolerated in terms of gastrointestinal reactions. The FOLFOXIRI regimen, whether used alone or in combination with targeted drugs, is associated with various AEs. CONCLUSION: In summary, the CAPOX regimen may be the safest option among the first-line systemic treatment regimens for mCRC patients, while the FOLFOXIRI + panitumumab regimen may be associated with a higher incidence of grade 3 or higher AEs.

Phase 1b study of mirvetuximab soravtansine, a folate receptor alpha (FRα)-targeting antibody-drug conjugate, in combination with carboplatin and bevacizumab in patients with platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the antitumor activity and safety profile of the triplet combination of mirvetuximab soravtansine (MIRV), carboplatin, and bevacizumab in recurrent, platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. METHODS: Participants with recurrent, platinum-sensitive epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer (1-2 prior lines of therapy) received MIRV (6 mg/kg adjusted ideal body weight), carboplatin (AUC5), and bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) once every 3 weeks. Carboplatin could be discontinued after 6 cycles per investigator discretion; continuation of MIRV+bevacizumab as maintenance therapy was permitted. Eligibility included folate receptor alpha (FRα) expression by immunohistochemistry (≥50% of cells with ≥2+ intensity; PS2+ scoring); prior bevacizumab was allowed. Tumor response, duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events (AEs) were assessed. RESULTS: Forty-one participants received triplet therapy, with a median of 6, 12, and 13 cycles of carboplatin, MIRV, and bevacizumab, respectively. The confirmed objective response rate was 83% (9 complete and 25 partial responses). The median DOR was 10.9 months; median PFS was 13.5 months. AEs (any grade) occurred as expected, based on each agent's safety profile; most common were diarrhea (83%), nausea (76%), fatigue (73%), thrombocytopenia (71%), and blurred vision (68%). Most cases were mild to moderate (grade ≤2), except for thrombocytopenia, for which most drug-related discontinuations occurred, and neutropenia. CONCLUSIONS: This triplet regimen (MIRV+carboplatin+bevacizumab) was highly active, with a tolerable AE profile in participants with recurrent, platinum-sensitive, FRα-expressing ovarian cancer. Thrombocytopenia was the primary cause of dose modifications. These outcomes compare favorably to historical data reported for platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab regimens in similar patient populations.

Safety/efficacy of atezolizumab + bevacizumab during anti-platelet/anticoagulation therapy in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This study aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of atezolizumab + bevacizumab therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma patients receiving anti-platelet agents or anticoagulants. METHODS: Patients were divided into those using (IM out) and those not using (IM in) anti-platelet agents or anticoagulants, who violated the exclusion criteria of the IMbrave150 trial, and were retrospectively examined. RESULTS: The study included 185 patients (IM in: 157; IM out: 28). For first-line treatment, progression-free survival was 184 days for IM in and 266 days for IM out (p = .136). Overall survival was 603 days for IM in and not reached for IM out (p = .265), with no significant between-group difference. Similarly, there were no significant between-group differences in progression-free survival or overall survival for later-line treatment. Haemorrhagic adverse events of ≥grade 3 were observed in 11 IM in patients and 3 IM out patients. No significant factors associated with haemorrhagic adverse events of ≥grade 3 were identified in the multivariate analysis including IM out classification, whose p value was .547. Regarding thrombotic/embolic adverse events in the IM out group, one case of exacerbation of portal vein thrombosis was observed. No deaths were directly attributable to bleeding events or exacerbations of thrombosis. CONCLUSION: Atezolizumab + bevacizumab therapy shows similar safety and efficacy in patients receiving and those not receiving anti-platelet agents or anticoagulants; therefore, it can be considered for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma receiving anti-platelet agents or anticoagulants.

The risk and burden of thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events in patients with malignant gliomas receiving bevacizumab.

PURPOSE: Bevacizumab has evolved as an integral treatment option for patients with high-grade gliomas. Little is known about clinical risk factors that predispose patients with high-grade gliomas receiving bevacizumab to VTE or ICH. We sought to characterize the clinical risk factors associated with risk of either event. METHODS: In this multi-institutional retrospective study, we first evaluated patients with high-grade gliomas who were treated with bevacizumab at University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center from 2015-2021. We compared clinical and treatment-related factors among three cohorts: those who developed VTE, ICH, or neither. We further compared survival outcomes of these patients from the time of bevacizumab initiation. Then to further confirm our results in a non-cancer center hospital setting we evaluated patients from two Ascension Seton Hospitals in Austin, Texas which are affiliated with Dell Medical School at the University of Texas at Austin from 2017-2022. RESULTS: We found that the presence of cerebral macrobleeding, defined as a magnetic susceptibility of > 1 cm3 on magnetic resonance imaging, was highly associated with risk of developing ICH after initiation of bevacizumab. Development of ICH was significantly associated with poorer survival outcomes. We did not find a statistically significant effect of VTE on survival after bevacizumab initiation. CONCLUSION: In order to stratify the risk for developing ICH before the initiation of bevacizumab, we recommend to assess for the presence of cerebral macrobleeding as it is associated with ICH development.

Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor therapy reduces the administration frequency of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents in patients with diabetic macular oedema with a history of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agent use: A cohort study using the Japanese health insurance claims database.

AIM: We assessed the effectiveness of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) in reducing the administration frequency of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents in patients with diabetic macular oedema (DMO) using a health insurance claims database. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study analysed health insurance claims data covering 11 million Japanese patients between 2005 and 2019. We analysed the frequency and duration of intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF agents after initiating SGLT2is or other antidiabetic drugs. RESULTS: Among 2412 matched patients with DMO, the incidence rates of anti-VEGF agent injections were 230.1 per 1000 person-year in SGLT2i users and 228.4 times per 1000 person-year in non-users, respectively, and the risk ratio for events was unchanged in both groups. Sub-analysis of each baseline characteristic of the patients showed that SGLT2is were particularly effective in patients with a history of anti-VEGF agent use [p = .027, hazard ratio (HR): 0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.22-0.91]. SGLT2is reduced the risk for the first (p = .023, HR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.22-0.91) and second (p = .021, HR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.17-0.89) anti-VEGF agent injections. CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in the risk ratio for the addition of anti-VEGF therapy between the two treatment groups. However, the use of SGLT2is reduced the frequency of anti-VEGF agent administration in patients with DMO requiring anti-VEGF therapy. Therefore, SGLT2i therapy may be a novel, non-invasive, low-cost adjunctive therapy for DMO requiring anti-VEGF therapy.

Pretreatment eosinophil count predicts response to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab therapy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

AIM: Pretreatment peripheral blood markers have value in predicting the treatment outcome of various cancers. In particular, the eosinophil count has recently gained attention. However, no study has reported the influence of the pretreatment eosinophil count on the outcomes of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (ATZ/BEV), which is the recommended first-line systemic therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (u-HCC). METHODS: We enrolled 114 patients with u-HCC treated with ATZ/BEV (n = 48) or lenvatinib (n = 66). The patients receiving ATZ/BEV or lenvatinib were divided into two groups by calculating the cutoff value of the pretreatment eosinophil count. The groups were compared regarding the clinicopathological characteristics, outcomes, and incidence of adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Twenty-three of 48 patients (47.9%) who received ATZ/BEV therapy were categorized as the ATZ/BEV-eosinophil-high group, which had better responses than the ATZ/BEV-eosinophil-low group (P = 0.0090). Kaplan-Meier curves revealed a trend toward significantly better progression-free survival (PFS) in the ATZ/BEV-eosinophil-high group than the ATZ/BEV-eosinophil-low group (the median PFS: 4.7 months in the ATZ/BEV-eosinophil-low group vs 12.6 months in the ATZ/BEV-eosinophil-high group; P = 0.0064). Multivariate analysis showed that a low eosinophil count was an independent risk factor for worse PFS after ATZ/BEV therapy (P = 0.0424, hazard ratio: 2.24, 95% confidence interval: 1.02-4.89). AEs (≥ grade 3) were significantly more likely to occur in the ATZ/BEV-eosinophil-high group (P = 0.0285). The outcomes did not significantly differ between the LEN-eosinophil-high group and the LEN-eosinophil-low group. CONCLUSION: A high pretreatment eosinophil count predicted a better response to ATZ/BEV therapy for u-HCC and was associated with the incidence of AEs (≥ grade 3).