BACKGROUND: Although the addition of bevacizumab significantly improves the efficacy of chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer, regulatory concerns still exist with regard to the magnitude of the benefits and the overall safety profile. METHODS: A literature-based meta-analysis to quantify the magnitude of benefit and safety of adding bevacizumab to chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer patients was conducted. Meta-regression and sensitivity analyses were also performed to identify additional predictors of outcome and to assess the influence of trial design. RESULTS: Five trials (3,841 patients) were gathered. A significant interaction according to treatment line was found for progression-free survival (PFS, p = 0.027); PFS was significantly improved for 1(st) line (Hazard Ratio, HR 0.68, p < 0.0001), with a 1-yr absolute difference (AD) of 8.4% (number needed to treat, NNT 12). A non-significant trend was found in overall survival (OS), and in PFS for 2(nd) line. Responses were improved with the addition of bevacizumab, without interaction between 1(st) line (Relative Risk, RR 1.46, p < 0.0001) and 2(nd) line (RR 1.58, p = 0.05). The most important toxicity was hypertension, accounting for a significant AD of 4.5% against bevacizumab (number needed to harm, NNH 22). Other significant, although less clinically meaningful, adverse events were proteinuria, neurotoxicity, febrile neutropenia, and bleeding. At the meta-regression analysis for 1(st)-line, more than 3 metastatic sites (p = 0.032), no adjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.00013), negative hormonal receptor status (p = 0.009), and prior anthracyclines-exposure (p = 0.019), did significantly affect PFS. CONCLUSIONS: Although with heterogeneity, the addition of bevacizumab to 1st-line chemotherapy significantly improves PFS, and overall activity. Hypertension should be weighted with the overall benefit on the individual basis.
BACKGROUND: Although the addition of bevacizumab significantly improves the efficacy of chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer, regulatory concerns still exist with regard to the magnitude of the benefits and the overall safety profile. METHODS: A literature-based meta-analysis to quantify the magnitude of benefit and safety of adding bevacizumab to chemotherapy for advanced breast cancerpatients was conducted. Meta-regression and sensitivity analyses were also performed to identify additional predictors of outcome and to assess the influence of trial design. RESULTS: Five trials (3,841 patients) were gathered. A significant interaction according to treatment line was found for progression-free survival (PFS, p = 0.027); PFS was significantly improved for 1(st) line (Hazard Ratio, HR 0.68, p < 0.0001), with a 1-yr absolute difference (AD) of 8.4% (number needed to treat, NNT 12). A non-significant trend was found in overall survival (OS), and in PFS for 2(nd) line. Responses were improved with the addition of bevacizumab, without interaction between 1(st) line (Relative Risk, RR 1.46, p < 0.0001) and 2(nd) line (RR 1.58, p = 0.05). The most important toxicity was hypertension, accounting for a significant AD of 4.5% against bevacizumab (number needed to harm, NNH 22). Other significant, although less clinically meaningful, adverse events were proteinuria, neurotoxicity, febrile neutropenia, and bleeding. At the meta-regression analysis for 1(st)-line, more than 3 metastatic sites (p = 0.032), no adjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.00013), negative hormonal receptor status (p = 0.009), and prior anthracyclines-exposure (p = 0.019), did significantly affect PFS. CONCLUSIONS: Although with heterogeneity, the addition of bevacizumab to 1st-line chemotherapy significantly improves PFS, and overall activity. Hypertension should be weighted with the overall benefit on the individual basis.
Authors: Nicholas J Petrelli; Eric P Winer; Julie Brahmer; Sarita Dubey; Sonali Smith; Charles Thomas; Linda T Vahdat; Jennifer Obel; Nicholas Vogelzang; Maurie Markman; John W Sweetenham; David Pfister; Mark G Kris; Lynn M Schuchter; Raymond Sawaya; Derek Raghavan; Patricia A Ganz; Barnett Kramer Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-11-09 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Toni K Choueiri; Erica L Mayer; Youjin Je; Jonathan E Rosenberg; Paul L Nguyen; Georges R Azzi; Joaquim Bellmunt; Harold J Burstein; Fabio A B Schutz Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-01-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Kathy D Miller; Linnea I Chap; Frankie A Holmes; Melody A Cobleigh; P Kelly Marcom; Louis Fehrenbacher; Maura Dickler; Beth A Overmoyer; James D Reimann; Amy P Sing; Virginia Langmuir; Hope S Rugo Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-02-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: David W Miles; Arlene Chan; Luc Y Dirix; Javier Cortés; Xavier Pivot; Piotr Tomczak; Thierry Delozier; Joo Hyuk Sohn; Louise Provencher; Fabio Puglisi; Nadia Harbeck; Guenther G Steger; Andreas Schneeweiss; Andrew M Wardley; Andreas Chlistalla; Gilles Romieu Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-05-24 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jae-Bok Lee; Ok Hee Woo; Kyong Hwa Park; Sang Uk Woo; Dae Sik Yang; Ae-Ree Kim; Eun Sook Lee; Yeul Hong Kim; Jun Suk Kim; Jae Hong Seo Journal: Invest New Drugs Date: 2009-09-16 Impact factor: 3.850
Authors: A Valachis; N P Polyzos; N Alpha Patsopoulos; V Georgoulias; D Mavroudis; D Mauri Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2010-01-09 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: M Di Salvatore; L Lo Giudice; E Rossi; C Santonocito; G Nazzicone; M G Rodriquenz; S Cappuccio; A Inno; P Fuso; A Orlandi; A Strippoli; E Capoluongo; A Astone; A Cassano; C Barone Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2015-07-04 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Ann H Partridge; R Bryan Rumble; Lisa A Carey; Steven E Come; Nancy E Davidson; Angelo Di Leo; Julie Gralow; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Beverly Moy; Douglas Yee; Shelley B Brundage; Michael A Danso; Maggie Wilcox; Ian E Smith Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-09-02 Impact factor: 44.544