Tianshu Ren1,2, Shu Wang1, Zexu Shen1, Chang Xu1, Yingshi Zhang1, Fuhai Hui1, Xingshun Qi3, Qingchun Zhao4,5. 1. Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, No. 103 Wenhua Road, Shenyang, 110016, Liaoning, China. 2. Department of Pharmacy, General Hospital of Northern Theater Command, Shenyang, China. 3. Department of Gastroenterology, General Hospital of Northern Theater Command, Shenyang, China. 4. Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, No. 103 Wenhua Road, Shenyang, 110016, Liaoning, China. zhaoqingchun1967@163.com. 5. Department of Pharmacy, General Hospital of Northern Theater Command, Shenyang, China. zhaoqingchun1967@163.com.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Guidelines recommend combined doublet backbone chemotherapy based on 5-fluorouracil and oxaliplatin (OX) or irinotecan (IR) as the first-line treatment options for metastatic colorectal cancer. However, it is still unknown which is better when combined with bevacizumab (BEV). This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to compare BEV-IR with BEV-OX regimens in terms of efficacy and safety. METHODS: We searched studies from databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and conference papers. The outcomes were overall response rate, overall survival, progression-free survival, and the incidence of the most common adverse events. The dichotomous data were reported as the risk ratio (RR) and the survival outcomes were extracted as the hazard ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Eleven studies including 5632 patients were identified. No difference was found in overall survival or overall response rate between BEV-IR and BEV-OX regimens. The pooled progression-free survival was significantly longer in the BEV-IR group than the BEV-OX group (hazard ratio = 0.92, 95% CI 0.87-0.98, p = 0.08). Compared with the BEV-OX group, the BEV-IR group was related to a higher risk of bleeding events (RR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.64-0.98, p = 0.03), venous thromboembolism (RR = 0.60, 95% CI 0.46-0.79, p = 0.0002), and diarrhea (RR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.62-0.80, p < 0.00001). Conversely, the BEV-OX group was related to a higher risk of thrombocytopenia (RR 2.39, 95% CI 1.67-3.42, p < 0.00001) and neuropathy (RR 3.80, 95% CI 1.90-7.64, p = 0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: The BEV-IR regimen was superior in improving progression-free survival as the first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. The two different doublet regimens combined with BEV had their specific features of adverse events.
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Guidelines recommend combined doublet backbone chemotherapy based on 5-fluorouracil and oxaliplatin (OX) or irinotecan (IR) as the first-line treatment options for metastatic colorectal cancer. However, it is still unknown which is better when combined with bevacizumab (BEV). This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to compare BEV-IR with BEV-OX regimens in terms of efficacy and safety. METHODS: We searched studies from databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and conference papers. The outcomes were overall response rate, overall survival, progression-free survival, and the incidence of the most common adverse events. The dichotomous data were reported as the risk ratio (RR) and the survival outcomes were extracted as the hazard ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Eleven studies including 5632 patients were identified. No difference was found in overall survival or overall response rate between BEV-IR and BEV-OX regimens. The pooled progression-free survival was significantly longer in the BEV-IR group than the BEV-OX group (hazard ratio = 0.92, 95% CI 0.87-0.98, p = 0.08). Compared with the BEV-OX group, the BEV-IR group was related to a higher risk of bleeding events (RR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.64-0.98, p = 0.03), venous thromboembolism (RR = 0.60, 95% CI 0.46-0.79, p = 0.0002), and diarrhea (RR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.62-0.80, p < 0.00001). Conversely, the BEV-OX group was related to a higher risk of thrombocytopenia (RR 2.39, 95% CI 1.67-3.42, p < 0.00001) and neuropathy (RR 3.80, 95% CI 1.90-7.64, p = 0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: The BEV-IR regimen was superior in improving progression-free survival as the first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. The two different doublet regimens combined with BEV had their specific features of adverse events.
Authors: Marzieh Araghi; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Mark Jenkins; James Brierley; Eva Morris; Freddie Bray; Melina Arnold Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2019-01-08 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Ruth Vera; Vicente Alonso; Javier Gállego; Encarnación González; Carmen Guillén-Ponce; Carles Pericay; Fernando Rivera; M José Safont; Manuel Valladares-Ayerbes Journal: Cancer Chemother Pharmacol Date: 2015-06-26 Impact factor: 3.333
Authors: Leonard B Saltz; Stephen Clarke; Eduardo Díaz-Rubio; Werner Scheithauer; Arie Figer; Ralph Wong; Sheryl Koski; Mikhail Lichinitser; Tsai-Shen Yang; Fernando Rivera; Felix Couture; Florin Sirzén; Jim Cassidy Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-04-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Herbert Hurwitz; Louis Fehrenbacher; William Novotny; Thomas Cartwright; John Hainsworth; William Heim; Jordan Berlin; Ari Baron; Susan Griffing; Eric Holmgren; Napoleone Ferrara; Gwen Fyfe; Beth Rogers; Robert Ross; Fairooz Kabbinavar Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-06-03 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: E Van Cutsem; A Cervantes; R Adam; A Sobrero; J H Van Krieken; D Aderka; E Aranda Aguilar; A Bardelli; A Benson; G Bodoky; F Ciardiello; A D'Hoore; E Diaz-Rubio; J-Y Douillard; M Ducreux; A Falcone; A Grothey; T Gruenberger; K Haustermans; V Heinemann; P Hoff; C-H Köhne; R Labianca; P Laurent-Puig; B Ma; T Maughan; K Muro; N Normanno; P Österlund; W J G Oyen; D Papamichael; G Pentheroudakis; P Pfeiffer; T J Price; C Punt; J Ricke; A Roth; R Salazar; W Scheithauer; H J Schmoll; J Tabernero; J Taïeb; S Tejpar; H Wasan; T Yoshino; A Zaanan; D Arnold Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2016-07-05 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Freddie Bray; Jacques Ferlay; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Rebecca L Siegel; Lindsey A Torre; Ahmedin Jemal Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2018-09-12 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Julia Sánchez-Gundín; Ana María Fernández-Carballido; Lidia Martínez-Valdivieso; Dolores Barreda-Hernández; Ana Isabel Torres-Suárez Journal: Int J Med Sci Date: 2018-04-03 Impact factor: 3.738