-
1.
Bevacizumab as maintenance therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis of individual patients' data from 3 phase III studies.
Salvatore, L, Bria, E, Sperduti, I, Hinke, A, Hegewisch-Becker, S, Aparicio, T, Le Malicot, K, Boige, V, Koeberle, D, Baertschi, D, et al
Cancer treatment reviews. 2021;:102202
Abstract
BACKGROUND The real impact of bevacizumab maintenance as single agent in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains unclear. SAKK-41/06 and PRODIGE-9 failed to demonstrate the non-inferiority and superiority of bevacizumab versus no maintenance, respectively, while AIO-KRK-0207 showed the non-inferiority of maintenance bevacizumab versus bevacizumab and fluoropyrimidines for time to strategy failure. METHODS Bibliography electronic databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were searched for English published clinical trials prospectively randomizing mCRC patients to receive bevacizumab maintenance or not after first-line chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. Individual patients' data (IPD) were provided by investigators for all included trials. Primary end-points were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), both from the start of induction and maintenance. Univariate and multivariate analyses for PFS and OS were performed. RESULTS Three phase III studies - PRODIGE-9, AIO-KRK-0207 and SAKK-41/06 - were included. Considering the different timing of randomization, IPD of patients not progressed during induction and starting maintenance phase entered the analysis. 909 patients were included, 457 (50%) received bevacizumab maintenance. Median PFS from induction start was 9.6 and 8.9 months in bevacizumab group versus no maintenance group, respectively (HR 0.78; 95%CI: 0.68-0.89; p < 0.0001). Subgroups analysis for PFS showed a significant interaction according for RAS status (p = 0.048), with a maintenance benefit limited to RAS wild-type patients. No difference in terms of OS was observed. CONCLUSIONS Despite the statistically significant PFS improvement for bevacizumab maintenance, the absolute benefit appears limited. Subgroup analysis shows a differential effect of bevacizumab maintenance in favor of RAS wild-type patients. Considering these results, maintenance therapy with fluoropyrimidine with or without bevacizumab remains the first option. Single agent bevacizumab maintenance can be considered in selected cases, such as cumulative toxicity or patient's refusal, in particular for RAS wild-type patients.
-
2.
The efficacy and safety of bevacizumab combined with FOLFOX regimen in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Zhang, H, You, J, Liu, W, Chen, D, Zhang, S, Wang, X
Medicine. 2021;(30):e26714
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND It is necessary to systematically evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of bevacizumab (BEV) combined with 5-fluorouracil + leucovorin + oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) regimen in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer. METHODS We searched the PubMed et al databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the BEV combined with the FOLFOX regimen in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer up to January 20, 2021. The Cochrane Collaborations' risk of bias tool was used for the quality assessment of included RCTs. Revman5.3 software was used for meta-analysis. RESULTS Eleven RCTs with a total of 3178 patients with advanced colorectal cancer were included, meta-analysis results showed that the objective response rate (odds ratio [OR] = 3.15, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 2.25-4.40, P < .001) and cancer control rate (OR = 2.73, 95% CI: 1.91-3.90, P < .001) of BEV + FOLFOX were higher than that of FOLFOX group. And the incidence of gastrointestinal adverse reactions (OR = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.07-1.55, P = .008) in the BEV + FOLFOX group was higher than that of the FOLFOX group, there were no significant differences in the incidence of leukopenia (OR = 1.04, 95% CI: 0.72-1.50, P = .83), hypertension (OR = 3.92, 95% CI: 0.81-18.88, P = .09) and neurotoxicity (OR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.8-1.27, P = .98) between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION BEV combined with the FOLFOX regimen is more effective than the FOLFOX regimen alone in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer, but it may also increase the risk of gastrointestinal adverse reactions.
-
3.
Neurodevelopmental Outcomes after Bevacizumab Treatment for Retinopathy of Prematurity: A Meta-analysis.
Tsai, CY, Yeh, PT, Tsao, PN, Chung, YE, Chang, YS, Lai, TT
Ophthalmology. 2021;(6):877-888
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate neurodevelopmental outcomes after intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) therapy in retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) infants compared with those not exposed to IVB. CLINICAL RELEVANCE The primary concern regarding IVB treatment of ROP is the potential systemic side effects, especially the risk of causing severe neurodevelopmental impairment (sNDI). Results regarding neurodevelopmental outcomes after IVB therapy are conflicting. METHODS We conducted a meta-analysis and searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science for related publications from inception through March 12, 2020. The eligibility criteria were as follows: comparative studies of ROP patients that (1) included IVB as a treatment arm, (2) included a control group without bevacizumab treatment, and (3) reported on at least 1 neurodevelopmental outcome, such as sNDI, Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition (Bayley III), composition scores, or cerebral palsy (CP). The primary outcome was sNDI, with the odds ratio (OR) calculated. Secondary outcomes were mean differences (MDs) for cognitive, language, and motor scores (Bayley III) and OR for CP. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. RESULTS Eight studies, 6 including laser-controlled ROP infants and 2 including ROP infants not requiring treatment, were included. The weighted OR for sNDI in the IVB group was 1.39 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98-1.97). The weighted MDs were -1.92 (95% CI, -4.73 to 0.88), -1.32 (95% CI, -4.65 to 1.99), and -3.66 (95% CI, -6.79 to -0.54) for cognitive, language, and motor scores in Bayley III, respectively. The OR for CP was 1.20 (95% CI, 0.56-2.55). No differences were observed between the preset subgroups comprising laser-controlled ROP infants and ROP infants not requiring treatment. The current quality of evidence was rated as low (sNDI and all Bayley III scores) to very low (CP). CONCLUSIONS Risk of sNDI was not increased in ROP patients after IVB treatment. Bayley III scores were similar in the IVB and control groups, except for a minor difference in motor performance. These findings suggest that the risk of additional sNDI after IVB treatment is low. Randomized trials are warranted to provide a higher quality of evidence.
-
4.
PHACOEMULSIFICATION CATARACT SURGERY WITH PROPHYLACTIC INTRAVITREAL BEVACIZUMAB FOR PATIENTS WITH COEXISTING DIABETIC RETINOPATHY: A Meta-Analysis.
Feng, Y, Zhu, S, Skiadaresi, E, McAlinden, C, Tu, R, Gao, R, Stephens, JW, Wang, Q, Huang, J
Retina (Philadelphia, Pa.). 2019;(9):1720-1731
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) injection combined with cataract surgery in the treatment of patients with cataract and coexisting diabetic retinopathy (DR). METHODS Pertinent comparative studies were identified through systemic searches of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register up to March 1, 2016. Outcome measures included corrected distance vision acuity, central macular thickness, and progression of DR and maculopathy. A meta-analysis was performed using RevMan (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, United Kingdom). RESULTS Six studies describing a total of 283 eyes were identified. The meta-analysis results showed that corrected distance vision acuity measured at 1 month and 3 months after cataract surgery was significantly better in the IVB groups than in the control groups (P < 0.00001 and P = 0.01), whereas the corrected distance vision acuity at 6 months did not vary significantly between the 2 groups (P = 0.24). Similarly, the central macular thickness at 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery was significantly thinner in the IVB groups than in the control groups (P = 0.01, P = 0.0004, and P = 0.01, respectively). At 6 months, the progression of postoperative DR and maculopathy occurred more frequently in the control group than in the IVB group (P = 0.0001 and P < 0.0001, respectively). CONCLUSION Our meta-analysis indicates that cataract surgery combined with IVB seems to be an effective treatment in patients with coexisting DR in the short term (up to 6 months). More randomized, prospective, and large-sample-sized trials are needed to evaluate the long-term effects of IVB at the time of cataract surgery in patients with DR.
-
5.
Preoperative intravitreal bevacizumab for proliferative diabetic retinopathy patients undergoing vitrectomy - First update.
Pérez-Argandoña, E, Verdaguer, J, Zacharías, S, González, R
Medwave. 2019;(1):e7512
Abstract
UPDATE This Living FRISBEE (Living FRIendly Summary of the Body of Evidence using Epistemonikos) is an update of the summary published in December 2014. INTRODUCTION Proliferative diabetic retinopathy can cause severe vision loss and even blindness if left untreated. Vitrectomy is often required in the treatment of more severe cases. Preoperative administration of bevacizumab, a humanized anti-vascular endothelial growth factor would improve intraoperative variables that facilitate surgery and improve postoperative course. METHODS We searched in Epistemonikos, the largest database of systematic reviews in health, which is maintained by screening multiple information sources, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, among others. We extracted data from the systematic reviews, reanalyzed data of primary studies, conducted a meta-analysis and generated a summary of findings table using the GRADE approach. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS We identified five systematic reviews including 16 studies overall, of which 14 were randomized trials. We concluded the preoperative use of intravitreal bevacizumab reduces the rate of vitreous hemorrhage in the early postoperative period, and probably also in the late postoperative period, but its effect on visual acuity is not clear. Furthermore, it probably decreases the surgical time and may decrease the incidence of iatrogenic retinal breaks. Although we are uncertain whether preoperative bevacizumab decreases intraoperative bleeding, it may reduce the need for endodiathermy.
-
6.
Comparison of efficacy between anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and laser treatment in Type-1 and threshold retinopathy of prematurity (ROP).
Li, Z, Zhang, Y, Liao, Y, Zeng, R, Zeng, P, Lan, Y
BMC ophthalmology. 2018;(1):19
Abstract
BACKGROUND Retinopathy of Prematurity (ROP) is one of the most common causes of childhood blindness worldwide. Comparisons of anti-VEGF and laser treatments in ROP are relatively lacking, and the data are scattered and limited. The objective of this meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy of both treatments in type-1 and threshold ROP. METHODS A comprehensive literature search on ROP treatment was conducted using PubMed and Embase up to March 2017 in all languages. Major evaluation indexes were extracted from the included studies by two authors. The fixed-effects and random-effects models were used to measure the pooled estimates. The test of heterogeneity was performed using the Q statistic. RESULTS Ten studies were included in this meta-analysis. Retreatment incidence was significantly increased for anti-VEGF (OR 2.52; 95% CI 1.37 to 4.66; P = 0.003) compared to the laser treatment, while the incidences of eye complications (OR 0.29; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.82; P = 0.02) and myopia were significantly decreased with anti-VEGF compared to the laser treatment. However, there was no difference in the recurrence incidence (OR 1.86; 95% CI 0.37 to 9.40; P = 0.45) and time between treatment and retreatment (WMD 7.54 weeks; 95% CI 2.00 to 17.08; P = 0.12). CONCLUSION This meta-analysis indicates that laser treatment may be more efficacious than anti-VEGF treatment. However, the results of this meta-analysis also suggest that laser treatment may cause more eye complications and increase myopia. Large-scale prospective RCTs should be performed to assess the efficacy and safety of anti-VEGF versus laser treatment in the future.
-
7.
Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor combined with intravitreal steroids for diabetic macular oedema.
Mehta, H, Hennings, C, Gillies, MC, Nguyen, V, Campain, A, Fraser-Bell, S
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2018;(4):CD011599
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND The combination of steroid and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) intravitreal therapeutic agents could potentially have synergistic effects for treating diabetic macular oedema (DMO). On the one hand, if combined treatment is more effective than monotherapy, there would be significant implications for improving patient outcomes. Conversely, if there is no added benefit of combination therapy, then people could be potentially exposed to unnecessary local or systemic side effects. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of intravitreal agents that block vascular endothelial growth factor activity (anti-VEGF agents) plus intravitreal steroids versus monotherapy with macular laser, intravitreal steroids or intravitreal anti-VEGF agents for managing DMO. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2018, Issue 1); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; LILACS; the ISRCTN registry; ClinicalTrials.gov and the ICTRP. The date of the search was 21 February 2018. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of intravitreal anti-VEGF combined with intravitreal steroids versus intravitreal anti-VEGF alone, intravitreal steroids alone or macular laser alone for managing DMO. We included people with DMO of all ages and both sexes. We also included trials where both eyes from one participant received different treatments. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane.Two authors independently reviewed all the titles and abstracts identified from the electronic and manual searches against the inclusion criteria. Our primary outcome was change in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) between baseline and one year. Secondary outcomes included change in central macular thickness (CMT), economic data and quality of life. We considered adverse effects including intraocular inflammation, raised intraocular pressure (IOP) and development of cataract. MAIN RESULTS There were eight RCTs (703 participants, 817 eyes) that met our inclusion criteria with only three studies reporting outcomes at one year. The studies took place in Iran (3), USA (2), Brazil (1), Czech Republic (1) and South Korea (1). Seven studies used the unlicensed anti-VEGF agent bevacizumab and one study used licensed ranibizumab. The study that used licensed ranibizumab had a unique design compared with the other studies in that included eyes had persisting DMO after anti-VEGF monotherapy and received three monthly doses of ranibizumab prior to allocation. The anti-VEGF agent was combined with intravitreal triamcinolone in six studies and with an intravitreal dexamethasone implant in two studies. The comparator group was anti-VEGF alone in all studies; two studies had an additional steroid monotherapy arm, another study had an additional macular laser photocoagulation arm. Whilst we judged these studies to be at low risk of bias for most domains, at least one domain was at unclear risk in all studies.When comparing anti-VEGF/steroid with anti-VEGF monotherapy as primary therapy for DMO, we found no meaningful clinical difference in change in BCVA (mean difference (MD) -2.29 visual acuity (VA) letters, 95% confidence interval (CI) -6.03 to 1.45; 3 RCTs; 188 eyes; low-certainty evidence) or change in CMT (MD 0.20 μm, 95% CI -37.14 to 37.53; 3 RCTs; 188 eyes; low-certainty evidence) at one year. There was very low-certainty evidence on intraocular inflammation from 8 studies, with one event in the anti-VEGF/steroid group (313 eyes) and two events in the anti-VEGF group (322 eyes). There was a greater risk of raised IOP (Peto odds ratio (OR) 8.13, 95% CI 4.67 to 14.16; 635 eyes; 8 RCTs; moderate-certainty evidence) and development of cataract (Peto OR 7.49, 95% CI 2.87 to 19.60; 635 eyes; 8 RCTs; moderate-certainty evidence) in eyes receiving anti-VEGF/steroid compared with anti-VEGF monotherapy. There was low-certainty evidence from one study of an increased risk of systemic adverse events in the anti-VEGF/steroid group compared with the anti-VEGF alone group (Peto OR 1.32, 95% CI 0.61 to 2.86; 103 eyes).One study compared anti-VEGF/steroid versus macular laser therapy. At one year investigators did not report a meaningful difference between the groups in change in BCVA (MD 4.00 VA letters 95% CI -2.70 to 10.70; 80 eyes; low-certainty evidence) or change in CMT (MD -16.00 μm, 95% CI -68.93 to 36.93; 80 eyes; low-certainty evidence). There was very low-certainty evidence suggesting an increased risk of cataract in the anti-VEGF/steroid group compared with the macular laser group (Peto OR 4.58, 95% 0.99 to 21.10, 100 eyes) and an increased risk of elevated IOP in the anti-VEGF/steroid group compared with the macular laser group (Peto OR 9.49, 95% CI 2.86 to 31.51; 100 eyes).One study provided very low-certainty evidence comparing anti-VEGF/steroid versus steroid monotherapy at one year. There was no evidence of a meaningful difference in BCVA between treatments at one year (MD 0 VA letters, 95% CI -6.1 to 6.1, low-certainty evidence). Likewise, there was no meaningful difference in the mean CMT at one year (MD - 9 μm, 95% CI -39.87μm to 21.87μm between the anti-VEGF/steroid group and the steroid group. There was very low-certainty evidence on raised IOP at one year comparing the anti-VEGF/steroid versus steroid groups (Peto OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.16 to 3.55).No included study reported impact of treatment on patients' quality of life or economic data. None of the studies reported any cases of endophthalmitis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Combination of intravitreal anti-VEGF plus intravitreal steroids does not appear to offer additional visual benefit compared with monotherapy for DMO; at present the evidence for this is of low-certainty. There was an increased rate of cataract development and raised intraocular pressure in eyes treated with anti-VEGF plus steroid versus anti-VEGF alone. Patients were exposed to potential side effects of both these agents without reported additional benefit. The majority of the evidence comes from studies of bevacizumab and triamcinolone used as primary therapy for DMO. There is limited evidence from studies using licensed intravitreal anti-VEGF agents plus licensed intravitreal steroid implants with at least one year follow-up. It is not known whether treatment response is different in eyes that are phakic and pseudophakic at baseline.
-
8.
Overview of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses on Systemic Adverse Events Associated With Intravitreal Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Medication Use.
Thulliez, M, Angoulvant, D, Pisella, PJ, Bejan-Angoulvant, T
JAMA ophthalmology. 2018;(5):557-566
Abstract
IMPORTANCE The systemic safety of intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) medications is still a matter of debate. OBJECTIVE This overview of systematic reviews evaluates systemic adverse events associated with intravitreal anti-VEGF treatments in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration, diabetic macular edema, or retinal vein occlusion. DESIGN, EVIDENCE, AND REPORTING This systematic search of PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials database includes meta-analyses and systematic reviews. We describe the summary measures of association between anti-VEGF treatments and outcomes reported in each systematic review. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The quality of the systematic reviews was assessed with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist and A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) checklist, version 1. FINDINGS We retrieved 21 systematic reviews published between January 1, 2011, and June 30, 2016. Of these, 11 analyzed systemic adverse events as the primary outcome. The median (interquartile range) PRISMA and AMSTAR scores were 23 of 27 (15-27) and 8 of 11 (5-11), respectively, but 5 reviews (25%) scored below 20 and 7, respectively. All reviews used an objective scale to assess methodological risk of bias in their included studies, the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool being the most commonly used (16 reviews [76%]). Anti-VEGF treatments did not increase the risk of systemic adverse events when compared with control regimens; similarly, there was no increase in systematic adverse events when treatment was given on a monthly schedule vs an as-needed regimen. Compared with ranibizumab, bevacizumab did not appear to be associated with an increase in the risk of systemic adverse events in the most recent and exhaustive reviews. Compared with control treatments, ranibizumab may be associated with an increase in the risk of nonocular hemorrhage in patients with age-related macular degeneration. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This overview of reviews and meta-analyses suggest that anti-VEGF treatments do not increase the risk of systemic adverse events, but that caution might be advisable in older patients with age-related macular degeneration who may be at higher risk of hemorrhagic events when receiving ranibizumab.
-
9.
Differential histopathologic parameters in colorectal cancer liver metastases resected after triplets plus bevacizumab or cetuximab: a pooled analysis of five prospective trials.
Cremolini, C, Milione, M, Marmorino, F, Morano, F, Zucchelli, G, Mennitto, A, Prisciandaro, M, Lonardi, S, Pellegrinelli, A, Rossini, D, et al
British journal of cancer. 2018;(7):955-965
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Many factors, including histopathologic parameters, seem to influence the prognosis of patients undergoing resection of colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRCLM), although their relative weight is unclear. Histopathologic growth patterns (HGPs) of CRCLM may affect sensitivity to antiangiogenics. We aimed at evaluating differences in histopathologic parameters of response according to the use of bevacizumab or cetuximab as first-line targeted agents, and at exploring the prognostic and predictive role of HGPs. METHODS We performed a comprehensive histopathologic characterisation of CRCLM from 159 patients who underwent secondary resection, after receiving triplets FOLFOXIRI (folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan) or COI (capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan) plus bevacizumab (N = 103) vs cetuximab (N = 56) in five first-line no-profit clinical trials. RESULTS Both major histopathologic response (tumour regression grade TRG1-2, 32 vs 14%, p = 0.013) and infarct-like necrosis (80 vs 64%, p = 0.035) were significantly higher in the bevacizumab than in the cetuximab group. Achieving major response positively affected relapse-free survival (RFS) (p = 0.012) and overall survival (OS) (p = 0.045), also in multivariable models (RFS, p = 0.008; OS, p = 0.033). In the desmoplastic HGP (N = 28), a higher percentage of major response was reported (57 vs 17% in pushing and 22% in replacement HGP, p < 0.001) and an unsignificant advantage from cetuximab vs bevacizumab was evident in RFS (p = 0.116). In the pushing HGP (N = 66), a significant benefit from bevacizumab vs cetuximab (p = 0.017) was observed. No difference was described in the replacement HGP (N = 65, p = 0.615). CONCLUSIONS The histopathologic response is the only independent determinant of survival in patients resected after triplets plus a biologic. When associated with triplet chemotherapy, bevacizumab induces a higher histopathologic response rate than cetuximab. The assessment of HGPs should be further explored as a predictor of benefit from available targeted agents.
-
10.
Letter to the Editor: Efficacy of the Intravitreal Sustained-Release Dexamethasone Implant for DME Refractory to Anti-VEGF Therapy: Meta-Analysis and Clinical Implications.
Hennings, C, Evans, J, Mehta, H
Ophthalmic surgery, lasers & imaging retina. 2018;(9):654-655