Aflibercept-Based and Bevacizumab-Based Second Line Regimens in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Propensity Score Weighted-Analysis from a Multicenter Cohort.
Jessica Lucchetti, Lorenzo Angotti, Alessandro Parisi, Michele Basso, Mariam Grazia Polito, Federica Zoratto, Emanuela Di Giacomo, Daniele Nitti, Alessandro Minelli, Lisa Salvatore, Maria Alessandra Calegari, Federica Lo Prinzi, Donatello Gemma, Carlo Signorelli, Margherita Veroli, Annunziato Anghelone, Luca Galbato Muscio, Barbara Di Cocco, Giorgio Trombetta, Cristina Morelli, Francesco Schietroma, Bruno Vincenzi, Alessio Cortellini, Giuseppe Tonini
{"title":"Aflibercept-Based and Bevacizumab-Based Second Line Regimens in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Propensity Score Weighted-Analysis from a Multicenter Cohort.","authors":"Jessica Lucchetti, Lorenzo Angotti, Alessandro Parisi, Michele Basso, Mariam Grazia Polito, Federica Zoratto, Emanuela Di Giacomo, Daniele Nitti, Alessandro Minelli, Lisa Salvatore, Maria Alessandra Calegari, Federica Lo Prinzi, Donatello Gemma, Carlo Signorelli, Margherita Veroli, Annunziato Anghelone, Luca Galbato Muscio, Barbara Di Cocco, Giorgio Trombetta, Cristina Morelli, Francesco Schietroma, Bruno Vincenzi, Alessio Cortellini, Giuseppe Tonini","doi":"10.1016/j.clcc.2024.12.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Both aflibercept and bevacizumab-based regimens are available II-line treatment options for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, no head-to-head trials established the optimal anti-angiogenic strategy for this setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We launched a multicenter, retrospective, observational study to assess and compare clinical efficacy of II-line treatments for patients with mCRC. Patients with KRAS/NRAS/BRAF-wild type and KRAS/NRAS mutant tumors were also analyzed separately.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>348 patients were included, of whom 153 and 195 were treated with bevacizumab- and aflibercept-based regimens, respectively. Patients treated with aflibercept showed an increased risk of death (corrected [co]-HR 1.92, 95 %CI: 1.37-2.68), of disease progression/death (co-HR 1.43, 95 %CI: 1.12-1.82) and a decreased objective response rate (ORR) (21.5 % vs 34.7 %, p=0.007) in comparison to bevacizumab. Patients treated with II-line bevacizumab were more frequently treated in the third line setting after disease progression (91.1 % vs 68.5 %, p<0.0001). In the KRAS/NRAS mutant cohort, treatment with bevacizumab was associated with longer overall survival (OS) (18.0 months vs 12.5 months, p=0.0069), but similar progression free survival (PFS) (p=0.32) and ORR (p=0.57). In the KRAS/NRAS, BRAF wild type cohort, patients treated with bevacizumab achieved longer OS (20.2 months vs 10.6 months, p=0.013), PFS (8.4 months vs 3.7 months, p=0.0002), and higher ORR (48.6 % vs 15.0 %, p=0.0016), compared to those treated with aflibercept. The results were independently confirmed with inverse probability of treatment weighting and with fixed multivariable Cox-regressions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings support the use of bevacizumab-based over aflibercept-based regimens as II-line treatment in mCRC, especially in KRAS/NRAS and BRAF wild type tumors.</p>","PeriodicalId":93939,"journal":{"name":"Clinical colorectal cancer","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical colorectal cancer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clcc.2024.12.007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Both aflibercept and bevacizumab-based regimens are available II-line treatment options for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, no head-to-head trials established the optimal anti-angiogenic strategy for this setting.
Methods: We launched a multicenter, retrospective, observational study to assess and compare clinical efficacy of II-line treatments for patients with mCRC. Patients with KRAS/NRAS/BRAF-wild type and KRAS/NRAS mutant tumors were also analyzed separately.
Findings: 348 patients were included, of whom 153 and 195 were treated with bevacizumab- and aflibercept-based regimens, respectively. Patients treated with aflibercept showed an increased risk of death (corrected [co]-HR 1.92, 95 %CI: 1.37-2.68), of disease progression/death (co-HR 1.43, 95 %CI: 1.12-1.82) and a decreased objective response rate (ORR) (21.5 % vs 34.7 %, p=0.007) in comparison to bevacizumab. Patients treated with II-line bevacizumab were more frequently treated in the third line setting after disease progression (91.1 % vs 68.5 %, p<0.0001). In the KRAS/NRAS mutant cohort, treatment with bevacizumab was associated with longer overall survival (OS) (18.0 months vs 12.5 months, p=0.0069), but similar progression free survival (PFS) (p=0.32) and ORR (p=0.57). In the KRAS/NRAS, BRAF wild type cohort, patients treated with bevacizumab achieved longer OS (20.2 months vs 10.6 months, p=0.013), PFS (8.4 months vs 3.7 months, p=0.0002), and higher ORR (48.6 % vs 15.0 %, p=0.0016), compared to those treated with aflibercept. The results were independently confirmed with inverse probability of treatment weighting and with fixed multivariable Cox-regressions.
Conclusion: These findings support the use of bevacizumab-based over aflibercept-based regimens as II-line treatment in mCRC, especially in KRAS/NRAS and BRAF wild type tumors.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
