Comparative efficacy and safety of low-dose versus high-dose bevacizumab in ovarian cancer: An indirect treatment comparison

IF 4.5 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Josée-Lyne Ethier , Cal Shephard , Diana P. Granados , Nikkita Dutta , Rana Qadeer , Saima Ahmad , Ellen Kasireddy , Mir-Masoud Pourrahmat , Mir Sohail Fazeli
{"title":"Comparative efficacy and safety of low-dose versus high-dose bevacizumab in ovarian cancer: An indirect treatment comparison","authors":"Josée-Lyne Ethier ,&nbsp;Cal Shephard ,&nbsp;Diana P. Granados ,&nbsp;Nikkita Dutta ,&nbsp;Rana Qadeer ,&nbsp;Saima Ahmad ,&nbsp;Ellen Kasireddy ,&nbsp;Mir-Masoud Pourrahmat ,&nbsp;Mir Sohail Fazeli","doi":"10.1016/j.ygyno.2025.03.022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>First-line therapy for ovarian cancer involves cytoreductive surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy, with or without bevacizumab. Bevacizumab can be administered at low (7.5 mg/kg every three weeks [Q3W]) or high dose (15 mg/kg Q3W). This study compared the efficacy and safety of these dosing strategies.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Systematic literature review of Embase, MEDLINE®, and CENTRAL (18/09/2023) identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating bevacizumab versus any therapy or control in ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer. Indirect treatment comparisons (ITC) of response, survival, and safety outcomes were performed, including sensitivity/subgroup analyses adjusting for heterogeneity.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Six RCTs (sample size: 24–1528 patients) were included for ITC. Five evaluated high-dose bevacizumab with chemotherapy. The common comparator was carboplatin + paclitaxel. Trials mainly included stage III (<em>n</em> = 4) or stage II-III (<em>n</em> = 1) ovarian cancer patients; one did not report cancer stage. Primary analyses showed no significant differences between low- versus high-dose bevacizumab for partial response (risk ratio [95 % confidence interval]: 0.66 [0.42, 1.02]), complete response (1.76 [0.76, 4.11]), objective response rate (1.01 [0.63, 1.61]), progressive disease (1.08 [0.38, 3.10]), clinical benefit (0.89 [0.76, 1.03]), any grade ≥ 3 adverse event (1.53 [0.96, 2.44]), specific grade ≥ 3 adverse events, overall survival (hazard ratio: 0.93 [0.77, 1.13]), or progression-free survival (1.02 [0.86, 1.22]). Sensitivity and subgroup analyses confirmed findings.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>This ITC found no significant difference in clinical outcomes between low- and high-dose bevacizumab combination therapy. Despite limitations of small sample size and heterogeneities, findings suggest that bevacizumab dose may not significantly impact ovarian cancer outcomes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12853,"journal":{"name":"Gynecologic oncology","volume":"196 ","pages":"Pages 1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gynecologic oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0090825825000915","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

First-line therapy for ovarian cancer involves cytoreductive surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy, with or without bevacizumab. Bevacizumab can be administered at low (7.5 mg/kg every three weeks [Q3W]) or high dose (15 mg/kg Q3W). This study compared the efficacy and safety of these dosing strategies.

Methods

Systematic literature review of Embase, MEDLINE®, and CENTRAL (18/09/2023) identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating bevacizumab versus any therapy or control in ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer. Indirect treatment comparisons (ITC) of response, survival, and safety outcomes were performed, including sensitivity/subgroup analyses adjusting for heterogeneity.

Results

Six RCTs (sample size: 24–1528 patients) were included for ITC. Five evaluated high-dose bevacizumab with chemotherapy. The common comparator was carboplatin + paclitaxel. Trials mainly included stage III (n = 4) or stage II-III (n = 1) ovarian cancer patients; one did not report cancer stage. Primary analyses showed no significant differences between low- versus high-dose bevacizumab for partial response (risk ratio [95 % confidence interval]: 0.66 [0.42, 1.02]), complete response (1.76 [0.76, 4.11]), objective response rate (1.01 [0.63, 1.61]), progressive disease (1.08 [0.38, 3.10]), clinical benefit (0.89 [0.76, 1.03]), any grade ≥ 3 adverse event (1.53 [0.96, 2.44]), specific grade ≥ 3 adverse events, overall survival (hazard ratio: 0.93 [0.77, 1.13]), or progression-free survival (1.02 [0.86, 1.22]). Sensitivity and subgroup analyses confirmed findings.

Conclusions

This ITC found no significant difference in clinical outcomes between low- and high-dose bevacizumab combination therapy. Despite limitations of small sample size and heterogeneities, findings suggest that bevacizumab dose may not significantly impact ovarian cancer outcomes.

Abstract Image

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Gynecologic oncology
Gynecologic oncology 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
6.40%
发文量
1062
审稿时长
37 days
期刊介绍: Gynecologic Oncology, an international journal, is devoted to the publication of clinical and investigative articles that concern tumors of the female reproductive tract. Investigations relating to the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of female cancers, as well as research from any of the disciplines related to this field of interest, are published. Research Areas Include: • Cell and molecular biology • Chemotherapy • Cytology • Endocrinology • Epidemiology • Genetics • Gynecologic surgery • Immunology • Pathology • Radiotherapy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信