Bevacizumab or Aflibercept in Combination with Second-Line FOLFIRI after Progression on FOLFOX Plus Bevacizumab in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Comparative Study.
Okan Aydin, Sermin Dinc Sonusen, Asli Buyukkuscu, Seyyit Bayram Sahin, Serhat Kalkan, Ahmet Emin Ozturk, Mert Erciyestepe, Fatih Atalah, Zehra Sucuoglu Isleyen, Emir Celik, Kayhan Erturk, Muhammed Mustafa Atci
{"title":"Bevacizumab or Aflibercept in Combination with Second-Line FOLFIRI after Progression on FOLFOX Plus Bevacizumab in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Comparative Study.","authors":"Okan Aydin, Sermin Dinc Sonusen, Asli Buyukkuscu, Seyyit Bayram Sahin, Serhat Kalkan, Ahmet Emin Ozturk, Mert Erciyestepe, Fatih Atalah, Zehra Sucuoglu Isleyen, Emir Celik, Kayhan Erturk, Muhammed Mustafa Atci","doi":"10.7150/jca.138530","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The optimal anti-angiogenic strategy in the second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after progression on first-line FOLFOX plus bevacizumab remains unclear. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of FOLFIRI combined with bevacizumab or aflibercept in this well-defined clinical setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this retrospective single-center study, 152 patients with mCRC who progressed after at least four cycles of first-line FOLFOX plus bevacizumab were included. Of these, 92 patients received FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab and 60 received FOLFIRI plus aflibercept as second-line therapy. Stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied to account for baseline differences between treatment groups. PFS and OS were evaluated using IPTW-weighted Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No statistically significant difference was observed between the bevacizumab and aflibercept groups for PFS (HR: 1.302, 95% CI: 0.929-1.825, p=0.125) or OS (HR: 1.212, 95% CI: 0.846-1.736, p=0.295) in the IPTW-weighted analyses. Treatment type was not independently associated with PFS or OS in multivariate analyses. Grade 3-4 toxicities were observed in both groups, with neutropenia being the most common; thrombocytopenia and neutropenia were numerically more frequent in the aflibercept group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>No statistically significant differences in efficacy were observed between FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab and FOLFIRI plus aflibercept in patients with mCRC progressing after first-line FOLFOX plus bevacizumab. Both strategies represent reasonable second-line options in this setting, highlighting the need for prospective studies to define the optimal sequencing of anti-angiogenic therapies.</p>","PeriodicalId":15183,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cancer","volume":"17 10","pages":"1733-1743"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13617413/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7150/jca.138530","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: The optimal anti-angiogenic strategy in the second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after progression on first-line FOLFOX plus bevacizumab remains unclear. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of FOLFIRI combined with bevacizumab or aflibercept in this well-defined clinical setting.
Methods: In this retrospective single-center study, 152 patients with mCRC who progressed after at least four cycles of first-line FOLFOX plus bevacizumab were included. Of these, 92 patients received FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab and 60 received FOLFIRI plus aflibercept as second-line therapy. Stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied to account for baseline differences between treatment groups. PFS and OS were evaluated using IPTW-weighted Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses.
Results: No statistically significant difference was observed between the bevacizumab and aflibercept groups for PFS (HR: 1.302, 95% CI: 0.929-1.825, p=0.125) or OS (HR: 1.212, 95% CI: 0.846-1.736, p=0.295) in the IPTW-weighted analyses. Treatment type was not independently associated with PFS or OS in multivariate analyses. Grade 3-4 toxicities were observed in both groups, with neutropenia being the most common; thrombocytopenia and neutropenia were numerically more frequent in the aflibercept group.
Conclusion: No statistically significant differences in efficacy were observed between FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab and FOLFIRI plus aflibercept in patients with mCRC progressing after first-line FOLFOX plus bevacizumab. Both strategies represent reasonable second-line options in this setting, highlighting the need for prospective studies to define the optimal sequencing of anti-angiogenic therapies.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Cancer is an open access, peer-reviewed journal with broad scope covering all areas of cancer research, especially novel concepts, new methods, new regimens, new therapeutic agents, and alternative approaches for early detection and intervention of cancer. The Journal is supported by an international editorial board consisting of a distinguished team of cancer researchers. Journal of Cancer aims at rapid publication of high quality results in cancer research while maintaining rigorous peer-review process.