Dataset Information

Neoadjuvant Bevacizumab plus Chemotherapy versus Chemotherapy Alone to Treat Non-Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Results from previous randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating whether the addition of bevacizumab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) could statistically significantly increase the pathological complete response (pCR) and to identify which subgroup would benefit most from such regimens have produced conflicting results. This meta-analysis was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone in the neoadjuvant setting.

Methods

A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane library was performed to identify eligible studies. The primary endpoint of interest was pCR. The secondary endpoints were clinical complete rate (cCR), surgery rate, breast-conserving surgery (BCS) rate, and toxicity. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager software version 5.3.

Results

Nine RCTs matched the selection criteria, yielding a total of 4967 patients (bevacizumab plus chemotherapy: 50.1%, chemotherapy alone: 49.9%). The results of this meta-analysis demonstrated that the addition of bevacizumab to NAC significantly increased the pCR rate (odds ratio [OR] = 1.34 [1.18-1.54]; P < 0.0001) compared with chemotherapy alone. Subgroup analysis showed that the effect of bevacizumab was more pronounced in patients with HER2-negative cancer (OR = 1.34 [1.17-1.54]; P < 0.0001) compared with HER2-positive cancer (OR = 1.69 [0.90-3.20]; P = 0.11). Similarly, in patients with HER2-negative cancer, the effect of bevacizumab was also more pronounced in patients with HR-negative cancer (OR = 1.38 [1.09-1.74]; P = 0.007) compared with HR-positive cancer (OR = 1.36 [0.78-2.35]; P = 0.27). No significant differences were observed between the groups with respect to cCR, surgery rate, or BCS rate. Additionally bevacizumab was associated with a higher incidence of neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and hand-foot syndrome.

Conclusions

Higher proportions of patients achieved pCR when bevacizumab was added to NAC compared with when they received chemotherapy alone; acceptable toxicities were also found. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that patients with histologically confirmed HER2-negative and HR-negative breast cancer benefited the most.

SUBMITTER: Cao L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4699216 | biostudies-literature | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Neoadjuvant Bevacizumab plus Chemotherapy versus Chemotherapy Alone to Treat Non-Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.

Cao Li L Yao Guang-yu GY Liu Min-feng MF Chen Lu-jia LJ Hu Xiao-lei XL Ye Chang-sheng CS

PloS one 20151230 12

<h4>Purpose</h4>Results from previous randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating whether the addition of bevacizumab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) could statistically significantly increase the pathological complete response (pCR) and to identify which subgroup would benefit most from such regimens have produced conflicting results. This meta-analysis was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone in the neoadjuvant set ...[more]

PMID: 26717149

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background To date, none of randomised trials aim to compare the efficacy of programmed death 1 (PD-1) inhibitor plus chemotherapy and bevacizumab plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This analysis pooled prospective data to compare the survival benefits of the two regimens for advanced NSCLC without targetable genetic mutations. Methods Data were pooled from three randomised phase III clinical trials: NCT03607539, NCT03134872 and NCT02954172. 466 patients received PD-1 inhibitor (200 mg) plus pemetrexed (500 mg/m²) and platinum (cisplatin 75 mg/m2 or carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) 5 mg/mL/min), while 432 patients received bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) plus paclitaxel (175 mg/m2) and carboplatin (AUC 6 mg/mL/min). Propensity score matching in a 1:1 ratio was performed to balance baseline characteristics of the two arms. The endpoints of this analysis were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and objective response rate (ORR). Results In total, 375 patients in each arm were matched. With a median follow-up of 23 months (IQR 21–26), results showed that median PFS was significantly prolonged in the PD-1 inhibitor arm than in the bevacizumab arm (10.1 vs 7.4 months; HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.73, p<0.001). Improved OS was also demonstrated in the PD-1 inhibitor arm (27.9 vs 20.2 months; HR 0.75 95% CI 0.61 to 0.91, p=0.004). ORR in the PD-1 inhibitor arm was 56.8%, while that in the bevacizumab arm was 45.1%. However, exploratory subgroup analysis indicated that median PFS and median OS of the two arms were comparable in patients with negative programmed death ligand 1 expression or in patients aged ≥65 years old. Conclusions PD-1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy was associated with significant survival benefits compared with bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC, which provides evidence support to guide clinical practice. Nonetheless, the comparative survival outcomes in several subgroups indicated that bevacizumab plus chemotherapy still mattered.

Project description:BACKGROUND:A previous systematic review found that giving neoadjuvant chemotherapy before surgery improved survival compared with radiotherapy. However, the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus surgery alone is still unclear. OBJECTIVES:To assess the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in women with early or locally-advanced cervical cancer. SEARCH METHODS:We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library) (to Issue 8, 2012), MEDLINE (OVID) (to Aug 2012), LILACS (to Aug 2012), Physician's Data Query (PDQ) (to Aug 2012). We sought both published and unpublished trials and undertook systematic searches of a number of trial sources with no restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA:Randomised trials comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy with surgery in women with early or locally-advanced cervical cancer who had not undergone any prior treatment likely to interfere with the treatment comparison. Trials giving radical radiotherapy for inoperable tumours and/or post-operative radiotherapy were also eligible. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), local and distant recurrence, rates of resection and surgical morbidity. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:Two authors independently extracted and checked data from trial reports, Depending on the type of outcome, trial hazard ratios (HRs) and odds ratios (ORs) were obtained or estimated from trial reports, or sought from trial investigators. MAIN RESULTS:Six trials (1078 women) were identified for inclusion in this updated review. All six trials provided data on OS (1071 women) and PFS (1027 women). Data on resection rates and pathological response were only available for five trials (908 to 940 women) and data on recurrence were only available for four trials (737 women). Both OS (HR 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 0.96, P = 0.02) and PFS (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.93, P = 0.008) were significantly improved with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The estimate for local recurrence was in favour of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.99, P = 0.04), although heterogeneity was observed. The result was no longer significant when the random-effects model was used (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.12, P = 0.11). Whilst not significant, estimates for distant recurrence (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.14, P = 0.16) and rates of resection (OR 1.55, 95% CI 0.96 to 2.50, P = 0.07) tended to favour neoadjuvant chemotherapy, although heterogeneity was observed. Exploratory analyses of pathological response showed a significant decrease in adverse pathological findings with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.73, P = < 0.0001 for lymph node status; OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.82, P = 0.002 for parametrial infiltration) which, despite substantial heterogeneity, was still significant when the random-effects model was used. There were also no differences in the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on survival according to total cisplatin dose, chemotherapy cycle length or by cervical cancer stage. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:Both OS and PFS were improved with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Although the effects were less clear on all other pre-specified outcomes, they all tended to be in favour of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Whilst these results appear to indicate that neoadjuvant chemotherapy may offer a benefit over surgery alone for women with early-stage or locally-advanced cervical cancer, the evidence is based on only a small number of trials, and further research may be warranted.

Project description:BackgroundFor treating recurrent glioblastoma, for which there is no established treatment, the antiangiogenic antibody, bevacizumab, is used alone or with irinotecan. This study was aimed at comparing the survival of patients with recurrent glioblastoma receiving bevacizumab monotherapy and those receiving bevacizumab plus irinotecan combination therapy (B+I) by using a nationwide population-based dataset.MethodsPatients matching the International Classification of Diseases code C71.x were screened from the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service database. From January 2008 to November 2021, patients who underwent surgery or biopsy and subsequent standard concurrent chemoradiation with temozolomide were included. Among them, those who received bevacizumab monotherapy or B+I were selected. Demographic characteristics, inpatient stay, prescription frequency, survival outcomes, and steroid prescription duration were compared between these two groups.ResultsEight hundred and forty-six patients who underwent surgery or biopsy and received concurrent chemoradiotherapy with temozolomide were included. Of these, 450 and 396 received bevacizumab monotherapy and B+I, respectively. The corresponding median overall survival from the initial surgery was 22.60 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 20.50-24.21) and 20.44 months (95% CI, 18.55-22.60; P = 0.508, log-rank test). The B+I group had significantly more bevacizumab prescriptions (median 5 times; BEV group: median 3 times). Cox analysis, based on the postsurgery period, revealed that male sex (hazard ratio [HR], 1.28; P = 0.002), older age (HR, 1.01; P = 0.042), and undergoing biopsy instead of surgery (HR, 1.79; P < 0.0001) were significantly associated with decreased survival. Fewer radiotherapy cycles correlated with improved survival outcomes (HR, 0.63; P = 0.001). Cox analysis, conducted from the start of chemotherapy including bevacizumab, showed that male sex was the only variable significantly associated with decreased survival (HR, 1.18; P = 0.044).ConclusionWe found no significant difference in overall survival between the bevacizumab monotherapy and B+I groups. Considering the additional potential toxicity associated with irinotecan, bevacizumab monotherapy could be a suitable treatment option for treating recurrent glioblastoma.

Dataset Information

Neoadjuvant Bevacizumab plus Chemotherapy versus Chemotherapy Alone to Treat Non-Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Neoadjuvant Bevacizumab plus Chemotherapy versus Chemotherapy Alone to Treat Non-Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets