Simulations to Predict Clinical Trial Outcome of Bevacizumab Plus Chemotherapy vs. Chemotherapy Alone in Patients With First-Line Gastric Cancer and Elevated Plasma VEGF-A.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Han K
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4961078 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Simulations to Predict Clinical Trial Outcome of Bevacizumab Plus Chemotherapy vs. Chemotherapy Alone in Patients With First-Line Gastric Cancer and Elevated Plasma VEGF-A.
Han Kelong K Claret L L Piao Y Y Hegde P P Joshi A A Powell J R JR Jin J J Bruno R R
CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology 20160712 7
To simulate clinical trials to assess overall survival (OS) benefit of bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy in selected patients with gastric cancer (GC), a modeling framework linking OS with tumor growth inhibition (TGI) metrics and baseline patient characteristics was developed. Various TGI metrics were estimated using TGI models and data from two phase III studies comparing bevacizumab plus chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy as first-line therapy in 976 GC patients. Time-to-tumor-growth (T ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:The addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy has demonstrated efficacy as a first-line treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Whether this combination is effective as a salvage treatment for patients with NSCLC remains unclear. The present retrospective study was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of chemotherapy plus bevacizumab with chemotherapy alone as a third-line, or continuing, treatment for patients with NSCLC. Between January 2011 and June 2016, a total of 38 patients with stage IV NSCLC who had received chemotherapy plus bevacizumab subsequent to failure of ≥2 prior regimens were matched with 38 patients who had received chemotherapy alone using propensity score matching from a dataset of 165 patients. The variables that were analyzed included age, sex, smoking history, histology, epithelial growth factor receptor mutation status, number of prior regimens and type of chemotherapy regimen. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to evaluate the prognostic factors for survival outcomes and tumor response, and toxicity analyses were performed. The objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) were improved in patients who underwent chemotherapy-bevacizumab treatment compared with chemotherapy alone (ORR, 23.7 vs. 5.3%, P<0.001; DCR, 65.8 vs. 31.6%, P<0.001). Progression-free survival was prolonged in the chemotherapy-bevacizumab group compared with the chemotherapy-alone group (median, 3.9 vs. 2.2 months; HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.32-0.89, P=0.014). Incidence of ≥grade 3 adverse events was low and similar across the groups. The combination of chemotherapy and bevacizumab is a potentially effective and safe alternative salvage treatment for patients with NSCLC who have not received bevacizumab treatment previously.
| S-EPMC5844063 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) is an important mechanism of resistance to angiogenesis inhibition. The ability of EMT pathway genetic variants to predict the efficacy of antiangiogenic therapy is unknown. We analyzed associations between functional SNPs in EMT-related genes and outcomes in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients undergoing first-line bevacizumab-based chemotherapy. A total of 220 mCRC patients were included in this study: 143 patients treated with first-line bevacizumab-based chemotherapy (bevacizumab cohort) and 77 patients treated with cetuximab-based chemotherapy (cetuximab cohort). SNPs in TWIST1 (rs2285682, rs2285681), ZEB1 (rs10826943, rs2839658), SNAIL (rs1543442, rs4647958), and E-cadherin (rs16260) genes were analyzed by PCR-based direct sequencing. Patients carrying a TWIST1 rs2285682 G allele had a significantly longer median progression-free survival (PFS) of 18.1 months and overall survival (OS) of 44.1 months compared with those with the T/T genotype, who had a median PFS of 13.3 months (HR, 0.57; P = 0.003) and OS of 29.2 months (HR, 0.53; P = 0.001) in the bevacizumab cohort. In multivariate analysis, associations between TWIST1 rs2285682 and PFS and OS remained significant. Among women, the G allele of TWIST1 rs2285682 (PFS HR, 0.39; P = 0.007; OS HR, 0.30; P = 0.001) and TWIST1 rs2285681 (PFS HR, 0.27; P < 0.001; OS HR, 0.25; P < 0.001) was associated with improved survival. No significant associations were found in the cetuximab cohort. Our findings suggest that TWIST1 polymorphisms are associated with survival in mCRC patients treated with first-line bevacizumab-based chemotherapy and may serve as clinically useful biomarkers for antiangiogenic therapy. Mol Cancer Ther; 15(6); 1405-11. ©2016 AACR.
| S-EPMC4893985 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThis study demonstrates that tislelizumab in combination with chemotherapy is associated with improved progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with advanced squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (sq-NSCLC).ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy and safety/tolerability of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy alone as first-line treatment for patients with advanced sq-NSCLC.Design, setting, and participantsThis open-label, randomized phase 3 clinical trial was conducted at 46 sites in China between July 2018 and June 2019 and included patients with treatment-naive, histologically confirmed stage IIIB/IV sq-NSCLC. The data cutoff for these analyses was December 6, 2019; data extraction occurred on January 7, 2020.InterventionsPatients were randomized (1:1:1) to receive 1 of the following regimens intravenously on a 21-day cycle: tislelizumab (200 mg, day 1) plus paclitaxel (175 mg/m2, day 1) and carboplatin (area under the concentration of 5, day 1) (arm A); tislelizumab plus nab-paclitaxel (100 mg/m2, days 1, 8, and 15) and carboplatin (arm B); and paclitaxel and carboplatin (arm C). Patients were stratified by disease stage and tumor programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression (<1% vs 1%-49% vs ≥50%).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by an independent review committee (IRC). Secondary end points included overall survival, investigator-assessed (INV) PFS, IRC-assessed objective response rate (ORR), and IRC-assessed duration of response, as well as the incidence and severity of adverse events (AEs).ResultsOverall, 355 patients (median [range] age, 62 [34-74] years; 330 men [91.7%]) with sq-NSCLC received treatment. After a median study follow-up of 8.6 months (95% CI, 8.1-9.0 months), IRC-assessed PFS was significantly improved with tislelizumab plus chemotherapy (arm A, 7.6 months; arm B, 7.6 months) vs chemotherapy alone (arm C, 5.5 months; hazard ratios were 0.524 (95% CI, 0.370-0.742; P < .001 [A vs C]) and 0.478 (95% CI, 0.336-0.679; P < .001 [B vs C]). Higher IRC-assessed ORR and longer IRC-assessed duration of response were observed in arms A (72.5%; 8.2 months) and B (74.8%; 8.6 months) vs C (49.6%; 4.2 months). No association was observed between PD-L1 expression and IRC-assessed PFS or ORR. Discontinuation of any treatment because of AEs was reported in 15 (12.5%; arm A), 35 (29.7%; arm B), and 18 (15.4%; arm C) patients. In each arm, the most common grade of 3 or greater AE was decreased neutrophil levels, which aligned with known chemotherapy toxic effects. Six treatment-related AEs leading to death occurred; however, no deaths were solely attributed to tislelizumab.Conclusions and relevanceIn this phase 3 randomized clinical trial, adding tislelizumab to chemotherapy was associated with significantly prolonged IRC-assessed PFS, higher IRC-assessed ORRs, and a manageable safety/tolerability profile in patients with advanced sq-NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03594747.
| S-EPMC8017481 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundContinuation of bevacizumab plus second-line chemotherapy has significantly improved overall and progression-free survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, the cost-effectiveness of such high cost therapy is still uncertain in China; so this analysis was performed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of these treatment options from the Chinese health care system perspective.MethodsA cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted using data from the ML18147 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00700102) by modeling a partitioned survival model. Main evaluation indicators were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) with a willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of $38,201 per QALY. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness and stability of the model. Subgroup and scenario analyses were also performed to make our study more relevant.ResultsBevacizumab plus chemotherapy increased 0.12 QALYs and an incremental cost of $22,761.62 compared with chemotherapy, resulting in an ICER of $188,904.09 per QALY. The model was most sensitive to the utility of progression-free survival and the cost of bevacizumab. Compared with chemotherapy, bevacizumab plus chemotherapy had a 0% cost-effectiveness probability, and no cost-effectiveness in subgroups at the WTP threshold of $38,201 per QALY. The scenario analysis found that bevacizumab biosimilar gained an ICER of $126,397.38 per QALY when assuming the cost of drugs was calculated at the most affordable price.ConclusionsAt the WTP threshold of $38,201 per QALY, continuation of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy is unlikely considered cost-effective for patients after first progression of mCRC.
| S-EPMC10807607 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo compare the efficacy of first-line bevacizumab plus chemotherapy with cetuximab plus chemotherapy based on the stratification of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients with mucinous adenocarcinoma (MA) or mucinous component (MC).MethodsA retrospective study involving all mCRC patients receiving first-line bevacizumab-based or cetuximab-based chemotherapy at our hospital from September 2013 to January 2020 was conducted. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR) were compared between the cetuximab-chemotherapy group and the bevacizumab-chemotherapy group on the basis of the conventional pathological classification of MA or MC.ResultsA total of 620 patients with mCRC were included in our study, consisting of 141 (22.7%) patients with MA/MC and 479 (77.3%) patients with non-mucinous adenocarcinoma (NMA). In the MA/MC cohort, patients who were treated with bevacizumab-based chemotherapy were associated with significantly better OS than those treated with cetuximab-base chemotherapy (30.0 vs. 26.3 months, p = 0.002), irrespective of tumor sites. The efficacy of bevacizumab-based chemotherapy was higher in nearly all subgroups as shown in the subgroup analysis. In the NMA cohort, median OS was better in the cetuximab plus chemotherapy group than that in the bevacizumab plus chemotherapy group (32.2 vs. 27.0 months, p = 0.005) for left-side mCRC patients, whereas OS was significantly longer in the bevacizumab plus chemotherapy group for right-side mCRC patients (26.0 vs. 20.9 months, p = 0.013).ConclusionConventional pathological classification (e.g. MA/MC) should be considered when tailoring the individualized optimal treatment for mCRC. Bevacizumab plus chemotherapy as first-line therapy may be the optimal option for patients with MA/MC.
| S-EPMC8124114 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeResults 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.MethodsA 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.ResultsNine 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.ConclusionsHigher 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.
| S-EPMC4699216 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceTreatment with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab may prolong overall survival among patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. However, to our knowledge, the cost-effectiveness of using this high-priced therapy for this indication is currently unknown.ObjectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab to treat unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma from the US payer perspective.Design, setting, and participantsThis economic evaluation used a partitioned survival model consisting of 3 discrete health states to assess the cost-effectiveness of treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab vs sorafenib. The characteristics of patients in the model were similar to patients in a phase 3, open-label randomized clinical trial (IMbrave150) who had unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma and had not previously received systemic treatment. Key clinical data were generated from the IMbrave150 trial conducted between March 15, 2018, and January 30, 2019, and cost and health preference data were collected from the literature.Main outcomes and measuresCosts, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), incremental cost-utility ratios, incremental net health benefits, and incremental net monetary benefits were calculated for the 2 treatment strategies. Subgroup, 1-way sensitivity, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.ResultsTreatment of hepatocellular carcinoma with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab added 0.530 QALYs and resulted in an incremental cost of $89 807 compared with sorafenib therapy, which had an incremental cost-utility ratio of $169 223 per QALY gained. The incremental net health benefit was -0.068 QALYs, and the incremental net monetary benefit was -$10 202 at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150 000/QALY. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that treatment with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab achieved a 35% probability of cost-effectiveness at a threshold of $150 000/QALY. One-way sensitivity analysis revealed that the results were most sensitive to the hazard ratio of overall survival. The subgroup analysis found that treatment with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was associated with preferred incremental net health benefits in several subgroups, including patients with hepatitis B and C.Conclusions and relevanceAtezolizumab plus bevacizumab treatment is unlikely to be a cost-effective option compared with sorafenib for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Reducing the prices of atezolizumab and bevacizumab may improve cost-effectiveness. The economic outcomes also may be improved by tailoring treatments based on individual patient factors.
| S-EPMC7905498 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeAnlotinib is a newly developed oral multitarget tyrosine kinase inhibitor. We retrospectively evaluated the toxicity and clinical efficacy of chemotherapy combined with anlotinib versus chemotherapy alone for metastatic/advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in patients who failed first- or second-line systemic treatment in China.Patients and MethodsIn this retrospective trial, ninety-four advanced NSCLC patients received chemotherapy combined with anlotinib (n = 41) or chemotherapy alone (n = 53) in Henan Cancer Hospital. We recorded the objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events (AEs).ResultsIn the anlotinib plus chemotherapy group, eleven patients (27%) achieved a PR (partial response), and twenty-one patients (51%) achieved SD (stable disease), with an ORR of 27% and a DCR of 78%. In the chemotherapy alone group, eight patients (15%) achieved a PR, and nineteen patients (36%) had SD, with an ORR of 15% and a DCR of 51%. The ORR in the combination arm was slightly, but not obviously, higher than that in the chemotherapy arm (27% vs 15%, p > 0.05). In addition, the DCR was significantly higher in the combination arm than in the chemotherapy alone arm (78% vs 51%, p=0.007). At the end of follow-up, patients in the combination arm had a 1.5-month longer median PFS than patients in the chemotherapy arm; this difference was statistically significant (5.0 vs 3.5, p=0.002). The median OS was not achieved at the final analysis. The hematological and nonhematological toxicities were well tolerated and controlled. In general, most toxicity was limited to grade I or II, well tolerated and controlled.ConclusionOur study suggests that anlotinib combined with chemotherapy may be an effective and well-tolerated treatment for advanced NSCLC in patients who fail first- or second-line therapy.
| S-EPMC7250176 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceSafe and effective therapies for untreated, advanced gastric/gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) cancer remain an unmet need.ObjectiveTo evaluate the antitumor activity of pembrolizumab, pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy, or chemotherapy alone in patients with untreated, advanced G/GEJ cancer with programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) combined positive score (CPS) of 1 or greater.Design, setting, and participantsThe phase 3 KEYNOTE-062 randomized, controlled, partially blinded interventional trial enrolled 763 patients with untreated, locally advanced/unresectable or metastatic G/GEJ cancer with PD-L1 CPS of 1 or greater from 200 centers in 29 countries between September 18, 2015, and May 26, 2017.InterventionsPatients were randomized 1:1:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg, pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (cisplatin 80 mg/m2/d on day 1 plus fluorouracil 800 mg/m2/d on days 1 to 5 or capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 twice daily), or chemotherapy plus placebo, every 3 weeks.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with PD-L1 CPS of 1 or greater or 10 or greater.ResultsA total of 763 patients were randomized to pembrolizumab (n = 256), pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (n = 257), or chemotherapy (n = 250). The median (range) age of all patients in the study cohort was 62 (20-87) years; 554 of 763 (72.6%) were men. At final analysis, after a median (range) follow-up of 29.4 (22.0-41.3) months, pembrolizumab was noninferior to chemotherapy for OS in patients with CPS of 1 or greater (median, 10.6 vs 11.1 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.91; 99.2% CI, 0.69-1.18). Pembrolizumab monotherapy was not superior to chemotherapy in patients with CPS of 1 or greater. Pembrolizumab prolonged OS vs chemotherapy in patients with CPS of 10 or greater (median, 17.4 vs 10.8 months; HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.49-0.97), but this difference was not statistically tested. Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy was not superior to chemotherapy for OS in patients with CPS of 1 or greater (12.5 vs 11.1 months; HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.70-1.03; P = .05) or CPS of 10 or greater (12.3 vs 10.8 months; HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.62-1.17; P = .16) or for PFS in patients with CPS of 1 or greater (6.9 vs 6.4 months; HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.70-1.02; P = .04). Grade 3 to 5 treatment-related adverse event rates for pembrolizumab, pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy, and chemotherapy were 17%, 73%, and 69%, respectively.Conclusions and relevanceThis phase 3 randomized clinical trial found that among patients with untreated, advanced G/GEJ cancer, pembrolizumab was noninferior to chemotherapy, with fewer adverse events observed. Pembrolizumab or pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy was not superior to chemotherapy for the OS and PFS end points tested.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02494583.
| S-EPMC7489405 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectiveSintilimab has superior efficacy and safety in patients with advanced or metastatic squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but its cost-effectiveness in China is unclear. This study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of sintilimab plus chemotherapy vs. pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy for locally advanced or metastatic squamous NSCLC in China.MethodsFrom the perspective of the Chinese health system, the partitioned survival model with three health states was established in a 3-week cycle and a lifetime time horizon. The two-stage method was used to estimate the overall survival hazard ratios to avoid the bias by crossover design in ORIENT-12 and KEYNOTE-407 studies. The anchored matching adjusted indirect comparison method (MAIC) was used for indirect comparison based on the individual patient data from ORIENT-12 and the publicly published KEYNOTE-407 study due to the lack of head-to-head clinical trials. Only direct medical costs were included, and utilities were derived from the published literature in the base case analysis. Sensitivity analysis was also performed to verify the robustness of the model results. In addition, the scenario analysis where the utilities were derived from the Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) scale in the ORIENT-12 by mapping to the EuroQol-5-dimension 5-level (EQ-5D-5L) was carried out to explore the uncertainty of the results.ResultsCompared with pembrolizumab + chemotherapy, sintilimab + chemotherapy incurred a lower lifetime cost ($12,321 vs. 36,371) and yielded fewer quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (0.9902 vs. 1.0085), which resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $1,314,208/QALY. A sintilimab strategy is a cost-effectiveness option under the WTP of 1-3 times the GDP per capita in China ($11,250/QALY~$33,749/QALY). The utility value of the post-progression, the unit cost of albumin paclitaxel, and the utility value of the progression-free state were the main drivers in the deterministic sensitivity analysis (DSA). According to the probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA), sintilimab + chemotherapy was 100% cost-effective when the WTP was 1-3 times China's per capita GDP. The results of the scenario analysis showed that sintilimab + chemotherapy obtained more QALYs (1.2319 vs. 1.1815) and lower costs ($12,321 vs. 36,371), which implied that sintilimab + chemotherapy may dominate the pembrolizumab + chemotherapy.ConclusionCompared with pembrolizumab + chemotherapy, sintilimab + chemotherapy is more cost-effective for first-line treatment in Chinese patients with locally advanced or metastatic squamous NSCLC.
| S-EPMC9395965 | biostudies-literature