Suppr超能文献

接受贝伐单抗治疗的伴有腹膜转移的转移性结直肠癌患者的胃肠道穿孔

Gastrointestinal perforation in metastatic colorectal cancer patients with peritoneal metastases receiving bevacizumab.

作者信息

Roohullah Aflah, Wong Hui-Li, Sjoquist Katrin M, Gibbs Peter, Field Kathryn, Tran Ben, Shapiro Jeremy, Mckendrick Joe, Yip Desmond, Nott Louise, Gebski Val, Ng Weng, Chua Wei, Price Timothy, Tebbutt Niall, Chantrill Lorraine

机构信息

Aflah Roohullah, Lorraine Chantrill, Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centre, Campbelltown, NSW 2560, Australia.

出版信息

World J Gastroenterol. 2015 May 7;21(17):5352-8. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i17.5352.

Abstract

AIM

To investigate the safety and efficacy of adding bevacizumab to first-line chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer patients with peritoneal disease.

METHODS

We compared rates of gastrointestinal perforation in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and peritoneal disease receiving first-line chemotherapy with and without bevacizumab in three distinct cohorts: (1) the AGITG MAX trial (Phase III randomised clinical trial comparing capecitabine vs capecitabine and bevacizumab vs capecitabine, bevacizumab and mitomycinC); (2) the prospective Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer (TRACC) registry (any first-line regimen ± bevacizumab); and (3) two cancer centres in New South Wales, Australia [Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centre and Liverpool Cancer Therapy Centre (NSWCC) from January 2005 to Decenber 2012, (any first-line regimen ± bevacizumab). For the AGITG MAX trial capecitabine was compared to the other two arms (capecitabine/bevacizumab and capecitabine/bevacizumab/mitomycinC). In the AGITG MAX trial and the TRACC registry rates of gastrointestinal perforation were also collected in patients who did not have peritoneal metastases. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, chemotherapy duration, and overall survival. Time-to-event outcomes were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test.

RESULTS

Eighty-four MAX, 179 TRACC and 69 NSWCC patients had peritoneal disease. There were no gastrointestinal perforations recorded in either the MAX subgroup or the NSWCC cohorts. Of the patients without peritoneal disease in the MAX trial, 4/300 (1.3%) in the bevacizumab arms had gastrointestinal perforations compared to 1/123 (0.8%) in the capecitabine alone arm. In the TRACC registry 3/126 (2.4%) patients who had received bevacizumab had a gastrointestinal perforation compared to 1/53 (1.9%) in the chemotherapy alone arm. In a further analysis of patients without peritoneal metastases in the TRACC registry, the rate of gastrointestinal perforations was 9/369 (2.4%) in the chemotherapy/bevacizumab group and 5/177 (2.8%) in the chemotherapy alone group. The addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy was associated with improved progression-free survival in all three cohorts: MAX 6.9 m vs 4.9 m, HR = 0.64 (95%CI: 0.42-1.02); P = 0.063; TRACC 9.1 m vs 5.5 m, HR = 0.61 (95%CI: 0.37-0.86); P = 0.009; NSWCC 8.7 m vs 6.8 m, HR = 0.75 (95%CI: 0.43-1.32); P = 0.32. Chemotherapy duration was similar across the groups.

CONCLUSION

Patients with peritoneal disease do not appear to have an increased risk of gastrointestinal perforations when receiving first-line therapy with bevacizumab compared to systemic therapy alone.

摘要

目的

探讨在患有腹膜疾病的转移性结直肠癌患者一线化疗中添加贝伐单抗的安全性和有效性。

方法

我们比较了三组不同队列中接受一线化疗(有或无贝伐单抗)的转移性结直肠癌和腹膜疾病患者的胃肠道穿孔发生率:(1)AGITG MAX试验(III期随机临床试验,比较卡培他滨与卡培他滨加贝伐单抗与卡培他滨、贝伐单抗和丝裂霉素C);(2)复发性和晚期结直肠癌(TRACC)前瞻性登记研究(任何一线治疗方案±贝伐单抗);(3)澳大利亚新南威尔士州的两个癌症中心[2005年1月至2012年12月的麦克阿瑟癌症治疗中心和利物浦癌症治疗中心(NSWCC),(任何一线治疗方案±贝伐单抗)。在AGITG MAX试验中,将卡培他滨与其他两组(卡培他滨/贝伐单抗和卡培他滨/贝伐单抗/丝裂霉素C)进行比较。在AGITG MAX试验和TRACC登记研究中,也收集了无腹膜转移患者的胃肠道穿孔发生率。次要终点包括无进展生存期、化疗持续时间和总生存期。采用Kaplan-Meier方法估计事件发生时间结局,并使用对数秩检验进行比较。

结果

84例MAX患者、179例TRACC患者和69例NSWCC患者患有腹膜疾病。MAX亚组或NSWCC队列中均未记录到胃肠道穿孔。在MAX试验中无腹膜疾病的患者中,贝伐单抗组300例中有4例(1.3%)发生胃肠道穿孔,而单纯卡培他滨组123例中有1例(0.8%)。在TRACC登记研究中,接受贝伐单抗治疗的126例患者中有3例(2.4%)发生胃肠道穿孔,而单纯化疗组53例中有1例(1.9%)。在TRACC登记研究中对无腹膜转移患者的进一步分析中,化疗/贝伐单抗组胃肠道穿孔发生率为9/369(2.4%),单纯化疗组为5/177(2.8%)。在所有三个队列中,化疗加用贝伐单抗均与无进展生存期改善相关:MAX组6.9个月对4.9个月,HR = 0.64(95%CI:0.42 - 1.02);P = 0.063;TRACC组9.1个月对5.5个月,HR = 0.61(95%CI:0.37 - 0.86);P = 0.009;NSWCC组8.7个月对6.8个月,HR = 0.75(95%CI:0.43 - 1.32);P = 0.32。各组化疗持续时间相似。

结论

与单纯全身治疗相比,患有腹膜疾病的患者在接受一线贝伐单抗治疗时胃肠道穿孔风险似乎并未增加。

相似文献

1
5
Right or Left Primary Site of Colorectal Cancer: Outcomes From the Molecular Analysis of the AGITG MAX Trial.
Clin Colorectal Cancer. 2019 Jun;18(2):141-148. doi: 10.1016/j.clcc.2018.12.002. Epub 2019 Jan 3.
9
Bevacizumab plus XELOX as first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: The OBELIX study.
World J Gastroenterol. 2015 Jun 21;21(23):7281-8. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i23.7281.

本文引用的文献

1
Bevacizumab increases the risk of gastrointestinal perforation in cancer patients: a meta-analysis with a focus on different subgroups.
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2014 Aug;70(8):893-906. doi: 10.1007/s00228-014-1687-9. Epub 2014 May 27.
5
Continuation of bevacizumab after first progression in metastatic colorectal cancer (ML18147): a randomised phase 3 trial.
Lancet Oncol. 2013 Jan;14(1):29-37. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(12)70477-1. Epub 2012 Nov 16.
6
Outcomes of colorectal cancer patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis treated with chemotherapy with and without targeted therapy.
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2012 Jul;38(7):617-23. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2012.03.008. Epub 2012 May 8.
7
Incidence and management of gastrointestinal perforation from bevacizumab in advanced cancers.
Curr Oncol Rep. 2012 Aug;14(4):277-84. doi: 10.1007/s11912-012-0238-8.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验