4.4 Article

Bevacizumab Improves the Overall and Progression-Free Survival of Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Treated with 5-Fluorouracil-Based Regimens Irrespective of Baseline Risk

Journal

ONCOLOGY
Volume 75, Issue 3-4, Pages 215-223

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000163850

Keywords

5-Fluorouracil; Bevacizumab; Colorectal cancer; Irinotecan

Categories

Funding

  1. F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Kohne et al. [Ann Oncol 2002; 13: 308-317] showed that four prognostic variables can be used to classify patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) treated with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/leucovorin (LV) into three risk groups with different overall survival (OS). This model was applied to data from phase II/III trials of first-line bevacizumab plus 5-FU/LVwith/without irinotecan (IFL). Methods: Data on tumor sites, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, alkaline phosphatase levels and white blood cell counts were used to classify patients into Kohne prognostic high-, intermediate- and low-risk groups. Median OS and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated for patients receiving 5-FU/LV plus bevacizumab or placebo (n = 489) and IFL plus bevacizumab or placebo (n = 812). Results: Median OS was longer in 5-FU/LV/bevacizumab (11.2-22.6 months) than in the 5-FU/LV/placebo (5.7-17.5 months), and in the IFL/bevacizumab arm (14.3-22.5 months) than in the IFL/placebo arm (8.4-17.9 months) across the Kohne high-, intermediate- and low-risk groups. The addition of bevacizumab also extended median PFS across the Kohne risk groups compared with placebo. Conclusions: Bevacizumab improves OS and PFS across the Kohne risk classification in patients with metastatic CRC. The Kohne model can be extended to patients treated with 5-FU/LV/bevacizumab, IFL and IFL/bevacizumab and to PFS data. Copyright (c) 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available