4.6 Article

Bevacizumab Combined with Chemotherapy Improves Survival for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Evidence from Meta Analysis

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 11, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0161912

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Colorectal cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer deaths in both sexes in the world. Improvement of existing therapy modalities and implementing new ones in order to improve survival of patients with colorectal cancer represents a great challenge for medicine. The aim of this paper was to assess the impact that adding bevacizumab to chemotherapy has on survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, compared to the use of chemotherapy alone. Methods Hazard ratios (HRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were determined from the studies and pooled. Two-sided p values were reported and considered to indicate statistical significance if less than 0.05. Results A total of 12 studies that meet the inclusion criteria were identified in the literature search, 3 phase II studies and 9 phase III studies. Based on the random effects meta-analysis, a statistically significant improvement was identified for both overall survival (HR = 0.84; 95% CI: 0.74-0.94; p = 0.003) and progression free survival (HR = 0.64; 95% CI: 0.55-0.73; p < 0.00001) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer when bevacizumab was added to chemotherapy, compared to chemotherapy treatment alone. Conclusion The findings of this meta analysis confirm the benefit of adding bevacizumab to chemotherapy in terms of survival and progression free survival, but the magnitude of this effect is not consistent throughout the included studies. This suggests the need for further research of interaction of bevacizumab with chemotherapeutic agents as well as recognition of patients' characteristics important for the treatment selection criteria.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available