4.3 Article

Randomized Phase III Study to Assess Efficacy and Safety of Adjuvant CAPOX with or without Bevacizumab in Patients after Resection of Colorectal Liver Metastases: HEPATICA study

Journal

NEOPLASIA
Volume 19, Issue 2, Pages 93-99

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.neo.2016.08.010

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Dutch Cancer Society [H3-B-CKTO/CKTO]
  2. Roche
  3. Sanofi Aventis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Bevacizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody targeting vascular endothelial growth factor ( VEGF). Recurrence after resection of colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs), presumably caused by VEGF-mediated outgrowth of micrometastases, might decrease when VEGF is inhibited. This study examines the efficacy and safety of adding bevacizumab to an adjuvant regimen of CAPOX in patients undergoing radical resection for their CRLMs. Patients with resected CRLMs were randomized after surgery to receive CAPOX and bevacizumab (arm A) or CAPOX alone (arm B) as adjuvant treatment. CAPOX was given in both arms for a total of eight cycles. Bevacizumab was administered for 16 cycles. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS), toxicity, and quality of life (QoL). In total, 79 patients were randomized. At the time of analysis, 23 events were encountered in arm A and 20 in arm B. Oneyear DFS rate was 79% [95% confidence interval (CI): 68%-93%] and 68% (95% CI: 55%-85%) for arm A and B, respectively (p =.89). Toxicity was evaluated for 75 patients. No significant differences in toxicity between the two arms were found. QoL scores were higher in arm A, of which emotional functioning and global QoL scores were significant. Adding bevacizumab to a CAPOX regimen in patients undergoing a resection for their CLM is safe and showed higher QoL scores compared with CAPOX alone. Because of premature closure of the study, conclusions about the effect on DFS of additional VEGF inhibition in this setting could not yet be made.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available