Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11434/1764
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorZimet, Allan-
dc.contributor.otherBurge, Matthew-
dc.contributor.otherSemira, Christine-
dc.contributor.otherLee, Belinda-
dc.contributor.otherLee, Margaret-
dc.contributor.otherKosmider, Suzanne-
dc.contributor.otherShapiro, Jeremy-
dc.contributor.otherMa, Birgette-
dc.contributor.otherDean, Andrew P.-
dc.contributor.otherSteel, Simone A.-
dc.contributor.otherLok, Sheau Wen-
dc.contributor.otherTomes, Javier-
dc.contributor.otherEastgate, Melissa-
dc.contributor.otherWong, Hui-Li-
dc.contributor.otherGibbs, Peter-
dc.date.accessioned2019-10-02T04:14:32Z-
dc.date.available2019-10-02T04:14:32Z-
dc.date.issued2018-09-
dc.identifier.citationClin Colorectal Cancer. 2018 Sep;17(3):e593-e599.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1533-0028en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11434/1764-
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: The FIRE-3 [5-fluorouracil, folinic acid, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) plus cetuximab versus FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab in first line treatment colorectal cancer (CRC)] study reported that first-line FOLFIRI plus cetuximab versus FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab resulted in similar progression-free survival (PFS) but improved overall survival (OS). A potential explanation is that the initial biologic agent administered in metastatic CRC (mCRC) affects later line efficacy of the other treatments. We sought to test this hypothesis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We interrogated our mCRC registry (Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer) regarding treatment and outcome data for RAS wild-type patients receiving epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFRIs) in second and subsequent lines. Survival outcomes from the beginning of EGFRI use were determined as a function of previous bevacizumab use and the interval between ceasing bevacizumab and beginning EGFRI use. RESULTS: Of 2061 patients, 222 eligible patients were identified, of whom 170 (77%) had received previous bevacizumab and 52 (23%) had not. PFS and OS from the start of EGFRIs did not differ by previous bevacizumab use (3.8 vs. 4.2 months; hazard ratio [HR], 1.12; P = .81; 9.0 vs. 9.2 months; HR, 1.19; P = .48, respectively) for the whole cohort or when analyzed by the primary tumor side (HR for left side, 1.07; P = .57; HR for right side, 1.2; P = .52). PFS was significantly shorter with right-sided primary tumors when the interval between bevacizumab and EGFRI use was < 6 versus > 6 months (median, 2.2 vs. 6 months; HR, 2.23; P = .01) but not with left-sided tumors (median, 4.2 vs. 5.5 months; HR, 1.12; P = .26). CONCLUSION: Previous bevacizumab use had no effect on the activity of subsequent EGFRIs. The apparent effect of time between biologic agents in right-sided tumors might reflect patient selection.en_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.subjectBevacizumaben_US
dc.subjectCetuximaben_US
dc.subjectFOLFIRIen_US
dc.subjectFluorouracilen_US
dc.subjectFolinic Aciden_US
dc.subjectIrinotecanen_US
dc.subjectColorectal Canceren_US
dc.subjectProgression-Free Survivalen_US
dc.subjectOverall Survivalen_US
dc.subjectMetastatic Colorectal Canceren_US
dc.subjectTreatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Canceren_US
dc.subjectBiologic Agentsen_US
dc.subjectInteractionen_US
dc.subjectSequencingen_US
dc.subjectSurvivalen_US
dc.subjectDepartment of Medical Oncology, Epworth Hospital, Richmond, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.subjectGeneral Surgery and Gastroenterology Clinical Institute, Epworth HealthCare, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.titlePrevious bevacizumab and efficacy of later anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibodies in metastatic colorectal cancer: results from a large international registry.en_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.clcc.2018.05.009en_US
dc.identifier.journaltitleClinical Colorectal Canceren_US
dc.description.pubmedurihttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=29958812en_US
dc.description.affiliatesRoyal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia; University of Queensland, St Lucia, Brisbane, Queensland, Australiaen_US
dc.description.affiliatesSystems Biology and Personalised Medicine Division, Walter and Eliza Hall Institute for Medical Research, Parkville, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.description.affiliatesDepartment of Medical Biology, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.description.affiliatesDepartment of Surgery, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.description.affiliatesDepartment of Medical Oncology, Western Health, St Albans, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.description.affiliatesDepartment of Medical Oncology, Eastern Health, Box Hill, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.description.affiliatesDepartment of Medical Oncology, Cabrini Health, Malvern, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.description.affiliatesDepartment of Medicine, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.description.affiliatesDepartment of Clinical Oncology, Chinese University of Hong Kong, New Territories, Hong Kongen_US
dc.description.affiliatesDepartment of Medical Oncology, St John of God Subiaco Hospital, Subiaco, Western Australia, Australiaen_US
dc.description.affiliatesVictorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.en_US
dc.description.affiliatesDepartment of Medical Oncology, Goulburn Valley Health, Shepparton, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.description.affiliatesRoyal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia; University of Queensland, St Lucia, Brisbane, Queensland, Australiaen_US
dc.type.contenttypeTexten_US
Appears in Collections:General Surgery and Gastroenterology

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in Epworth are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.