6533b7d2fe1ef96bd125f45a

RESEARCH PRODUCT

How to deal with second line dilemma in metastatic colorectal cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

subject

description

e15006 Background: Monoclonal antibodies targeting epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) or vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) have demonstrated efficacy in combination with chemotherapy as second line for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, there is still a paucity of evidence or guidelines suggesting the right sequential treatment in all RAS (KRAS/NRAS) wild type(wt)mCRC. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the impact of these targeted therapies by reviewing literature data. Methods: We used Cochrane, EMBASE and Medline databases to select phase III clinical trials containing efficacy and safety data about chemotherapy (CT) or CT + targeted agents combination (Anti-VEGF and Anti-EGFR) in second line mCRC setting. We performed direct comparisons to obtain pooled data for anti-VEGF + CT versus CT and anti-EGFR +CT versus CT comparisons. Then we performed indirect comparisons between anti-EGFR and Anti-VEGF. Outcomes were disease control rate (DCR), response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and most common G3-G5 toxicities. Results: Eight eligible RCTs (6793 pts) were included: 5 studies compared anti-VEGF + CT and 3 anti-EGFR + CT combinations to CT. After direct comparisons, pooled indirect results showed significantly improved OS (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72–0.94) and DCR (HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.04–1.54) favouring anti-VEGF combinations in overall population; however, no statistically significant differences in all RAS wt patients was observed (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.70–1.09). Additionally, anti-EGFR combinations significantly increased ORR in all patients (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31–0.96), showing a trend in all RAS wt patients (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.48–0.83) too. Furthermore, no significant difference in PFS and DCR all RAS was registered. Anti-VEGF combination significantly increased Only a significant asthenia difference (RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.03–1.75) was registered. Conclusions: At our knowledge, our indirect comparisons between anti-VEGF and anti-EGFR combinations showed for the first time better OS and DCR for anti-VEGF combinations, whereas better RR is observed for anti-EGFR combinatory regimens, defining a role of both targeted agents in second line mCRC setting.