Cargando…

Maintenance treatment of combination with bevacizumab vs single agent for advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: When the patients of advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have achieved remission by induction therapy, it is controversial that combination with bevacizumab is used as maintenance therapy. Pemetrexed is a classic drug for maintenance therapy, is bevacizumab the super...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kong, Ying, Hong, Liang, Xu, Xiaocheng, Xu, Jia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8341328/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34397863
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000026862
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: When the patients of advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have achieved remission by induction therapy, it is controversial that combination with bevacizumab is used as maintenance therapy. Pemetrexed is a classic drug for maintenance therapy, is bevacizumab the superiority to pemetrexed is also unclear. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of advanced non-squamous NSCLC in the maintenance treatment. METHOD: From the establishment as of December 6, 2020, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane electronic databases were searched and the American Society of Clinical Oncology, European Society of Medical Oncology, and National Comprehensive Cancer Network databases in the past 10 years. The application of combination with bevacizumab, pemetrexed was studied in clinical trials of maintenance treatment for advanced NSCLC. The extracted data include progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and grade 3–4 adverse events (AE). RESULTS: Seven clinical trials we screened, 6 were phase III RCTs, and a cohort trial, including 3298 patients. Compared with bevacizumab and pemetrexed, PFS of combination with bevacizumab was significantly improved (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.65–0.77, P < .00001), but OS was not improved (HR = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.85–1.01, P = .10). Compared with bevacizumab and pemetrexed, no significant difference of PFS (HR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.69–1.09, P = .21), and OS (HR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.72–1.05, P = .15) was found. A higher incidence of grade 3–4 AE occurred in combination with bevacizumab (odds ratio = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.35–1.97, P < .00001). CONCLUSIONS: PFS was significantly improved in patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC who use bevacizumab combination with single-agent as maintenance treatment, but it does not translate into the advantages of OS; compared with bevacizumab, no PFS and OS benefits were found. A higher incidence of grade 3–4 AE occurred in combination with bevacizumab than pemetrexed and bevacizumab.