Publication: Bevacizumab plus Capecitabine as Maintenance Therapy after Initial Bevacizumab plus XELOX Treatment in Previously Untreated Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Phase Ill 'Stop and Go' Study Results - A Turkish Oncology Group Trial
| dc.contributor.author | DANE, FAYSAL | |
| dc.contributor.authors | Yalcin, Suayib; Uslu, Ruchan; Dane, Faysal; Yilmaz, Ugur; Zengin, Nurullah; Buyukunal, Evin; Buyukberber, Suleyman; Camci, Celalettin; Sencan, Orhan; Kilickap, Sadettin; Ozdener, Fatih; Cevik, Duygu | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2022-03-14T10:56:33Z | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2026-01-11T08:46:37Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2022-03-14T10:56:33Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2013 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Objective: It was the aim of this study to evaluate maintenance therapy with bevacizumab + capecitabine following induction with bevacizumab + capecitabine + oxaliplatin (XELOX) versus bevacizumab + XELOX until progression as first-line therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Methods: Patients received either bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg) + XELOX (capecitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14 + oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks) until disease progression (arm A) or the same doses of bevacizumab + XELOX for 6 cycles followed by bevacizumab + capecitabine until disease progression (arm B). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and safety. Results: One hundred and twenty-three patients were randomized. Treatment compliance was similar in both groups. Median PFS was significantly longer for arm B than for arm A (11.0 vs. 8.3 months; p = 0.002). There was no significant difference between the two arms for ORR (66.7 vs. 59.0%; p = 0.861) or median OS (23.8 vs. 20.2 months; p = 0.100). Tolerability was acceptable in both treatment arms; the most frequent grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (arm B vs. arm A) were fatigue (6.6 vs. 16.1%), diarrhoea (3.3 vs. 11.3%), anorexia (3.3 vs. 11.3%), and neuropathy (1.6 vs. 8.1%). Conclusions: Maintenance therapy with bevacizumab + capecitabine can be considered an appropriate option following induction bevacizunnab + XELOX in patients with mCRC instead of continuation of bevacizumab + XELOX. (C) 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.1159/000355914 | |
| dc.identifier.eissn | 1423-0232 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0030-2414 | |
| dc.identifier.pubmed | 24247559 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/11424/245541 | |
| dc.identifier.wos | WOS:000329268000003 | |
| dc.language.iso | eng | |
| dc.publisher | KARGER | |
| dc.relation.ispartof | ONCOLOGY | |
| dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess | |
| dc.subject | Bevacizumab | |
| dc.subject | Capecitabine | |
| dc.subject | Oxaliplatin | |
| dc.subject | Metastatic colorectal cancer | |
| dc.subject | Maintenance therapy | |
| dc.subject | 1ST-LINE THERAPY | |
| dc.subject | FINAL REPORT | |
| dc.subject | OXALIPLATIN | |
| dc.subject | FLUOROURACIL | |
| dc.subject | CHEMOTHERAPY | |
| dc.subject | LEUCOVORIN | |
| dc.subject | COMBINATION | |
| dc.subject | EFFICACY | |
| dc.subject | INTERMITTENT | |
| dc.subject | FOLFOX4 | |
| dc.title | Bevacizumab plus Capecitabine as Maintenance Therapy after Initial Bevacizumab plus XELOX Treatment in Previously Untreated Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Phase Ill 'Stop and Go' Study Results - A Turkish Oncology Group Trial | |
| dc.type | article | |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
| oaire.citation.endPage | 335 | |
| oaire.citation.issue | 6 | |
| oaire.citation.startPage | 328 | |
| oaire.citation.title | ONCOLOGY | |
| oaire.citation.volume | 85 |
Files
Original bundle
1 - 1 of 1
