Table 1 Demography, clinical features and tumour responses of patients treated with cetuximab and bevacizumab regimensa

From: Feasibility of proposed single-nucleotide polymorphisms as predictive markers for targeted regimens in metastatic colorectal cancer

 

Total no. of patients (%), (n =170)b

 

Demographic and clinical features

Cetuximab regimens (n =124)

Bevacizumab regimens (n =100)

P -value c

Gender, male/female

78/46 (62.9/37.1)

50/50 (50/50)

0.058

Age, mean (ranges)

52 (25–75)

52 (30–74)

0.804

ECOG performance status, 0/1/2

19/101/4 (15.3/81.5/3.2)

13/86/1 (13/86/1)

0.455

Primary tumour site, colon/rectum

75/49 (60.5/39.5)

62/38 (62/38)

0.891

Curative tumour resection

57 (46)

49 (49)

0.678

No. of prior chemotherapy lines, 0/1/2/⩾3

16/19/53/36 (12.9/15.3/42.7/29)

22/35/24/19 (22/35/24/19)

<0.001

No. of metastatic sites, 1/2/⩾3

33/34/57 (26.6/27.4/46)

20/33/47 (20/33/47)

0.447

Tumour responsesd

  

0.74

 CR

3 (2.4)

4 (4)

 

 PR

40 (32.3)

28 (28)

 

 SD

46 (37.1)

35 (35)

 

 PD

35 (28.2)

33 (33)

 

Survival period, mean±s.e.m, months

PFS (ranges)

6.2±0.4 (0.8–25)

6.9±0.4 (1.1–14.3)

0.123

OS (ranges)

10.2±0.6 (1–25)

10.7±0.9 (0.8–37.8)

0.86

  1. Abbreviations: CR=complete response; ECOG=Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; 5-FU=5-fluorouracil; OS=overall survival; PFS=progression-free survival; PD=progressive disease; PR=partial response; SD=stable disease.
  2. Bold font, P<0.05.
  3. aEither irinotecan or oxaliplatin was combined to cetuximab and bevacizumab with 5-FU/leucovorin (FL) or capecitabine, namely, FOLFIRI and XELIRI or FOLFOX and XELOX.
  4. bIncluding 54 patients receiving crossover treatments.
  5. cComparison between cetuximab and bevacizumab regimens by Pearson’s χ2-test or unpaired t-test.
  6. dAssessment using RECIST criteria (Therasse et al, 2000).
Back to article page