Does the Addition of Biologic Agents to Chemotherapy in Patients with Unresectable Colorectal Cancer Metastases Result in a Higher Proportion of Patients Undergoing Resection? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
- 294 Downloads
Surgical resection provides the best opportunity for cure for metastatic colorectal cancer. Whether addition of a biologic agent to chemotherapy improves the rate of conversion from unresectable to resectable disease remains uncertain. We carried out a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis to define the impact of biologic agents on resection.
We searched Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, and PubMed for randomized controlled trials published up until April 2017 comparing chemotherapy and biologics (intervention) vs. chemotherapy alone (control) in treatment-naïve patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer. Study selection, data abstraction, risk of bias, and quality of evidence assessment were performed in duplicate. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to estimate the pooled odds ratio (OR) for resection rate and corresponding confidence interval (CI).
Nine studies, including a total of 4345 patients, were analyzed. Seven studies assessed epithelial growth factor receptor (EGFR)-directed monoclonal antibodies, and two used antiangiogenic agents. The addition of a biologic agent to chemotherapy was associated with higher resection rate (OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.07–2.02; resection rate 8.4 vs. 6.1%). Subgroup analysis based on mechanism of action of drugs showed benefit for resection rate only with EGFR-directed agents (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.10–2.64). Heterogeneity among studies was low (I 2 = 34%).
The addition of biologic agents to systemic chemotherapy in patients with initially unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer improved resection rate. The optimal biologic agent for this outcome cannot yet be determined.
KeywordsColorectal cancer metastases Chemotherapy Biologic agents Resectability Systematic review
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 1.Society AC. Cancer Facts & Figures 2017. 2017; https://www.cancer.org/research/cancer-facts-statistics/all-cancer-facts-figures/cancer-facts-figures-2017.html. Accessed March 20, 2017.
- 2.Nordlinger B, Sorbye H, Glimelius B, et al. Perioperative FOLFOX4 chemotherapy and surgery versus surgery alone for resectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer (EORTC 40983): long-term results of a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(12):1208–1215.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 4.Van Cutsem E, Peeters M, Siena S, et al. Open-label phase III trial of panitumumab plus best supportive care compared with best supportive care alone in patients with chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2007;25(13):1658–1664.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Van Cutsem E, Köhne CH, Láng I, et al. Cetuximab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: updated analysis of overall survival according to tumor KRAS and BRAF mutation status. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(15):2011–2019.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 12.Higgins JG, S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011] ed: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011.Google Scholar
- 15.Review Manager (RevMan) [computer program]. Version 5.3. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration; 2014.Google Scholar
- 22.Tveit KM, Guren T, Glimelius B, et al. Phase III trial of cetuximab with continuous or intermittent fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (Nordic FLOX) versus FLOX alone in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: the NORDIC-VII study. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(15):1755–1762.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 26.Venook AP, Niedzwiecki D, Lenz H-J, et al. CALGB/SWOG 80405: Phase III trial of irinotecan/5-FU/leucovorin (FOLFIRI) or oxaliplatin/5-FU/leucovorin (mFOLFOX6) with bevacizumab (BV) or cetuximab (CET) for patients (pts) with KRAS wild-type (wt) untreated metastatic adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum (MCRC). Paper presented at: 2014 ASCO Annual Meeting2014; Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
- 27.Tejpar S, Stintzing S, Ciardiello F, et al. Prognostic and Predictive Relevance of Primary Tumor Location in Patients With RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Retrospective Analyses of the CRYSTAL and FIRE-3 Trials. JAMA Oncol. 2016.Google Scholar
- 28.Venook AP, Niedzwiecki D, Innocenti F, et al. Impact of primary (1°) tumor location on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Analysis of CALGB/SWOG 80405 (Alliance). Paper presented at: 2016 ASCO Annual Meeting2016; Chicago, IL.Google Scholar