Kozloff, Mark

Abstract Introduction: Results of several large clinical trials have demonstrated inferior outcomes when CLL patients (pts) with del(17p), or to a lesser extent del(11q), are treated with chemoimmunotherapy. Despite recent advances in targeted therapies, management of unfavorable-risk CLL pts remains challenging. The Connect CLL registry is the largest prospective study describing real-world management of a diverse cohort of CLL pts. Here we describe the management of genetically unfavorable-risk CLL pts enrolled in the Connect CLL Registry, and test associations between del(17p)/del(11q) mutations and treatment choice, timing of therapy, and outcomes. Methods: Connect CLL is a longitudinal, multicenter, observational cohort study of 1,494 CLL pts enrolled between 2010-2014 at 179 community (n=1,311), 17 academic (n=155), and 3 government (n=28) sites within ≤ 2 months of initiating any line of therapy (LOT). For this study, pts were categorized into 3 risk-groups based on FISH or cytogenetic results at enrollment: unfavorable risk [either del(17p)/del(11q) positive]; favorable risk [absence of del(17p)/del(11q)]; and unknown risk (testing not performed). Analyses were stratified by LOT at enrollment (LOT1 vs LOT≥2). The risk of an EFS defining event was compared across risk-groups stratified by LOT, including only pts who had been followed for ≥ 2 years (yr) or those who had an EFS defining event (death, progression/relapse, transformation) within 2 yr, using multivariable (MV) logistic regression. Logistic regression analyses of 18 potential predictors were performed, and significant predictors (0.10 significance level) were then included in a MV logistic regression model to identify factors associated with inferior 2 yr EFS. Results: Of 1,494 pts enrolled, 225 had unfavorable risk [del(17p), n = 94; del(11q), n = 131], 621 favorable risk, and 648 unknown risk. For pts enrolled at LOT1 (n = 889), 141 had unfavorable risk, 425 favorable risk, and 323 unknown risk. Baseline characteristics for unfavorable-risk pts in LOT1 included: median age 69 yr (62% age ≥ 65 yr); 91% White; 53% Rai stage ≥ 2; 86% community sites; 0.9 yr median time from dx to LOT1; 8% family history CLL. With the exception of age, unfavorable-risk pts treated at LOT1 with FCR (median age 63) and BR (median age 74) had similar demographic characteristics. Median time from dx to LOT1 was 1.0, 1.3, and 2.0 yr for unfavorable risk, favorable, and unknown-risk pts, respectively (P < 0.001 for comparison of the 3 risk-subgroups). Reasons for initiating treatment in unfavorable-risk pts were lymphadenopathy (42%), bone marrow failure (36%), and lymphocytosis (33%) (similar across the 3 risk-subgroups). The three most common therapies for unfavorable-risk pts in LOT1 were FCR (36%), BR (21%), and FR (6%). Favorable-risk (FCR 26%, BR 24%, and R 10%) and unknown-risk pts (FCR 22%, BR 18%, and R 17%) were treated similarly in LOT1. Median time from dx to LOT≥2 was 3.5 yr in unfavorable-risk pts (vs 4.1 yr in favorable and 4.6 yr in unknown risk pts; P = 0.04 for comparison of the 3 risk-groups). For unfavorable-risk pts in LOT≥2, BR (26%), R (11%), and FCR (10%) were most commonly prescribed. At any LOT, only 10% of unfavorable-risk pts participated in a clinical trial and 4% underwent allogeneic SCT. Overall, 33% (LOT1) and 68% (LOT≥2) of pts experienced an EFS defining event within 2 yrs. Pts with unfavorable risk (vs favorable risk) had significantly worse outcomes, with a higher-risk of death/progression/relapse/transformation within 2 yr (LOT1: 42% vs 29%, respectively, P = 0.008; and LOT≥2: 80% vs 61%, P = 0.004). Unfavorable-risk pts treated with either FCR or BR at LOT1 had similar risk of an EFS defining event (odds ratio [OR] 0.9, CI 0.6-1.5). Results from MV analyses of LOT1 pts identified unfavorable risk (OR 1.9; 95% CI 1.1-3.1; P = 0.0168) and age ≥ 75 years (OR 2.6; 95% CI 1.5-4.3; P = 0.007) as independent predictors of inferior EFS at 2 yr. Conclusions: Although similar treatment approaches were used among the 3 risk-subgroups, pts with unfavorable-risk CLL had inferior outcomes at LOT1 and LOT≥2. These results, from a real-world setting, validate the findings for unfavorable risk pts from large clinical trials. These data underscore the importance of performing genetic risk stratification on all CLL pts, and support consideration of clinical trials and/or B cell receptor targeted agents for unfavorable risk CLL pts when treatment is considered. Disclosures Mato: Janssen: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Pronai Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding. Nabhan:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Flowers:Celegene: Other: Unpaid consultant, Research Funding; Celegene: Other: Unpaid consultant, Research Funding; Spectrum: Research Funding; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; OptumRx: Consultancy; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Spectrum: Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; OptumRx: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Acerta: Research Funding. Kay:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Tolero Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Hospira: Research Funding. Kipps:Pharmacyclics Abbvie Celgene Genentech Astra Zeneca Gilead Sciences: Other: Advisor; Pharmacyclics Abbvie Celgene Genentech Astra Zeneca Gilead Sciences: Other: Advisor. Grinblatt:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Lamanna:Genentech-Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Infinity: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Kozloff:Genentech: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy. Sullivan:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Flick:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kiselev:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Bhushan:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Swern:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sharman:Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Calistoga: Honoraria; Roche: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding.

Abstract The majority of pts with newly diagnosed CLL are classified with Rai stage 0 or 1 disease and typically experience an indolent clinical course. However, little is known regarding the reasons for initiating therapy in this population or patterns of initial treatment in the contemporary era of our practicing community. We utilized data from the Connect CLL registry, a US-based multi-center, prospective observational cohort study that is aimed at understanding patterns of CLL management without a study-specific intervention. Eligible pts were adults with a clinical diagnosis of CLL who initiated therapy ≤2 months prior to enrollment, and were enrolled from academic (n=155), community (n=1311), or government (n=28) sites between 2010-2014. Descriptive statistics were applied to examine data on demographics, baseline characteristics, treatment selection, early treatment outcomes, and reasons for initiating therapy that were reported for pts with Rai 0/1 CLL receiving first-line therapy. Multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to evaluate predictors of complete response (CR) and event-free survival (EFS) defined as the occurrence of the first of disease progression, relapse or death within 24 months of enrollment. Among 684 pts who received first-line therapy at enrollment and for whom Rai stage was available, 363 had Rai 0/1 CLL. This group had a median age of 68 years (range 41-90); 94% were white, 60% male, 98% insured, and 93% were treated in community practices; 47% had Rai stage 0 disease (54% Binet A); 33% had ≥1 constitutional symptoms; 96% had ECOG performance status of 0 or 1; 35% had conventional cytogenetics and 53% had FISH analysis performed. Among pts for whom cytogenetic or FISH analysis were performed, 159 (72%) were abnormal, of them 37 pts (23%) had del(11q), 104 pts (65%) had del(13q), 33 pts (21%) had trisomy 12, and 20 pts (13%) had del(17p) by conventional cytogenetics and/or FISH, including 8% with del(17p) by FISH. The median time from diagnosis to initiation of therapy was 2.5 years (range 0-20 years) for Rai 0/1 pts compared with 0.5 years for pts enrolled with Rai stage ≥2 (range 0-32). The most common reasons for initiating therapy (with >1 reason possible) in Rai 0/1 CLL were: bulky or progressive or lymphadenopathy (40%), progressive lymphocytosis (39%), any disease-related symptom (weight loss, fatigue, fever, night sweats; 28%), anemia (20%), and thrombocytopenia (15%); 42% of pts had >1 reason for initiation. The most common first-line regimens used in this cohort were: fludarabine/cyclophosphamide/rituximab (FCR; 29%), bendamustine/rituximab (BR; 20%), and rituximab alone (12%). Of the 317 pts who either responded to treatment during the first 24 months of enrollment or were followed ≥24 months, 143 pts (45%) achieved CR (investigator assessed as per protocol) and 264 (83%) achieved CR or partial response. Female gender (odds ratio [OR] = 2.22), treatment with BR or FCR (OR = 3.41), and time from diagnosis to therapy (OR = 0.92; with each year increase in time from diagnosis to initiation of therapy, relative odds of CR decreases by 8%), were independent predictors of CR. Of the 311 evaluable pts, 82 pts (26%) experienced an EFS event during the 24 months on study, of which 19 (23%) were deaths and 48 (59%) were progressions. Age ≥75 years (OR = 4.46), lymphocytosis as a reason for therapy initiation (OR = 1.89), and male gender (OR = 1.73) were independent predictors of an EFS event within 24 months. The Connect CLL registry represents the largest comprehensive prospective cohort of CLL pts collected from multiple practices across the US. In concordance with other studies, pts with Rai 0/1 initiated therapy approximately 2.5 years following CLL diagnosis and included a cohort of pts with poor prognostic FISH characteristics. Although chemoimmunotherapy was associated with a significantly higher likelihood of CR, progressive lymphocytosis as a reason for initiating therapy (and not any form of treatment) was more likely to predict an early EFS event. Approaches using novel agents or combination therapies aimed towards addressing pts with progressive lymphocytosis should be considered in future studies. Disclosures Flowers: Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; OptumRx: Consultancy; AbbVie: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Celegene: Other: Unpaid consultant, Research Funding; Spectrum: Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Spectrum: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding. Nabhan:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Kay:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Hospira: Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Tolero Pharma: Research Funding. Mato:AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pronai Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy. Lamanna:Genentech-Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Infinity: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Grinblatt:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Kipps:Pharmacyclics Abbvie Celgene Genentech Astra Zeneca Gilead Sciences: Other: Advisor; Pharmacyclics Abbvie Celgene Genentech Astra Zeneca Gilead Sciences: Other: Advisor. Kozloff:Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy. Sullivan:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Flick:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kiselev:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Bhushan:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Swern:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sharman:TG Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Research Funding; Calistoga: Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 3926 Introduction. Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients will have significant variation in signs and symptoms at initial presentation and across lines of therapy, with concomitant effect on patient health-related quality of life (HRQOL). HRQOL and other patient-reported outcomes, together with clinical outcomes, provide a more complete perspective on the burden of disease and facilitate a broader view of the impact of treatment regimens. This analysis evaluates whether the HRQOL of patients with CLL in the United States (US) varies at the time the patients are about to embark on various lines of therapy, and offers a baseline report from which subsequent longitudinal analysis post-treatment will be possible. Methods. Clinical and HRQOL data were collected in Connect®CLL, a prospective observational registry initiated in March 2010 involving centers in the US. Physicians provided data on the demographics and clinical characteristics of patients receiving therapy. HRQOL was self-reported by patients at enrollment using the Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI, a symptom assessment tool), the EQ-5D (a non-disease-specific HRQOL instrument), and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Leukemia (FACT-Leu, a leukemia-specific HRQOL instrument). We characterized patients who had initial (First Line), second (Second Line) or subsequent (Higher Line) treatment regimens prior to initiation of regimens. Reported mean overall and/or domain-specific BFI, EQ-5D and FACT-Leu scores were analyzed by line of therapy. Statistical significance of score differences among sub-cohorts was ascertained by ANOVA using SAS 9.1. Results. Evaluable data were reported on 1005 patients, enrolled from 161 centers (93% community, 7% academic). Patients were predominantly male (62%) and white (89%) with mean age at 69 (standard deviation [SD] 11) years. HRQOL scores by line of therapy are presented: The total FACT-Leu and FACT-G results, and the total EQ-5D Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) results, consistently suggest that patients initiating first line therapy have somewhat better HRQOL compared with those initiating subsequent lines of therapy. FACT-Leu total scores of patients initiating first line therapy were associated with better physical and leukemia-specific considerations, and the EQ-5D total score was associated with better mobility and pain/discomfort. Conclusions. Initial results from the Connect® CLL Registry indicate that HRQOL prior to treatment is better among patients initiating first line therapy compared to patients initiating later lines of treatment. Future analyses should be conducted to determine what clinical or other factors may be associated with the HRQOL deterioration in patients initiating subsequent lines of therapy, so as to inform clinician decision making. Also, subsequent longitudinal analyses should be undertaken to determine how HRQOL might be affected by the different lines of therapy and the specific treatment regimens, as well as by their initial HRQOL and other patient factors. Disclosures: Kay: Celgene: Research Funding. Flowers:Celgene: Consultancy; Prescription Solutions: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Millennium: Research Funding, Unpaid consultancy, Unpaid consultancy Other; Genentech: Unpaid consultancy, Unpaid consultancy Other; Gilead: Research Funding; Spectrum: Research Funding; Janssen lymphoma research foundation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Weiss:Celgene: Consultancy. Lamanna:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Flinn:Celgene: Research Funding. Grinblatt:Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Kipps:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Kozloff:Celgene: Consultancy. Lerner:Celgene Connect: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sharman:Celgene: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria; Calistoga: Honoraria; Portola pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Khan:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Street:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Swern:Celgene: Employment. Sullivan:Celgene: Employment. Pashos:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

514 Background: Randomized trials and OCSs have demonstrated that BV treatment in 1st-line (1L), in 2L, and across multiple lines is associated with longer survival in patients (pts) with mCRC. This analysis was aimed at comparing the effectiveness of BV after 1st disease progression (PD) between male and female mCRC pts who received 1L BV-containing therapy in a real-world setting. Methods: ARIES is a large, prospective OCS that enrolled pts who received BV and chemotherapy (CT) for 1L mCRC. Post-PD effectiveness was assessed for men and women characterizing BV use by cumulative and dichotomous approaches. The primary analysis treated BV exposure as cumulative BV doses after 1st PD and post-progression overall survival (ppOS) as the time from 1st PD to death. A time-dependent Cox regression model was fitted to assess the effect of cumulative BV exposure on ppOS, while controlling for potential confounders. A dichotomous secondary analysis characterized BV exposure as receipt of CT + BV (BBP) or CT alone (No BBP) within 2 months after PD and ppOS as time from 1st PD + 2 months to death. Results: Among the 1,550 1L mCRC pts enrolled, 1,199 (532 women) had PD. In the primary analysis, hazard ratios (HRs) for ppOS decreased, on average, by 1.2% with each additional BV dose. When stratified by sex, the average risk reduction per BV dose over 15 doses was 1.8% in women and 0.7% in men. In the secondary analysis that included 331 women (BBP, 180; No BBP, 151) and 417 men (BBP, 245, No BBP, 172) who received BV ± CT within 2 months post-PD, the HRs for ppOS with BBP treatment were 0.46 (95% CI, 0.35–0.59) in women and 0.52 (95% CI, 0.41–0.67) in men. Statistical interaction tests for differences in the effectiveness of BV between men and women were negative for primary and secondary analyses (P of 0.58 and 0.77). Protocol-specified adverse events occurred in 17.8% of women and 10.2% of men in the BBP population; this difference was largely related to rates of hypertension (8.3% vs 2.4%, respectively). Conclusions: In ARIES, the effectiveness of BV after first PD was not statistically different between women and men with mCRC. Clinical trial information: NCT00388206.

702 Background: Median overall survival (OS) in mCRC has significantly improved over the past 20 yrs, but the observed range of OS in pts remains wide; a large percentage of pts have OS <1 yr or >4 yrs. ARIES was a prospective OCS conducted from 2006–2012 that evaluated outcomes in pts receiving BV + chemotherapy (CT) for mCRC in general clinical practice. The objective of this analysis is to examine clinical characteristics of pts with long vs short OS. Methods: This analysis included 1,417/1,550 first-line (1L) BV-treated mCRC pts who died or had complete follow-up on study. Long OS was defined as OS within the upper quartile of the analysis population (range 42–67 mos); short OS was defined as OS within the lower quartile (range 0.3–12 mos). Progression-free survival (PFS) was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods. Pt and disease characteristics and treatment patterns were described using summary statistics. Results: Pt and disease characteristics are shown in the Table. Median PFS was 22.3 mos (95% CI, 19.9–23.3) vs. 4.9 mos (95% CI, 4.6–5.4), in the long-OS vs. short-OS groups. More pts with long OS received any second-line (2L) therapy (71% vs. 46%), and were exposed to 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan throughout the course of their disease (53% vs. 32%) compared with pts with short OS. KRAS/BRAF mutation status was not collected. Conclusions: Pts with long OS had better baseline performance status, primary tumors more likely to have been resected, and were more likely to have received 2L CT. Additional analyses of detailed treatment patterns and safety are ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT00388206. [Table: see text]

SummaryThe clinical course of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) is heterogeneous, and treatment options vary considerably. The Connect® CLL registry is a multicentre, prospective observational cohort study that provides a real‐world perspective on the management of, and outcomes for, patients with CLL. Between 2010 and 2014, 1494 patients with CLL and that initiated therapy, were enrolled from 199 centres throughout the USA (179 community‐, 17 academic‐, and 3 government‐based centres). Patients were grouped by line of therapy at enrolment (LOT). We describe the clinical and demographic characteristics of, and practice patterns for, patients with CLL enrolled in this treatment registry, providing patient‐level observational data that represent real‐world experiences in the USA. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analyses were performed on 49·3% of patients at enrolment. The most common genetic abnormalities detected by FISH were del(13q) and trisomy 12 (45·7% and 20·8%, respectively). Differences in disease characteristics and comorbidities were observed between patients enrolled in LOT1 and combined LOT2/≥3 cohorts. Important trends observed include the infrequent use of genetic prognostic testing, and differences in patient characteristics for patients receiving chemoimmunotherapy combinations. These data represent experiences of patients with CLL in the USA, which may inform treatment decisions in everyday practice.

ABSTRACTPurposeThis analysis from Avastin® Registries: Investigation of Effectiveness and Safety (ARIES) examined the association between exposure to bevacizumab after disease progression (PD) and postprogression survival (PPS) in bevacizumab‐exposed metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) through the application of time‐dependent and time‐fixed analytical methods.MethodsPatients with mCRC who were treated with first‐line bevacizumab and who survived first PD (PD1) were included. A time‐dependent Cox regression model was fitted to assess the effect of cumulative bevacizumab exposure on PPS, while controlling for potential confounders. In addition to support findings from previous studies, a modified intent‐to‐treat (mITT) analysis compared PPS in patients who received bevacizumab beyond disease progression (BBP) with those who did not (No‐BBP).ResultsOf 1550 patients, 1199 survived PD1 and had a median PPS of 13.4 months. Cumulative bevacizumab exposure was associated with improved PPS (p = 0.0040). After adjusting for confounders, the hazard ratios (HRs) for PPS decreased, on average, by 1.2% (range, 1.1–1.3%) with each additional dose of bevacizumab. In the mITT analysis, the median PPS for BBP (n = 438) was 14.4 months vs 10.6 months with for No‐BBP (n = 667). BBP was found to be independently associated with longer PPS in a multivariable Cox regression analysis (HR, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.73–0.97). Protocol‐specified adverse events suspected to be associated with bevacizumab occurred in 13.0% of patients with BBP.ConclusionThis analysis supports the observation that bevacizumab exposure after PD1 is associated with longer PPS in mCRC. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Abstract Background. The Bevacizumab Regimens’ Investigation of Treatment Effects (BRiTE) study is a prospective, observational cohort study designed to elucidate safety and effectiveness outcomes associated with bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy as used in clinical practice for first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Patients and Methods. Baseline characteristics, prespecified bevacizumab-related adverse events, and effectiveness data were collected from 1,953 mCRC patients who were receiving first-line treatment including bevacizumab at 248 U.S. sites. Results. At database lock, the median follow-up was 20.1 months. At baseline, 46% of patients were aged ≥65 years and 49% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score ≥1. Fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin was the most common first-line chemotherapy regimen (56%). Overall rates of bevacizumab-related adverse events in the BRiTE study, such as gastrointestinal perforation (1.9%), arterial thromboembolic events (2%), grade 3–4 bleeding (2.2%), and de novo hypertension requiring medication (22%), were consistent with those reported in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of bevacizumab in first-line mCRC treatment. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) times were 9.9 (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.5–10.3) months and 22.9 (95% CI, 21.9–24.4) months, respectively. Conclusion. The median PFS and OS durations and safety profile of bevacizumab in the BRiTE study were similar to those in RCTs of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in first-line mCRC patients. The observations from the BRiTE study complement and expand upon RCT data, providing clinical information in a large cohort of bevacizumab-treated patients and subgroups such as the elderly.

Purpose Bevacizumab provides a survival benefit in first- and second-line metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In a large, observational, bevacizumab treatment study (Bevacizumab Regimens: Investigation of Treatment Effects and Safety [BRiTE]) in patients who had mCRC, a longer-than-expected overall survival (OS) of 25.1 months was reported. The association between various pre- and post-treatment factors (including the use of bevacizumab beyond first progression [BBP]) and survival was examined. Patients and Methods The 1,445 of 1,953 previously untreated patients with mCRC who were enrolled in BRiTE and who experienced disease progression (PD) were classified into three groups: no post-PD treatment (n = 253), post-PD treatment without bevacizumab (no BBP; n = 531), and BBP (n = 642). Relevant baseline and on-study variables, including BBP, were analyzed with a Cox model with respect to their independent effect on survival beyond first PD. Results Median OS was 25.1 months (95% CI, 23.4 to 27.5 months), and median progression-free survival was 10.0 months in the overall BRiTE population. Baseline and postbaseline factors were well balanced between the BBP and no-BBP groups. Median OS rates were 12.6, 19.9, and 31.8 months in the no post-PD treatment, no-BBP, and BBP groups, respectively. In multivariate analyses, compared with no BBP, BBP was strongly and independently associated with improved survival (HR, 0.48; P < .001). Hypertension that required medication was the only bevacizumab-related safety event that occurred more frequently in the BBP group (24.6% v 19.2%). Conclusion These results from a large, prospective, observational study suggest that continued vascular endothelial growth factor inhibition with bevacizumab beyond initial PD could play an important role improving the overall success of therapy for patients who have mCRC.