Schwartz, Michael A

Purpose Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer mortality in the United States. Antiangiogenic therapy with bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy improves survival in previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. This study was conducted to determine the effect of bevacizumab (at 10 mg/kg) on survival duration for oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients and Methods Eight hundred twenty-nine metastatic colorectal cancer patients previously treated with a fluoropyrimidine and irinotecan were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups: oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFOX4) with bevacizumab; FOLFOX4 without bevacizumab; or bevacizumab alone. The primary end point was overall survival, with additional determinations of progression-free survival, response, and toxicity. Results The median duration of survival for the group treated with FOLFOX4 and bevacizumab was 12.9 months compared with 10.8 months for the group treated with FOLFOX4 alone (corresponding hazard ratio for death = 0.75; P = .0011), and 10.2 months for those treated with bevacizumab alone. The median progression-free survival for the group treated with FOLFOX4 in combination with bevacizumab was 7.3 months, compared with 4.7 months for the group treated with FOLFOX4 alone (corresponding hazard ratio for progression = 0.61; P < .0001), and 2.7 months for those treated with bevacizumab alone. The corresponding overall response rates were 22.7%, 8.6%, and 3.3%, respectively ( P < .0001 for FOLFOX4 with bevacizumab v FOLFOX4 comparison). Bevacizumab was associated with hypertension, bleeding, and vomiting. Conclusion The addition of bevacizumab to oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin improves survival duration for patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer.

Spontaneous portosystemic shunts (SPSSs) have been associated with worse clinical outcomes in the pre–liver transplantation (LT) setting, but little is known about their post‐LT impacts. Our aim was to compare LT candidates with and without SPSSs and assess the impact of SPSSs on patient mortality and graft survival in the post‐LT setting. Patients 18 years or older with abdominal imaging done prior to LT were included. Exclusion criteria were the presence of pre‐LT surgical shunts, LT indications other than cirrhosis, and combined solid organ transplantations. SPSSs were classified as absent, small, or large according to their maximum diameter (8 mm). Multiple variables that could influence the post‐LT course were extracted for analysis. Patient and graft survival were estimated using the Kaplan‐Meier method and were compared between groups using a log‐rank test. The project received institutional review board approval. We extracted data from 326 patients. After comparing patients without SPSS or with small or large SPSSs, no statistical difference was found for overall patient survival: no SPSS (n = 8/63), reference; small SPSS (n = 18/150), hazard ratio (HR), 1.05 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45‐2.46); and large SPSS (n = 6/113), HR, 0.60 (95% CI, 0.20‐1.78); P = 0.20. Also, no difference was found for graft survival: no SPSS (n = 11/63), reference; small SPSS (n = 21/150), HR, 0.80 (95% CI, 0.38‐1.70); large SPSS (n = 11/113), HR, 0.59 (95% CI, 0.25‐1.40); P = 0.48. Similarly, no statistical significance was found for these variables when comparing if the graft used was procured from a donation after circulatory death donor versus a donation after brain death donor. In conclusion, the previously described association between SPSSs and worse clinical outcomes in pre‐LT patients seems not to persist once patients undergo LT. This study suggests that no steps to correct SPSS intraoperatively are necessary.