Comparison of first-line bevacizumab in combination with mFOLFOX6 or XELOX in metastatic XXXX .

@entity901 @entity1 @entity137 @entity416 @entity16 @entity14 @entity694 @entity1487
PURPOSE: Currently, there are several @entity901 combination regimens for first-line therapy of metastatic @entity14 (mCRC). In this study, we compared the survival outcomes of mCRC @entity1 treated with bevacizumab in combination with either modified @entity1487 /FA/ @entity901 (mFOL- FOX6) or @entity416 / @entity901 (XELOX). METHODS: We designed a two-arm retrospective study of mCRC @entity1 with @entity694 who were treated with bevacizumab and either mFOLFOX6 or XELOX and who had complete clinical and treatment data. We analysed their therapeutic responses, adverse events, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS), and then determined whether there were any statistically significant differences. RESULTS: A total of 131 @entity1 (85 male; 65% and 46 female; 35%) were evaluated. Fifty-seven @entity1 (43.5%) were treated with bevacizumab and mFOLFOX6 and 74 (56.5%) with bevacizumab and XELOX. The median PFS was 9.1 months (95% CI, 4.9-13.1) and 10 months (95% CI, 4.2-15.9) in the mFOLFOX6 and XELOX arms, respectively (p=0.610). The median OS was 29 months (95% CI, 21.6- 34.3) and 27.5 months (95% CI 20-38) in the mFOLFOX6 and XELOX arms (p=0.812), respectively. The most common reason for treatment withdrawal was disease progression (102 @entity1 ; 91%) and the most common grade 3-4 @entity137 was @entity16 ( <=14%). CONCLUSION: Our results show that XELOX is a safe and effective alternative to mFOLFOX6 when combined with bevacizumab as first-line treatment for mCRC @entity1 .
