Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1055/s-0045-1804535
Real-World Evidence for Comparative Outcomes between Innovator and Biosimilar Bevacizumab in Advanced Colorectal Cancers
Funding None.
Abstract
Purpose
Generic versions of bevacizumab are commonly used in India in patients with advanced/metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRCs), but there is limited real-world evidence (RWE) about their efficacy in comparison to the innovator bevacizumab.
Methods
Patients diagnosed with mCRC between January 2017 and January 2022 and receiving a combination of chemotherapy and bevacizumab were retrospectively analyzed for demographic variables and survivals. The primary endpoint of the study was the estimation and comparison of median progression-free survival (mPFS) between patients receiving innovator versus generic bevacizumab as first-line therapy (CT1) by the Kaplan–Meier method.
Results
A total of 944 patients were included in the analysis, of whom 652 patients (69%) received bevacizumab as CT1, 449 patients (48%) during second-line chemotherapy (CT2), and 74 patients (8%) during third-line therapy (CT3). The innovator was administered to 132 patients (14%), while the remaining 812 patients (86%) received a generic molecule. With a median follow-up of 18 months, there was no difference in mPFS between patients receiving the innovator or biosimilar (10 vs. 9.3 months, p = 0.62). Similarly, there was no difference in median overall survival (mOS) between patients receiving the innovator or biosimilar during CT1 (17.8 vs. 18 months, p = 0.85). Among the patients who received bevacizumab during CT2, there was no statistically significant difference in mPFS between the innovator and the biosimilar (5.5 vs. 5.8 months, p = 0.97), nor was there a difference in mOS between patients receiving the innovator or biosimilar during CT2 (8.15 vs. 8.58 months, p = 0.16).
Conclusion
The current study offers RWE to suggest similar outcomes with innovator and generic bevacizumab when combined with chemotherapy in mCRCs. This has significant implications in India and other low- and middle-income countries besides providing oncologists with greater confidence to use these molecules in their clinical practice.
Publication History
Received: 30 December 2024
Accepted: 28 January 2025
Article published online:
06 March 2025
© 2025. MedIntel Services Pvt Ltd. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India
-
References
- 1 Garcia J, Hurwitz HI, Sandler AB. et al. Bevacizumab (Avastin®) in cancer treatment: a review of 15 years of clinical experience and future outlook. Cancer Treat Rev 2020; 86: 102017
- 2 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 2017; 3 (02) 194-201
- 3 Stintzing S, Modest DP, Rossius L. et al; FIRE-3 investigators. FOLFIRI plus cetuximab versus FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer (FIRE-3): a post-hoc analysis of tumour dynamics in the final RAS wild-type subgroup of this randomised open-label phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2016; 17 (10) 1426-1434
- 4 Hegewisch-Becker S, Graeven U, Lerchenmüller CA. et al. Maintenance strategies after first-line oxaliplatin plus fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (AIO 0207): a randomised, non-inferiority, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2015; 16 (13) 1355-1369
- 5 Simkens LHJ, van Tinteren H, May A. et al. Maintenance treatment with capecitabine and bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer (CAIRO3): a phase 3 randomised controlled trial of the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group. Lancet 2015; 385 (9980) 1843-1852
- 6 Apsangikar PD, Chaudhry SR, Naik MM, Deoghare SB, Joseph J. Comparative pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety of bevacizumab biosimilar to reference bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Indian J Cancer 2017; 54 (03) 535-538
- 7 Parmar DV, Bhatt JK, Manjunath K. et al. Evaluation of biosimilar Bevacizumab in the treatment of Indian patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. . Accessed December 17, 2024 at: https://www.hilarispublisher.com/proceedings/evaluation-of-biosimilar-bevacizumab-in-the-treatment-of-indian-patients-with-nonsmallcell-lung-cancer-9527.html
- 8 Kasliwal S, K R, Reddy P. et al. Comparison of efficacy and safety of a bevacizumab biosimilar, in combination with chemotherapies, in nonresectable metastatic colorectal cancer and in advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer: a randomized, double-blind, phase III study. South Asian J Cancer 2023; 13 (01) 66-76
- 9 Sharma V, Sharma A, Raina V. et al. Metastatic colo-rectal cancer: real life experience from an Indian tertiary care center. BMC Cancer 2021; 21 (01) 630
- 10 Ramaswamy A, Babu V, Kothari R. et al. Treatment of metastatic colorectal cancers in resource-constrained low- and middle-income countries (LMICS) scenario-outcomes, practice patterns, and commentary on treatment costs. South Asian J Cancer 2022; 11 (04) 293-298
- 11 Lu B, Dvorani E, Nguyen L. et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of bevacizumab biosimilars versus originator bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer: a comparative study using real-world data. Value Health 2024; 27 (12) 1689-1697
- 12 Kumar G, DSouza H, Menon N. et al. Safety and efficacy of bevacizumab biosimilar in recurrent/ progressive glioblastoma. Ecancermedicalscience 2021; 15: 1166