Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 2 Efficacy results of bevacizumab trials [28]

From: Regulatory withdrawal of medicines marketed with uncertain benefits: the bevacizumab case study

Trial Line in therapy Trial years Number patients enrolled Comparison Progression-free survival Overall survival
      Median difference (months) Hazard Ratio (95 % confidence interval, P value) Median difference (months) Hazard Ratio (95 % confidence interval, P value)
AVF2119g trial [63] Second line (previously treated with anthracycline and taxane) 2000–2002 462 Bevacizumab plus capecitabine versus capecitabine 0.7 0.98 (0.77–1.25, P < 0.86) 0.6 1.05 (0.86–1.30, P < 0.63)
E2100 trial [4, 10] First line 2001–2004 722 Bevacizumab plus paclitaxel versus paclitaxel 5.5 0.48 (0.39–0.61, P < 0.0001) 1.7 0.87 (0.72–1.05, P = 0.137)
AVADO trial (BO17708) [13, 28] First line 2006–2007 736 Bevacizumab plus docetaxel versus docetaxel 0.9 0.62 (0.48–0.79, P = 0.0003) - 1.7 1.00, 0.76–1.32, P = 0.98)
RIBBON-1 (AVF3694g) [14, 28] First line 2005–2007 622 Bevacizumab plus taxane/anthracycline versus taxane/anthracycline 1.2 0.64 (0.52–0.80, P < 0.0001) Not reported 1.11 (0.86–1.43, P = 0.44)
   2005–2007 615 Bevacizumab plus capecitabine versus capecitabine 2.9 0.69 (0.56–0.84, P =0.0002) 2.9 0.88 (0.69–1.13, P = 0.33)
RIBBON-2 (AVF3693g) [28] Second line 2006–2008 684 Bevacizumab plus taxanes, capecitabine or gemcitabine versus taxanes, capecitabine or gemcitabine 2.1 0.78 (0.64–0.93, P = 0.0072) Non significant difference