Risk of gastrointestinal perforation in cancer patients receiving ramucirumab: a meta-analysis of RCTs

abstract
 

Purpose:

Although existing evidence from clinical trials has demonstrated manifestation of gastrointestinal perforation with the use of ramucirumab, overall risks have yet to be reported. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to get a better understanding of the overall incidence and risk of gastrointestinal perforation associated with ramucirumab.

Methods:

The PubMed and Web of Science databases as well as abstracts presented at American Society of Clinical Oncology conferences were searched to identify relevant studies published up to 01 May 2015. Eligible studies included randomized trials of ramucirumab either alone or in combination with another agent compared with the control arm without ramucirumab and that reported gastrointestinal perforation event. Overall incidence, relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed using fixed- or random-effects models depending on the heterogeneity of the included studies.

Results:

A total of 4579 patients with a variety of solid malignancies from six RCTs were included in our meta-analysis. The incidence of gastrointestinal perforation related to ramucirumab was 1.5% (95% CI 1.1–2.1%) with a mortality of 29.8% (95% CI 14.9–50.7%). The RR of gastrointestinal perforation associated with ramucirumab was 2.56 (95% CI 1.29–5.09; P  =  0.007).

Conclusions:

Treatment with the ramucirumab is associated with a significant increase in risk of gastrointestinal perforation in cancer patients.

 References

1.	Liguigli W, Tomasello G, Toppo L, Ratti M, Passalacqua R. Ramucirumab for metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer: results and implications of the REGARD trial. Future Oncol. 2014;10(9):1549–57.
2.	Fuchs CS, Tomasek J, Yong CJ, Dumitru F, Passalacqua R, Goswami C. Ramucirumab monotherapy for previously treated advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (REGARD): an international, randomised, multicentre, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2014;383(9911):31–9.
3.	Wilke H, Muro K, Van Cutsem E, Oh SC, Bodoky G, Shimada Y. Ramucirumab plus paclitaxel versus placebo plus paclitaxel in patients with previously treated advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (RAINBOW): a double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(11):1224–35.
4.	ClinicalTrials.gov: List results, search of ramucirumab. Available from http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?term = Ramucirumab (accessed 2014 Sep 20).
5.	Hapani S, Chu D, Wu S. Risk of gastrointestinal perforation in patients with cancer treated with bevacizumab: a meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2009;10(6):559–68.
6.	Qi WX, Sun YJ, Tang LN, Shen Z, Yao Y. Risk of gastrointestinal perforation in cancer patients treated with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2014;89(3):394–403.
7.	Garon EB, Ciuleanu TE, Arrieta O, Prabhash K, Syrigos KN, Goksel T. Ramucirumab plus docetaxel versus placebo plus docetaxel for second-line treatment of stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer after disease progression on platinum-based therapy (REVEL): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2014;384(9944):665–73.
8.	Penson RT, Moore KM, Fleming GF, Braly P, Schimp V, Nguyen H. A phase II study of ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) in the treatment of persistent or recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;134(3):478–85.
9.	Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials. 1996;17(1):1–12.
10.	Lane PW. Meta-analysis of incidence of rare events. Stat Methods Med Res. 2012;22(2):117–32.
11.	DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7(3):177–88.
12.	Mackey JR, Ramos-Vazquez M, Lipatov O, McCarthy N, Krasnozhon D, Semiglazov V. Primary results of ROSE/TRIO-12, a randomized placebo-controlled phase III trial evaluating the addition of ramucirumab to first-line docetaxel chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(2):141–8.
13.	Tabernero J, Yoshino T, Cohn AL, Obermannova R, Bodoky G, Garcia-Carbonero R. Ramucirumab versus placebo in combination with second-line FOLFIRI in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma that progressed during or after first-line therapy with bevacizumab, oxaliplatin, and a fluoropyrimidine (RAISE): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16(5):499–508.
14.	Doebele RC, Spigel D, Tehfe M, Thomas S, Reck M, Verma S. Phase 2, randomized, open-label study of ramucirumab in combination with first-line pemetrexed and platinum chemotherapy in patients with nonsquamous, advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. Cancer. 2014;6(10):29132.
15.	Saif MW, Elfiky A, Salem RR. Gastrointestinal perforation due to bevacizumab in colorectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14(6):1860–9.
16.	Kamba T, Tam BY, Hashizume H, Haskell A, Sennino B, Mancuso MR. VEGF-dependent plasticity of fenestrated capillaries in the normal adult microvasculature. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2006;290(2):H560–76.
17.	Wang Y, Fei D, Vanderlaan M, Song A. Biological activity of bevacizumab, a humanized anti-VEGF antibody in vitro. Angiogenesis. 2004;7(4):335–45.
18.	Mir O, Mouthon L, Alexandre J, Mallion JM, Deray G, Guillevin L. Bevacizumab-induced cardiovascular events: a consequence of cholesterol emboli syndrome? J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99(1):85–6.
19.	Heinzerling JH, Huerta S. Bowel perforation from bevacizumab for the treatment of metastatic colon cancer: incidence, etiology, and management. Curr Surg. 2006;63(5):334–7.
20.	Choi YI, Lee SH, Ahn BK, Baek SU, Park SJ, Kim YS. Intestinal perforation in colorectal cancers treated with bevacizumab (Avastin). Cancer Res Treat. 2008;40(1):33–5.
21.	Tol J, Cats A, Mol L, Koopman M, Bos MM, van der Hoeven JJ. Gastrointestinal ulceration as a possible side effect of bevacizumab which may herald perforation. Invest New Drugs. 2008;26(4):393–7.
22.	Han ES, Monk BJ. What is the risk of bowel perforation associated with bevacizumab therapy in ovarian cancer? Gynecol Oncol. 2007;105(1):3–6.
23.	Badgwell BD, Camp ER, Feig B, Wolff RA, Eng C, Ellis LM. Management of bevacizumab-associated bowel perforation: a case series and review of the literature. Ann Oncol. 2008;19(3):577–82.
24.	Burger RA, Brady MF, Bookman MA, Monk BJ, Walker JL, Homesley HD. Risk factors for GI adverse events in a phase III randomized trial of bevacizumab in first-line therapy of advanced ovarian cancer: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(12):1210–7.
25.	Tanyi JL, McCann G, Hagemann AR, Coukos G, Rubin SC, Liao JB. Clinical predictors of bevacizumab-associated gastrointestinal perforation. Gynecol Oncol. 2011;120(3):464–9.
26.	Sliesoraitis S, Tawfik B. Bevacizumab-induced bowel perforation. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2011;111(7):437–41.
27.	Walraven M, Witteveen PO, Lolkema MP, van Hillegersberg R, Voest EE, Verheul HM. Antiangiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibition related gastrointestinal perforations: a case report and literature review. Angiogenesis. 2011;14(2):135–41.
28.	Abu-Hejleh T, Mezhir JJ, Goodheart MJ, Halfdanarson TR. Incidence and management of gastrointestinal perforation from bevacizumab in advanced cancers. Curr Oncol Rep. 2012;14(4):277–84.
29.	Ezzedine S, Bege T, Berdah S, Vitton V, Grimaud JC, Barthet M. Endoscopic management of colonic perforation owing to angiogenesis inhibitors. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2013;20(6):e230–2.