Skip to main content
. 2018 Jan 15;91(1):12–17. doi: 10.15386/cjmed-881

Table III.

Second line setting and beyond.

Study (year) Treatment Patients End points (months) HR (95% CI) p value
Giantonio et al E3200 (2007) Bevacizumab vs. FOLFOX4 vs. FOLFOX4+ Bevacizumab 829 (820) OS (10.2 vs. 10.8 vs. 12.9) 0.76 (NS) 0.0018
243vs.291vs.286 PFS (2.7 vs. 4.7 vs. 7.3) 0.75 (NS) 0.0011
Grothey et al CORRECT (2013) placebo vs. Regorafenib 760 OS (5.0 vs. 6.4) 0.77 (0.64–0.94) 0.0052
255 vs. 505 PFS (1.7 vs. 1.9) 0.49 (0.42-0.58) <0.0001