Table 4.
The treatment‐related toxicity status of patients who received additional anti‐VEGF or anti‐EGFR agents in neoadjuvant treatment
| Study | Enrollment, n | Neoadjuvant therapy | Grade 3/4 treatment‐related toxicitya |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blaszkowsky 2014 | 32 | 5‐FU + Erlotinib + bevacizumab + RT | NR |
| Borg 2014 | 46 | Folfox‐4 + bevacizumab | Grade 3/4 gastrointestinal perforation: 1/46 (2.17%)Grade 3/4 bleeding/hemorrhage: 2/46 (4.35%)Grade 3/4 wound‐healing complication: 0 |
| 45 | 5‐FU + bevacizumab + RT | Grade 3/4 gastrointestinal perforation: 0Grade 3/4 bleeding/hemorrhage: 0Grade 3/4 wound‐healing complication: 2/45 (4.44%) | |
| Crane 2010 | 25 | Capecitabine + bevacizumab + RT | NR |
| Dellas 2013 | 69 | Capox + bevacizumab + RT | Grade 3/4 delayed wound‐healing: 1/69 (1.45%) |
| Dipetrillo2012 | 25 | mFOLFOX6 + bevacizumab + RT | Grade 3/4 bleeding: 1/25 (4%) |
| Fernandez‐Martos 2014 | 46 | Capox + bevacizumab | NR |
| Garcia 2015 | 41 | Capecitabine + bevacizumab + RT | NR |
| Gasparini 2012 | 43 | Capecitabine + bevacizumab + RT | Grade 3/4 rectal hemorrhage: 0 |
| Hasegawa 2014 | 25 | Capox + bevacizumab | NR |
| Landry 2015 | 54 | Capox + bevacizumab + RT | Grade 3/4 CNS hemorrhage: 1/54 (1.85%) |
| Nogue 2011 | 47 | Capox + bevacizumab + RT | Grade 3/4 hemorrhage: 0 |
| Resch 2012 | 8 | Capecitabine + bevacizumab + RT | NR |
| Sadahiro 2015 | 52 | S‐1 + bevacizumab + RT | NR |
| Spigel 2012 | 35 | 5‐FU + bevacizumab + RT | Grade 3/4 wound complication: 0 |
| Uehara 2013 | 32 | Capox + bevacizumab | Grade 3/4 perforation: 1/32 (3.13%) |
| Velenik 2011 | 61 | Capecitabine + bevacizumab + RT | Grade 3/4 bleeding: 10/61 (16.39%) |
| Wang 2014 | 12 | FOLFOX + bevacizumab + RT/5‐FU + bevacizumab + RT | NR |
| 6 | FOLFOX + bevacizumab + RT | NR | |
| Xiao 2015 | 25 | 5‐FU + oxaliplatin + bevacizumab + RT | NR |
| Koukourakis 2011 | 19 | Capecitabine + bevacizumab + RT | NR |
| Salazar 2015 | 44 | Capecitabine + bevacizumab + RT | NR |
| Willett 2010 | 32 | 5‐FU + bevacizumab + RT | NR |
| Bengala 2009 | 40 | 5‐FU + cetuximab + RT | NR |
| Horisberger 2009 | 50 | Capecitabine + Irinotecan + cetuximab + RT | NR |
| Kim, S. Y 2011 | 40 | CapIri + cetuximab + RT | Grade 3/4 diarrhea: 2/40 (12.5%)Grade 3/4 hand‐foot syndrome: 0Grade 3/4 skin rash: 2/40 (5%) |
| Machiels 2007 | 40 | Capecitabine + cetuximab + RT | Grade 3/4 diarrhea: 6/40(15%);Grade 3/4 hand‐foot syndrome: 1/40 (2.5%);Grade 3/4 acneiform rash: 0 |
| Rodel 2008 | 60 | Capox + cetuximab + RT | Grade 3/4 diarrhea: 9/60 (15%)Grade 3/4 hand‐foot syndrome: 0Grade 3/4 radiation dermatitis: Grade 3: 4/60 (6.67%);Grade 3/4 acneiform rash: 2/60 (3.33%) |
| Sun 2012 | 63 | Capecitabine + cetuximab + RT | Grade 3/4 diarrhea: 0Grade 3/4 hand and foot syndrome: 0Grade 3/4 radiodermatitis: 10/63 (15.87%)Grade 3/4 acneiform rash: 4/63 (6.35%) |
| Velenik 2012 | 47 | Capecitabine + cetuximab + RT | Grade 3/4 diarrhea: 4/47 (8.51%)Grade 3/4 hand‐foot syndrome: 0Grade 3/4 acneiform rash: 0 |
| Dewdney 2012 | 83 | Capecitabine + cetuximab + RT | NR |
| Jin 2015 | 21 | Capecitabine + nimotuzumab + RT | Grade 3/4 diarrhea: 2/21 (9.52%)Grade 3/4 hand‐foot skin reaction: 0Grade 3/4 radiation dermatitis: 0Grade 3/4 acneiform rash: 0 |
| Helbling 2013 | 40 | Capecitabine + panitumumab + RT | Grade 3/4 diarrhea: 4/40 (10%)Grade 3/4 hand‐foot syndrome: 1/40 (2.5%)Grade 3/4 acneiform rash: 1/40 (2.5%) |
| Pinto 2011 | 60 | 5‐FU + oxaliplatin + panitumumab + RT | Grade 3/4 diarrhea: 23/60 (38.33%)Grade 3/4 hand‐foot syndrome: 0Grade 3/4 acneiform rash: 11/60 (18.33%) |
RT, radiotherapy; 5‐FU, fluorouracil; FOLFOX, leucovorin plus fluorouracil plus oxaliplatin; Capox, capecitabine plus oxaliplatin; S‐1, tegafur plus gimeracil plus potassium oxonate; NR, not reported.
a
We focused on bleeding and bowel perforation and impaired wound‐healing for anti‐VEGF‐relevant cohorts and diarrhea and skin changes in the affected area of the skin involved in radiotherapy for anti‐EGFR‐relevant cohorts.