65Plus: open-label study of bevacizumab in combination with pemetrexed or pemetrexed/carboplatin as first-line treatment of patients with advanced or recurrent nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer

Wolfgang Schuette,1 Claus-Peter Schneider,2,3 Walburga Engel-Riedel,4 Christian Schumann,5,6 Martin Kohlhaeufl,7 Monika Heidi Ursel Serke,8 Gert Hoeffken,9 Cornelius Kortsik,10 Martin Reck11 1Department of Internal Medicine II, Hospital Martha-Maria Halle-Doelau, Halle, 2Department of Pneumonology, Central Hospital, Bad Berka, 3Department of Internal Medicine, DRK Manniske Hospital, Bad Frankenhausen, 4Cologne Clinics, Merheim Lung Hospital, Cologne, 5Pneumonology, Department of Internal Medicine II, University Hospital Ulm, 6Clinic for Pneumology, Thoracic Oncology, Sleep, and Respiratory Critical Care, Kempten-Oberallgäu, 7Center of Pneumonology and Chest Surgery, Hospital Schillerhoehe, Gerlingen, 8Pneumonology, Lung Clinics, Hemer, 9Center of Pneumonology, Chest and Vascular Surgery, Specialty Hospital Coswig, Coswig, 10Department of Pneumonology, Catholic Hospital, Mainz, 11Department of Thoracic Oncology, Lung Clinic, Grosshansdorf, Germany Background: The aim of the study was to investigate in terms of noninferiority the efficacy and safety of a monochemotherapy regimen of pemetrexed plus bevacizumab (BevPem) versus carboplatin/pemetrexed plus bevacizumab (BevCPem) in elderly patients as first-line treatment for advanced metastatic or recurrent nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Materials and methods: 65Plus was a Phase III, randomized, open-label study. In total, 253 patients received BevPem (n=119) or BevCPem (n=134). The primary outcome measure was progression-free survival. Secondary end points were overall survival, tumor response, and safety outcomes. Evaluations were performed for the whole study population and stratified according to Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS).Results: Noninferiority of BevPem in comparison to BevCPem could not be demonstrated for the overall population (P=0.7864). Significant superiority of the combined treatment BevCPem was seen in patients of ECOG PS 0–1 (median PFS 5.1 vs 6.9 months, HR 1.353, 95% CI 1.03–1.777), while the opposite tendency was observed in patients with ECOG PS 2 (median PFS 2.9 vs 1.5 months, HR 0.628, 95% CI 0.195–2.025). Overall, better tolerability was found for the BevPem group, irrespective of ECOG PS.Conclusion: Results from the 65plus study give evidence that BevPem and BevCPem treatments may exert differential effects on PFS, depending on the patients ECOG PS. It appears that patients with better ECOG PS (0–1) benefited more from the combined treatment with carboplatin, while the group comprising more severely impaired patients (ECOG PS 2) benefited more from the monochemotherapy. Keywords: bevacizumab, pemetrexed, carboplatin, NSCLC, elderly patient