Prognostic and predictive biomarkers for anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody therapy in RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Table 2 Relative size of anti-EGFR mAb efficacy for BRAF mutant tumors compared to BRAF wild-type tumors. Results stratified by anti-EGFR drug, line of therapy, and bevacizumab in control arm

Subgroup	PFS			P value for interaction*	OS			P value for interaction^*		ORR		P value for interaction^*
	N Trials	Interaction Hazard Ratio (95% CI)	Interaction P value	P value for interaction*	N Trials	Interaction Hazard Ratio (95% CI)	Interaction P value	P value for interaction^*	N Trials	Interaction Odds Ratio (95% CI)	Interaction P value	P value for interaction^*
Anti-EGFR drug				0.55				0.56				0.33
Cetuximab	7	1.44 (1.11, 1.87)	< 0.01		6	1.10 (0.82, 1.46)	0.52		3	0.66 (0.23, 1.89)	0.44
Panitumumab	6	1.26 (0.88, 1.80)	0.21		5	1.26 (0.88, 1.79)	0.21		1	2.93 (0.18, 46.88)	0.45
Line of therapy				0.88				0.88
First	8	1.36 (1.06, 1.74)	0.02		7	1.10 (0.84, 1.43)	0.50		3	0.80 (0.30, 2.13)	0.65	-
≥ Second	5	1.41 (0.94, 2.11)	0.10		4	1.16 (0.60, 2.25)	0.65		0	-
Bevacizumab in control arm?				1.00				0.60				0.33
Yes	3	1.37 (0.87, 2.16)	0.18		3	1.29 (0.81, 2.06)	0.28		3	0.66 (0.23, 1.89)	0.44
No	10	1.37 (1.08, 1.75)	< 0.01		8	1.12 (0.87, 1.44)	0.38		1	2.93 (0.18, 46.88)	0.45

^*Test comparing the HRs between trial subgroups (cetuximab; panitumumab; line of therapy; with/without bevacizumab;)

ISSN: 1471-2407