Investigator

Shuichi Kamijima

Chugai Pharmaceutical Co Ltd Japan

Research Interests

SKShuichi Kamijima
Papers(2)
Incidence of gastroin…Incidence of fistula …
Collaborators(10)
Shunichi FukuharaTakafumi ToitaTakayuki EnomotoToru SugiyamaYasuo SugitaniAkihiko UedaAyaka ShimizuDaisuke AokiHidemichi WatariKiyoko Ogino
Institutions(7)
Chugai Pharmaceutical…Kyoto UniversityOkinawa Prefectural C…Niigata University Gr…Iwate Medical Univers…Keio UniversityHokkaido University

Papers

Incidence of gastrointestinal perforation associated with bevacizumab in combination with neoadjuvant chemotherapy as first-line treatment of advanced ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer: analysis of a Japanese healthcare claims database

To assess the incidence of bevacizumab-associated gastrointestinal (GI) perforation during first-line treatment of patients with ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in Japanese real-world clinical practice. A retrospective study was conducted using a healthcare claims database owned by Medical Data Vision Co., Ltd. (study period, 2008-2020). Patients who initiated first-line treatment of ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer were identified and divided into NAC and primary debulking surgery (PDS) groups. The incidence of bevacizumab-associated GI perforation was compared within the NAC group and between the groups. Paclitaxel + carboplatin (TC) was most commonly used as first-line treatment (39.5% and 59.6% in the NAC and PDS groups, respectively). TC + bevacizumab was used in 9.3% and 11.6% of patients in the NAC and PDS groups, respectively. In the NAC group receiving TC, the proportion of patients with risk factors for GI perforation was lower among patients with versus without concomitant bevacizumab. The incidence of GI perforation in the NAC group was 0.38% (1/266 patients) in patients receiving TC + bevacizumab and 0.18% (2/1,131 patients) in patients receiving TC without bevacizumab (risk ratio=2.13; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.19 to 23.36; risk difference=0.20; 95% CI=-0.58 to 0.97). None of the 319 patients in the PDS group receiving TC + bevacizumab had GI perforation. No notable increase was observed in GI perforation associated with NAC containing bevacizumab. We conclude that bevacizumab is prescribed with sufficient care in Japan to avoid GI perforation.

Incidence of fistula occurrence in patients with cervical cancer treated with bevacizumab: data from real-world clinical practice

Abstract Background This study aimed to determine the incidence of pelvic fistulas in cervical cancer patients treated with bevacizumab in Japanese clinical practice. Methods A post-marketing surveillance (PMS) study was conducted between June 2016 and February 2018 to survey physicians who treated advanced or recurrent cervical cancer patients with bevacizumab (according to the product label). The clinical/treatment status of patients with pelvic fistulas was assessed in an additional retrospective case series study. Results 142 patients were included in the PMS study (median age 51 years; 66.9% squamous cell carcinoma; 66.2% recurrent cervical cancer; 64.1% previous radiotherapy). Patients received a median of seven bevacizumab doses. Six patients, all of whom had a history of pelvic irradiation, developed seven fistulas (4.2%; 95% confidence interval, 1.56–8.96), and five patients had also undergone pelvic surgery. The case series study of the patients who developed fistulas indicated that three patients had high cumulative bladder and rectal doses of radiation, and two of them had undergone salvage re-irradiation for pelvic recurrence. The other three patients underwent both radical hysterectomy and adjuvant radiotherapy, but did not receive an excessive radiation dose to the bladder or rectum. Conclusions This study found that the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval for pelvic fistula incidence did not exceed the incidence reported in the GOG 240 study. To ensure an adequate benefit-risk assessment of bevacizumab in cervical cancer patients, a comprehensive evaluation of prior treatment is essential and the possibility of unexpected fistulas, even after careful evaluation, should be considered.

2Papers
13Collaborators