Olszewski and colleagues review
preclinical and clinical
data regarding vascular endothelial
growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors,
with particular attention to the
development of bevacizumab(Drug information on bevacizumab) (Avastin)
in patients with colorectal cancer.
The translation from biologic concept
to clinical proof of concept has been
striking in its rapidity. However, many
important questions remain, and this
story is only beginning to unfold. In
this commentary, we will highlight
some of those questions that bear on
the optimal use of VEGF inhibitors in
patients with colorectal cancer.
A New Paradigm
VEGF inhibitory strategies represent
a new paradigm for the treatment
of cancer-namely, targeting of the
tumor microenvironment rather than
the cancer cell itself. Tumors rely on
the development of new blood vessels
to continue to grow and survive,
as the diffusion capacity of oxygen
and micronutrients is only approximately
200 mm. Cells that exceed this
distance from a vascular source cannot
survive.[1,2] Further convection
of larger molecules requires a net pres
sure gradient between capillaries and
interstitium.[3]
VEGF is one of the most potent
angiogenic growth factors identified
to date; it is upregulated in normal
conditions such as wound healing and
bone growth, as well as in pathologic
conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis
and tumor growth. VEGF promotes
angiogenesis, induces vascular leakage
and fenestration of endothelial
cells, and maintains existing blood
vessels.[4] The angiogenic process
involves dissolution of the existing
basement membrane, endothelial cell
proliferation, formation of a new basement
membrane, and recruitment and
investment of smooth muscle cells and
pericytes around the new blood vessels.[
2] The resulting tumor vasculature
is disorganized, tortuous, and
porous, leading to increased interstitial
fluid pressure as plasma proteins diffuse
out of the vessels, thereby equalizing
the pressure gradient and potentially
interfering with the delivery of cytotoxic
chemotherapy.[2,3] As noted by
Olszewski et al, VEGF and VEGF receptors
are upregulated in colorectal
cancer, and this upregulation is associated
with a poor prognosis and increased
metastatic potential.
Primary Mechanisms of
VEGF Inhibitor Effect
Uncertainty exists regarding the
primary mechanisms underlying the
clinical activity of VEGF inhibitors
such as bevacizumab. It is often presumed
that antiangiogenic therapy will
result in tumor cell "starvation." However,
it is becoming increasingly clear
that VEGF inhibitor effects on vascular
permeability, resulting in reduced
interstitial fluid pressure with the
associated improved delivery of cytotoxic
therapy, is of paramount importance
for clinical activity.[5,6] For
example, in preclinical models, inhibition
of VEGF signaling results in
normalization of the tumor vascular
network, decreased interstitial fluid
pressure, and restoration of a hydrostatic
pressure gradient that allows for
deeper penetration of larger molecules
into the tumor.[3,5]
Clinically, bevacizumab appears to
have limited activity as a single
agent,[7] or when coadministered with
chemotherapy to which the tumor has
already developed resistance.[8] If
VEGF inhibitors act in large part to
facilitate the chemotherapy effect, they
may not bring us closer to an ultimate
goal of therapeutic regimens that do
not include small-molecule cytotoxics
and their associated toxicities.
On the other hand, recent data demonstrating
antitumor activity with a
combination of a VEGF inhibitor (bevacizumab)
and an epidermal growth
factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor (erlotinib
[Tarceva]) in patients with lung
cancer[9] raise the possibility that
combinations of relatively selective
agents that target interrelated pathways
(EGFR signaling results in
VEGF upregulation[10]) can result in
cooperative antitumor activity. However,
if bevacizumab potentiates the
activity of erlotinib via permeability
mechanisms, this does not imply that
a similar benefit would not be seen
with antibody inhibitors of EGFR, given
that their bulky structures may limit
the impact of changes in interstitial
pressure on drug delivery.
Second-Line Therapy?
Bevacizumab is most commonly
utilized as a component of front-line
therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer.
A key unanswered question is
whether bevacizumab should be continued
with the next line of cytotoxic
treatment. One might hypothesize that
if bevacizumab potentiates the delivery
of chemotherapy to tumors, this
should also hold for second-line
therapy. Unfortunately, available data
do not address this issue directly.
Giantonio et al recently reported the
results of Eastern Cooperative Oncology
Group (ECOG) 3200, a randomized
trial in which bevacizumab was
associated with improved survival
when added to the FOLFOX4 regimen
(fluorouracil [5-FU], leucovorin, oxaliplatin(Drug information on oxaliplatin) [Eloxatin) after failure
of initial treatment with irinotecan(Drug information on irinotecan)
(Camptosar) and 5-FU.[7] However,
the patients in this trial had not received
bevacizumab as a component
of first-line therapy.
In the bevacizumab licensing trial
reported by Hurwitz et al,[11] patients
randomized to receive bevacizumab in
combination with irinotecan/5-FU/
leucovorin were permitted to continue
bevacizumab after progression on
first-line therapy. However, it is difficult
to define the impact of bevacizumab
continuation in this trial, as this
decision was not randomized, and is
hence subject to selection bias. The
hypothesis that continuation of bevacizumab
after initial therapy will be of
benefit is testable and should be
pursued.
Adjuvant Treatment
Ongoing and planned clinical trials
will address the use of bevacizumab
in the adjuvant setting in colon
cancer (National Surgical Adjuvant
Breast and Bowel Project [NSABP]
C-08, ECOG 5202) and rectal cancer
(ECOG 5204). This is another context
in which hypotheses regarding mechanism
of action will guide clinical trial
design and interpretation of results. It
is unknown whether micrometastases
in patients with clinically localized disease
are of sufficient size to enable the
angiogenic process, and hence be a target
for anti-VEGF therapy.
The NSABP trial was designed
with continuation of bevacizumab
biweekly for 6 months after the
completion of a 6-month chemotherapy-
plus-bevacizumab phase.[12]
A question arises as to whether this
design should be modified given the
current data suggesting a lack of
activity for single-agent bevacizumab,[
7] as well as the potential for
arterial thromboembolic events[13]
with prolonged use in this potentially
cured population. The current designs
of ECOG 5202 and ECOG 5204 also
call for bevacizumab use concurrently
with chemotherapy, and for 6 months
thereafter.
Other Unanswered Questions
At this time, no clinical parameters
associated with response or resistance
to bevacizumab have been
identified.[14] In addition, little is
known with regard to risk factors for
potentially severe adverse events such
as thrombosis,[13] hypertension, or
gastrointestinal perforation.[11] The
optimal dose of bevacizumab is not
certain, as both the 5- and 10-mg/kg
doses biweekly have resulted in improved
survival.[7,11] In vivo pharmacodynamic
studies (eg, using
vascular imaging) are being pursued
as a potential surrogate to help define
dose and schedule.[6] Furthermore,
the VEGF gene is polymorphic, and
the functional relevance of these variations
is currently undetermined. It is
plausible that polymorphisms in
VEGF or VEGF-receptor genes will
contribute to tumor behavior as well
as to the clinical activity of VEGF
inhibitors.[15,16] Definition of the
clinical activity of other VEGF inhibitory
strategies (eg, receptor antagonists)
is also eagerly awaited.
Clinical success with bevacizumab
has provided proof of principle regarding
the tumor microenvironment
as a target in general, and the VEGF
pathway in particular. These advances
should stimulate further efforts to understand
the relationship between tumor
and stroma, permitting refinement
and identification of strategies that
exploit this interdependence as a therapeutic
target.
