Case report: Changes in serum bevacizumab concentration in a hemodialysis patient with unresectable colorectal cancer treated with FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab

Case report: Successful treatment of a patient undergoing haemodialysis with multifocal hepatocellular carcinoma using atezolizumab and bevacizumab

In the last five years, the advent of combination immune checkpoint inhibitor atezolizumab and anti-angiogenic agent bevacizumab has transformed treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. As patient outcomes improve, healthcare professionals will more frequently encounter patients with concomitant hepatocellular cancer and end stage kidney disease on haemodialysis. We present the first case in the literature of a 58-year-old male with multifocal hepatocellular carcinoma undertaking regular haemodialysis who was successfully treated with atezolizumab and bevacizumab with a partial response and stable disease for two years, who suffered grade 1 fatigue, grade 2 hypertension and eventually grade 3 wound infection leading to cessation of bevacizumab. After disease progression on atezolizumab monotherapy, all chemotherapy was stopped. We embed this case in a review of the current literature of atezolizumab and bevacizumab use in patients undertaking haemodialysis and conclude that both targeted therapies may be safely used in these patients. We recommend joint close management of these patients between oncology and nephrology teams, with initial cardiovascular risk stratification before commencing atezolizumab and bevacizumab therapy. During therapy, there should be regular monitoring of blood pressure, or proteinuria if the patient is oliguric under guidance of the dialysis team if preservation of residual renal function is required.

[A Case Report of Successful Treatment with Dose-controlled mFOFOX6+Bevacizumab for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in Patient Receiving Hemodialysis]

A 65-years-old man undergoing hemodialysis for chronic kidney disease was diagnosed with ascending colon cancer and 3 hepatic metastases. He was administered mFOLFOX6 (reducing the dose to 50%) plus bevacizumab (BEV) therapy. Hemodialysis was performed 4 h after administration of oxaliplatin on day1 and repeated three times a week. No serious adverse events were observed. After 4 courses of chemotherapy, a computer tomography scan showed that the hepatic metastases had reduced. 2 courses of mFOLFOX6 (increasing the dose to 75%) plus BEV therapy were added, he was operated by laparoscopic right hemicolectomy and laparoscopic patrial hepatectomy. He has been in remission for 2 years and 4 months since the surgery. Dose-adjusted chemotherapy with hemodialysis was effective and improve the prognosis of the patient.

Plasma exchange as a tool for removal of bevacizumab: Highlighting application for urgent surgery

Background

Bevacizumab is commonly used to manage cerebral edema associated with brain tumors. However, its long half-life poses challenges for patients requiring urgent surgery due to wound complications. We present a case of utilizing therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) to remove bevacizumab in a patient with recurrent glioblastoma requiring urgent surgery.

Methods

A 58-year-old male with recurrent glioblastoma, IDH-wildtype, presented with clinical and radiographic concern for ventriculitis requiring urgent wound washout only 4 days after his last bevacizumab infusion. TPE was performed for 3 sessions after surgery using a centrifugation-based cell separator. Replacement fluids included normal serum albumin, normal saline, and fresh frozen plasma. Bevacizumab levels were quantified using an enzyme-linked immunoabsorbent assay before and after each TPE session.

Results

TPE effectively removed bevacizumab, enabling safe surgery without new complications. Plasma bevacizumab levels decreased from 1087.63 to 145.35 ng/mL (13.4% of original) by the end of the last TPE session. This decline is consistent with nearly 3 half-lives, which compares favorably to the expected timeline of natural decline given the 21-day half-life.

Conclusions

We report a complex clinical scenario of a patient requiring urgent wound washout 4 days after last bevacizumab infusion for CNS infection. Surgery was successfully performed without new complications with use of TPE to remove bevacizumab immediately following surgery. This case highlights the feasibility of this approach, which may be utilized effectively in patients requiring surgery after having recently received bevacizumab.

Safety of Early Bevacizumab Administration after Central Venous Port Placement for Patients with Colorectal Cancer

Bevacizumab (BEV) requires an adequate withdrawal period to avoid BEV-related complications during major surgery. However, the safety of BEV administration immediately after surgical placement of the central venous (CV) port, a minor surgery, is still unclear. This study aimed to investigate whether BEV is safe when administered early after CV port placement. We retrospectively evaluated 184 patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) treated with a BEV-containing regimen and divided them into two groups according to the interval between CV port implantation and chemotherapy initiation, with the early administration group being ≤7 days and late administration group being >7 days. Complications were then compared between the two groups. The early-administration group was significantly older and had a higher rate of colon cancer than the late-administration group. Overall, 24 (13%) patients developed CV port-related complications. Male sex was a risk factor for complications (odds ratio [OR], 3.154; 95% CI, 1.19-8.36). The two groups showed no significant difference in the frequency of complications (p = 0.84) or patient characteristics (after the inverse probability of treatment weighting, p = 0.537). In conclusion, the frequency of complications is not affected by the timing of BEV initiation after CV port implantation. Thus, early BEV administration after CV port placement is safe.