VEGF inhibitors (VEGFi) activity in liver metastases (mets) regardless of primary cancer type: Meta-analysis and systematic review.

3024 Background: Liver metastasis is a poor prognostic factor in several cancers and is associated with poor response to immunotherapy (IO) in melanoma and lung cancer. VEGFi have activity in hepatocarcinoma (HCC) and is hypothesized to be due the hypoxic microenvironment. Whether this is also true for liver mets is unknown. We sought to assess the efficacy of VEGFi in liver mets utilizing randomized-controlled clinical trials (RCTs) testing the efficacy of VEGFi, regardless of primary cancer site. Methods: Systematic searches of PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Embase were conducted from January 1, 2000, to January 1, 2022. All RCTs that compared a backbone of systemic therapy (chemotherapy [chemo] and/or IO and/or targeted therapy [TT]) or best supportive care (BSC) with vs without VEGFi in patients (pts) with liver mets from any cancer were selected. HCC trials were excluded. Study design, cancer type, number of pts, lines of treatment, study drugs and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were extracted. Pooled effects of VEGFi in pts with liver mets across different cancer types were estimated using random effect model with inverse variance. Heterogeneity between studies was assessed by I 2 statistics. Sensitivity analyses were performed considering prespecified subgroups of trials. Results: 3170 pts with liver mets from 19 RCTs were included in this meta-analysis: 8 colorectal cancer, 4 non-small cell lung cancer, 4 renal cell cancer & urothelial cancer, 1 pancreatic cancer, 1 GIST and 1 gastric cancer. Backbone systemic therapy in these trials included: chemo (11), TT (2), IO (2), chemo+IO (1), chemo+TT (1); and 2 BSC trials. Moderate heterogeneity between studies for both PFS (I 2 = 55%) and OS (I 2 = 46%) was seen. The addition of VEGFi to standard systemic therapy or BSC was associated with superior PFS (HR = 0.61; 95% CI, 0.50-0.74; p < 0.0001) and OS (HR = 0.86; 95%CI, 0.76-0.99; p = 0.0334) in pts with liver mets, regardless of whether pts had only liver mets or concurrent other sites of mets. In the subset of RCTs with data on pts without liver mets, the benefit with VEGFi was more pronounced in patients with liver mets (HR = 0.56) vs those without liver mets (HR = 0.64) for PFS, but not for OS. Conclusions: The addition of VEGFi to standard management improved survival outcomes in pts with liver mets across different cancer types and warrants further investigation. VEGFi added to IO may be effective in pts with resistant liver mets.