Evidence Hub

Association of antibiotic exposure with the mortality in metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with bevacizumab-containing chemotherapy: A hospital-based retrospective cohort study

Linbin Lu, Ting-Ting Zhuang, Erqian Shao, Yanhong Liu, Hui-Min He, Zhimin Shu, Yan Huang, Yichen Yao et al.

PLoS ONE, 2019

147 participants · 19 citations

Abstract

Background Preclinical studies showed that antibiotic exposure played a role in clinical outcomes in patients with chemotherapy via modulation of microbiota. However, it remains unknown whether antibiotic exposure during the bevacizumab therapy affects the clinical outcomes in metastatic colorectal cancer(mCRC) patients. This study aimed to examine the association between the antibiotic medication and the clinical outcomes in mCRC patients with bevacizumab therapy. Methods This retrospective cohort analysis included 147 mCRC patients treated with bevacizumab. The hazard ratio of death was estimated using three Cox proportional hazards models with (1) never vs ever; (2) never vs 1–6 days and 7–40 days;(3) increase per day, and further tested using propensity score matching (PSM) and landmark analysis. A smooth curve technique was used to explore the shape of dose-response relationship. Results Compared with the non-antibiotic group, antibiotic exposure was inversely associated with the mortality in the antibiotic group after adjustment for demographic and other potential confounders (a history of medication: HR, 0.650(95%CI: 0.360 to 1.173); an increase per day: HR, 0.967(CI: 0.924 to 1.011); 1–6 days: HR, 0.859(CI: 0.441 to 1.674); 7–40 days: HR, 0.474(CI: 0.225 to 0.999); P for trend = 0.040). A test for the interaction between sex was statistically significant (p = 0.016). A similar result was found as measured by landmark and PSM analysis. Significant negative…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 147 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free