Retrospective efficacy analysis of olaparib combined with bevacizumab in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer

Table 1 Comparison of general data between the two groups

General information	Control group (n = 43)	Observation group (n = 39)	t/χ2	P value
Gender (n)			0.413	0.521
Male	24	19
Female	19	20
Age (yr), mean ± SD	46.02 ± 7.28	48.37 ± 6.41	1.545	0.126
BMI (kg/m2), mean ± SD	22.45 ± 3.46	23.01 ± 2.98	0.781	0.437
Histological classification (n)			0.427	0.808
Adenocarcinoma	27	22
Mucinous cancer	12	12
Undifferentiated carcinoma	4	5
TNM stage (n)			2.201	0.138
III	12	17
IV	31	22

BMI: Body mass index; TNM: Tumor-node-metastasis.

Table 2 Comparison of short-term efficacy between the two groups, n (%)

Group	iCR	iPR	iSD	iPD	ORR	DCR
Control group (n = 43)	9 (20.93)	16 (37.21)	11 (25.58)	7 (16.28)	25 (58.14)	36 (83.72)
Observation group (n = 39)	20 (51.28)	12 (30.77)	6 (15.38)	1 (2.56)	32 (82.05)	38 (97.44)
χ2					5.518	4.369
P value					0.019	0.037

ORR: Objective response rate; DCR: Disease control rate; iCR: Immune complete response; iPR: Immune partial response; iSD: Immune stable disease; iPD: Immune progressive disease.

Table 3 Comparison of serum-related index levels between the two groups

Group	VEGF (pg/mL)		MMP-9 (mg/L)		COX-2 (ng/L)
	Before treatment	After treatment	Before treatment	After treatment	Before treatment	After treatment
Control group (n = 43), mean ± SD	421.38 ± 36.41	375.60 ± 22.05a	301.25 ± 26.73	256.78 ± 17.62a	711.39 ± 54.43	523.41 ± 27.48a
Observation group (n = 39), mean ± SD	427.91 ± 37.23	294.81 ± 20.63a	308.43 ± 22.08	200.43 ± 15.02a	718.43 ± 49.26	311.36 ± 22.14a
t	0.802	17.083	1.318	15.504	0.612	38.227
P value	0.425	< 0.001	0.191	< 0.001	0.542	< 0.001

^aP < 0.05 vs before treatment in the same group. VEGF: Vascular endothelial growth factor; MMP-9: Matrix metalloprotein-9; COX-2: Cyclooxygenase-2.

Table 4 Comparison of tumor marker levels between the two groups

Group	HE4 (pmol/L)		CA125 (ng/mL)		CA199 (U/mL)
	Before treatment	After treatment	Before treatment	After treatment	Before treatment	After treatment
Control group (n = 43), mean ± SD	343.75 ± 51.26	184.65 ± 22.34a	82.43 ± 11.27	58.56 ± 6.08a	119.60 ± 15.62	82.84 ± 9.28a
Observation group (n = 39), mean ± SD	349.81 ± 45.79	121.36 ± 19.48a	83.26 ± 10.33	35.61 ± 4.25a	121.03 ± 19.85	56.37 ± 7.41a
t	0.562	13.610	0.346	19.618	0.364	14.177
P value	0.576	< 0.001	0.730	< 0.001	0.717	< 0.001

^aP < 0.05 vs before treatment in the same group. HE4: Human epididymis protein 4; CA125: Carbohydrate antigen 125; CA199: Carbohydrate antigen 199.

Table 5 Comparison of incidence rate of adverse reactions between the two groups, n (%)

Group	Gastrointestinal reactions	Thrombus	Myelosuppression	Hepatic and renal impairment	Total incidence
Control group (n = 43)	4 (9.30)	1 (2.33)	3 (6.98)	1 (2.33)	9 (20.94)
Observation group (n = 39)	1 (2.56)	0 (0)	0 (0)	1 (2.56)	2 (5.12)
χ2					4.397
P value					0.036