ArticleTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology2020
Comparing the efficacy and safety of second-line therapies for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a network meta-analysis of phase III trials.
Article in Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of efficacy and safety of adjuvant therapies versus sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of second-line therapies for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Comparative Efficacy of Cabozantinib and Ramucirumab After Sorafenib for Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma and Alpha-fetoprotein ≥ 400 ng/mL: A Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison.Advances in therapy · 2021Trial
- Efficacy and safety of regorafenib as a first-line agent alone or in combination with an immune checkpoint inhibitor for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Article
- Therapeutic Efficacy and Safety of Lenvatinib after Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Cancers · 2023Article
- Regorafenib versus Cabozantinib as a Second-Line Treatment for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: An Anchored Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of Efficacy and Safety.Liver cancer · 2023Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Regorafenib Plus Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors with or Without TACE as a Second-Line Treatment for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2023Article
- Regorafenib Combined with PD-1 Blockade Immunotherapy versus Regorafenib as Second-Line Treatment for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe prospect for targeted therapies in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has dramatically changed since several recent clinical trials have yielded promising results. The number of second-line therapies is increasing, though the consequent challenge is to consider differences between these interventions. This is a comparative investigation of presently approved second-line drugs for HCC based on findings from phase III randomized controlled trials.
methodsData related to treatment efficacy including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) were extracted and compared using a Bayesian approach. Adverse events (AEs) and the rate of discontinuation due to AEs were assessed and compared with provide a more complete understanding. OS and PFS in patients with alpha fetoprotein (AFP) values greater than 400 were compared and ranked as a subgroup.
resultsA total of five trials involving 2571 patients were included. The comparison suggests that regorafenib and cabozantinib significantly prolong OS compared with placebo. The rate of AEs and treatment discontinuation did not significantly differ, although the types of AEs varied substantially. Subgroup analysis did not highlight a significant OS difference between regorafenib [hazard ratio (HR) 0.68; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50-0.92], cabozantinib (HR 0.71; CI 0.54-0.94) and ramucirumab (HR 0.69; CI 0.57-0.84).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.