Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34017396›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2021

Lenvatinib versus sorafenib as first-line therapy of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Antonio Facciorusso, Nicola Tartaglia, Rosanna Villani, Gaetano Serviddio, Daryl Ramai, Babu P Mohan, Saurabh Chandan, Mohamed A Abd El Aziz, Jessica Evangelista, Christian Cotsoglou and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of translational research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Antonio FacciorussoDepartment of Surgical and Medical Sciences, Gastroenterology Unit, University of Foggia Foggia 71122, Italy.
Nicola TartagliaDepartment of Surgical and Medical Sciences, General Surgery Unit, University of Foggia Foggia 71122, Italy.
Rosanna VillaniC.U.R.E. (University Center for Liver Disease Research and Treatment), Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Foggia Foggia 71122, Italy.
Gaetano ServiddioC.U.R.E. (University Center for Liver Disease Research and Treatment), Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Foggia Foggia 71122, Italy.
Daryl RamaiGastroenterology and Hepatology, Brooklyn Hospital Medical Center Brooklyn, NY, USA.
Babu P MohanGastroenterology & Hepatology, University of Utah Health Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
Saurabh ChandanGastroenterology Unit, CHI Health Creighton University Medical Center Omaha, NE, USA.
Mohamed A Abd El AzizDepartment of Surgery, Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN, USA.
Jessica EvangelistaThoracic Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS Rome 00168, Italy.
Christian CotsoglouGeneral Surgery Department, ASST-Vimercate Vimercate 20871, Italy.
Antonio AmbrosiDepartment of Surgical and Medical Sciences, General Surgery Unit, University of Foggia Foggia 71122, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is limited evidence on the efficacy of lenvatinib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients. Aim of this meta-analysis was to compare lenvatinib and sorafenib as first-line treatment. Computerized bibliographic search was performed on main databases through November 2020. The primary outcome was overall survival, whereas survival rate (at 1-, and 2-year), progression-free survival (PFS), tumor response, and severe adverse event rate were the secondary outcomes. Results were expressed in terms of odds ratio (OR) or hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Five studies enrolling 1481 patients were included. No difference in terms of overall survival was detected (HR 0.81, 0.58-1.11) and median survival was 13.4 months (9.38-17.48) in lenvatinib and 11.4 months (8.46-14.47) in sorafenib patients. Lenvatinib led to a significant improvement of PFS (HR 0.67, 0.48-0.94) and median PFS was 5.88 months (3.68-8) in lenvatinib and 4.17 months (3.08-5.25) in sorafenib patients. Lenvatinib determined a considerably higher rate of objective response (33.3%, 23.6%-43% versus 6.5%, 3.5%-9.5%; OR 7.70, 2.99-19.82), and of disease control rate (76.9%, 70.4%-83.5% versus 52.7%, 40.7%-64.6%; OR 2.41, 1.55-3.77). No difference between lenvatinib and sorafenib in terms of severe adverse event rate was observed (OR 1.31, 0.82-2.09). Lenvatinib prolongs progression-free survival as compared to sorafenib in HCC patients, although this result does not translate to a significant survival benefit.

Indexed as

HCCliver cancerrecurrencesurvivalsystemic therapy

Identifiers

PMID34017396
PMCPMC8129234

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.