Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36272060›Full record

ArticleTargeted oncology2022

Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab and Lenvatinib as First-Line Therapy for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis.

Takashi Niizeki, Takayuki Tokunaga, Yuko Takami, Yoshiyuki Wada, Masaru Harada, Michihiko Shibata, Kazuhiko Nakao, Ryu Sasaki, Fumihito Hirai, Satoshi Shakado and 21 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Targeted oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

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

31 authors at 16 institutions in 1 country.

Takashi NiizekiDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Kurume University School of Medicine, 67 Asahi-machi, Kurume, Fukuoka, 830-0011, Japan.
Takayuki TokunagaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Faculty of Life Sciences, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, Japan.
Yuko TakamiDepartment of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, National Hospital Organization Kyushu Medical Center, Fukuoka, Japan.
Yoshiyuki WadaDepartment of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, National Hospital Organization Kyushu Medical Center, Fukuoka, Japan.
Masaru HaradaThird Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, Kitakyushu, Japan.
Michihiko ShibataThird Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, Kitakyushu, Japan.
Kazuhiko NakaoDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Nagasaki University Hospital, Nagasaki, Japan.
Ryu SasakiDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Nagasaki University Hospital, Nagasaki, Japan.
Fumihito HiraiDepartment of Gastroenterology and Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Fukuoka University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Satoshi ShakadoDepartment of Gastroenterology and Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Fukuoka University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Tomoharu YoshizumiDepartment of Surgery and Science, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Shinji ItohDepartment of Surgery and Science, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Hiroshi YatsuhashiClinical Research Center, Department of Hepatology, National Hospital Organization Nagasaki Medical Center, Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Omura, Nagasaki, Japan.
Shigemune BekkiClinical Research Center, Department of Hepatology, National Hospital Organization Nagasaki Medical Center, Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Omura, Nagasaki, Japan.
Akio IdoDepartment of Human and Environmental Sciences, Digestive and Lifestyle Diseases, Kagoshima University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Kagoshima, Japan.
Seiichi MawatariDepartment of Human and Environmental Sciences, Digestive and Lifestyle Diseases, Kagoshima University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Kagoshima, Japan.
Koichi HondaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Faculty of Medicine, Oita University, Yufu, Japan.
Rie SugimotoDepartment of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatology, National Hospital Organization Kyushu Cancer Center, Fukuoka, Japan.
Takeshi SenjuDepartment of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatology, National Hospital Organization Kyushu Cancer Center, Fukuoka, Japan.
Hirokazu TakahashiDivision of Metabolism and Endocrinology, Faculty of Medicine, Saga University, Saga, Japan.
Takuya KuwashiroLiver Center, Faculty of Medicine, Saga University Hospital, Saga University, Saga, Japan.
Tatsuji MaeshiroFirst Department of Internal Medicine, University of the Ryukyus Hospital, Okinawa, Japan.
Makoto NakamutaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, National Hospital Organization Kyushu Medical Center, Fukuoka, Japan.
Yoshifusa AratakeDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, National Hospital Organization Kyushu Medical Center, Fukuoka, Japan.
Tsutomu YamashitaDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Oita Medical Center, Oita, Japan.
Yuichiro OtsukaDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Oita Medical Center, Oita, Japan.
Shuichi MatsumotoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Fukuoka Tokushukai Hospital, Kasuga, Japan.
Tetsuro SohdaDepartment of Hepatology, Japanese Red Cross Fukuoka Hospital, Fukuoka, Japan.
Shigeo ShimoseDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Kurume University School of Medicine, 67 Asahi-machi, Kurume, Fukuoka, 830-0011, Japan. shimose_shigeo@med.kurume-u.ac.jp.ORCID 0000-0003-2068-8386
Kenta MurotaniBiostatistics Center, Graduate School of Medicine, Kurume University, Kurume, Fukuoka, Japan.
Yasuhito TanakaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Faculty of Life Sciences, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, Japan.
National Kyushu Medical Center · JPKurume University · JPFukuoka University · JPKagoshima University · JPKumamoto University · JPKyushu University · JPNagasaki Medical Center · JPNagasaki University Hospital · JPNational Hospital Organization Kyushu Cancer Center · JPOita Medical Center · JPSaga University · JPUniversity of Occupational and Environmental Health Japan · JPFukuoka Tokushukai Hospital · JPJapanese Red Cross Fukuoka Hospital · JPOita University · JPUniversity of the Ryukyus · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA comparison between atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (ATEZO/BEVA) and lenvatinib (LEN) for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains unclear.

objectiveThis study aimed to compare the therapeutic effects and safety of ATEZO/BEVA and LEN as first-line therapies for HCC. PATIENTS AND

methodsThis study was a retrospective analysis of 810 patients with HCC who underwent ATEZO/BEVA (n = 186) or LEN (n = 624) as first-line systemic therapy between March 2018 to March 2022 at 14 facilities. After propensity score matching, 304 patients (ATEZO/BEVA group: n = 152; LEN group: n = 152) were analyzed.

resultsAfter propensity score matching, although there was no significant difference in objective response rates (ORRs) between the ATEZO/BEVA and LEN groups (ORR 44.8% vs. 46.7%, p = 0.644), the median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) in the ATEZO/BEVA group were significantly higher than those in the LEN group (median PFS: 8.3 months vs. 6.0 months, p = 0.005; median OS: not reached vs. 20.2 months, p = 0.039). The rates of appetite loss, fatigue, and proteinuria of grade 3 or higher in the ATEZO/BEVA group were lower than those in the LEN group. However, the rate of bleeding of grade 3 or higher in the ATEZO/BEVA group was higher than that in the LEN group. The conversion rate was higher in the ATEZO/BEVA group than that in the LEN group (8.6% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.007).

conclusionsATEZO/BEVA showed superiority to LEN in terms of prognosis and conversion rate as first-line therapy. Moreover, ATEZO/BEVA had a lower rate of severe adverse events, except for bleeding, than LEN.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, HepatocellularLiver NeoplasmsAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedBevacizumabHumansPhenylurea CompoundsPropensity ScoreQuinolinesRetrospective StudiesAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedatezolizumabBevacizumablenvatinibPhenylurea CompoundsQuinolines

Identifiers

PMID36272060
PMCPMC9684293
OpenAlexW4307093356

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.