Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36620586›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2022

Efficacy and safety of lenvatinib versus sorafenib in first-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A meta-analysis.

Jia Luo, Benjian Gao, Zhiyu Lin, Hua Fan, Wen Ma, Danfei Yu, Qian Yang, Jing Tian, Xiaoli Yang, Bo Li

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. miRNAs in HCC, pathogenesis, and targets.Hepatology (Baltimore, Md.) · 2024
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jia LuoDepartment of Oncology and Hematology, People's Hospital of Leshan, Leshan, China.
Benjian GaoDepartment of General Surgery (Hepatobiliary Surgery), The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.
Zhiyu LinDepartment of Oncology and Hematology, People's Hospital of Leshan, Leshan, China.
Hua FanDepartment of Oncology and Hematology, People's Hospital of Leshan, Leshan, China.
Wen MaDepartment of Oncology and Hematology, People's Hospital of Leshan, Leshan, China.
Danfei YuDepartment of Oncology and Hematology, People's Hospital of Leshan, Leshan, China.
Qian YangDepartment of Oncology and Hematology, People's Hospital of Leshan, Leshan, China.
Jing TianDepartment of Oncology and Hematology, People's Hospital of Leshan, Leshan, China.
Xiaoli YangDepartment of General Surgery (Hepatobiliary Surgery), The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.
Bo LiDepartment of General Surgery (Hepatobiliary Surgery), The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.
Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Lenvatinib and sorafenib are first-line oral multikinase inhibitors approved for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the choice of the primary therapeutic agent among these two remains controversial. This meta-analysis aimed to estimate the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib and sorafenib in patients with advanced HCC. Methods: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase databases were searched for relevant research published up to June 30, 2022. After quality assessment and data extraction of the included studies, RevMan 5.3 software was used for analysis. Odds ratio (OR) and hazard ratio (HR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a fixed-effects or random-effects model. Results: Fifteen studies containing 3908 patients were included after final scrutiny. Our meta-analysis showed that there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) between the lenvatinib and sorafenib groups (HR = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.72-1.02; Conclusion: Given its potential survival benefit and good tolerability, lenvatinib is an appropriate and promising alternative to sorafenib as first-line systemic therapy in patients with advanced HCC. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD 42022327398.

Indexed as

hepatocellular carcinomalenvatinibmeta-analysissorafenibsystemic therapy

Identifiers

PMID36620586
PMCPMC9814719
OpenAlexW4312075873

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.