ArticleCancer medicine2024
Frontline evaluation: Atezolizumab-bevacizumab versus lenvatinib for BCLC stage B hepatocellular carcinoma exceeding the up-to-seven criteria.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Taiwan liver cancer association management consensus guidelines for intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma.Clinical and molecular hepatology · 2025Guideline
- TACE plus donafenib and immune checkpoint inhibitors for intermediate HCC (CHANCE2410 study): a propensity score matching analysis.European radiology experimental · 2026Article
- Comparative Efficacy of Initial Treatment Strategies in Patients with Transarterial Chemoembolisation-Unsuitable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Liver cancer · 2026Article
- Frontline evaluation: Atezolizumab-bevacizumab versus lenvatinib for BCLC stage B hepatocellular carcinoma exceeding the up-to-seven criteria.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab combined with bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) compared to lenvatinib (LEN) as first-line systemic therapy for patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage B hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) exceeding the up-to-seven criteria threshold, who are typically unsuitable for transarterial chemoembolization (TACE).
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 49 consecutive patients with HCC treated at Tokyo Metropolitan Komagome Hospital between May 2018 and October 2023. The patients were divided into two groups: the Atez/Bev group (21 patients) and the LEN group (28 patients). Eligibility criteria included Child-Pugh A classification, no prior systemic therapy, and ineligibility for resection, ablation, or transplantation. Treatment outcomes were assessed through periodic imaging and laboratory tests, evaluating OS, PFS, ORR, and disease control rate (DCR).
resultsBoth groups demonstrated comparable baseline characteristics, with a median follow-up of 15.4 months. No significant difference was observed in OS between the Atez/Bev and LEN groups (median OS: 19.80 vs. 22.20 months, p = 0.763). The median PFS was 10.23 months for Atez/Bev and 7.20 months for LEN (p = 0.343). There were no statistically significant differences in ORR or DCR between the two groups. Common adverse events included elevated AST and ALT levels, with no significant difference in the overall rate of adverse events between the groups.
conclusionsAtez/Bev and LEN demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety as first-line systemic treatments for patients with BCLC stage B HCC exceeding the up-to-seven criteria. Both therapeutic options are viable for this population, though further large-scale prospective studies are required to confirm these findings.
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.