ArticleScientific reports2024
Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization plus Sorafenib versus transcatheter arterial chemoembolization plus Lenvatinib for intermediate hepatocellular carcinoma.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of the efficacy of transarterial chemoembolization combined with different molecular targeted agents and/or immune checkpoint inhibitors for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Article
- Locoregional Therapies for Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Portal Vein Tumor Thrombus.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2025Review
- Clinical predictors for liver function impairment and post-embolization syndrome following transcatheter arterial chemoembolization in primary hepatic carcinoma patients: a retrospective study.American journal of cancer research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecent studies have highlighted that TACE in conjunction with Lenvatinib (TACE-L) offers a promising adjunct therapy for advanced HCC patients, outperforming TACE plus Sorafenib (TACE-S). However, there has been a lack of research comparing these two regimens for intermediate HCC.
aimsThis study aims to address the research gap by evaluating the efficacy of TACE-L versus TACE-S in intermediate HCC patients.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on a cohort of consecutive intermediate HCC patients who received either TACE-L or TACE-S from November 2018 to December 2022. Portal vein width was assessed using abdominal NMRI or Doppler ultrasonography, and inflammatory markers were derived from routine blood counts. The primary outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and adverse drug reactions (ADRs).
resultsThe study included 117 patients, with 56 in the TACE-S group and 61 in the TACE-L group. The TACE-S group demonstrated superior OS (HR = 1.704, 95% CI: 1.012-2.870, p = 0.045) compared to the TACE-L group. No significant difference was observed in PFS (HR:1.512, 95% CI: 0.988-2.313, p = 0.057) between the two groups. Subgroup analyses revealed that male patients, those with cirrhosis, and those with more than four tumors had better OS and PFS in the TACE-S group than in the TACE-L group. Inflammatory markers were comparable between the groups. The TACE-S group experienced a higher incidence of palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (PPE) (14/56 [25%] vs. 5/61 [8.1%], p = 0.014) but a lower incidence of hypertension (3/56 [5.3%] vs. 11/61 [18%], p = 0.035) compared to the TACE-L group.
conclusionsIn patients with intermediate HCC, TACE-S was found to be more effective in terms of OS than TACE-L. No significant disparity was noted in PFS between the two treatment groups.
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.