SynthesisTechnology in cancer research & treatment
PD-1/PD-L1 Inhibitors Plus Antiangiogenic Drugs Versus Sorafenib as the First Line Treatment for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Phase 3 RCTs Based Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Technology in cancer research & treatment. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- First-line immune checkpoint inhibitors plus targeted therapy versus sorafenib or lenvatinib monotherapy for unresectable or advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis of phase 3 trials.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Pooled it
- Up-regulated programmed cell death protein-1/its ligand 1 expression promotes metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease malignant progression.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFor advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), sorafenib remains the established therapy. PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus antiangiogenic drugs (PIAD) as a new therapeutic approach for advanced HCC is still a subject of clinical debate regarding whether they offer improved treatment outcomes. This study was conducted to compare the two treatments in terms of antitumor efficacy and safety.
methodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PIAD and sorafenib for advanced HCC were retrieved from six databases. Survival (overall survival [OS] and progression-free survival [PFS]) were the main outcomes measured. Secondary endpoints included responses, adverse events (AEs), and effects on quality of life.
resultsSeven studies based on four RCTs (CARES-310, COSMIC-312, IMbrave150, and ORIENT-32) were included. The PIAD group exhibited better OS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.53, 0.89], P = 0.005), and PFS (HR: 0.60, 95% CI: [0.53, 0.67], P < 0.00001). The survival advantages of OS and PFS were confirmed in almost all subgroups. The PIAD group exhibited higher OS rates at 6-18 months and PFS rates at 6-12 months. Additionally, the objective response rate, disease control rate, complete response, and partial response were higher in PIAD group. The PIAD group had a delayed decline in quality of life, physical functioning, and role functioning. However, the PIAD group experienced more grades 3-5 and serious AEs, along with treatment discontinuation, dose reduction, and dose interruption.
conclusionsPIAD appears to be better than sorafenib for advanced HCC with better survival and responses. However, its higher rate of AEs requires cautious attention.
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.