SynthesisAdvances in therapy2025
An Indirect Treatment Comparison of Lenvatinib for the First-Line Treatment of Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.
Synthesis in Advances in therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Pachymic acid exhibits synergistic antitumor efficacy with lenvatinib in hepatocellular carcinoma by targeting PPARγ to inhibit glycolysis.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2026Article
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 compared the relative efficacy of first-line lenvatinib, a standard-of-care treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC), vs licensed/license in-progress comparators. Using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and network meta-analysis (NMA), updated evidence for lenvatinib monotherapy from LEAP-002, in addition to evidence from REFLECT, was included in the analyses.
methodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified via systematic review. REFLECT and LEAP-002 investigated lenvatinib in uHCC, with patient-level data available for each; however, only REFLECT included a comparator arm of interest (sorafenib). The lenvatinib arm from LEAP-002 was adjusted to match aggregate data for confounding factors from REFLECT using IPTW. Weighted Cox regressions, including matching variables as covariates, were used to derive hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). These HR estimates were included in Bayesian NMAs to compare lenvatinib with comparators; survival was significantly improved if the 95% credible interval for the HR did not include 1.0. Scenario analyses explored alternative choices for IPTW estimators.
resultsEight RCTs (including REFLECT) and the single-arm adjusted lenvatinib data from LEAP-002 were included in the NMA base case. Lenvatinib demonstrated significant improvement in OS compared with sorafenib 400 mg twice daily (BID) and significant improvement in PFS compared with sorafenib 400 mg BID, tremelimumab 300 mg plus durvalumab 1500 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W), and durvalumab 1500 mg Q4W.
conclusionsThese results suggest that patients with uHCC treated with lenvatinib have similar or significantly improved OS and PFS compared with licensed/license in-progress therapies.
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.