ArticleJournal of hepatocellular carcinoma2025
Real-World Comparison of Lenvatinib and Sorafenib as First-Line Treatments for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Multicenter Study.
Article in Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Lenvatinib and sorafenib remain viable first-line (1L) options for patients ineligible for newer therapies. This study uses real-world data (RWD) to compare the effectiveness and safety of lenvatinib and sorafenib, addressing gaps between clinical trials and real-world practice. Materials and Methods: This retrospective, multi-center study utilized the Liver Cancer IN Korea (LINK) database, including HCC patients diagnosed between January 2015 and June 2022 who received 1L lenvatinib or sorafenib. Effectiveness and safety were assessed with real-world overall survival (rwOS), time to treatment discontinuation (rwTTD), time to next treatment (rwTTNT), and incidence of adverse events of special interest (AESI). Propensity score matching was employed to adjust for potential bias. Results: Post-matching, lenvatinib demonstrated a longer median rwOS of 9.56 months (95% CI: 8.25-10.78) compared to 7.13 months (95% CI: 6.44-7.82) of sorafenib, and longer medians for rwTTD (3.65 months, 95% CI: 3.09-4.07 vs 2.04 months, 95% CI: 1.87-2.30) and rwTTNT (6.51 months, 95% CI: 5.62-7.62 vs 3.71 months, 95% CI: 3.45-4.34). Regarding AESI, lenvatinib was significantly associated with lower rates of hand-foot syndrome (incidence rate ratio, IRR 0.55, 95% CI: 0.33-0.88, Conclusion: Leveraging RWD, our study demonstrated that 1L lenvatinib may offer a survival advantage over 1L sorafenib in HCC patients, with both treatments exhibiting safety profiles consistent with clinical trials. RWD complements clinical trials by validating long-term outcomes and addressing patient populations excluded from pivotal studies, guiding therapeutic decisions in clinical practice.
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.