SynthesisInternational journal of clinical oncology2026
Comparative efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitor-based regimens versus tyrosine kinase inhibitors in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma stratified by etiology: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International journal of clinical oncology, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains a leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide, with limited treatment success in advanced stages. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), such as sorafenib and lenvatinib, are the first-line treatments; however, their modest survival benefits and toxicity require better alternatives. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have shown promise; however, direct comparisons between ICI-based regimens and TKIs, particularly those stratified by hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) etiology, are lacking.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines, with a protocol registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251131652). We searched the PubMed, Embase (OVID), and CENTRAL databases to compare ICI-based regimens with TKI monotherapies for advanced or unresectable HCC. Randomized controlled trials and high-quality observational studies reporting clinical outcomes (overall survival [OS], progression-free survival [PFS], objective response rate [ORR], and disease control rate [DCR]) were included. Subgroup analyses were performed for HCC etiology (hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, hepatitis C virus (HCV), and non-viral causes) and liver function status (Child-Turcotte-Pugh [CTP] A vs. B/C). Hazard ratios (HRs) and risk ratios (RRs) were pooled using a random-effects model.
resultsSeventeen studies (randomized controlled trials and observational studies) that included patients with advanced HCC were included. ICI-based regimens significantly improved overall survival (HR = 0.81; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.68-0.95; I
conclusionsICI-based therapies are more effective and better tolerated than are TKI monotherapies for advanced HCC, particularly in patients with HBV-related disease and preserved liver function. The efficacy appears to be attenuated in HCV-related and non-viral HCC, as well as in patients with impaired liver function, underscoring the importance of considering both disease etiology and liver functional reserve in guiding systemic treatment strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41701457What 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.