ReviewCureus2026
A Narrative Review of the Therapeutic Effectiveness of Lenvatinib in Comparison With Immunotherapy for the Treatment of Non-Viral Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.
Review in Cureus, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The therapeutic landscape of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC) has evolved with the advent of targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). While ICI-based regimens such as atezolizumab and bevacizumab are widely adopted as first-line therapy, emerging evidence indicates reduced effectiveness in patients with non-viral etiologies such as metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) and steatotic liver disease (MASLD). With viral HCC declining and non-viral cases increasing, lenvatinib, a potent multi-kinase inhibitor, has gained attention for its favorable efficacy in this subgroup. A thorough literature search was conducted across PubMed, MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online), Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Science Direct, for English-language studies published from 2014 to 2025. Relevant randomized controlled trials, observational studies, real-world evidence, and registered clinical trials were reviewed. Our review indicates that lenvatinib may outperform ICI-based regimens in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) among patients with non-viral aHCC, particularly those with MASLD/MASH; however, this observation is based predominantly on retrospective studies. Its mechanisms, including angiogenesis inhibition and immune modulation, offer advantages in the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment of non-viral HCC. Safety data suggest a manageable profile, with adverse events comparable to those in viral HCC. Emerging data also support lenvatinib-based combination therapies to enhance efficacy. Moreover, we have also discussed the existing challenges in managing HCC in clinical practice. Lenvatinib is a promising first-line option in non-viral aHCC in patients with MASH or MASLD. Given the etiology-specific response to therapy, future research and clinical guidelines should consider stratified approaches. Evidence suggests superior survival outcomes compared with ICIs. Etiology-specific responses highlight the need for stratified therapeutic approaches and consideration of lenvatinib-based combination 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.