4.4 Article

Effectiveness of Lenvatinib Versus Sorafenib for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Patients with Hepatic Decompensation

Journal

DIGESTIVE DISEASES AND SCIENCES
Volume 67, Issue 10, Pages 4939-4949

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10620-021-07365-9

Keywords

Liver cancer; Chemotherapy; Targeted therapy; Survival; Child-Pugh classification

Funding

  1. Liver Research Foundation of Korea as part of Bio Future Strategies Research Project

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The effectiveness of lenvatinib and sorafenib is comparable in the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in decompensated patients.
Background/Aim Lenvatinib and sorafenib are currently available to treat patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, since the clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of lenvatinib and sorafenib included only patients with Child- Pugh class A, little is known about the effectiveness of the treatments in patients with hepatic decompensation. We compared the effectiveness of lenvatinib and sorafenib in decompensated patients with unresectable HCC. Methods Consecutive patients who were classified as Child-Pugh class B or C and received lenvatinib or sorafenib as first-line systemic therapy for unresectable HCC between November 2018 and April 2020 at a tertiary referral center were included in this retrospective study. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), and the secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), time-to-progression, best overall tumor response, and safety profiles. Results Among 94 patients, 34 received lenvatinib and 60 received sorafenib. The median OS was 4.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.9-5.2): 4.2 months (95% CI, 2.9-5.3) for lenvatinib and 4.1 months (95% CI, 2.7-6.4) for sorafenib. The treatment regimen was not associated with significant improvement in OS after adjusting for covariables (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.92; 95% CI, 0.54-1.54; P = 0.74). The treatment regimen was not an independent predictor of PFS (lenvatinib vs. sorafenib; aHR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.48-1.24; P = 0.28). HRs were maintained even after balancing with the inverse probability treatment weighting method. Objective response rates were 11.8% and 6.7% in patients receiving lenvatinib and sorafenib, respectively (P = 0.45). Ten patients in both groups (five in the lenvatinib group and five in the sorafenib group) underwent dose modification due to adverse events, and significant difference was not observed between the treatment groups (P = 0.49). Conclusion The effectiveness of lenvatinib and sorafenib was comparable for the treatment of unresectable HCC in decompensated patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available