Primary Treatment with Molecular‐Targeted Agents for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Propensity Score‐matching Analysis
Authors:
- Masahito NakanoMasahito Nakano
- The Kurume Liver Cancer Study Group of JapanTJThe Kurume Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan
Open Access
- 20 June 2020
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Hepatology Communications
- Vol. 4 (8) , 1218-1228
Abstract
Sorafenib and lenvatinib, as molecular‐targeted agents, constitute effective primary treatment options for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the choice of optimal primary treatment agent remains controversial. Here, we aimed to assess the respective outcomes between these agents as primary treatment in patients with advanced HCC through use of propensity score–matching analysis (PSMA). We enrolled 670 consecutive patients who were diagnosed with advanced HCC and received sorafenib (n = 524) or lenvatinib (n = 146) as the primary treatment among 18 participating institutions between May 2009 and October 2019. To reduce confounding, we used PSMA regarding seven variables related to advanced HCC prognosis, resulting in the selection of 292 patients (n = 146 for each agent). Following PSMA, no significant difference was observed in the outcome of overall survival time between patients treated with sorafenib or lenvatinib (median survival time 15.3 or 14.9 months, respectively; P = 0.2358). Patients treated with lenvatinib exhibited significantly greater therapeutic effects (response rate: 5% and 31%; disease control rate: 46% and 69% for sorafenib and lenvatinib, respectively; P < 0.0001), but showed significantly lower probability of transition to secondary treatment (sorafenib, 60%; lenvatinib, 45%; P < 0.0269) and higher any adverse events rate (sorafenib, 86%; lenvatinib, 95%; P = 0.0207). Conclusion : As a primary molecular‐targeted agent–based treatment for advanced HCC, our findings suggested that sorafenib is generally appropriate as it offers significantly lower frequency of adverse events and higher probability of transition to secondary treatment, in consideration of the enhanced postprogression survival mediated by sequential treatment. Alternatively, lenvatinib affords a significantly higher therapeutic effect and should be used when immediate tumor reduction is required.Keywords
This publication has 44 references indexed in Scilit:
- Lenvatinib versus sorafenib in first-line treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomised phase 3 non-inferiority trialThe Lancet, 2018
- The diagnosis and treatment of hepatocellular carcinomaSeminars in Diagnostic Pathology, 2017
- Hepatocellular carcinoma: From diagnosis to treatmentSurgical Oncology, 2016
- Sunitinib Versus Sorafenib in Advanced Hepatocellular Cancer: Results of a Randomized Phase III TrialJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2013
- Brivanib Versus Sorafenib As First-Line Therapy in Patients With Unresectable, Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Results From the Randomized Phase III BRISK-FL StudyJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2013
- Brivanib in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Who Were Intolerant to Sorafenib or for Whom Sorafenib Failed: Results From the Randomized Phase III BRISK-PS StudyJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2013
- Efficacy and safety of sorafenib in patients in the Asia-Pacific region with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase III randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trialThe Lancet Oncology, 2009
- Sorafenib in Advanced Hepatocellular CarcinomaNew England Journal of Medicine, 2008
- A quantitative analysis of kinase inhibitor selectivityNature Biotechnology, 2008
- BAY 43-9006 Exhibits Broad Spectrum Oral Antitumor Activity and Targets the RAF/MEK/ERK Pathway and Receptor Tyrosine Kinases Involved in Tumor Progression and AngiogenesisCancer Research, 2004