Sorafenib vs. Lenvatinib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma after atezolizumab/bevacizumab failure: A real-world study

Abstract

Study Highlights• This study compared treatment and survival outcomes of lenvatinib and sorafenib as second-line treatments for advanced HCC following ATE+BEV failure.• Although overall survival was comparable between the two treatments after adjustment, lenvatinib treatment demonstrated significantly better PFS than sorafenib, both before and after adjusting for patient characteristics.• The findings enhance our understanding of effective treatment strategies for advanced HCC, suggesting the potential role of lenvatinib for improving PFS.• These insights are valuable for optimizing therapy in advanced HCC patients who do not respond to first line ATE+BEV treatment, thereby helping to bridge the gap between the current clinical guidelines and the real-world treatment for advanced HCC.

Correspondence to editorial on “Sorafenib vs. Lenvatinib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma after atezolizumab/bevacizumab failure: A real-world study”

“…17 We previously demonstrated that our study showed low ORR (7.5% in unmatched, 5.6% in PS-matched) and low OS (10.3 month) and PFS (3.5 month) than expectation in the lenvatinib second-line with cohort. 18 The OS and PFS was lower at 6.5 month and PFS 2.2 month, respectively, with Child-Pugh Class B patients in our study, but the patient number (n=3) was too small to draw any conclusion regarding clinical outcomes. Considering that Child-Pugh class B patients receiving second or higher-line systemic therapy will be common in clinical practice, lenvatinib can be a good alternative if liver function and adverse events are well monitored and managed as there is few treatment option.…”