Remitha Ni Putu Sri Indrani, Dewi Ni Putu Rista Pradnya, Kusuma Komang Wira Ananta, Sasmana I Gede Aswin Parisya, Supadmanaba I Gede Putu, Sindhughosa Dwijo Anargha, Mariadi I Ketut
Faculty of Medicine, Udayana University, Denpasar, Bali, Indonesia.
Department of Biochemistry, Faculty of Medicine, Udayana University, Denpasar, Bali, Indonesia.
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2025 May 1;26(5):1529-1542. doi: 10.31557/APJCP.2025.26.5.1529.
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the leading form of primary liver cancer, is strongly associated with liver cirrhosis and major risk factors such as hepatitis B and C, alcohol consumption, obesity, and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Despite treatment advancements, survival rates for unresectable HCC remain low. Lenvatinib and the combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab (ATE/BEV) show promise, but further studies are needed to compare their clinical outcomes. This study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of LEN and ATE/BEV in unresectable HCC patients.
This research was conducted using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) strategy. Literature searches were conducted through PubMed, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, SpringerLink, and Ebsco to gather studies on comparing LEN versus ATE/BEV for managing unresectable HCC. The quality assessment was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) and treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were evaluated using Review Manager 5.4 and RStudio 2024.04.1.
Twelve retrospective studies were included, comprising 6,620 samples. There was no difference in the OS (HR=0.72; 95%CI: 0.44-1.18, p=0.20), PFS (HR=0.90; 95%CI: 0.75-1.07; p=0.23), ORR (OR=1.16; 95%CI:0.86-1.56; p=0.34) and DCR (OR=1.14; 95%CI:0.97-1.34; p=0.12) between groups. Moreover, in viral and non-viral patients group, LEN showed similar OS and PFS compared with ATE/BEV. In terms of safety, LEN exhibited higher incidences of decreased appetite (OR=2.95; 95%CI:1.12-7.79; p=0.03), diarrhea (OR=2.61; 95%CI:2.06-3.32; p<0.00001), fatigue (OR=1.48; 95%CI:1.27-1.73; P<0.00001), hand-foot syndrome (OR=7.73; 95%CI:4.84-12.33; P<0.00001), and showed lower incidences of increased aspartate aminotransferase (OR=0.44; 95%CI:0.28-0.69; p=0.0004) compared to ATE/BEV. Moreover, LEN showed similar AEs in grade ≥ 3 AEs (OR=1.15; 95%CI:0.29-4.55; p=0.84), hypertension (OR=1.39; 95%CI:0.84-2.28; p=0.20), proteinuria (OR=1.10; 95%CI:0.75-1.60; p=0.63) compared to ATE/BEV.
LEN was found to be non-inferior to ATE/BEV in terms of OS, PFS, ORR, DCR. However, LEN may be associated with a higher incidence of AEs.
肝细胞癌(HCC)是原发性肝癌的主要形式,与肝硬化以及乙型和丙型肝炎、酒精摄入、肥胖和非酒精性脂肪性肝病等主要危险因素密切相关。尽管治疗取得了进展,但不可切除HCC的生存率仍然很低。乐伐替尼以及阿替利珠单抗和贝伐单抗联合用药(ATE/BEV)显示出前景,但需要进一步研究来比较它们的临床疗效。本研究旨在评估乐伐替尼(LEN)和ATE/BEV在不可切除HCC患者中的疗效和安全性。
本研究采用PRISMA(系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目)策略进行。通过PubMed、ScienceDirect、谷歌学术、Cochrane图书馆、SpringerLink和Ebsco进行文献检索,以收集比较LEN与ATE/BEV治疗不可切除HCC的研究。使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表(NOS)进行质量评估。使用Review Manager 5.4和RStudio 2024.04.1评估总生存期(OS)、无进展生存期(PFS)、客观缓解率(ORR)、疾病控制率(DCR)和治疗相关不良事件(AE)。
纳入12项回顾性研究,共6620个样本。两组之间的OS(风险比[HR]=0.72;95%置信区间[CI]:0.44-1.18,p=0.20)、PFS(HR=0.90;95%CI:0.75-1.07;p=0.23)、ORR(比值比[OR]=1.16;95%CI:0.86-1.56;p=0.34)和DCR(OR=1.14;95%CI:0.97-1.34;p=0.12)无差异。此外,在病毒感染和非病毒感染患者组中,与ATE/BEV相比,LEN显示出相似的OS和PFS。在安全性方面,与ATE/BEV相比,LEN出现食欲下降(OR=2.95;95%CI:1.12-7.79;p=0.03)、腹泻(OR=2.61;95%CI:2.06-3.32;p<0.00001)、疲劳(OR=1.48;95%CI:1.27-1.73;P<0.00001)、手足综合征(OR=7.73;95%CI:4.84-12.33;P<0.00001)的发生率更高,而天门冬氨酸氨基转移酶升高的发生率更低(OR=0.44;95%CI:0.28-0.69;p=0.0004)。此外,与ATE/BEV相比,LEN在≥3级AE(OR=1.15;95%CI:0.29-4.55;p=0.84)、高血压(OR=1.39;95%CI:0.84-2.28;p=0.20)、蛋白尿(OR=1.10;95%CI:0.75-1.60;p=0.63)方面显示出相似的AE发生率。
在OS、PFS、ORR、DCR方面,发现LEN不劣于ATE/BEV。然而,LEN可能与更高的AE发生率相关。