Real-world outcomes of first-line lenvatinib versus sorafenib in advanced HCC.
Abstract
e16228 Background: Lenvatinib and sorafenib are approved first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors for patients with unresectable or metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Although randomized trials demonstrated non-inferior survival, differences in toxicity and tolerability may influence real-world outcomes. While immune-checkpoint inhibitor combinations are now preferred first-line therapy, TKIs remain essential for patients with contraindications to immunotherapy. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the TriNetX Research Network. Adults (≥18 years) with advanced HCC initiating first-line lenvatinib or sorafenib were identified. The index date was treatment initiation. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes included hospitalization, emergency department (ED) visits, ascites/paracentesis, hepatic encephalopathy, and hypertension. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed adjusting for age, sex, and baseline comorbidities. Cox proportional hazards models were used. Results: A total of 16,588 patients were identified (5,292 lenvatinib; 11,296 sorafenib). After propensity score matching, 2,514 patients were included in each cohort. Baseline characteristics were well-balanced, including age (65.8 vs 66.0 years), sex (78% male), hypertension (51.8% both), ascites (19.4% vs 18.7%), and hepatic encephalopathy (3.7% vs 3.6%). No significant difference in overall survival was observed between lenvatinib and sorafenib (median 519 vs 501 days; HR 1.03, [0.95-1.11]; p = 0.51), suggesting time-varying treatment effects (proportional hazards p = 0.007), with survival probability at end of follow-up favoring sorafenib (20.57% vs 4.15%). Mortality risk was slightly higher with lenvatinib (51.0% vs 48.0%; risk difference 3.1% [CI 0.3-5.8%]; p = 0.031). No significant differences were observed in hospitalization (34.6% vs 36.9%; p = 0.37), ED visits (31.3% vs 32.9%; p = 0.37), ascites/paracentesis (24.4% vs 22.1%; p = 0.086), GI bleeding (14.7% vs 14.4%; p = 0.82), variceal bleeding (4.2% vs 3.8%; p = 0.56), or hepatorenal syndrome (5.5% vs 5.0%; p = 0.44). Lenvatinib was associated with significantly higher rates of hepatic encephalopathy (7.4% vs 5.7%; RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.05-1.61; p = 0.018), acute kidney injury (22.2% vs 19.7%; RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.00-1.26; p = 0.046), and new-onset or worsening hypertension (25.8% vs 18.4%; RR 1.4, 95% CI 1.20-1.64; p < 0.001). Conclusions: In this propensity score-matched analysis, lenvatinib and sorafenib demonstrated equivalent median overall survival in advanced HCC. However, lenvatinib was associated with significantly higher rates of hepatic encephalopathy, acute kidney injury, and new-onset hypertension, which may inform treatment selection. Limitations include the retrospective design, potential residual confounding, and limited availability of detailed tumor staging and performance status.
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (5)
Ahmad Al-Alwan
1Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, United States
Mohammed Aloqaily
Mrinalini Ramesh
University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY
Muhammad Awidi
Charleston Area Medical Center, Charleston, WV
Kannan Thanikachalam
Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY