IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0112530.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Assessing the Effect of Sorafenib in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Author

Listed:
  • Songlin Peng
  • Yang Zhao
  • Feng Xu
  • Changjun Jia
  • Yongqing Xu
  • Chaoliu Dai

Abstract

Background: The efficacy of sorafenib in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of sorafenib for treating patients with advanced HCC. Methods: The PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed sorafenib therapy in patients with advanced HCC. The outcomes included overall survival (OS), time to progression (TTP), overall response rate (ORR), and toxicities. Hazard ratio (HR) and risk ratio (RR) were used for the meta-analysis and were expressed with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Seven RCTs, with a total of 3807 patients, were included in this meta-analysis. All patients received sorafenib alone, or with other chemotherapeutic regimens. Pooled estimates showed that sorafenib improved the OS (HR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.61, 0.90; P = 0.002), or TTP outcomes (HR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.55, 0.86; P = 0.001). Subgroup analysis revealed that sorafenib was more effective in the patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 1–2 (HR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.60, 1.0; P = 0.05), or macroscopic vascular invasion (MVI), and/or extrahepatic spread (EHS) (HR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.46, 0.93; P = 0.02), in terms of OS. Patients who received sorafenib did not have a higher ORR (RR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.65, 1.11; P = 0.10). In addition, there was a slight increase in toxicity in the sorafenib group. Conclusion: Treatment with sorafenib significantly improved OS and TTP in patients with advanced HCC. Additional large-scale, well-designed RCTs are needed to evaluate the efficacy of sorafenib-based therapy in the treatment of advanced HCC.

Suggested Citation

  • Songlin Peng & Yang Zhao & Feng Xu & Changjun Jia & Yongqing Xu & Chaoliu Dai, 2014. "An Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Assessing the Effect of Sorafenib in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(12), pages 1-13, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0112530
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0112530
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0112530
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0112530&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0112530?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hla-Hla Thein & Yao Qiao & Ahmad Zaheen & Nathaniel Jembere & Gonzalo Sapisochin & Kelvin K W Chan & Eric M Yoshida & Craig C Earle, 2017. "Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment with non-curative or palliative intent for hepatocellular carcinoma in the real-world setting," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-20, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0112530. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.