Efficacy and safety of second-line therapies for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

• Published in: BMC cancer 2024-08, Vol.24 (1), p.1023-13
• Main Authors: Lu, Fenping, Zhao, Kai, Ye, Miaoqing, Xing, Guangyan, Liu, Bowen, Li, Xiaobin, Ran, Yun, Wu, Fenfang, Chen, Wei, Hu, Shiping
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Anilides - adverse effects; Anilides - therapeutic use; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized - therapeutic use; Antimitotic agents; Antineoplastic agents; Cancer; Cancer therapies; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular - drug therapy; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular - mortality; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular - pathology; Care and treatment; Clinical trials; Comparative analysis; Complications and side effects; Computer network protocols; Disease control; Drug therapy; Efficacy; Hepatocellular carcinoma; Hepatoma; Humans; Immunotherapy; Liver; Liver cancer; Liver Neoplasms - drug therapy; Liver Neoplasms - mortality; Liver Neoplasms - pathology; Markov analysis; Medical research; Meta-analysis; Network Meta-Analysis; Patients; Pharmaceutical research; Phenylurea Compounds - adverse effects; Phenylurea Compounds - therapeutic use; Placebos; Progression-Free Survival; Pyridines - adverse effects; Pyridines - therapeutic use; Ramucirumab; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Safety; Second-line; Software; Systematic Review; Treatment Outcome
• ISSN: 1471-2407; 1471-2407
• DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-12780-y

The selection of appropriate second-line therapy for liver cancer after first-line treatment failure poses a significant clinical challenge due to the lack of direct comparative studies and standard treatment protocols. A network meta-analysis (NMA) provides a robust method to systematically evaluate the clinical outcomes and adverse effects of various second-line treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library to identify phase III/IV randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to March 11, 2024. The outcomes extracted were median overall survival (OS), median progression-free survival (PFS), time to disease progression (TTP), disease control rate (DCR), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse reactions. This study was registered in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42023427843) to ensure transparency, novelty, and reliability. We included 16 RCTs involving 7,005 patients and 10 second-line treatments. For advanced HCC patients, regorafenib (HR = 0.62, 95%CI: 0.53-0.73) and cabozantinib (HR = 0.74, 95%CI: 0.63-0.85) provided the best OS benefits compared to placebo. Cabozantinib (HR = 0.42, 95%CI: 0.32-0.55) and regorafenib (HR = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.31-0.68) also offered the most significant PFS benefits. For TTP, apatinib (HR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.33-0.57), ramucirumab (HR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.34-0.57), and regorafenib (HR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.38-0.51) showed significant benefits over placebo. Regarding ORR, ramucirumab (OR = 9.90, 95% CI: 3.40-42.98) and S-1 (OR = 8.68, 95% CI: 1.4-154.68) showed the most significant increases over placebo. Apatinib (OR = 3.88, 95% CI: 2.48-6.10) and cabozantinib (OR = 3.53, 95% CI: 2.54-4.90) provided the best DCR benefits compared to placebo. Tivantinib showed the most significant advantages in terms of three different safety outcome measures. Our findings suggest that, in terms of overall efficacy and safety, regorafenib and cabozantinib are the optimal second-line treatment options for patients with advanced HCC.