What question did this study set out to answer?

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor plus bevacizumab compared to sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma patients.

April 30, 2026Open Access

Is PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor plus bevacizumab superior to sorafenib as first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma? A pooled analysis of four phase 3 RCTs

Key Points

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor plus bevacizumab compared to sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma patients.
Conducted a meta-analysis of four phase 3 randomized controlled trials
Included trials from diverse data sources, focusing on treatment-naïve advanced HCC individuals
Assessed endpoints included progression-free survival and overall survival
PIB significantly improved overall survival (HR: 0.65, P < 0.00001) compared to sorafenib
PIB also resulted in a better progression-free survival (HR: 0.60, P < 0.00001)
Objective response rate and disease control rate were higher with PIB, although adverse events were more frequent.

Abstract

Sorafenib has served as standard treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Recently, several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have explored the use of programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitor plus bevacizumab (PIB) in alternative first-line regimens; however, the magnitude and consistency of their clinical benefits remain to be systematically quantified. We therefore conducted a meta-analysis aimed at evaluating PIB versus sorafenib regarding efficacy and safety among treatment-naïve individuals with advanced HCC. Comprehensive search through 6 data sources was performed to identify phase 3 trials assessing PIB versus sorafenib in the target population. The main endpoints for assessing effectiveness included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Additional outcomes assessed tumor responses, adverse events (AEs), and patient condition at the time of data cutoff. Four phase 3 RCTs (HEPATORCH, IMbrave150, ORIENT-32, and SCT-I10A-C301) encompassing 1,744 patients were included. Compared with sorafenib, PIB significantly improved the OS (HR: 0.65 0.57, 0.74, P < 0.00001) and PFS (HR: 0.60 0.53, 0.67, P < 0.00001). Subgroup analyses showed that the treatment benefits of the PIB group in both PFS and OS were consistent across nearly all subgroups. In addition, the combination regimen achieved significantly higher objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) based on RECIST version 1.1 and mRECIST criteria. However, the PIB group also led to higher rates of serious treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). The top three grade 3–4 TRAEs reported for PIB patients included hypertension (121/1108, 10.92%), platelet count decreased (58/946, 6.13%), and proteinuria (50/1108, 4.51%). PIB demonstrates superior survival and tumor response benefits over sorafenib as initial treatment in patients with advanced HCC, with an acceptable and manageable safety profile. CRD 420261294641.

Is PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor plus bevacizumab superior to sorafenib as first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma? A pooled analysis of four phase 3 RCTs

Key Points

Abstract

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Also Consider