Multicentre retrospective cohort study demonstrates durable survival outcomes with lenvatinib in radioactive iodine-refractory thyroid cancer, indicating efficacy despite reduced starting doses.
Background: Lenvatinib is an established first-line therapy for radioactive iodine (RAI)-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC); however, real-world data, particularly from Asian populations with long-term follow-up, remain limited. Methods: We conducted a multicentre retrospective cohort study across seven public hospitals in Hong Kong. Adult patients with RAI-refractory DTC who received lenvatinib between 1 January 2010 and 31 March 2025 were included. Efficacy outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and duration of treatment. Landmark analyses were performed at 6 and 12 months after lenvatinib initiation. Safety outcomes included treatment-related adverse events graded according to CTCAE version 5.0. Results: A total of 82 patients were included, with a median follow-up of 24.7 (IQR, 14.2–46.6) months. The median age at treatment initiation was 69 years, and the median starting dose of lenvatinib was 14 mg. Median PFS was 31.0 months (95% CI, 16.6–40.8) and median OS was 46.8 months (95% CI, 33.6–67.6), with multivariable analyses identifying brain metastasis as the most consistent adverse prognostic factor. The ORR was 52.4% and the DCR was 82.9%. Treatment-related adverse events were common, most frequently hypertension (73.2%) and proteinuria (57.3%); grade ≥ 3 events occurred predominantly as hypertension (45.1%). Conclusions: Lenvatinib achieved durable clinical outcomes in patients with RAI-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer despite the frequent use of reduced starting doses. Treatment-related toxicities were common but generally manageable, allowing prolonged treatment in many patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: