A systematic review of lenvatinib and sorafenib for treating progressive, locally advanced or metastatic, differentiated thyroid cancer after treatment with radioactive iodine

Fleeman, Nigel ORCID: 0000-0002-4637-9779, Houten, Rachel ORCID: 0000-0002-4315-7732, Chaplin, Marty ORCID: 0000-0002-7097-8704, Beale, Sophie, Boland, Angela ORCID: 0000-0002-5435-8644, Dundar, Yenal ORCID: 0000-0002-9847-1622, Greenhalgh, Janette ORCID: 0000-0003-4812-1904, Duarte, Rui and Shenoy, Aditya (2019) A systematic review of lenvatinib and sorafenib for treating progressive, locally advanced or metastatic, differentiated thyroid cancer after treatment with radioactive iodine BMC CANCER, 19 (1). 1209-. ISSN 1471-2407, 1471-2407

Access the full-text of this item by clicking on the Open Access link.

Text Fleeman et al BMC Cancer 2019.pdf - Published version Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

Background: Treatment with radioactive iodine is effective for many patients with progressive, locally advanced or metastatic, differentiated thyroid cancer. However, some patients become refractory to treatment. These types of patients are considered to have radioactive iodine refractory differentiated thyroid cancer (RR-DTC). Methods: We searched Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed and the Cochrane Library from January 1999 through January 2017. Reference lists of included studies and ongoing trial registries were also searched. Reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective observational studies, and systematic reviews/indirect comparisons were eligible for inclusion. In the absence of direct clinical trial evidence comparing lenvatinib versus sorafenib, we assessed the feasibility of conducting an indirect comparison to obtain estimates of the relative efficacy and safety of these two treatments. Results: Of 2364 citations, in total, 93 papers reporting on 2 RCTs (primary evidence), 9 observational studies and 13 evidence reviews (supporting evidence) were identified. Compared to placebo, RCT evidence demonstrated improvements with lenvatinib or sorafenib in median progression-free survival (PFS) and objective tumour response rate (ORR). Overall survival (OS) was confounded by high treatment crossover (≥75%) in both trials. Adverse events (AEs) were more common with lenvatinib or sorafenib than with placebo but the most common AEs associated with each drug differed. Primarily due to differences in the survival risk profiles of patients in the placebo arms of the RCTs, we considered it inappropriate to indirectly compare the effectiveness of lenvatinib versus sorafenib. ORR and AE findings for lenvatinib and sorafenib from the supporting evidence were broadly in line with RCT evidence. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data were limited. Conclusions: Lenvatinib and sorafenib are more efficacious than placebo (a proxy for best supportive care) for treating RR-DTC. Uncertainty surrounds the extent of the impact on OS and HRQoL. Lenvatinib could not reliably be compared with sorafenib. Choice of treatment is therefore likely to depend on an individual patient's circumstances.

Item Type:	Article
Uncontrolled Keywords:	Thyroid cancer, Systematic review, Clinical effectiveness, Lenvatinib, Sorafenib, Tyrosine kinase inhibitor
Depositing User:	Symplectic Admin
Date Deposited:	19 Dec 2019 15:58
Last Modified:	16 Jun 2026 13:28
DOI:	10.1186/s12885-019-6369-7
Open Access URL:	http://v/
Related Websites:	Author Publisher
URI:	https://livrepository.liverpool.ac.uk/id/eprint/3067070
Disclaimer:	The University of Liverpool is not responsible for content contained on other websites from links within repository metadata. Please contact us if you notice anything that appears incorrect or inappropriate.