Table 3.
Basic characteristics of included literature.
| Study | Country | Study type | Intervention | Sample size | Gender (male/female) | Age (Yr) | Child-Pugh class: A/B | ECOG score: 0–1/2 | BCLC stage: B/C | Hepatitis B virus | Outcome indicators |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YX Chen 2022 | China | RCS | TACE + Lenvatinib vs TACE | 34 68 |
33/1 66/2 |
60.1 ± 10.8 61.4 ± 11.8 |
31/3 65/3 |
27/7 57/11 |
NA | 31 58 |
①②③④⑥ |
| Ando 2021 | Japan | RCS | TACE + Lenvatinib vs Lenvatinib | 19 19 |
18/1 17/2 |
74 (46–84) 72 (57–88) |
19/0 19/0 |
NA | 19/0 19/0 |
NA | ①②③④⑥ |
| QY Xie 2022 | China | RCS | TACE + Lenvatinib vs TACE | 53 51 |
41/12 38/13 |
56.6 ± 5.7 56.8 ± 5.7 |
42/11 39/12 |
NA | NA | 45 42 |
①②④⑤⑥ |
| WZ Fan 2022 | China | RCS | TACE + Lenvatinib vs Lenvatinib | 78 78 |
70/8 71/7 |
51 ± 10 51 ± 11 |
66/12 64/14 |
78/0 78/0 |
0/78 0/78 |
67 67 |
①②④⑥ |
| ZW Peng 2022 | China | RCT | TACE + Lenvatinib vs Lenvatinib | 170 168 |
139/31 132/36 |
54 (46–64) 56 (48–63) |
170/0 168/0 |
170/0 168/0 |
NA | 148 144 |
①②③④⑥ |
| ZG Fu 2021 | China | RCS | TACE + Lenvatinib vs TACE | 60 60 |
50/10 55/5 |
60 (25–76) 60 (33–81) |
56/4 57/3 |
NA | 33/25 26/31 |
48 48 |
①②③④⑥ |
| DD Xia 2022 | China | RCS | TACE + Lenvatinib vs Lenvatinib | 58 58 |
NA | NA | NA | 58/0 58/0 |
NA | NA | ①②③④⑥ |
| Kuroda 2022 | Japan | RCS | TACE + Lenvatinib vs Lenvatinib | 63 63 |
51/12 53/10 |
70.4 ± 9.6 69.6 ± 8.9 |
56/7 57/6 |
63/0 63/0 |
27/36 32/31 |
11 15 |
③④⑥ |
| LK Dong 2022 | China | RCS | TACE + Lenvatinib vs TACE | 26 26 |
16/10 17/9 |
51.0 ± 8.8 52.1 ± 8.7 |
18/8 15/11 |
NA | 13/13 15/11 |
NA | ①②⑤ |
| J Liu 2022 | China | RCS | TACE + Lenvatinib vs TACE | 52 51 |
48/4 43/8 |
53.5 ± 12.0 50.0 ± 12.7 |
38/14 43/8 |
39/13 38/13 |
8/44 8/43 |
NA | ①②③④ |
| HY Wang 2020 | China | RCS | TACE + Lenvatinib vs TACE | 30 30 |
23/7 25/5 |
65.6 ± 5.5 65.3 ± 5.9 |
NA | NA | 21/9 20/10 |
NA | ①②⑤⑥ |
| N Ai 2022 | China | RCS | TACE + Lenvatinib vs TACE | 23 23 |
18/5 16/7 |
53.1 ± 12.1 54.2 ± 11.8 |
9/14 8/15 |
17/6 18/5 |
9/14 11/12 |
20 19 |
①② |
| MY Zhong 2022 | China | RCT | TACE + Lenvatinib vs TACE | 30 30 |
28/2 26/4 |
43.5 ± 7.8 40.3 ± 6.4 |
24/6 26/4 |
NA | NA | NA | ①②⑤ |
| M Zhang 2022 | China | RCT | TACE + Lenvatinib vs TACE | 48 48 |
41/7 39/9 |
56.1 ± 10.3 54.4 ± 8.3 |
48/0 48/0 |
NA | NA | NA | ①② |
| YH Liu 2022 | China | RCS | TACE + Lenvatinib vs TACE | 54 50 |
34/20 37/13 |
59.2 ± 10.4 58.4 ± 9.4 |
NA | NA | NA | NA | ①② |
| FQ Zhang 2022 | China | RCT | TACE + Lenvatinib vs TACE | 40 40 |
32/8 31/9 |
56.3 ± 5.6 55.3 ± 6.3 |
NA | NA | 22/18 21/19 |
NA | ①②⑤ |
| B Li 2022 | China | RCS | TACE + Lenvatinib vs TACE | 34 60 |
19/15 33/27 |
69.2 ± 3.2 69.2 ± 3.3 |
20/14 34/26 |
NA | NA | NA | ①②④⑤ |
| X Huang 2020 | China | RCT | TACE + Lenvatinib vs TACE | 30 30 |
20/10 21/9 |
56.5 ± 5.6 56.3 ± 5.3 |
NA | NA | NA | NA | ①② |
AFP = alpha-fetoprotein, BCLC = Barcelona clinic liver cancer, DCR = disease control rate, ECOG = eastern cooperative oncology group, NA = not available, ORR = objective response rate, OS = overall survival, PFS = progression-free survival, RCT = randomized controlled trial, RCS = retrospective cohort study, TACE = transarterial chemoembolization, VEGF = vascular endothelial growth factor.
①=ORR, ②=DCR, ③=PFS, ④=OS, ⑤=AFP and (or) VEGF, ⑥= grade ≥ 3 adverse events.