Targeted Oncology

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 565–567 | Cite as

Learning from 7 Years of Experience with Sorafenib in Advanced HCC: Sorafenib Better than Sorafenib?

  • Sandrine Faivre
  • Armand de Gramont
  • Eric Raymond

Sorafenib approval in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was based on two randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III trials. In those studies, sorafenib treatment resulted in a median overall survival (mOS) of 10.7 months versus 7.9 months with placebo in the Sorafenib HCC Assessment Randomized Protocol (SHARP) trial including Western patients [1] and 6.5 months versus 4.2 months in the Asian-Pacific study [2]. Since then, results of large randomized trials using sunitinib, brivanib and linifanib have been reported showing no OS benefit (and sometimes deleterious effects) over sorafenib as first-line therapy in patients with advanced HCC [3, 4, 5]. Cynically, a total of more than 3000 patients were randomized in phase III trials for the merit of strengthening sorafenib as a stand-alone standard of care in advanced HCC [6]. Shall we contemplate these disheartening trials or surpass disappointments to move forward learning from failures to continue developing novel...


Sorafenib Sunitinib Overall Response Rate Sorafenib Treatment Adverse Event Management 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Compliance with Ethical Standards



Conflict of Interest

Sandrine Faivre, Armand de Gramont and Eric Raymond declare no conflicts of interest.


  1. 1.
    Llovet JM, Ricci S, Mazzaferro V, et al. Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:378–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cheng A-L, Kang Y-K, Chen Z, et al. Efficacy and safety of sorafenib in patients in the Asia-Pacific region with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase III randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2009;10:25–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cheng A-L, Kang Y-K, Lin D-Y, et al. Sunitinib versus sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular cancer: results of a randomized phase III trial. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31:4067–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Johnson PJ, Qin S, Park J-W, et al. Brivanib versus sorafenib as first-line therapy in patients with unresectable, advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: results from the randomized phase III BRISK-FL study. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(28):3517–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cainap C, Qin S, Huang W-T, et al. linifanib versus sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: results of a randomized phase III trial. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(2):172–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Llovet JM, Hernandez-Gea V. Hepatocellular carcinoma: reasons for phase III failure and novel perspectives on trial design. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20:2072–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Marrero JA, Lencioni R, Ye S-L, et al. Final analysis of GIDEON (Global Investigation of Therapeutic Decisions in Hepatocellular Carcinoma [HCC] and of Its Treatment with Sorafenib [Sor]) in >3000 Sor-treated patients (pts): Clinical findings in pts with liver dysfunction [abstract no. 4126]. J Clin Oncol 2013;(Suppl)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cabrera R, Limaye AR, Horne P, et al. The anti-viral effect of sorafenib in hepatitis C-related hepatocellular carcinoma. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2013;37:91–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Reiberger T, Angermayr B, Schwabl P, et al. Sorafenib attenuates the portal hypertensive syndrome in partial portal vein ligated rats. J Hepatol. 2009;51:865–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Azad NS, Aragon-Ching JB, Dahut WL, et al. Hand-foot skin reaction increases with cumulative sorafenib dose and with combination anti-vegf therapy. Clin Cancer Res 2009;15:1411–6.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Houk BE, Bello CL, Poland B, et al. Relationship between exposure to sunitinib and efficacy and tolerability endpoints in patients with cancer: results of a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic meta-analysis. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2010;66:357–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fukudo M, Ito T, Mizuno T, et al. Exposure-toxicity relationship of sorafenib in Japanese patients with renal cell carcinoma and hepatocellular carcinoma. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2014;53:185–96.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Li Y, Li S, Zhu Y, et al. Incidence and risk of sorafenib-induced hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Hypertens. 2014;16:177–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Feinstein AR, Sosin DM, Wells CK. The Will Rogers phenomenon. N Engl J Med. 1985;312:1604–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sandrine Faivre
    • 1
    • 2
  • Armand de Gramont
    • 3
  • Eric Raymond
    • 1
  1. 1.Medical OncologyHôpitaux Universitaires Paris Nord Val de Seine (HUPVNS)ParisFrance
  2. 2.Medical OncologyHôpital BeaujonClichyFrance
  3. 3.Center of Experimental TherapeuticsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Lausanne (CHUV)LausanneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations