Title: Comparison of the outcomes between sorafenib and lenvatinib as the first-line systemic
treatment for HBV-associated hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score matching analysis
Version: 2 Date: 17 Oct 2021
Reviewer's report:
This study provides real-world evidence indicating that the difference including OS, PFS, TTP
and response between sorafenib and lenvatinib in patients with HBV-HCC using PSM analysis.
This is an interesting issue but there are several issues should be clarified and corrected before
further processing:
1. The enrolled patients were all HBV carrier. Since the virus itself is an important risk factor
associated with outcome, authors should offer the information that how many patients received
antiviral therapy and the viral status before TKI treatment start.
2. The authors should offer comparative tables including baseline difference between two groups
before matching and why some patients could receive subsequent anti-HCC treatment as well
as what kinds of therapy did they receive.
3. In the part of “OS and its predictors”, please check the P-value of EHM, PVT, biliary invasion
and kind of TKI in the univariate analysis. They all showed P-value > 0.05 in the table 4 that
were not comparable in the text.
4. Why higher AST level instead of ALT is associated with poor OS ?
5. In page 14, please attach the reference for “ subgroup analysis for OS in the REFLECT
international phase 3 trial.”
6. Please offer the latest edition for reference 1 about current distribution of HBV population
in different regions.
7. Please offer English edition for reference 18.
8. Please check the P-value of PFS between two TKI (p=0.134) since it’s not comparable in the
table 5 (p=0.138).
9. Could the authors give an adequate explanation why these two TKIs showed different efficacy
in different age and baseline AFP level ?
10. I strongly suggest this manuscript needs English editing before being published.
Title: Comparison of the outcomes between sorafenib and lenvatinib as the first-line systemic
treatment for HBV-associated hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score matching analysis
Version: 2 Date: 17 Oct 2021
Reviewer's report:
This study provides real-world evidence indicating that the difference including OS, PFS, TTP
and response between sorafenib and lenvatinib in patients with HBV-HCC using PSM analysis.
This is an interesting issue but there are several issues should be clarified and corrected before
further processing:
1. The enrolled patients were all HBV carrier. Since the virus itself is an important risk factor
associated with outcome, authors should offer the information that how many patients received
antiviral therapy and the viral status before TKI treatment start.
2. The authors should offer comparative tables including baseline difference between two groups
before matching and why some patients could receive subsequent anti-HCC treatment as well
as what kinds of therapy did they receive.
3. In the part of “OS and its predictors”, please check the P-value of EHM, PVT, biliary invasion
and kind of TKI in the univariate analysis. They all showed P-value > 0.05 in the table 4 that
were not comparable in the text.
4. Why higher AST level instead of ALT is associated with poor OS ?
5. In page 14, please attach the reference for “ subgroup analysis for OS in the REFLECT
international phase 3 trial.”
6. Please offer the latest edition for reference 1 about current distribution of HBV population
in different regions.
7. Please offer English edition for reference 18.
8. Please check the P-value of PFS between two TKI (p=0.134) since it’s not comparable in the
table 5 (p=0.138).
9. Could the authors give an adequate explanation why these two TKIs showed different efficacy
in different age and baseline AFP level ?
10. I strongly suggest this manuscript needs English editing before being published.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Comparison of the outcomes between sorafenib and lenvatinib as the first-line systemic
treatment for HBV-associated hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score matching analysis
Version: 2 Date: 17 Oct 2021
Reviewer's report:
This study provides real-world evidence indicating that the difference including OS, PFS, TTP
and response between sorafenib and lenvatinib in patients with HBV-HCC using PSM analysis.
This is an interesting issue but there are several issues should be clarified and corrected before
further processing:
1. The enrolled patients were all HBV carrier. Since the virus itself is an important risk factor
associated with outcome, authors should offer the information that how many patients received
antiviral therapy and the viral status before TKI treatment start.
2. The authors should offer comparative tables including baseline difference between two groups
before matching and why some patients could receive subsequent anti-HCC treatment as well
as what kinds of therapy did they receive.
3. In the part of “OS and its predictors”, please check the P-value of EHM, PVT, biliary invasion
and kind of TKI in the univariate analysis. They all showed P-value > 0.05 in the table 4 that
were not comparable in the text.
4. Why higher AST level instead of ALT is associated with poor OS ?
5. In page 14, please attach the reference for “ subgroup analysis for OS in the REFLECT
international phase 3 trial.”
6. Please offer the latest edition for reference 1 about current distribution of HBV population
in different regions.
7. Please offer English edition for reference 18.
8. Please check the P-value of PFS between two TKI (p=0.134) since it’s not comparable in the
table 5 (p=0.138).
9. Could the authors give an adequate explanation why these two TKIs showed different efficacy
in different age and baseline AFP level ?
10. I strongly suggest this manuscript needs English editing before being published.
assistant