Predictive Performance of CAGE-B and SAGE-B Models in Asian Treatment-Naive Patients Who Started Entecavir for Chronic Hepatitis B.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Cirrhosis and age (CAGE-B) and stiffness and age (SAGE-B) models assess the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) development in white patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) undergoing sustained antiviral therapy (AVT). Herein, we checked the predictive performance of these models in Asian patients with CHB. METHODS: We reviewed 734 treatment-naive patients with CHB who started entecavir between 2006 and 2011 and were followed up for more than 5 years without HCC development during AVT. The predictive performance of CAGE-B and SAGE-B models was calculated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs). RESULTS: Median liver stiffness assessed using transient elastography after 5 years of AVT was 6.8 kPa. Median CAGE-B and SAGE-B models after 5 years of AVT were 7.0 and 6.0, respectively. More than 5 years after AVT initiation, 66 patients (9.0%) developed HCC. The AUROCs of the CAGE-B and SAGE-B models were 0.764 and 0.785 after 7 years and 0.799 and 0.802 after 10 years of AVT, respectively. The cumulative incidence of HCC was significantly higher in the high-risk groups according to CAGE-B and SAGE-B risk stratification than in the medium- and low-risk groups (P < .05 in all cases). The SAGE-B model showed a higher likelihood ratio (χ2) (76.2 vs 71.4) and linear trend (χ2) (74.1 vs 58.6) than the CAGE-B model, whereas the CAGE-B model showed higher Akaike information criteria (64.3 vs 50.3). CONCLUSIONS: Both SAGE-B and CAGE-B showed acceptable performance in predicting HCC after 5 years of AVT in Asian patients with CHB.

Clinical outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 in patients with pre-existing liver diseases: A multicenter study in South Korea.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Although coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread rapidly worldwide, the implication of pre-existing liver disease on the outcome of COVID-19 remains unresolved.
. METHODS: A total of 1,005 patients who were admitted to five tertiary hospitals in South Korea with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 were included in this study. Clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients with coexisting liver disease as well as the predictors of disease severity and mortality of COVID-19 were assessed.
. RESULTS: Of the 47 patients (4.7%) who had liver-related comorbidities, 14 patients (1.4%) had liver cirrhosis. Liver cirrhosis was more common in COVID-19 patients with severe pneumonia than in those with non-severe pneumonia (4.5% vs. 0.9%, P=0.006). Compared to patients without liver cirrhosis, a higher proportion of patients with liver cirrhosis required oxygen therapy; were admitted to the intensive care unit; had septic shock, acute respiratory distress syndrome, or acute kidney injury; and died (P<0.05). The overall survival rate was significantly lower in patients with liver cirrhosis than in those without liver cirrhosis (log-rank test, P=0.003). Along with old age and diabetes, the presence of liver cirrhosis was found to be an independent predictor of severe disease (odds ratio, 4.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-17.02;P=0.026) and death (hazard ratio, 2.86; 95% CI, 1.04-9.30; P=0.042) in COVID-19 patients.
. CONCLUSION: This study suggests liver cirrhosis is a significant risk factor for COVID-19. Stronger personal protection and more intensive treatment for COVID-19 are recommended in these patients.

Effects of Branched-Chain Amino Acid (BCAA) Supplementation on the Progression of Advanced Liver Disease: A Korean Nationwide, Multicenter, Prospective, Observational, Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Clinical evidence for the benefits of branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs) is lacking in advanced liver disease. We evaluated the potential benefits of long-term oral BCAA supplementation in patients with advanced liver disease. METHODS: Liver cirrhosis patients with Child-Pugh (CP) scores from 8 to 10 were prospectively recruited from 13 medical centers. Patients supplemented with 12.45 g of daily BCAA granules over 6 months, and patients consuming a regular diet were assigned to the BCAA and control groups, respectively. The effects of BCAA supplementation were evaluated using the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, CP score, serum albumin, serum bilirubin, incidence of cirrhosis-related events, and event-free survival for 24 months. RESULTS: A total of 124 patients was analyzed: 63 in the BCAA group and 61 in the control group. The MELD score (p = 0.009) and CP score (p = 0.011) significantly improved in the BCAA group compared to the control group over time. However, the levels of serum albumin and bilirubin in the BCAA group did not improve during the study period. The cumulative event-free survival was significantly improved in the BCAA group compared to the control group (HR = 0.389, 95% CI = 0.221-0.684, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Long-term supplementation with oral BCAAs can potentially improve liver function and reduce major complications of cirrhosis in patients with advanced liver disease.

Phase I/II study of first-line combination therapy with sorafenib plus resminostat, an oral HDAC inhibitor, versus sorafenib monotherapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in east Asian patients.

PURPOSE: Resminostat is an oral inhibitor of class I, IIB, and IV histone deacetylases. This phase I/II study compared the safety and efficacy of resminostat plus sorafenib versus sorafenib monotherapy as first-line therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In phase I, resminostat (400 mg or 600 mg/day on days 1 to 5 every 14 days) was administered with sorafenib (800 mg/day for 14 days) to determine the recommended dose for phase II. In phase II, patients were randomized (1:1) to sorafenib monotherapy or resminostat plus sorafenib. The primary endpoint was time-to-progression (TTP). RESULTS: Nine patients (3: 400 mg, 6: 600 mg) were enrolled in phase I, and the recommended dose of resminostat was determined to be 400 mg/day. Then 170 patients were enrolled in phase II. Median TTP/overall survival (OS) were 2.8/14.1 months with monotherapy versus 2.8/11.8 months with combination therapy (Hazard Ratio [HR]: 0.984, p = 0.925/HR: 1.046, p = 0.824). The overall incidence of adverse events was similar in both groups (98.8% versus 100.0%). However, thrombocytopenia ≥ Grade 3 was significantly more frequent in the combination therapy group (34.5% versus 2.4%, p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis revealed that median TTP/OS was 1.5/6.9 months for monotherapy versus 2.8/13.1 months for combination therapy (HR: 0.795, p = 0.392/HR: 0.567, p = 0.065) among patients with a normal-to-high baseline platelet count (≥ 150 × 103/mm3). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with advanced HCC, first-line therapy with resminostat at the recommended dose plus sorafenib showed no significant efficacy advantage over sorafenib monotherapy.

Effects of branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs) on the progression of advanced liver disease: A Korean nationwide, multicenter, retrospective, observational, cohort study.

Evidence of the potential benefits of long-term oral branched-chain amino acid (BCAA) supplementation in reducing the severity of liver disease is limited.Patients who were diagnosed with liver cirrhosis with a Child-Pugh (CP) score of 8-10 were included. The BCAA group consumed BCAAs daily for at least 6 months, and the control group consumed a diet without BCAA. We analyzed the improvements based on the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, CP score, incidence of cirrhosis-related complications, and event-free survival over 2 years. Among the 867 recruited patients, 307 (166 in the BCAA group and 141 in the control group) were analyzed. The BCAA group was divided into 3 subgroups, whose patients consumed 4.15 g, 8.3 g, or 12.45 g of BCAAs daily for the analysis. There were significant differences in the CP score, albumin, and hepatic encephalopathy between the 2 groups at baseline. After matching the propensity scores, we analyzed patients in the BCAA-12.45 g group (12.45 g of BCAAs daily, n = 41) and matched control group (n = 41). The MELD score significantly improved in the BCCA-12.45 g group compared to the matched control group (P = .004). The changes in the serum bilirubin level (P = .014) and CP score (P = .033) over time also differed significantly between the 2 groups. The incidence rates of cirrhosis-related complications (P = .973) and development of hepatocellular carcinoma (2 cases each) did not differ significantly between the 2 groups.Long-term oral BCAA supplementation has beneficial effects in patients with advanced liver cirrhosis. A further large-scale prospective study is needed to delineate these beneficial effects.

Survival outcomes of hepatic resection compared with transarterial chemoembolization or sorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombosis.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Treating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with portal vein tumor thrombosis (PVTT) remains controversial. We compared the outcomes of hepatic resection (HR), transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), and sorafenib therapy as treatments for HCC with PVTT. METHODS: Patients diagnosed as HCC with PVTT between January 2000 and December 2011 who received treatment with sorafenib, HR, or TACE were included. Patients with main PVTT, superior mesenteric vein tumor thrombosis, or Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) class C were excluded. The records of 172 patients were analyzed retrospectively. HR, TACE, and sorafenib treatment were performed is 40, 80, and 52 patients respectively. PVTT was classified as either involving the segmental branch (type I) or extending to involve the right or left portal vein (type II). RESULTS: The median survival time was significantly longer in the HR group (19.9 months) than in the TACE and sorafenib groups (6.6 and 6.2 months, respectively; both p<0.001), and did not differ significantly between the latter two groups (p=0.698). Among patients with CTP class A, type I PVTT or unilobar-involved HCC, the median survival time was longer in the HR group than in the TACE and sorafenib groups (p=0.006). In univariate analyses, the initial treatment method, tumor size, PVTT type, involved lobe, CTP class, and presence of cirrhosis or ascites were correlated with overall survival. The significant prognostic factors for overall survival in Cox proportional-hazards regression analysis were initial treatment method (HR vs. TACE: hazard ratio=1.750, p=0.036; HR vs. sorafenib: hazard ratio=2.262, p=0.006), involved lobe (hazard ratio=1.705, p=0.008), PVTT type (hazard ratio=1.617, p=0.013), and CTP class (hazard ratio=1.712, p=0.012). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with TACE or sorafenib, HR may prolong the survival of patients with HCC in cases of CTP class A, type I PVTT or unilobar-involved HCC.

Adjuvant sorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma after resection or ablation (STORM): a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There is no standard of care for adjuvant therapy for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. This trial was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of sorafenib versus placebo as adjuvant therapy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after surgical resection or local ablation. METHODS: We undertook this phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma with a complete radiological response after surgical resection (n=900) or local ablation (n=214) in 202 sites (hospitals and research centres) in 28 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 400 mg oral sorafenib or placebo twice a day, for a maximum of 4 years, according to a block randomisation scheme (block size of four) using an interactive voice-response system. Patients were stratified by curative treatment, geography, Child-Pugh status, and recurrence risk. The primary outcome was recurrence-free survival assessed after database cut-off on Nov 29, 2013. We analysed efficacy in the intention-to-treat population and safety in randomly assigned patients receiving at least one study dose. The final analysis is reported. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00692770. FINDINGS: We screened 1602 patients between Aug 15, 2008, and Nov 17, 2010, and randomly assigned 1114 patients. Of 556 patients in the sorafenib group, 553 (>99%) received the study treatment and 471 (85%) terminated treatment. Of 558 patients in the placebo group, 554 (99%) received the study treatment and 447 (80%) terminated treatment. Median duration of treatment and mean daily dose were 12·5 months (IQR 2·6-35·8) and 577 mg per day (SD 212·8) for sorafenib, compared with 22·2 months (8·1-38·8) and 778·0 mg per day (79·8) for placebo. Dose modification was reported for 497 (89%) of 559 patients in the sorafenib group and 206 (38%) of 548 patients in the placebo group. At final analysis, 464 recurrence-free survival events had occurred (270 in the placebo group and 194 in the sorafenib group). Median follow-up for recurrence-free survival was 8·5 months (IQR 2·9-19·5) in the sorafenib group and 8·4 months (2·9-19·8) in the placebo group. We noted no difference in median recurrence-free survival between the two groups (33·3 months in the sorafenib group vs 33·7 months in the placebo group; hazard ratio [HR] 0·940; 95% CI 0·780-1·134; one-sided p=0·26). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were hand-foot skin reaction (154 [28%] of 559 patients in the sorafenib group vs four [<1%] of 548 patients in the placebo group) and diarrhoea (36 [6%] vs five [<1%] in the placebo group). Sorafenib-related serious adverse events included hand-foot skin reaction (ten [2%]), abnormal hepatic function (four [<1%]), and fatigue (three [<1%]). There were four (<1%) drug-related deaths in the sorafenib group and two (<1%) in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: Our data indicate that sorafenib is not an effective intervention in the adjuvant setting for hepatocellular carcinoma following resection or ablation.

A phase II study of the efficacy and safety of the combination therapy of the MEK inhibitor refametinib (BAY 86-9766) plus sorafenib for Asian patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

PURPOSE: There is an unmet need for treatment options in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Sorafenib is currently the only approved systemic treatment for HCC. Refametinib, an oral, allosteric MEK inhibitor, has demonstrated antitumor activity in combination with sorafenib in vitro and in vivo. A phase II study evaluated efficacy and safety of refametinib plus sorafenib in Asian patients with HCC (NCT01204177). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Eligible patients received twice-daily refametinib 50 mg plus twice-daily sorafenib 200 mg (morning)/400 mg (evening), with dose escalation to sorafenib 400 mg twice daily from cycle 2 if no grade ≥ 2 hand-foot skin reaction, fatigue, or gastrointestinal toxicity occurred. Primary efficacy endpoint: disease control rate. Secondary endpoints: time to progression, overall survival, pharmacokinetic assessment, biomarker analysis, safety, and tolerability. RESULTS: Of 95 enrolled patients, 70 received study treatment. Most patients had liver cirrhosis (82.9%) and hepatitis B viral infection (75.7%). Disease control rate was 44.8% (primary efficacy analysis; n = 58). Median time to progression was 122 days, median overall survival was 290 days (n = 70). Best clinical responders had RAS mutations; majority of poor responders had wild-type RAS. Most frequent drug-related adverse events were diarrhea, rash, aspartate aminotransferase elevation, vomiting, and nausea. Dose modifications due to adverse events were necessary in almost all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Refametinib plus sorafenib showed antitumor activity in patients with HCC and was tolerated at reduced doses by most patients. Frequent dose modifications due to grade 3 adverse events may have contributed to limited treatment effect. Patients with RAS mutations appear to benefit from refametinib/sorafenib combination.

Clinical outcomes and prognostic factors of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated with sorafenib as first-line therapy: a Korean multicenter study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Sorafenib is recommended as a standard treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The efficacy and safety of sorafenib as a first-line therapy in Korean patients with advanced HCC were investigated. METHODS: From 2007 to 2012, 86 patients with advanced HCC (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage C) treated with sorafenib as a first-line therapy were enrolled from five tertiary hospitals. Predictors of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were analyzed. RESULTS: The median age was 59.5 years, and 71 (82.6%) were males; 57 (66.3%) patients were in Child-Pugh class A. The median OS and PFS were 5.0 (range 4.0-5.9) and 3.2 (range 2.6-3.7) months, respectively. Regarding OS, Child-Pugh class A (6.0 vs 2.8 months), tumor diameter < 5 cm (6.0 vs 4.3 months), baseline α-fetoprotein < 200 ng/mL (5.8 vs 4.1 months), and the advent of hand-foot-skin reaction of ≥ grade 2 (5.9 vs 4.0 months) were independent favorable predictors (all P < 0.05). Similarly, regarding PFS, Child-Pugh class A (4.3 vs 2.1 months), tumor diameter < 5 cm (3.9 vs 2.8 months), baseline α-fetoprotein < 200 ng/mL (5.6 vs 2.8 months), and the advent of hand-foot-skin reaction of ≥ grade 2 (4.5 vs 2.6 months) were independent favorable predictors (all P < 0.05). All toxicities during sorafenib treatment were manageable. CONCLUSIONS: Because the efficacy of sorafenib seems marginal in Korean patients with treatment-naïve HCC, how to select candidates with favorable outcomes should be further investigated.

Brivanib versus sorafenib as first-line therapy in patients with unresectable, advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: results from the randomized phase III BRISK-FL study.

PURPOSE: Brivanib is a dual inhibitor of vascular-endothelial growth factor and fibroblast growth factor receptors that are implicated in the pathogenesis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Our multinational, randomized, double-blind, phase III trial compared brivanib with sorafenib as first-line treatment for HCC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Advanced HCC patients who had no prior systemic therapy were randomly assigned (ratio, 1:1) to receive sorafenib 400 mg twice daily orally (n = 578) or brivanib 800 mg once daily orally (n = 577). Primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included time to progression (TTP), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) based on modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST), and safety. RESULTS: The primary end point of OS noninferiority for brivanib versus sorafenib in the per-protocol population (n = 1,150) was not met (hazard ratio [HR], 1.06; 95.8% CI, 0.93 to 1.22), based on the prespecified margin (upper CI limit for HR ≤ 1.08). Median OS was 9.9 months for sorafenib and 9.5 months for brivanib. TTP, ORR, and DCR were similar between the study arms. Most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events for sorafenib and brivanib were hyponatremia (9% and 23%, respectively), AST elevation (17% and 14%), fatigue (7% and 15%), hand-foot-skin reaction (15% and 2%), and hypertension (5% and 13%). Discontinuation as a result of adverse events was 33% for sorafenib and 43% for brivanib; rates for dose reduction were 50% and 49%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our study did not meet its primary end point of OS noninferiority for brivanib versus sorafenib. However, both agents had similar antitumor activity, based on secondary efficacy end points. Brivanib had an acceptable safety profile, but was less well-tolerated than sorafenib.

Brivanib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who were intolerant to sorafenib or for whom sorafenib failed: results from the randomized phase III BRISK-PS study.

PURPOSE: Brivanib is a selective dual inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor and fibroblast growth factor receptors implicated in tumorigenesis and angiogenesis in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). An unmet medical need persists for patients with HCC whose tumors do not respond to sorafenib or who cannot tolerate it. This multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial assessed brivanib in patients with HCC who had been treated with sorafenib. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 395 patients with advanced HCC who progressed on/after or were intolerant to sorafenib were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive brivanib 800 mg orally once per day plus best supportive care (BSC) or placebo plus BSC. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included time to progression (TTP), objective response rate (ORR), and disease control rate based on modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) and safety. RESULTS: Median OS was 9.4 months for brivanib and 8.2 months for placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.89; 95.8% CI, 0.69 to 1.15; P = .3307). Adjusting treatment effect for baseline prognostic factors yielded an OS HR of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.63 to 1.04; P = .1044). Exploratory analyses showed a median time to progression of 4.2 months for brivanib and 2.7 months for placebo (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.76; P < .001), and an mRECIST ORR of 10% for brivanib and 2% for placebo (odds ratio, 5.72). Study discontinuation due to treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 61 brivanib patients (23%) and nine placebo patients (7%). The most frequent treatment-related grade 3 to 4 AEs for brivanib included hypertension (17%), fatigue (13%), hyponatremia (11%), and decreased appetite (10%). CONCLUSION: In patients with HCC who had been treated with sorafenib, brivanib did not significantly improve OS. The observed benefit in the secondary outcomes of TTP and ORR warrants further investigation.

Efficacy and safety of sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma according to baseline status: subset analyses of the phase III Sorafenib Asia-Pacific trial.

BACKGROUND: The phase III Sorafenib Asia-Pacific (AP) trial-conducted in China, Taiwan and South Korea - confirmed that sorafenib improves overall survival (OS) and is safe for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We performed a series of exploratory subset analyses to determine whether baseline status affected response to sorafenib. METHODS: In the Sorafenib AP trial, 226 patients with well-preserved liver function (>95% Child-Pugh A) were randomised 2:1 to sorafenib 400mg bid or matching placebo. Subanalyses were based on aetiology (hepatitis B virus present/absent); tumour burden (macroscopic vascular invasion and/or extrahepatic spread present/absent); presence or absence of either lung or lymph node metastasis at baseline, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (0, 1-2); serum concentrations of alanine aminotransferase/aspartate aminotransferase (normal, mildly elevated, moderately elevated), alpha-fetoprotein (normal/elevated) and total bilirubin (normal/elevated); and whether or not there was a history of hepatectomy or transarterial chemoembolisation/embolisation. Subgroup assessments included OS, time to progression (TTP), disease control rate and safety. FINDINGS: Sorafenib consistently improved both median OS and median TTP, compared with placebo (range of hazard ratios (HR), 0.32-0.87 and 0.31-0.75, respectively). The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were hand-foot skin reaction, diarrhoea and fatigue, the incidence of which was similar between subgroups. INTERPRETATION: The efficacy and safety profiles of sorafenib in the subpopulations described were comparable with those in the overall study population. These exploratory analyses suggest that sorafenib is effective for patients from the AP region with advanced HCC, irrespective of baseline status.

Phase III study of sorafenib after transarterial chemoembolisation in Japanese and Korean patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: In Japan and South Korea, transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) is an important locoregional treatment for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Sorafenib, a multikinase inhibitor, has been shown effective and safe in patients with advanced HCC. This phase III trial assessed the efficacy and safety of sorafenib in Japanese and Korean patients with unresectable HCC who responded to TACE. METHODS: Patients (n=458) with unresectable HCC, Child-Pugh class A cirrhosis and ≥25% tumour necrosis/shrinkage 1-3 months after 1 or 2 TACE sessions were randomised 1:1 to sorafenib 400mg bid or placebo and treated until progression/recurrence or unacceptable toxicity. Primary end-point was time to progression/recurrence (TTP). Secondary end-point was overall survival (OS). FINDINGS: Baseline characteristics in the two groups were similar; >50% of patients started sorafenib>9 weeks after TACE. Median TTP in the sorafenib and placebo groups was 5.4 and 3.7 months, respectively (hazard ratio (HR), 0.87; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.70-1.09; P=0.252). HR (sorafenib/placebo) for OS was 1.06 (95% CI, 0.69-1.64; P=0.790). Median daily dose of sorafenib was 386 mg, with 73% of patients having dose reductions and 91% having dose interruptions. Median administration of sorafenib and placebo was 17.1 and 20.1 weeks, respectively. No unexpected adverse events were observed. INTERPRETATION: This trial, conducted prior to the reporting of registrational phase III trials, found that sorafenib did not significantly prolong TTP in patients who responded to TACE. This may have been due to delays in starting sorafenib after TACE and/or low daily sorafenib doses.

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.

BACKGROUND: Most cases of hepatocellular carcinoma occur in the Asia-Pacific region, where chronic hepatitis B infection is an important aetiological factor. Assessing the efficacy and safety of new therapeutic options in an Asia-Pacific population is thus important. We did a multinational phase III, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to assess the efficacy and safety of sorafenib in patients from the Asia-Pacific region with advanced (unresectable or metastatic) hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: Between Sept 20, 2005, and Jan 31, 2007, patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who had not received previous systemic therapy and had Child-Pugh liver function class A, were randomly assigned to receive either oral sorafenib (400 mg) or placebo twice daily in 6-week cycles, with efficacy measured at the end of each 6-week period. Eligible patients were stratified by the presence or absence of macroscopic vascular invasion or extrahepatic spread (or both), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and geographical region. Randomisation was done centrally and in a 2:1 ratio by means of an interactive voice-response system. There was no predefined primary endpoint; overall survival, time to progression (TTP), time to symptomatic progression (TTSP), disease control rate (DCR), and safety were assessed. Efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00492752. FINDINGS: 271 patients from 23 centres in China, South Korea, and Taiwan were enrolled in the study. Of these, 226 patients were randomly assigned to the experimental group (n=150) or to the placebo group (n=76). Median overall survival was 6.5 months (95% CI 5.56-7.56) in patients treated with sorafenib, compared with 4.2 months (3.75-5.46) in those who received placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0.68 [95% CI 0.50-0.93]; p=0.014). Median TTP was 2.8 months (2.63-3.58) in the sorafenib group compared with 1.4 months (1.35-1.55) in the placebo group (HR 0.57 [0.42-0.79]; p=0.0005). The most frequently reported grade 3/4 drug-related adverse events in the 149 assessable patients treated with sorafenib were hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR; 16 patients [10.7%]), diarrhoea (nine patients [6.0%]), and fatigue (five patients [3.4%]). The most common adverse events resulting in dose reductions were HFSR (17 patients [11.4%]) and diarrhoea (11 patients [7.4%]); these adverse events rarely led to discontinuation. INTERPRETATION: Sorafenib is effective for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in patients from the Asia-Pacific region, and is well tolerated. Taken together with data from the Sorafenib Hepatocellular Carcinoma Assessment Randomised Protocol (SHARP) trial, sorafenib seems to be an appropriate option for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.