Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 629

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Linifanib Versus Sorafenib in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Results of a Randomized Phase III Trial

Open access
Cainap, Calin, Qin, Shukui, Huang, Wen-Tsung, Chung, Ik Joo, Pan, Hongming, Cheng, Ying, Kudo, Masatoshi, Kang, Yoon-Koo, Chen, Pei-Jer, Toh, Han-Chong, Gorbunova, Vera, Eskens, Ferry A.L.M., Qian, Jiang, McKee, Mark D., Ricker, Justin L., Carlson, Dawn M., El-Nowiem, Saied·2015·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: This open-label phase III trial evaluated efficacy and tolerability of linifanib versus sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) without prior systemic therapy. Patients and Methods: Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to linifanib 17.5 mg once daily or sorafenib 400 mg twice daily. Patients were stratified by region (Outside Asia, Japan, and rest of Asia), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score (ECOG PS; 0 or 1), vascular invasion or extrahepatic spread (yes or no), and hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection (yes or no). The primary end point of the study was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points were time to progression (TTP) and objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1. Results: We randomly assigned 1,035 patients (median age, 60 years; Asian, 66.6%; ECOG PS 0, 65.2%; HBV, 49.1%; vascular invasion or extrahepatic spread, 70.1%). Median OS was 9.1 months on the linifanib arm (95% CI, 8.1 to 10.2) and 9.8 months on the sorafenib arm (95% CI, 8.3 to 11.0; hazard ratio [HR], 1.046; 95% CI, 0.896 to 1.221). For prespecified stratification subgroups, OS HRs ranged from 0.793 to 1.119 and the 95% CI contained 1.0. Median TTP was 5.4 months on the linifanib arm (95% CI, 4.2 to 5.6) and 4.0 months on the sorafenib arm (95% CI, 2.8 to 4.2; HR, 0.759; 95% CI, 0.643 to 0.895; P = .001). Best response rate was 13.0% on the linifanib arm versus 6.9% on the sorafenib arm. Grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs); serious AEs; and AEs leading to discontinuation, dose interruption, and reduction were more frequent with linifanib (all P < .001). Conclusion: Linifanib and sorafenib had similar OS in advanced HCC. Predefined superiority and noninferiority OS boundaries were not met for linifanib and the study failed to meet the primary end point. TTP and ORR favored linifanib; safety results favored sorafenib.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1200/jco.2013.54.3298

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 35 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Zhu AX, 37th European Society for Medical Oncology Congress

Cited by

See all 629

Metadata

Authors
Cainap, C., Qin, S., Huang, W.-T., Chung, I. J., Pan, H., Cheng, Y., Kudo, M., Kang, Y.-K., Chen, P.-J., Toh, H.-C., Gorbunova, V., Eskens, F. A. L. M., Qian, J., McKee, M. D., Ricker, J. L., Carlson, D. M., & El-Nowiem, S.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2015-01-10
Volume
33
Issue
2
Pages
172-179
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2120967735
Cited by
629
References
35
FWCI
29.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Linifanib Versus Sorafenib in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Results of a Randomized Phase III Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2013.54.3298
The paper
Cainap, C., Qin, S., Huang, W.-T., Chung, I. J., Pan, H., Cheng, Y., Kudo, M., Kang, Y.-K., Chen, P.-J., Toh, H.-C., Gorbunova, V., Eskens, F. A. L. M., Qian, J., McKee, M. D., Ricker, J. L., Carlson, D. M., & El-Nowiem, S. (2015). Linifanib Versus Sorafenib in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Results of a Randomized Phase III Trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2013.54.3298

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.