Cost-effectiveness analysis of seven treatments vs sorafenib as first-line therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in China

Table 2 Bayesian surface under the cumulative ranking curve and ranking profiles for safety endpoints (adverse events)

Treatment	AEs of any grade			Grade ≥ 3 AEs
	SUCRA (%)	Rank	PrBest (%)	SUCRA (%)	Rank	PrBest (%)
Placebo	96.5	1.5	48.3	77.8	5.0	0
Sorafenib	32.9	11.1	0	55.9	8.9	0
Lenvatinib	46.2	9.1	0	28	14	0
Donafenib	53.3	8.0	0	74.8	5.5	0
Sintilimab plus IBI305	20.7	12.9	0	31.5	13.3	0
Rivoceranib plus camrelizumab	4	15.4	0	4.4	18.2	0
Tislelizumab	80.7	3.9	0	93.9	2.1	16.1
Avastin plus tecentriq	68.5	5.7	0	55.9	8.9	0
Cabozantinib plus atezolizumab	11.1	14.3	0	13.3	16.6	0
Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval Durvalumab	70.9	5.4	0	78.4	4.9	0
Durvalumab	96.8	1.5	51.7	98.6	1.3	79.5
Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab	37.5	10.4	0	16.9	16.0	0
Lenvatinib plus TACE	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
Sorafenib plus TACE	NA	NA	NA	3.2	18.4	0
Nivolumab	85.9	3.1	0	90.8	2.7	4.5
Sorafenib plus erlotinib	35.2	10.7	0	47.8	10.4	0
Linifanib	16.3	13.6	0	29.9	13.6	0
Sunitinib	NA	NA	NA	35.1	12.7	0
Brivanib	43.6	9.5	0	48.6	10.2	0
Sorafenib plus pravastatin	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
Sorafenib plus doxorubicin	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
Sorafenib plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
Avastin plus toripalimab	NA	NA	NA	65	7.3	NA

AEs: Adverse events; NA: Not available; PrBest: Probability of being best; SUCRA: Surface under the cumulative ranking curve; TACE: Transarterial chemoembolization.