Biomedical subjects

Shukui Qin

Publications and source records attributed to Shukui Qin.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2026

Durvalumab Plus Chemotherapy for Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer: A Post Hoc Analysis of the TOPAZ-1 Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: In the TOPAZ-1 trial's primary analysis, durvalumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin (GemCis) showed statistically significant improved overall survival (OS) vs placebo plus GemCis with comparable safety between treatment groups in participants with advanced biliary tract cancer (aBTC). Durvalumab plus GemCis was recently established as the first-line standard of care among patients with aBTC. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate 4-year OS and safety of durvalumab plus GemCis in participants with aBTC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This post hoc analysis of the global, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 TOPAZ-1 randomized clinical trial included participants 18 years and older with histologically confirmed unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic biliary tract adenocarcinoma. In the TOPAZ-1 trial, patients were enrolled from April 2019 to December 2020 at 105 sites in 17 countries. Data cutoff was February 28, 2025. INTERVENTION: Participants received intravenous durvalumab, 1500 mg, or placebo plus gemcitabine, 1000 mg/m2, and cisplatin, 25 mg/m2, on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks for up to 8 cycles, followed by durvalumab or placebo monotherapy every 4 weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: OS, duration of treatment exposure, serious adverse events, and adverse events resulting in discontinuation were assessed approximately 48 months after the last participant was randomized. RESULTS: Overall, 685 participants were randomized, with 341 receiving durvalumab plus GemCis (median [range] age, 64 [20-84] years; 172 [50.4%] female) and 344 receiving placebo plus GemCis (median [range] age, 64 [31-85] years; 168 [48.8%] female). Median (range) follow-up in censored participants was 56.9 (1.7-67.2) months for participants who received durvalumab plus GemCis and 50.7 (0.9-62.6) months for participants who received placebo plus GemCis. Median OS was 13.0 (95% CI, 11.6-14.1) months for durvalumab plus GemCis and 11.4 (95% CI, 10.1-12.5) months for placebo plus GemCis (hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.64-0.88); 48-month OS rate was 11.8% vs 4.3%, respectively. The rate of serious adverse events possibly related to treatment was similar between arms (52 of 338 participants [15.4%] in the durvalumab plus GemCis arm vs 59 of 342 participants [17.3%] in the placebo plus GemCis arm). In the durvalumab plus GemCis and placebo plus GemCis arms, 21 of 338 participants (6.2%) and 18 of 342 participants (5.3%), respectively, experienced adverse events leading to study drug discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this post hoc analysis of the phase 3 TOPAZ-1 randomized clinical trial, durvalumab plus GemCis demonstrated long-term survival benefit and a clinically manageable safety profile, supporting its use as a first-line treatment for aBTC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03875235.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Matching-adjusted indirect comparison of fruquintinib versus ramucirumab in advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.

Aim: Fruquintinib (Fruq), a selective VEGFR 1/2/3 inhibitor, showed a significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in the Phase III FRUTIGA trial for advanced gastric/gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) adenocarcinoma. Ramucirumab (RAM), an anti-VEGFR2 antibody, demonstrated efficacy in the RAINBOW-Asia trial. This anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) evaluated Fruq plus paclitaxel versus RAM plus paclitaxel as second-line therapy for G/GEJ adenocarcinoma in the absence of head-to-head trials. Materials & methods: Data from individual patients in the FRUTIGA study (N = 703) and aggregated data from the RAINBOW-Asia study (N = 440) were analyzed. Baseline characteristics were balanced using entropy balancing. The placebo plus paclitaxel (PBO + PTX) groups served as the common comparators. The primary outcome was PFS; secondary outcomes included overall survival, objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR). Rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were also compared as an exploratory outcome using an adjusted indirect risk difference. Sensitivity analyses included restricted mean survival time and simulated treatment comparison. Results: After weighting (effective sample size = 564), baseline covariates were balanced. The anchored MAIC demonstrated that Fruq + PTX significantly improved PFS compared with RAM + PTX (HR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.51-0.96; p = 0.0280), corresponding to a 30% reduction in progression risk, with a significant restricted mean survival time benefit of 1.18 months at 20 months (95% CI: 0.08-2.27; p = 0.024). Fruq achieved significantly higher ORR (OR: 1.76, 95% CI: 1.16-2.68; p = 0.008) and DCR (OR: 1.94, 95% CI: 1.33-2.83; p < 0.001). Overall survival was similar (0.97; 95% CI: 0.73-1.30; p = 0.8640). Subgroup analyses showed PFS benefits with Fruq in patients with ECOG PS 1, peritoneal metastases and two or fewer metastatic sites. In sensitivity analysis, the simulated treatment comparison also suggested a PFS benefit for Fruq + PTX (HR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.32-0.50; p < 0.0001). For any-grade TEAEs, the indirect comparison showed higher adjusted relative incidences of increased bilirubin with Fruq + PTX than with RAM + PTX (RD: 12.3%; 95% CI: 2.3-22.4%, p < 0.05) and of hypokalemia (RD: 9.0%; 95% CI: 1.5-16.4%, p < 0.05). For grade ≥3 TEAEs, the adjusted relative incidence of decreased body weight was higher with Fruq + PTX than with RAM + PTX (RD: 2.9%; 95% CI: 0.6-5.2%, p < 0.05). The adjusted relative incidences of increased AST, ALT and hypocalcemia were numerically lower in the fruquintinib group than in the RAM group. Conclusion: This MAIC indicates that Fruq + PTX may be more effective than RAM + PTX in second-line advanced G/GEJ adenocarcinoma, with potentially improved PFS, ORR and DCR, and similar overall survival. Safety analyses suggested generally comparable safety profiles across the two regimens. Fruq + PTX remains a valuable treatment option, offering important comparative evidence for clinical and health technology assessment decisions. Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifiers: NCT07144995.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

Chinese expert consensus on precision testing and molecular diagnosis of pancreatic cancer (2025).

This consensus by the CSCO Pancreatic Cancer Expert Committee establishes evidence-based guidelines for molecular testing in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. It details recommendations for biomarkers (e.g., KRAS, BRCA, MSI), liquid biopsy, and precision imaging to direct targeted therapies and immunotherapy, aiming to standardize diagnosis and optimize individualized patient care. Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the most common pathological type of primary pancreatic malignancy, accounting for ~95% of cases and generally referred to as pancreatic cancer [1]. Its prognosis is extremely poor and its incidence continues to rise [2]. According to the most recent global cancer statistics, the incidence of pancreatic cancer ranks 12th among all cancers, and its mortality ranks 6th, making it one of the deadliest malignancies worldwide [3]. Approximately 57% of patients have metastatic disease at diagnosis and require systemic therapy, for which chemotherapy remains the standard first-line option [1]. However, the overall response rate to currently available systemic regimens is low, and the 5-year survival rate for patients with metastatic disease remains below 5% [3]. Although most pancreatic cancers harbor canonical driver mutations, they exhibit marked heterogeneity at the molecular level. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) and integrative genomic analyses have identified molecular subtypes of PDAC with potential clinical relevance [4-9]. With the increasing implementation of precision oncology, the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Pancreatic Cancer give a level 1 recommendation to perform genetic and other molecular testing on tissue or cytologic specimens as part of the pathological diagnostic work-up, in order to guide individualized treatment, including targeted therapy and immunotherapy [10]. To further promote the use of genetic and molecular testing in the precision treatment of pancreatic cancer, the CSCO Pancreatic Cancer Expert Committee convened a multidisciplinary panel to develop the present Chinese Expert Consensus on Precision Testing and Molecular Diagnosis of Pancreatic Cancer (2025), aiming to provide clinicians with an authoritative reference for precision diagnostics and treatment decision-making.

Humans↗