SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “VEGFR”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2026

Unravelling bioanalytical innovations, degradation processes, and impurity landscapes of VEGFR inhibitors.

From pre-formulation studies to clinical trials, VEGFR-targeted small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) require rigorous analytical standards. Bioanalysis, stability-indicating studies, and impurity profiling are used to examine chromatographic advances for VEGFR-targeted TKIs like sunitinib, pazopanib, axitinib, sorafenib, cabozantinib, vandetanib, apatinib, lenvatinib, nintedanib, and regorafenib. An LC-MS/MS and UPLC-MS/MS routinely show sub ng/mL performance, as shown by LLOQs (0.2 ng/mL) for sunitinib and axitinib, 1 ng/mL for pazopanib, 5-7 ng/mL for sorafenib, 0.5-1.5 ng/mL for regorafenib metabolic products, and 0.1-0.5 ng/mL for lenvatinib. These approaches are used for pharmacokinetics and therapeutic drug monitoring due to their good correlation coefficient of 0.1-10,000 ng/mL, accuracy of 95%-108%, and precision of 15% RSD. UPLC-QTOF-MS/MS distinguishes degradants and metabolites during forced degradation studies, enabling structural elucidation following ICH M7 risk evaluation protocol. HPTLC/MLC offers fast, sensitive screenings, while RP-HPLC/DAD or HPLC-UV offer reliable, cost-effective routine quality-control solutions with LOD/LOQ in the μg/mL range and linearity of 10-240 μg/mL. This review lists the structures and CAS numbers of ten VEGFR-2 TKI degradants and metabolites, as well as pharmacopeial impurities in SMILES forms. It will be useful for future method development and regulatory applications. To ensure VEGFR-targeted TKI quality, safety, and therapeutic efficacy, LC-MS/MS for trace quantification and HRMS for structure elucidation provide a robust, future-oriented framework. To improve VEGFR-targeted TKI quality, safety, and regulatory compliance, analytical development should focus on HRMS-based impurity characterization, AI-assisted degradation prediction, green chromatography, and harmonized bioanalytical validation.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Adjuvant apatinib therapy following concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with high-risk nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A multicenter, prospective phase 2 study.

PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy and safety of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) combined with apatinib in locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (LA-NPC). METHODS: This multicenter, prospective, phase II study enrolled patients with newly histologically confirmed LA-NPC, who were randomly assigned to receive CCRT followed by adjuvant apatinib (investigational arm) or CCRT alone (control arm). The investigational arm received 250 mg/day of oral apatinib administered every 28 days for up to six cycles after CCRT. The primary endpoint was 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) and secondary endpoints of overall survival (OS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) of 3-year, and safety. RESULTS: From July 2018 to September 2020, 44 and 44 patients were randomized into the CCRT-alone and CCRT and apatinib groups, respectively. The median follow-up duration 56 (range: 40.0-58.6) months. The survival outcomes were the 3-year PFS, OS, and DMFS rates in the adjuvant apatinib following CCRT group were significantly higher than those observed in the CCRT-alone group((PFS, 78.6%vs. 54.5%, p = 0.027; OS, 88.1% vs. 75.0%, p = 0.029; DMFS, 85.4%vs. 59.1%, p = 0.009). The 3-year LRFS was similar between the groups. The grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events(TRAEs) were higher in the former group than in the latter. The most common grade 3-4 non-hematology-related adverse events were hypertension (14.3%), hand-foot syndrome (9.5%), increased transaminase levels (7.1%), and headache (7.1%). CONCLUSION: Apatinib significantly improved the treatment effects of CCRT for high-risk LA-NPC patients. Therefore, CCRT and adjuvant apatinib may represent a promising option for this patient population.

Adjuvant therapy↗

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↗