ArticleESMO gastrointestinal oncology2025
Durvalumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin versus S-1 plus gemcitabine-cisplatin in advanced biliary tract cancer: a comparative study.
Article in ESMO gastrointestinal oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Following the TOPAZ-1 trial, chemoimmunotherapy with durvalumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin (GCD) became the standard first-line treatment of advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC). This study aimed to compare the therapeutic efficacy of GCD and gemcitabine, cisplatin, and S-1 (GCS). Methods: This single-center, retrospective study consecutively included patients with advanced BTC receiving primary treatment with GCD or GCS between November 2018 and August 2024. Results: A total 265 patients with advanced BTC were included: 97 were treated with GCD and 168 were treated with GCS. Median overall survival (OS) was 17.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 12.7-20.6 months] in the GCD group versus 18.3 months (95% CI 15.4-20.4 months) in the GCS group, with no statistically significant difference ( Conclusion: GCD and GCS provide comparable survival outcomes and safety in clinical practice, with a significantly longer DoR in the GCS group. Alongside GCD, GCS represents one of the standard treatment options for advanced BTC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.