Ming Zhou

Ming Zhou

Auto-generated profile, based on publicly available information

Ming Zhou

Health Management Centre, Tianjin Medical University General Hospital, Tianjin, China

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

17Years (2010-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
11 May 2020 in Nature Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
KSKurt A. Schalper
Kurt A. Schalper
MCMichael Carleton
Michael Carleton
MZMing Zhou
Ming Zhou
TCTian Chen
Tian Chen
YFYe Feng
Ye Feng
IMIGNACIO MELERO
IGNACIO MELERO

20 October 2023 in Journal of Clinical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
ADAdi Diab
Adi Diab
HGHelen Gogas
Helen Gogas
Shahneen K. SandhuShahneen K. Sandhu
Shahneen K. Sandhu
GLGeorgina Venetia Long
Georgina Venetia Long
PAPaolo A. Ascierto
Paolo A. Ascierto
NKNikhil I. Khushalani
Nikhil I. Khushalani
PURPOSE: Despite marked advances in the treatment of unresectable or metastatic melanoma, the need for novel therapies remains. Bempegaldesleukin (BEMPEG), a pegylated interleukin-2 (IL-2) cytokine prodrug, demonstrated efficacy in the phase II PIVOT-02 trial. PIVOT IO 001 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03635983 ) is a phase III, randomized, open-label study that builds on the PIVOT-02 results in first-line melanoma. METHODS: Patients with previously untreated, unresectable, or metastatic melanoma were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive BEMPEG plus nivolumab (NIVO) or NIVO monotherapy. Primary end points were objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review and overall survival (OS). Secondary and exploratory end points included additional efficacy measures, safety, and pharmacokinetics (PKs) and pharmacodynamics analyses. RESULTS: In 783 patients (n = 391, BEMPEG plus NIVO; n = 392, NIVO monotherapy), the median follow-up was 11.6 months in the intent-to-treat population. The ORR with BEMPEG plus NIVO was 27.7% versus 36.0% with NIVO (two-sided P = .0311). The median PFS with BEMPEG plus NIVO was 4.17 months (95% CI, 3.52 to 5.55) versus 4.99 months (95% CI, 4.14 to 7.82) with NIVO (hazard ratio [HR], 1.09; 97% CI, 0.88 to 1.35; P = .3988). The median OS was 29.67 months (95% CI, 22.14 to not reached [NR]) with BEMPEG plus NIVO versus 28.88 months (95% CI, 21.32 to NR) with NIVO (HR, 0.94; 99.929% CI, 0.59 to 1.48; P = .6361). Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) and serious AE rates were higher with the combination (21.7% and 10.1%, respectively) versus NIVO (11.5% and 5.5%, respectively). BEMPEG PK exposure and absolute lymphocyte count changes after BEMPEG plus NIVO were comparable between PIVOT IO 001 and PIVOT-02. CONCLUSION: The PIVOT IO 001 study did not meet its primary end points of ORR, PFS, and OS. Increased toxicity was observed with BEMPEG plus NIVO versus NIVO.

18 September 2013 in Journal of Applied Statistics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MZMing Zhou
Ming Zhou
YSYongzhao Shao
Yongzhao Shao
This paper investigates a new test for normality that is easy for biomedical researchers to understand and easy to implement in all dimensions. In terms of power comparison against a broad range of alternatives, the new test outperforms the best known competitors in the literature as demonstrated by simulation results. In addition, the proposed test is illustrated using data from real biomedical studies.

1 March 2015 in Mayo Clinic Proceedings
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
CWCarol H. Wysham
Carol H. Wysham
LMLeigh A. MacConell
Leigh A. MacConell
DMDavid G. Maggs
David G. Maggs
MZMing Zhou
Ming Zhou
PGPeter S. Griffin
Peter S. Griffin
MTMichael E. Trautmann
Michael E. Trautmann

4 September 2015 in Cardiovascular Diabetology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Rafael SimóRafael Simó
Rafael Simó
BGBruno Guerci
Bruno Guerci
GSGuntram Schernthaner
Guntram Schernthaner
BGBaptist Gallwitz
Baptist Gallwitz
JRJuan Rosas-Guzmàn
Juan Rosas-Guzmàn
JKJacek Kiljański
Jacek Kiljański
The risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality is significantly increased in patients with diabetes; thus, it is important to determine whether glucose-lowering therapy affects this risk over time. Changes in cardiovascular risk markers were examined in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with exenatide twice daily (a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist) or glimepiride (a sulfonylurea) added to metformin in the EURopean EXenAtide (EUREXA) study. Patients with type 2 diabetes failing metformin were randomized to add-on exenatide twice daily (n = 515) or glimepiride (n = 514) until treatment failure defined by hemoglobin A1C. Anthropomorphic measures, blood pressure (BP), heart rate, lipids, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) over time were evaluated. Over 36 months, twice-daily exenatide was associated with improved body weight (−3.9 kg), waist circumference (−3.6 cm), systolic/diastolic BP (−2.5/−2.6 mmHg), high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol (0.05 mmol/L), triglycerides (−0.2 mmol/L), and hsCRP (−1.7 mg/L). Heart rate did not increase (−0.3 beats/minute), and low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (0.2 mmol/L) and total cholesterol (0.1 mmol/L) increased slightly. Between-group differences were significantly in favor of exenatide for body weight (P < 0.0001), waist circumference (P < 0.001), systolic BP (P < 0.001), diastolic BP (P = 0.023), HDL-cholesterol (P = 0.001), and hsCRP (P = 0.004). Fewer patients randomized to exenatide twice daily versus glimepiride required the addition of at least one antihypertensive (20.4 vs 26.4 %; P = 0.026) or lipid-lowering medication (8.4 vs 12.8 %; P = 0.025). Add-on exenatide twice daily was associated with significant, sustained improvement in several cardiovascular risk markers in patients with type 2 diabetes versus glimepiride. Clinical trial registration: NCT00359762, http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov

16 February 2014 in Statistics in Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
ZYZhao Yang
Zhao Yang
MZMing Zhou
Ming Zhou