John H Strickler

Dr. John H Strickler

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

19Years (2008-Present)

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

Representative Publications

View All Publications
20 January 2023 in Journal of Clinical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
VMVan K Morris
Van K Morris
EKErin B. Kennedy
Erin B. Kennedy
Nancy Noel BaxterNancy Noel Baxter
Nancy Noel Baxter
ABAl B Bowen Benson Benson
Al B Bowen Benson Benson
ACAndrea Cercek
Andrea Cercek
CECathy Eng
Cathy Eng
PURPOSE: To develop recommendations for treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). METHODS: ASCO convened an Expert Panel to conduct a systematic review of relevant studies and develop recommendations for clinical practice. RESULTS: Five systematic reviews and 10 randomized controlled trials met the systematic review inclusion criteria. RECOMMENDATIONS: Doublet chemotherapy should be offered, or triplet therapy may be offered to patients with previously untreated, initially unresectable mCRC, on the basis of included studies of chemotherapy in combination with anti–vascular endothelial growth factor antibodies. In the first-line setting, pembrolizumab is recommended for patients with mCRC and microsatellite instability-high or deficient mismatch repair tumors; chemotherapy and anti–epidermal growth factor receptor therapy is recommended for microsatellite stable or proficient mismatch repair left-sided treatment-naive RAS wild-type mCRC; chemotherapy and anti–vascular endothelial growth factor therapy is recommended for microsatellite stable or proficient mismatch repair RAS wild-type right-sided mCRC. Encorafenib plus cetuximab is recommended for patients with previously treated BRAF V600E–mutant mCRC that has progressed after at least one previous line of therapy. Cytoreductive surgery plus systemic chemotherapy may be recommended for selected patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases; however, the addition of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy is not recommended. Stereotactic body radiation therapy may be recommended following systemic therapy for patients with oligometastases of the liver who are not considered candidates for resection. Selective internal radiation therapy is not routinely recommended for patients with unilobar or bilobar metastases of the liver. Perioperative chemotherapy or surgery alone should be offered to patients with mCRC who are candidates for potentially curative resection of liver metastases. Multidisciplinary team management and shared decision making are recommended. Qualifying statements with further details related to implementation of guideline recommendations are also included. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines .

1 March 2021 in Clinical Cancer Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JSJohn H Strickler
John H Strickler
BHBrent A. Hanks
Brent A. Hanks
MKMustafa Khasraw
Mustafa Khasraw
Immune checkpoint inhibitors, including antibodies that block programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) and PD-L1, have transformed the management of many cancers. However, the majority of patients have primary or acquired resistance to these immunotherapies. There is a significant unmet need for predictive biomarkers that can reliably identify patients who derive a clinically meaningful response from PD-1/PD-L1 blockade. High tumor mutational burden (TMB-H) has shown promise as a biomarker in lung cancer, but the broad applicability of TMB-H as a biomarker of response across all solid tumors is unclear. The FDA has approved the PD-1 inhibitor, pembrolizumab, as a therapy for all solid tumors with TMB equal to or greater than 10 mutations/megabase as measured by the FoundationOne CDx assay. This approval was based on an exploratory analysis of the KEYNOTE-158 study, which was a single-arm, phase II multi-cohort study of pembrolizumab for select, previously treated advanced solid tumors. Here, we elucidate the caveats of using TMB as a biomarker with a universal threshold across all solid tumors. While we recognize the importance of this and other FDA pan-cancer approvals, several questions about TMB as a predictive biomarker remain unanswered. In this perspective, we discuss clinical trial evidence in this area. We review the relationship between TMB and the tumor immune microenvironment. We highlight the risks of extrapolating evidence from a limited number of tumor histologies to all solid tumors, and we propose avenues for future research.

6 July 2020 in Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ADArvind Dasari
Arvind Dasari
VMVan K. Morris
Van K. Morris
CACarmen J. Allegra
Carmen J. Allegra
CAChloe Atreya
Chloe Atreya
ABAl B. Benson
Al B. Benson
SKScott Kopetz
Scott Kopetz
An increasing number of studies are describing potential uses of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) in the care of patients with colorectal cancer. Owing to this rapidly developing area of research, the Colon and Rectal–Anal Task Forces of the United States National Cancer Institute convened a panel of multidisciplinary experts to summarize current data on the utility of ctDNA in the management of colorectal cancer and to provide guidance in promoting the efficient development and integration of this technology into clinical care. The panel focused on four key areas in which ctDNA has the potential to change clinical practice, including the detection of minimal residual disease, the management of patients with rectal cancer, monitoring responses to therapy, and tracking clonal dynamics in response to targeted therapies and other systemic treatments. The panel also provides general guidelines with relevance for ctDNA-related research efforts, irrespective of indication.

1 August 2016 in Journal of Clinical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
EBEdward P. Balaban
Edward P. Balaban
PMPamela B. Mangu
Pamela B. Mangu
AKAlok A. Khorana
Alok A. Khorana
MSManish A. Shah
Manish A. Shah
SMSomnath Mukherjee
Somnath Mukherjee
NYNelson S. Yee
Nelson S. Yee
Purpose: To provide evidence-based recommendations to oncologists and others for treatment of patients with locally advanced, unresectable pancreatic cancer. Methods: American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an Expert Panel of medical oncology, radiation oncology, surgical oncology, gastroenterology, palliative care, and advocacy experts and conducted a systematic review of the literature from January 2002 to June 2015. Outcomes included overall survival, disease-free survival, progression-free survival, and adverse events. Results: Twenty-six randomized controlled trials met the systematic review criteria. Recommendations: A multiphase computed tomography scan of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis should be performed. Baseline performance status and comorbidity profile should be evaluated. The goals of care, patient preferences, psychological status, support systems, and symptoms should guide decisions for treatments. A palliative care referral should occur at first visit. Initial systemic chemotherapy (6 months) with a combination regimen is recommended for most patients (for some patients radiation therapy may be offered up front) with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1 and a favorable comorbidity profile. There is no clear evidence to support one regimen over another. The gemcitabine-based combinations and treatments recommended in the metastatic setting (eg, fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin and gemcitabine plus nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel) have not been evaluated in randomized controlled trials involving locally advanced, unresectable pancreatic cancer. If there is local disease progression after induction chemotherapy, without metastasis, then radiation therapy or stereotactic body radiotherapy may be offered also with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤ 2 and an adequate comorbidity profile. If there is stable disease after 6 months of induction chemotherapy but unacceptable toxicities, radiation therapy may be offered as an alternative. Patients with disease progression should be offered treatment per the ASCO Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer Treatment Guideline. Follow-up visits every 3 to 4 months are recommended. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/guidelines/LAPC and www.asco.org/guidelines/MetPC and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki .

1 February 2018 in Cancer Discovery
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
JSJohn H Strickler
John H Strickler
JLJonathan M Loree
Jonathan M Loree
LALeanne G. Ahronian
Leanne G. Ahronian
APAparna R. Parikh
Aparna R. Parikh
DNDonna Niedzwiecki
Donna Niedzwiecki
SKScott Kopetz
Scott Kopetz
“Liquid biopsy” approaches analyzing cell-free DNA (cfDNA) from the blood of patients with cancer are increasingly utilized in clinical practice. However, it is not yet known whether cfDNA sequencing from large cohorts of patients with cancer can detect genomic alterations at frequencies similar to those observed by direct tumor sequencing, and whether this approach can generate novel insights. Here, we report next-generation sequencing data from cfDNA of 1,397 patients with colorectal cancer. Overall, frequencies of genomic alterations detected in cfDNA were comparable to those observed in three independent tissue-based colorectal cancer sequencing compendia. Our analysis also identified a novel cluster of extracellular domain (ECD) mutations in EGFR, mediating resistance by blocking binding of anti-EGFR antibodies. Patients with EGFR ECD mutations displayed striking tumor heterogeneity, with 91% harboring multiple distinct resistance alterations (range, 1–13; median, 4). These results suggest that cfDNA profiling can effectively define the genomic landscape of cancer and yield important biological insights. Significance: This study provides one of the first examples of how large-scale genomic profiling of cfDNA from patients with colorectal cancer can detect genomic alterations at frequencies comparable to those observed by direct tumor sequencing. Sequencing of cfDNA also generated insights into tumor heterogeneity and therapeutic resistance and identified novel EGFR ectodomain mutations. Cancer Discov; 8(2); 164–73. ©2017 AACR. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 127

1 February 2019 in Annals of Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
CPC.M. Parseghian
C.M. Parseghian
JLJonathan M Loree
Jonathan M Loree
VMVan K Morris
Van K Morris
XLX. Liu
X. Liu
KCK.K. Clifton
K.K. Clifton
SKS. Kopetz
S. Kopetz
Colorectal cancer (CRC) has been shown to acquire RAS and EGFR ectodomain mutations as mechanisms of resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibition (anti-EGFR). After anti-EGFR withdrawal, RAS and EGFR mutant clones lack a growth advantage relative to other clones and decay; however, the kinetics of decay remain unclear. We sought to determine the kinetics of acquired RAS/EGFR mutations after discontinuation of anti-EGFR therapy. We present the post-progression circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) profiles of 135 patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic CRC treated with anti-EGFR who acquired RAS and/or EGFR mutations during therapy. Our validation cohort consisted of an external dataset of 73 patients with a ctDNA profile suggestive of prior anti-EGFR exposure and serial sampling. A separate retrospective cohort of 80 patients was used to evaluate overall response rate and progression free survival during re-challenge therapies. Our analysis showed that RAS and EGFR relative mutant allele frequency decays exponentially (r2=0.93 for RAS; r2=0.94 for EGFR) with a cumulative half-life of 4.4 months. We validated our findings using an external dataset of 73 patients with a ctDNA profile suggestive of prior anti-EGFR exposure and serial sampling, confirming exponential decay with an estimated half-life of 4.3 months. A separate retrospective cohort of 80 patients showed that patients had a higher overall response rate during re-challenge therapies after increasing time intervals, as predicted by our model. These results provide scientific support for anti-EGFR re-challenge and guide the optimal timing of re-challenge initiation.