Antonio Calles

Antonio Calles

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
1 December 2015 in Journal of Thoracic Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ACAntonio Calles
Antonio Calles
XLXiaoyun Liao
Xiaoyun Liao
LSLynette M. Sholl
Lynette M. Sholl
SRScott J. Rodig
Scott J. Rodig
GFGordon J. Freeman
Gordon J. Freeman
PJPasi A. Jänne
Pasi A. Jänne

15 June 2014 in Targeted Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
IBIrene Brana
Irene Brana
ACAntonio Calles
Antonio Calles
PLPatricia M. LoRusso
Patricia M. LoRusso
LYLorrin K. Yee
Lorrin K. Yee
TPThomas A. Puchalski
Thomas A. Puchalski
ECEmiliano Calvo
Emiliano Calvo

1 March 2015 in Cancer Cell
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
FWFrederick H. Wilson
Frederick H. Wilson
CJCory M. Johannessen
Cory M. Johannessen
FPFederica Piccioni
Federica Piccioni
PTPablo Tamayo
Pablo Tamayo
JKJong Wook Kim
Jong Wook Kim
LGLevi A. Garraway
Levi A. Garraway

30 April 2014 in Clinical Cancer Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
EGElena Garralda
Elena Garralda
KPKeren Paz
Keren Paz
PLPedro Pablo López
Pedro Pablo López
SJSiân Jones
Siân Jones
AKAmanda Katz
Amanda Katz
MHManuel Hidalgo
Manuel Hidalgo
Background: Current technology permits an unbiased massive analysis of somatic genetic alterations from tumor DNA as well as the generation of individualized mouse xenografts (Avatar models). This work aimed to evaluate our experience integrating these two strategies to personalize the treatment of patients with cancer. Methods: We performed whole-exome sequencing analysis of 25 patients with advanced solid tumors to identify putatively actionable tumor-specific genomic alterations. Avatar models were used as an in vivo platform to test proposed treatment strategies. Results: Successful exome sequencing analyses have been obtained for 23 patients. Tumor-specific mutations and copy-number variations were identified. All samples profiled contained relevant genomic alterations. Tumor was implanted to create an Avatar model from 14 patients and 10 succeeded. Occasionally, actionable alterations such as mutations in NF1, PI3KA, and DDR2 failed to provide any benefit when a targeted drug was tested in the Avatar and, accordingly, treatment of the patients with these drugs was not effective. To date, 13 patients have received a personalized treatment and 6 achieved durable partial remissions. Prior testing of candidate treatments in Avatar models correlated with clinical response and helped to select empirical treatments in some patients with no actionable mutations. Conclusion: The use of full genomic analysis for cancer care is encouraging but presents important challenges that will need to be solved for broad clinical application. Avatar models are a promising investigational platform for therapeutic decision making. While limitations still exist, this strategy should be further tested. Clin Cancer Res; 20(9); 2476–84. ©2014 AACR.

14 June 2015 in Clinical Cancer Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ACAntonio Calles
Antonio Calles
LSLynette M. Sholl
Lynette M. Sholl
SRScott J. Rodig
Scott J. Rodig
APAshley K. Pelton
Ashley K. Pelton
JHJason L Hornick
Jason L Hornick
PJPasi Antero Jänne
Pasi Antero Jänne
Purpose: LKB1 loss is common in lung cancer, but no assay exists to efficiently evaluate the presence or absence of LKB1. We validated an IHC assay for LKB1 loss and determined the impact of LKB1 loss in KRAS-mutant non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Experimental Design: We optimized and validated an IHC assay for LKB1 (clone Ley37D/G6) using a panel of lung cancer cell lines and tumors with known LKB1 mutations, including 2 patients with Peutz–Jeghers syndrome (PJS) who developed lung adenocarcinoma. We retrospectively analyzed tumors for LKB1 using IHC from 154 KRAS-mutant NSCLC patients, including 123 smokers and 31 never-smokers, and correlated the findings with patient and tumor characteristics and clinical outcome. Results: LKB1 expression was lost by IHC in 30% of KRAS-mutant NSCLC (smokers 35% vs. never-smokers 13%, P = 0.017). LKB1 loss did not correlate with a specific KRAS mutation but was more frequent in tumors with KRAS transversion mutations (P = 0.029). KRAS-mutant NSCLC patients with concurrent LKB1 loss had a higher number of metastatic sites at the time of diagnosis (median 2.5 vs. 2, P = 0.01), higher incidence of extrathoracic metastases (P = 0.01), and developed brain metastasis more frequently (48% vs. 25%, P = 0.02). There was a nonsignificant trend to worse survival in stage IV KRAS-mutant NSCLC patients with LKB1 loss. Conclusions: LKB1 IHC is a reliable and efficient assay to evaluate for loss of LKB1 in clinical samples of NSCLC. LKB1 loss is more common in smokers, and is associated with a more aggressive clinical phenotype in KRAS-mutant NSCLC patients, accordingly to preclinical models. Clin Cancer Res; 21(12); 2851–60. ©2015 AACR.

14 May 2017 in Cancer Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
TKTakayuki Kosaka
Takayuki Kosaka
JTJunko Tanizaki
Junko Tanizaki
RPRaymond M. Paranal
Raymond M. Paranal
HEHideki Endoh
Hideki Endoh
CLChristine Lydon
Christine Lydon
PJPasi Antero Jänne
Pasi Antero Jänne
Insertion mutations in EGFR and HER2 both occur at analogous positions in exon 20. Non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with tumors harboring these mutations seldom achieve clinical responses to dacomitinib and afatinib, two covalent quinazoline–based inhibitors of EGFR or HER2, respectively. In this study, we investigated the effects of specific EGFR and HER2 exon 20 insertion mutations from NSCLC patients that had clinically achieved a partial response after dacomitinib treatment. We identified Gly770 as a common feature among the drug-sensitive mutations. Structural modeling suggested that this mutation may facilitate inhibitor binding to EGFR. Introduction of Gly770 into two dacomitinib-resistant EGFR exon 20 insertion mutants restored sensitivity to dacomitinib. Based on these findings, we used afatinib to treat an NSCLC patient whose tumor harbored the HER2 V777_G778insGSP mutation and achieved a durable partial response. We further identified secondary mutations in EGFR (T790M or C797S) and HER2 (C805S) that mediated acquired drug resistance in drug-sensitive EGFR or HER2 exon 20 insertion models. Overall, our findings identified a subset of EGFR and HER2 exon 20 insertion mutations that are sensitive to existing covalent quinazoline–based EGFR/HER2 inhibitors, with implications for current clinical treatment and next-generation small-molecule inhibitors. Cancer Res; 77(10); 2712–21. ©2017 AACR.