John Strickler

Positions:

Associate Professor of Medicine

Medicine, Medical Oncology
School of Medicine

Member of the Duke Cancer Institute

Duke Cancer Institute
School of Medicine

Education:

M.D. 2005

The University of Chicago

Residency, Medicine

University of Washington

Fellowship in Hematology-Oncology, Medicine

Duke University School of Medicine

Grants:

A Phase 1 Open-label Dose Escalation and Dose Expansion Study of CGX1321 in Subjects with Advanced Solid Tumors and Phase 1b Study of CGX1321 in Combination with Pembrolizumab in Subjects with Advanced Gastrointestinal Tumors

Administered By
Duke Cancer Institute
Awarded By
Curegenix Inc.
Role
Principal Investigator
Start Date
End Date

A PHASE Ib, MULTICENTER, OPEN-LABELSTUDY TO EVALUATE THE SAFETY, EFFICACY, AND PHARMACOKINETICS OF CIBISATAMAB IN COMBINATION WITH ATEZOLIZUMAB AFTER PRETREATMENT WITH OBINUTUZUMAB IN PATIENTS WITH PREVIOUSLY TREATED METASTATIC, MICROSATELLITE-STABL

Administered By
Duke Cancer Institute
Awarded By
Genentech, Inc.
Role
Principal Investigator
Start Date
End Date

A PHASE 1/2, OPEN-LABEL, MULTICENTER, DOSE ESCALATION AND DOSE EXPANSION STUDY OF NKTR-262 IN COMBINATION WITH NKTR-214 AND IN COMBINATION WITH NKTR-214 PLUS NIVOLUMAB IN PATIENTS WITH LOCALLY ADVANCED OR METASTATIC SOLID TUMOR MALIGNANCIES

Administered By
Duke Cancer Institute
Awarded By
Nektar Therapeutics
Role
Principal Investigator
Start Date
End Date

Phase 2 Study Comparing Efficacy and Safety of ABT-165 plus FOLFIRI vs Bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Previously Treated with Fluoropyrimidine/Oxaliplatin and Bevacizumab

Administered By
Duke Cancer Institute
Awarded By
AbbVie Inc.
Role
Principal Investigator
Start Date
End Date

A Phase 1 Study Evaluating the Safety, Pharmacokinetics, and Anti-Tumor Activity ofABBV-321 in Subjects with Advanced Solid Tumors Associated with Overexpression of the Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) or its Ligands

Administered By
Duke Cancer Institute
Awarded By
AbbVie Inc.
Role
Principal Investigator
Start Date
End Date

Publications:

ctDNA applications and integration in colorectal cancer: an NCI Colon and Rectal-Anal Task Forces whitepaper.

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.
Authors
Dasari, A; Morris, VK; Allegra, CJ; Atreya, C; Benson, AB; Boland, P; Chung, K; Copur, MS; Corcoran, RB; Deming, DA; Dwyer, A; Diehn, M; Eng, C; George, TJ; Gollub, MJ; Goodwin, RA; Hamilton, SR; Hechtman, JF; Hochster, H; Hong, TS; Innocenti, F; Iqbal, A; Jacobs, SA; Kennecke, HF; Lee, JJ; Lieu, CH; Lenz, H-J; Lindwasser, OW; Montagut, C; Odisio, B; Ou, F-S; Porter, L; Raghav, K; Schrag, D; Scott, AJ; Shi, Q; Strickler, JH; Venook, A; Yaeger, R; Yothers, G; You, YN; Zell, JA; Kopetz, S
MLA Citation
Dasari, Arvind, et al. “ctDNA applications and integration in colorectal cancer: an NCI Colon and Rectal-Anal Task Forces whitepaper.Nat Rev Clin Oncol, July 2020. Pubmed, doi:10.1038/s41571-020-0392-0.
URI
https://scholars.duke.edu/individual/pub1450995
PMID
32632268
Source
pubmed
Published In
Nature Reviews. Clinical Oncology
Published Date
DOI
10.1038/s41571-020-0392-0

ASO Author Reflection: Postoperative Chemotherapy for Nonmetastatic, Poorly Differentiated Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Carcinomas.

Authors
Schmitz, R; Moris, D; Strickler, JH; Blazer, DG
MLA Citation
Schmitz, Robin, et al. “ASO Author Reflection: Postoperative Chemotherapy for Nonmetastatic, Poorly Differentiated Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Carcinomas.Ann Surg Oncol, July 2020. Pubmed, doi:10.1245/s10434-020-08802-1.
URI
https://scholars.duke.edu/individual/pub1450823
PMID
32613368
Source
pubmed
Published In
Annals of Surgical Oncology
Published Date
DOI
10.1245/s10434-020-08802-1

Impact of Postoperative Chemotherapy on the Survival of Patients with High-Grade Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine whether postoperative chemotherapy is associated with a survival benefit for patients with poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) of the stomach, small bowel, or pancreas. METHODS: Patients were identified in the National Cancer Database (NCDB) between 2004 and 2014. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to reduce selection bias. To compare the overall survival (OS) of patients in different treatment groups, IPTW-adjusted Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards models were used. RESULTS: The inclusion criteria were met by 759 patients. The diagnosis was NEC of the stomach for 195 patients (25.7%), NEC of the small intestine for 278 patients (36.6%), and NEC of the pancreas for 286 patients (37.7%). Overall, 213 patients (28.1%) received postoperative chemotherapy after curative resection. For the patients who received chemotherapy, IPTW-adjusted survival showed no OS benefit. However, subgroup analysis demonstrated improved OS with observation (OB) for patients with NEC of the small intestine (hazard ratio [HR], 1.436; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13-1.823; P = 0.003), T3 or T4 primary tumor (HR, 1.258; 95% CI 1.08-1.465; P = 0.003), node-positive disease (HR, 1.238; 95% CI 1.040-1.475; P = 0.0165), or positive resection margin (HR, 1.4283; 95% CI 1.02-2.00; P = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: In this national database analysis, postoperative chemotherapy was not associated with improved survival for patients with poorly differentiated gastroenteropancreatic (GEP) NECs. These findings highlight the need for continued efforts to understand better which patients in this high-risk population will benefit from additional systemic therapy and the need for continued development of more effective therapies for these patients.
Authors
Schmitz, R; Mao, R; Moris, D; Strickler, JH; Blazer, DG
MLA Citation
Schmitz, Robin, et al. “Impact of Postoperative Chemotherapy on the Survival of Patients with High-Grade Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Carcinoma.Ann Surg Oncol, June 2020. Pubmed, doi:10.1245/s10434-020-08730-0.
URI
https://scholars.duke.edu/individual/pub1448177
PMID
32556871
Source
pubmed
Published In
Annals of Surgical Oncology
Published Date
DOI
10.1245/s10434-020-08730-0

Atezolizumab with or without bevacizumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (GO30140): an open-label, multicentre, phase 1b study.

BACKGROUND: Dual blockade of PD-L1 and VEGF has enhanced anticancer immunity through multiple mechanisms and augmented antitumour activity in multiple malignancies. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1) alone and combined with bevacizumab (anti-VEGF) in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: GO30140 is an open-label, multicentre, multiarm, phase 1b study that enrolled patients at 26 academic centres and community oncology practices in seven countries worldwide. The study included five cohorts, and the two hepatocellular carcinoma cohorts, groups A and F, are described here. Inclusion criteria for these two groups included age 18 years and older; histologically, cytologically, or clinically (per American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases criteria) confirmed unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma that was not amenable to curative treatment; no previous systemic treatment; and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. In group A, all patients received atezolizumab (1200 mg) and bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) intravenously every 3 weeks. In group F, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous atezolizumab (1200 mg) plus intravenous bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) every 3 weeks or atezolizumab alone by interactive voice-web response system using permuted block randomisation (block size of two) and stratification factors of geographical region; macrovascular invasion, extrahepatic spread, or both; and baseline α-fetoprotein concentration. Primary endpoints were confirmed objective response rate in all patients who received the combination treatment for group A and progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population in group F, both assessed by an independent review facility according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. In both groups, safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of any study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02715531, and is closed to enrolment. FINDINGS: In group A, 104 patients were enrolled between July 20, 2016, and July 31, 2018, and received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. With a median follow-up of 12·4 months (IQR 8·0-16·2), 37 (36%; 95% CI 26-46) of 104 patients had a confirmed objective response. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were hypertension (13 [13%]) and proteinuria (seven [7%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 25 (24%) patients and treatment-related deaths in three (3%) patients (abnormal hepatic function, hepatic cirrhosis, and pneumonitis). In group F, 119 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned (60 to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab; 59 to atezolizumab monotherapy) between May 18, 2018, and March 7, 2019. With a median follow-up of 6·6 months (IQR 5·5-8·5) for the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 6·7 months (4·2-8·2) for the atezolizumab monotherapy group, median progression-free survival was 5·6 months (95% CI 3·6-7·4) versus 3·4 months (1·9-5·2; hazard ratio 0·55; 80% CI 0·40-0·74; p=0·011). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events in group F were hypertension (in three [5%] patients in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group; none in the atezolizumab monotherapy group) and proteinuria (in two [3%] patients in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group; none in the atezolizumab monotherapy group). Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in seven (12%) patients in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and two (3%) patients in the atezolizumab monotherapy group. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Our study shows longer progression-free survival with a combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab than with atezolizumab alone in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma not previously treated with systemic therapy. Therefore, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab might become a promising treatment option for these patients. This combination is being compared with standard-of-care sorafenib in a phase 3 trial. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech.
Authors
Lee, MS; Ryoo, B-Y; Hsu, C-H; Numata, K; Stein, S; Verret, W; Hack, SP; Spahn, J; Liu, B; Abdullah, H; Wang, Y; He, AR; Lee, K-H; GO30140 investigators,
MLA Citation
Lee, Michael S., et al. “Atezolizumab with or without bevacizumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (GO30140): an open-label, multicentre, phase 1b study.Lancet Oncol, vol. 21, no. 6, June 2020, pp. 808–20. Pubmed, doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30156-X.
URI
https://scholars.duke.edu/individual/pub1447300
PMID
32502443
Source
pubmed
Published In
Lancet Oncol
Volume
21
Published Date
Start Page
808
End Page
820
DOI
10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30156-X

A phase II study of savolitinib (volitinib, AZD6094, HMPL-504) in subjects with MET amplified metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) detected by cell-free (cf)DNA

Authors
Jia, J; Niedzwiecki, D; Arrowood, C; Garett-Mead, N; Nagy, R; Lanman, RB; Wright, J; Nixon, AB; Strickler, JH
URI
https://scholars.duke.edu/individual/pub1444228
Source
wos-lite
Published In
Journal of Clinical Oncology : Official Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology
Volume
38
Published Date