Robert S. Meehan
National Institutes of Health
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Robert S. Meehan.
Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2017
Shivaani Kummar; Geraldine O’Sullivan Coyne; Khanh Do; Baris Turkbey; Paul S. Meltzer; Eric C. Polley; Peter L. Choyke; Robert S. Meehan; Rasa Vilimas; Yvonne Horneffer; Lamin Juwara; Ann Lih; Amul Choudhary; Sandra A. Mitchell; Lee J. Helman; James H. Doroshow; Alice P. Chen
Purpose Desmoid tumors (aggressive fibromatosis) arise from connective tissue cells or fibroblasts. In general, they are slow growing and do not metastasize; however, locally aggressive desmoid tumors can cause severe morbidity and loss of function. Disease recurrence after surgery and/or radiation and diagnosis of multifocal desmoid tumors highlight the need to develop effective systemic treatments for this disease. In this study, we evaluate objective response rate after therapy with the γ-secretase inhibitor PF-03084014 in patients with recurrent, refractory, progressive desmoid tumors. Patients and Methods Seventeen patients with desmoid tumors received PF-03084014 150 mg orally twice a day in 3-week cycles. Response to treatment was evaluated at cycle 1 and every six cycles, that is, 18 weeks, by RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) version 1.1. Patient-reported outcomes were measured at baseline and at every restaging visit by using the MD Anderson Symptoms Inventory. Archival tumor and blood samples were genotyped for somatic and germline mutations in APC and CTNNB1. Results Of 17 patients accrued to the study, 15 had mutations in APC or CTNNB1 genes. Sixteen patients (94%) were evaluable for response; five (29%) experienced a confirmed partial response and have been on study for more than 2 years. Another five patients with prolonged stable disease as their best response remain on study. Patient-reported outcomes confirmed clinician reporting that the investigational agent was well tolerated and, in subgroup analyses, participants who demonstrated partial response also experienced clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvements in symptom burden. Conclusion PF-03084014 was well tolerated and demonstrated promising clinical benefit in patients with refractory, progressive desmoid tumors who receive long-term treatment.
Drugs | 2017
Geraldine O’Sullivan Coyne; Alice P. Chen; Robert S. Meehan; James H. Doroshow
The repair of DNA damage is a critical cellular process governed by multiple biochemical pathways that are often found to be defective in cancer cells. The poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) family of proteins controls response to single-strand DNA breaks by detecting these damaged sites and recruiting the proper factors for repair. Blocking this pathway forces cells to utilize complementary mechanisms to repair DNA damage. While PARP inhibition may not, in itself, be sufficient to cause tumor cell death, inhibition of DNA repair with PARP inhibitors is an effective cytotoxic strategy when it is used in patients who carry other defective DNA-repair mechanisms, such as mutations in the genes BRCA 1 and 2. This discovery has supported the development of PARP inhibitors (PARPi), agents that have proven effective against various types of tumors that carry BRCA mutations. With the application of next-generation sequencing of tumors, there is increased interest in looking beyond BRCA mutations to identify genetic and epigenetic aberrations that might lead to similar defects in DNA repair, conferring susceptibility to PARP inhibition. Identification of these genetic lesions and the development of screening assays for their detection may allow for the selection of patients most likely to respond to this class of anticancer agents. This article provides an overview of clinical trial results obtained with PARPi and describes the companion diagnostic assays being established for patient selection. In addition, we review known mechanisms for resistance to PARPi and potential strategies for combining these agents with other types of therapy.
Oncologist | 2018
Robert S. Meehan; Shivaani Kummar; Khanh Do; Geraldine O’Sullivan Coyne; Lamin Juwara; Jennifer Zlott; Larry Rubinstein; James H. Doroshow; Alice P. Chen
Abstract Lessons Learned. The combination of the antiangiogenic agent ziv‐aflibercept and the heat shock protein 90 inhibitor ganetespib was associated with several serious and unexpected adverse events and was not tolerable on the dosing schedule tested. Studies such as these emphasize the importance of considering overlapping toxicities when designing novel treatment combination regimens. Background. Although inhibition of angiogenesis is an effective strategy for cancer treatment, acquired resistance to antiangiogenic therapy is common. Heat shock protein 90 (Hsp90) is a molecular chaperone that regulates various oncogenic signaling pathways involved in acquired resistance and has been shown to play a role in angiogenesis. Combining an antiangiogenic agent with an Hsp90 inhibitor has therefore been proposed as a strategy for preventing resistance and improving antitumor activity. We conducted a single‐arm phase I study evaluating the combination of ziv‐aflibercept, an antiangiogenic drug, with the Hsp90 inhibitor ganetespib. Methods. Adult patients were eligible if they had recurrent or metastatic gastrointestinal carcinomas, nonsquamous non‐small cell lung carcinomas, urothelial carcinomas, or sarcomas that had progressed after at least one line of standard therapy. Ziv‐aflibercept was administered intravenously on days 1 and 15, and ganetespib was administered intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15, of each 28‐day cycle. Results. Five patients were treated with the combination. Although three patients achieved stable disease, study treatment was associated with several serious and unexpected adverse events. Conclusion. The dose escalation phase of this study was not completed, but the limited data obtained suggest that this combination may be too toxic when administered on this dosing schedule.
Cancer Research | 2017
Robert S. Meehan; Alice P. Chen; Geraldine O’Sullivan Coyne; Shivaani Kummar; Jiuping Ji; Rasa Vilimas; Lamin Juwara; Robert J. Kinders; Katherine V. Ferry-Galow; Deborah Wilsker; Yiping Zhang; Angie B. Dull; Tony Navas; Lihua Wang; Ralph E. Parchment; James H. Doroshow
Inhibition of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) sensitizes tumor cells to DNA damage that would normally be repaired through the base excision repair pathway. PARP inhibitors are active clinically against BRCA-deficient ovarian cancers. The PARP inhibitor talazoparib produces cytotoxicity in human cancer cell lines and animal models of tumors that harbor mutations that compromise DNA repair pathways. In this study, single agent talazoparib (1000 µg/day) was administered to patients with deleterious BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and advanced solid tumors in 28 day cycles. The primary objective of the trial was to examine pharmacodynamic (PD) effects of talazoparib; the secondary objective was to determine response rate in patients whose tumors carry BRCA mutations. Mandatory paired tumor biopsies were obtained pre-treatment and 3-6 hrs post-treatment on cycle 1 day 8. Optional biopsies were collected at the time of progression. One core from each time point was analyzed for PARP inhibition by a validated ELISA assay while the other core was used for IFA analysis of γH2AX. A total of 9 patients (pts) were enrolled and treated before this trial was closed due to lack of drug availability: [prostate (3), ovarian (2), breast (2), uterine sarcoma (1), pancreatic (1)]. Median age was 63 (range: 33-73 yrs); male-to-female ratio was 4:5; and the median number of prior treatments was 6 (range: 1-12). All 9 pts were evaluable for PD endpoints. One pt progressed during the first cycle of treatment; 8 pts were evaluable for clinical response. Mean time on study for evaluable pts was 8 cycles (range: 2-18); 5 of 8 (62%) pts experienced a documented partial responses [ovarian (2), prostate (2), breast (1)] lasting between 4 and 12 cycles (median: 6 cycles). Two pts had stable disease for 4 to 6 cycles, and one progressed after 2 cycles. The agent was well tolerated; the most frequent adverse events were hematologic including grade (gr) 4 anemia (1) and thrombocytopenia (1), and gr 3 anemia (2), neutropenia (1), lymphopenia (1). Decreases in PAR levels (>75%) were observed in all cycle 1 day 8 biopsy pairs, documenting a primary PD effect. Increased γH2AX expression was observed for 4/6 pts in post-dose biopsies; pre-treatment γH2AX levels, measured as %Nuclear Associated Protein (NAP), increased from a mean ± SD of 1.33 ± 1.08 to a post-treatment %NAP mean of 5.60 ± 0.78; (p=0.018), supporting a role for drug-enhanced DNA double strand breaks in the mechanism of action of talazoparib for BRCA mutant tumors. In summary, talazoparib demonstrated significant clinical activity as a single agent in patients with BRCA-deficient tumors and produced substantial reductions in tumor PAR levels in matched pre and post-treatment tumor biopsies. Citation Format: Robert S. Meehan, Alice P. Chen, Geraldine O’Sullivan Coyne, Shivaani Kummar, Jiuping Ji, Rasa Vilimas, Lamin Juwara, Robert J. Kinders, Katherine Ferry-Galow, Deborah Wilsker, Yiping Zhang, Angie B. Dull, Tony Navas, Lihua Wang, Ralph E. Parchment, James H. Doroshow. Pilot trial of talazoparib (BMN 673), an oral PARP inhibitor, in patients with advanced solid tumors carrying deleterious BRCA mutations [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2017; 2017 Apr 1-5; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 4678. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2017-4678
Translational cancer research | 2016
Robert S. Meehan; Alice P. Chen; James H. Doroshow
The rapidly expanding number of new, molecularly-targeted treatments for patients with breast cancer has dramatically increased the pressure to evaluate safety and efficacy for these compounds in a more efficient fashion (1). Moving quickly from early phase, proof-of-mechanism studies to more definitive therapeutic trials has become an important focus of cancer drug development efforts over the past decade (2). New clinical trial designs that explore testing of several new agents simultaneously in a single “umbrella” or “basket” study are currently being explored as a means to this end (3).
Journal of Labor Research | 2016
Robert S. Meehan; Alice P. Chen
Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2016
Geraldine Helen O'Sullivan Coyne; Shivaani Kummar; Khanh Tu Do; Peter L. Choyke; Baris Turkbey; Eric C. Polley; Yvonne Horneffer; Lamin Juwara; Rasa Vilimas; Robert S. Meehan; Lee J. Helman; James H. Doroshow; Alice P. Chen
Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2016
Robert S. Meehan; Geraldine Helen O'Sullivan Coyne; Shivaani Kummar; Jerry M. Collins; Larry D. Anderson; Jennifer Zlott; Lamin Juwara; Naoko Takebe; Richard Piekarz; Howard Streicher; Elad Sharon; Barbara A. Conley; Larry Rubinstein; Deborah Wilsker; Angie B. Dull; Katherine V. Ferry-Galow; Robert J. Kinders; James H. Doroshow; Alice P. Chen
Molecular Cancer Therapeutics | 2018
Geraldine O’Sullivan Coyne; Shivaani Kummar; Naoko Takebe; Khanh Do; Robert S. Meehan; Richard Piekarz; Jennifer Zlott; L. Juwara; Mary G. Quinn; Elad Sharon; Howard Streicher; Lawrence Rubinstein; Chana Levine; James H. Doroshow; Alice P. Chen
Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2017
Geraldine Helen O'Sullivan Coyne; Shivaani Kummar; Robert S. Meehan; Lamin Juwara; Richard Piekarz; Elad Sharon; Howard Streicher; Barbara A. Conley; Naoko Takebe; Lyndsay Harris; Austin Doyle; Mary Flanagan Quinn; Larry Rubinstein; Deborah Wilsker; Robert J. Kinders; E. Levy; James H. Doroshow; Alice P. Chen