Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Shreyaskumar Patel is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Shreyaskumar Patel.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2007

Correlation of Computed Tomography and Positron Emission Tomography in Patients With Metastatic Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor Treated at a Single Institution With Imatinib Mesylate: Proposal of New Computed Tomography Response Criteria

Haesun Choi; C. Charnsangavej; Silvana C. Faria; Homer A. Macapinlac; M. A. Burgess; Shreyaskumar Patel; Lei L. Chen; Donald A. Podoloff; Robert S. Benjamin

PURPOSE Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) are insensitive in evaluating gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) treated with imatinib. This study evaluates whether computed tomography (CT) findings of GIST after imatinib treatment correlate with tumor responses by [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) and develops reliable, quantitative, CT response criteria. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 172 lesions selected by RECIST were evaluated in 40 patients with metastatic GISTs treated with imatinib. All patients had pretreatment and 2-month follow-up CTs and FDG-PETs. Multivariate analysis was performed using tumor size and density (Hounsfield unit [HU]) on CT and maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) on FDG-PET. Patients were observed up to 28 months. RESULTS Mean baseline tumor size and density on CT were 5.3 cm and 72.8 HU, respectively, and mean baseline SUVmax on FDG-PET was 5.8. Thirty-three patients had good response on FDG-PET. A decrease in tumor size of more than 10% or a decrease in tumor density of more than 15% on CT had a sensitivity of 97% and a specificity of 100% in identifying PET responders versus 52% and 100% by RECIST. Good responders on CT at 2 months had significantly longer time to progression than those who did not respond (P = .01). CONCLUSION Small changes in tumor size or density on CT are sensitive and specific methods of assessing the response of GISTs. If the prognostic value of our proposed CT response criteria can be confirmed prospectively, the criteria should be employed in future studies of patients with GIST.


The Lancet | 2009

Adjuvant imatinib mesylate after resection of localised, primary gastrointestinal stromal tumour: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Ronald P. DeMatteo; Karla V. Ballman; Cristina R. Antonescu; Robert G. Maki; Peter W.T. Pisters; George D. Demetri; Martin E. Blackstein; Charles D. Blanke; Margaret von Mehren; Murray F. Brennan; Shreyaskumar Patel; Martin D. McCarter; Jonathan Polikoff; Benjamin R. Tan; Kouros Owzar

BACKGROUND Gastrointestinal stromal tumour is the most common sarcoma of the intestinal tract. Imatinib mesylate is a small molecule that inhibits activation of the KIT and platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha proteins, and is effective in first-line treatment of metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumour. We postulated that adjuvant treatment with imatinib would improve recurrence-free survival compared with placebo after resection of localised, primary gastrointestinal stromal tumour. METHODS We undertook a randomised phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial. Eligible patients had complete gross resection of a primary gastrointestinal stromal tumour at least 3 cm in size and positive for the KIT protein by immunohistochemistry. Patients were randomly assigned, by a stratified biased coin design, to imatinib 400 mg (n=359) or to placebo (n=354) daily for 1 year after surgical resection. Patients and investigators were blinded to the treatment group. Patients assigned to placebo were eligible to crossover to imatinib treatment in the event of tumour recurrence. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival, and analysis was by intention to treat. Accrual was stopped early because the trial results crossed the interim analysis efficacy boundary for recurrence-free survival. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00041197. FINDINGS All randomised patients were included in the analysis. At median follow-up of 19.7 months (minimum-maximum 0-56.4), 30 (8%) patients in the imatinib group and 70 (20%) in the placebo group had had tumour recurrence or had died. Imatinib significantly improved recurrence-free survival compared with placebo (98% [95% CI 96-100] vs 83% [78-88] at 1 year; hazard ratio [HR] 0.35 [0.22-0.53]; one-sided p<0.0001). Adjuvant imatinib was well tolerated, with the most common serious events being dermatitis (11 [3%] vs 0), abdominal pain (12 [3%] vs six [1%]), and diarrhoea (ten [2%] vs five [1%]) in the imatinib group and hyperglycaemia (two [<1%] vs seven [2%]) in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION Adjuvant imatinib therapy is safe and seems to improve recurrence-free survival compared with placebo after the resection of primary gastrointestinal stromal tumour. FUNDING US National Institutes of Health and Novartis Pharmaceuticals.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2007

We Should Desist Using RECIST, at Least in GIST

Robert S. Benjamin; Haesun Choi; Homer A. Macapinlac; M. A. Burgess; Shreyaskumar Patel; Lei L. Chen; Donald A. Podoloff; C. Charnsangavej

PURPOSE Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) are insensitive in evaluating imatinib-treated gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). Response by Choi criteria, a 10% decrease in size or a 15% decrease in density on contrast-enhanced CT, correlated well in a small training set of patients who showed response as measured by positron emission tomography, and was more predictive of time to tumor progression (TTP) than response by RECIST. This study was designed to validate these observations in an independent data set. PATIENTS AND METHODS Fifty-eight patients with imatinib-treated GISTs were evaluated by RECIST and Choi criteria. TTP was compared with TTP in the training set. Patients were analyzed initially with follow-up to 28 months, extended to 60 months for survival analysis. RESULTS Patients who met Choi response criteria on CT at 2 months had significantly better TTP than those who did not (P = .0002), whereas response group by RECIST was not significantly correlated with TTP. Even when the 98 patients from both sets were analyzed together, the response group by RECIST did not correlate significantly with TTP, whereas response group by Choi criteria did correlate significantly with TTP. Disease-specific survival (DSS) was also significantly correlated with response group by Choi criteria (P = .04), but not with response group by RECIST. CONCLUSION Choi response criteria are reproducible, more sensitive, and more precise than RECIST in assessing the response of GISTs to imatinib mesylate. Response by Choi criteria, unlike response by RECIST, correlates significantly with TTP and DSS. Response by Choi criteria should be incorporated routinely into future studies of GIST therapy. We should desist using RECIST, at least in GIST.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2007

Randomized phase II study of gemcitabine and docetaxel compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcomas

Robert G. Maki; J. Kyle Wathen; Shreyaskumar Patel; Dennis A. Priebat; Scott H. Okuno; Brian L. Samuels; Michael Fanucchi; David C. Harmon; Scott M. Schuetze; Denise K. Reinke; Peter F. Thall; Robert S. Benjamin; Laurence H. Baker; Martee L. Hensley

Purpose Gemcitabine as a single agent and the combination of gemcitabine and docetaxel have activity in patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcoma. To determine if the addition of docetaxel to gemcitabine improved clinical outcome of patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcomas, we compared a fixed dose rate infusion of gemcitabine versus a lower dose of gemcitabine with docetaxel. Patients and Methods In this open-label phase II clinical trial, the primary end point was tumor response, defined as complete or partial response or stable disease lasting at least 24 weeks. A Bayesian adaptive randomization procedure was used to produce an imbalance in the randomization in favor of the superior treatment, accounting for treatment-subgroup interactions. Results One hundred nineteen of 122 randomly assigned patients had assessable outcomes. The adaptive randomization assigned 73 patients (60%) to gemcitabine-docetaxel and 49 patients (40%) to gemcitabine alone, indicating gemcitabine-docetaxel was superior. ...


Cancer Research | 2004

A missense mutation in KIT kinase domain 1 correlates with imatinib resistance in gastrointestinal stromal tumors

Lei L. Chen; Jonathan C. Trent; Elsie F. Wu; Gregory N. Fuller; Latha Ramdas; Wei Zhang; Austin K. Raymond; Victor G. Prieto; Caroline O. Oyedeji; Kelly K. Hunt; Raphael E. Pollock; Barry W. Feig; Kimberly Hayes; Haesun Choi; Homer A. Macapinlac; Walter N. Hittelman; Marco A. De Velasco; Shreyaskumar Patel; M. A. Burgess; Robert S. Benjamin; Marsha L. Frazier

KIT gain of function mutations play an important role in the pathogenesis of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). Imatinib is a selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor of ABL, platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR), and KIT and represents a new paradigm of targeted therapy against GISTs. Here we report for the first time that, after imatinib treatment, an additional specific and novel KIT mutation occurs in GISTs as they develop resistance to the drug. We studied 12 GIST patients with initial near-complete response to imatinib. Seven harbored mutations in KIT exon 11, and 5 harbored mutations in exon 9. Within 31 months, six imatinib-resistant rapidly progressive peritoneal implants (metastatic foci) developed in five patients. Quiescent residual GISTs persisted in seven patients. All six rapidly progressive imatinib-resistant implants from five patients show an identical novel KIT missense mutation, 1982T→C, that resulted in Val654Ala in KIT tyrosine kinase domain 1. This novel mutation has never been reported before, is not present in pre-imatinib or post-imatinib residual quiescent GISTs, and is strongly correlated with imatinib resistance. Allelic-specific sequencing data show that this new mutation occurs in the allele that harbors original activation mutation of KIT.


Cancer | 2001

Alveolar soft part sarcoma: clinical course and patterns of metastasis in 70 patients treated at a single institution.

Charles A. Portera; Viet Ho; Shreyaskumar Patel; Kelly K. Hunt; Barry W. Feig; Paula M. Respondek; Alan W. Yasko; Robert S. Benjamin; Raphael E. Pollock; Peter W.T. Pisters

Alveolar soft part sarcoma (ASPS) is a rare form of soft tissue sarcoma. Brain metastases have been reported to be a common feature of Stage IV ASPS, and recent practice guidelines recommend routine intracranial imaging as part of the staging evaluation in all patients who present with ASPS.


Spine | 2010

A novel classification system for spinal instability in neoplastic disease: an evidence-based approach and expert consensus from the Spine Oncology Study Group.

Charles G. Fisher; Christian P. DiPaola; Timothy C. Ryken; Mark H. Bilsky; Christopher I. Shaffrey; Sigurd Berven; James S. Harrop; Michael G. Fehlings; Stefano Boriani; Dean Chou; Meic H. Schmidt; David W. Polly; R. Biagini; Shane Burch; Mark B. Dekutoski; Aruna Ganju; Peter C. Gerszten; Ziya L. Gokaslan; Michael W. Groff; Norbert J. Liebsch; Ehud Mendel; Scott H. Okuno; Shreyaskumar Patel; Laurence D. Rhines; Peter S. Rose; Daniel M. Sciubba; Narayan Sundaresan; Katsuro Tomita; Peter Pal Varga; Luiz Roberto Vialle

Study Design. Systematic review and modified Delphi technique. Objective. To use an evidence-based medicine process using the best available literature and expert opinion consensus to develop a comprehensive classification system to diagnose neoplastic spinal instability. Summary of Background Data. Spinal instability is poorly defined in the literature and presently there is a lack of guidelines available to aid in defining the degree of spinal instability in the setting of neoplastic spinal disease. The concept of spinal instability remains important in the clinical decision-making process for patients with spine tumors. Methods. We have integrated the evidence provided by systematic reviews through a modified Delphi technique to generate a consensus of best evidence and expert opinion to develop a classification system to define neoplastic spinal instability. Results. A comprehensive classification system based on patient symptoms and radiographic criteria of the spine was developed to aid in predicting spine stability of neoplastic lesions. The classification system includes global spinal location of the tumor, type and presence of pain, bone lesion quality, spinal alignment, extent of vertebral body collapse, and posterolateral spinal element involvement. Qualitative scores were assigned based on relative importance of particular factors gleaned from the literature and refined by expert consensus. Conclusion. The Spine Instability Neoplastic Score is a comprehensive classification system with content validity that can guide clinicians in identifying when patients with neoplastic disease of the spine may benefit from surgical consultation. It can also aid surgeons in assessing the key components of spinal instability due to neoplasia and may become a prognostic tool for surgical decision-making when put in context with other key elements such as neurologic symptoms, extent of disease, prognosis, patient health factors, oncologic subtype, and radiosensitivity of the tumor.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2001

Phase II Clinical Investigation of Gemcitabine in Advanced Soft Tissue Sarcomas and Window Evaluation of Dose Rate on Gemcitabine Triphosphate Accumulation

Shreyaskumar Patel; Varsha Gandhi; Jan Jenkins; Nicholas Papadopolous; M. Andrew Burgess; Carl Plager; William Plunkett; Robert S. Benjamin

PURPOSE To evaluate the efficacy, toxicity, and optimal dose rate of gemcitabine in adult patients with advanced soft tissue sarcomas (STS) by comparing levels of gemcitabine triphosphate (GTP) in peripheral-blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) of patients receiving two different dose rates. PATIENTS AND METHODS Fifty-six assessable patients with STS (17 gastrointestinal [GI] leiomyosarcomas and 39 other histologies) were treated on a two-arm phase II study. Gemcitabine was given at 1 g/m2 as a 30-minute infusion weekly for up to 7 weeks followed by 1 week of rest and reassessment of tumor. Subsequent cycles were given at 1 g/m2 weekly for 3 weeks followed by 1 week of rest. Nine patients underwent cellular pharmacologic studies at two different dose rates (1 g/m2 over a standard 30-minute infusion on week 1 and over pharmacologically based infusion of 150 minutes on week 2) to evaluate GTP levels in PBMCs. RESULTS Seven partial responses were noted among 39 patients, for an overall response rate of 18% (95% confidence interval, 7% to 29%). Median duration of response was 3.5 months (range, 2 to 13 months). Four of 10 patients with non-GI leiomyosarcomas achieved a partial response. No objective responses were noted in 17 patients with GI leiomyosarcomas. One patient had a mixed response. Median time to progression for all patients (both arms) was 3 months; median survival was 13.9 months. Treatment was generally well tolerated. Comparison of cellular pharmacology demonstrated a significant 1.4-fold increase in the concentration of GTP with the 150-minute infusion. CONCLUSION Given the limited therapeutic armamentarium for STS, the activity of gemcitabine is encouraging. Its potential for combination therapy in the salvage setting should be studied with pharmacologically guided fixed dose-rate infusion.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2011

Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score: An Analysis of Reliability and Validity From the Spine Oncology Study Group

Daryl R. Fourney; Evan Frangou; Timothy C. Ryken; Christian P. DiPaola; Christopher I. Shaffrey; Sigurd Berven; Mark H. Bilsky; James S. Harrop; Michael G. Fehlings; Stefano Boriani; Dean Chou; Meic H. Schmidt; David W. Polly; R. Biagini; Shane Burch; Mark B. Dekutoski; Aruna Ganju; Peter C. Gerszten; Ziya L. Gokaslan; Michael W. Groff; Norbert J. Liebsch; Ehud Mendel; Scott H. Okuno; Shreyaskumar Patel; Laurence D. Rhines; Peter S. Rose; Daniel M. Sciubba; Narayan Sundaresan; Katsuro Tomita; Peter Pal Varga

PURPOSE Standardized indications for treatment of tumor-related spinal instability are hampered by the lack of a valid and reliable classification system. The objective of this study was to determine the interobserver reliability, intraobserver reliability, and predictive validity of the Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS). METHODS Clinical and radiographic data from 30 patients with spinal tumors were classified as stable, potentially unstable, and unstable by members of the Spine Oncology Study Group. The median category for each patient case (consensus opinion) was used as the gold standard for predictive validity testing. On two occasions at least 6 weeks apart, each rater also scored each patient using SINS. Each total score was converted into a three-category data field, with 0 to 6 as stable, 7 to 12 as potentially unstable, and 13 to 18 as unstable. RESULTS The κ statistics for interobserver reliability were 0.790, 0.841, 0.244, 0.456, 0.462, and 0.492 for the fields of location, pain, bone quality, alignment, vertebral body collapse, and posterolateral involvement, respectively. The κ statistics for intraobserver reliability were 0.806, 0.859, 0.528, 0.614, 0.590, and 0.662 for the same respective fields. Intraclass correlation coefficients for inter- and intraobserver reliability of total SINS score were 0.846 (95% CI, 0.773 to 0.911) and 0.886 (95% CI, 0.868 to 0.902), respectively. The κ statistic for predictive validity was 0.712 (95% CI, 0.676 to 0.766). CONCLUSION SINS demonstrated near-perfect inter- and intraobserver reliability in determining three clinically relevant categories of stability. The sensitivity and specificity of SINS for potentially unstable or unstable lesions were 95.7% and 79.5%, respectively.


Annals of Surgical Oncology | 2006

Surgical Resection of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors After Treatment with Imatinib

Robert Hans Ingemar Andtbacka; Chaan S. Ng; Courtney L. Scaife; Janice N. Cormier; Kelly K. Hunt; Peter W.T. Pisters; Raphael E. Pollock; Robert S. Benjamin; M. A. Burgess; Lei L. Chen; Jonathan C. Trent; Shreyaskumar Patel; Kevin A. Raymond; Barry W. Feig

BackgroundSurgical resection of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) has been the most effective therapy for these rare tumors. Imatinib has been introduced as systemic therapy for locally advanced and metastatic GIST. In this study, the surgical resection rates and long-term outcomes of patients treated with preoperative imatinib for locally advanced primary, recurrent, or metastatic GISTs were evaluated.MethodsPatients were retrospectively assessed for completeness of surgical resection and for disease-free and overall survival after resection.ResultsForty-six patients underwent surgery after treatment with imatinib. Eleven were treated for locally advanced primary GISTs for a median of 11.9 months, followed by complete surgical resection. All eleven were alive at a median of 19.5 months, and ten were free of disease. Thirty-five patients were treated for recurrent or metastatic GIST. Of these, eleven underwent complete resection. Six of the eleven patients had recurrent disease at a median of 15.1 months. All eleven patients were alive at a median of 30.7 months. Patients with a partial radiographic tumor response to imatinib had significantly higher complete resection rates than patients with progressive disease (91% vs. 4%; P < .001). Of the 24 patients with incomplete resection, 18 initially responded to imatinib but were unable to undergo complete resection after they progressed before surgery.ConclusionsPreoperative imatinib can decrease tumor volume and is associated with complete surgical resection in locally advanced primary GISTs. Early surgical intervention should be considered for imatinib-responsive recurrent or metastatic GIST, since complete resection is rarely achieved once tumor progression occurs.

Collaboration


Dive into the Shreyaskumar Patel's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Robert S. Benjamin

University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Vinod Ravi

University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Dejka M. Araujo

University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Peter W.T. Pisters

University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Raphael E. Pollock

University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Barry W. Feig

University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Anthony P. Conley

University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Neeta Somaiah

University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Robert G. Maki

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge