R

Richard L. Schilsky

American Society of Clinical Oncology

ORCID: 0000-0003-4474-4303

Publishes on Colorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies, Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics, Lung Cancer Treatments and Mutations. 560 papers and 39.9k citations.

560Publications
39.9kTotal Citations

Is this you? Claim your profile.

Add your photo, update your bio, and get notified when your ranking changes.

Top publicationsby citations

Randomized Trial of Dose-Dense Versus Conventionally Scheduled and Sequential Versus Concurrent Combination Chemotherapy as Postoperative Adjuvant Treatment of Node-Positive Primary Breast Cancer: First Report of Intergroup Trial C9741/Cancer and Leukemia Group B Trial 9741
Marc L. Citron, Donald A. Berry, Constance Cirrincione et al.|Journal of Clinical Oncology|2003
Cited by 1.6k

PURPOSE: Using a 2 x 2 factorial design, we studied the adjuvant chemotherapy of women with axillary node-positive breast cancer to compare sequential doxorubicin (A), paclitaxel (T), and cyclophosphamide (C) with concurrent doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) followed by paclitaxel (T) for disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS); to determine whether the dose density of the agents improves DFS and OS; and to compare toxicities. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 2,005 female patients were randomly assigned to receive one of the following regimens: (I) sequential A x 4 (doses) --> T x 4 --> C x 4 with doses every 3 weeks, (II) sequential A x 4 --> T x 4 --> C x 4 every 2 weeks with filgrastim, (III) concurrent AC x 4 --> T x 4 every 3 weeks, or (IV) concurrent AC x 4 --> T x 4 every 2 weeks with filgrastim. RESULTS: A protocol-specified analysis was performed at a median follow-up of 36 months: 315 patients had experienced relapse or died, compared with 515 expected treatment failures. Dose-dense treatment improved the primary end point, DFS (risk ratio [RR] = 0.74; P =.010), and OS (RR = 0.69; P =.013). Four-year DFS was 82% for the dose-dense regimens and 75% for the others. There was no difference in either DFS or OS between the concurrent and sequential schedules. There was no interaction between density and sequence. Severe neutropenia was less frequent in patients who received the dose-dense regimens. CONCLUSION: Dose density improves clinical outcomes significantly, despite the lower than expected number of events at this time. Sequential chemotherapy is as effective as concurrent chemotherapy.

Improved Outcomes From Adding Sequential Paclitaxel but Not From Escalating Doxorubicin Dose in an Adjuvant Chemotherapy Regimen for Patients With Node-Positive Primary Breast Cancer
I. Craig Henderson, Donald A. Berry, George D. Demetri et al.|Journal of Clinical Oncology|2003
Cited by 1.3k

PURPOSE: This study was designed to determine whether increasing the dose of doxorubicin in or adding paclitaxel to a standard adjuvant chemotherapy regimen for breast cancer patients would prolong time to recurrence and survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: After surgical treatment, 3,121 women with operable breast cancer and involved lymph nodes were randomly assigned to receive a combination of cyclophosphamide (C), 600 mg/m(2), with one of three doses of doxorubicin (A), 60, 75, or 90 mg/m(2), for four cycles followed by either no further therapy or four cycles of paclitaxel at 175 mg/m(2). Tamoxifen was given to 94% of patients with hormone receptor-positive tumors. RESULTS: There was no evidence of a doxorubicin dose effect. At 5 years, disease-free survival was 69%, 66%, and 67% for patients randomly assigned to 60, 75, and 90 mg/m(2), respectively. The hazard reductions from adding paclitaxel to CA were 17% for recurrence (adjusted Wald chi(2) P =.0023; unadjusted Wilcoxon P =.0011) and 18% for death (adjusted P =.0064; unadjusted P =.0098). At 5 years, the disease-free survival (+/- SE) was 65% (+/- 1) and 70% (+/- 1), and overall survival was 77% (+/- 1) and 80% (+/- 1) after CA alone or CA plus paclitaxel, respectively. The effects of adding paclitaxel were not significantly different in subsets defined by the protocol, but in an unplanned subset analysis, the hazard ratio of CA plus paclitaxel versus CA alone was 0.72 (95% confidence interval, 0.59 to 0.86) for those with estrogen receptor-negative tumors and only 0.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 1.07) for patients with estrogen receptor-positive tumors, almost all of whom received adjuvant tamoxifen. The additional toxicity from adding four cycles of paclitaxel was generally modest. CONCLUSION: The addition of four cycles of paclitaxel after the completion of a standard course of CA improves the disease-free and overall survival of patients with early breast cancer.

American Society of Clinical Oncology Provisional Clinical Opinion: Testing for <i>KRAS</i> Gene Mutations in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma to Predict Response to Anti–Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Monoclonal Antibody Therapy
Carmen J. Allegra, J. Milburn Jessup, Mark R. Somerfield et al.|Journal of Clinical Oncology|2009
Cited by 1.2k

PURPOSE: An American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) provisional clinical opinion (PCO), offers timely clinical direction to ASCO's oncologists following publication or presentation of potentially practice-changing data from major studies. This PCO addresses the utility of KRAS gene mutation testing in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma to predict response to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) monoclonal antibody (MoAb) therapy with cetuximab or panitumumab (see Note). CLINICAL CONTEXT: Recent results from phase II and III clinical trials demonstrate that patients with metastatic colorectal cancer benefit from therapy with monoclonal antibodies directed against the EGFR, when used either as monotherapy or combined with chemotherapy. Retrospective subset analyses of the data from these trials strongly suggest that patients who have KRAS mutations detected in codon 12 or 13 do not benefit from this therapy. RECENT DATA: Five randomized controlled trials of cetuximab or panitumumab have evaluated outcomes for patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma in relation to KRAS mutational status as no mutation detected (wild type) or abnormal (mutated). Another five single-arm studies have retrospectively evaluated tumor response according to KRAS status. PROVISIONAL CLINICAL OPINION: Based on systematic reviews of the relevant literature, all patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma who are candidates for anti-EGFR antibody therapy should have their tumor tested for KRAS mutations in a CLIA-accredited laboratory. If KRAS mutation in codon 12 or 13 is detected, then patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma should not receive anti-EGFR antibody therapy as part of their treatment. NOTE: ASCO's provisional clinical opinions (PCOs) reflect expert consensus based on clinical evidence and literature available at the time they are written, and are intended to assist physicians in clinical decision-making and identify questions and settings for further research. Due to the rapid flow of scientific information in oncology, new evidence may have emerged since the time a PCO was submitted for publication. PCOs are not continually updated and may not reflect the most recent evidence. PCOs cannot account for individual variation among patients, and cannot be considered inclusive of all proper methods of care or exclusive of other treatments. It is the responsibility of the treating physician or other health care provider, relying on independent experience and knowledge of the patient, to determine the best course of treatment for the patient. Accordingly, adherence to any PCO is voluntary, with the ultimate determination regarding its application to be made by the physician in light of each patient's individual circumstances. ASCO PCOs describe the use of procedures and therapies in clinical practice and cannot be assumed to apply to the use of these interventions in the context of clinical trials. ASCO assumes no responsibility for any injury or damage to persons or property arising out of or related to any use of ASCO's PCOs, or for any errors or omissions.

A Randomized Trial of Aspirin to Prevent Colorectal Adenomas in Patients with Previous Colorectal Cancer
Robert S. Sandler, Susan Halabi, John A. Baron et al.|New England Journal of Medicine|2003
Cited by 1.1k

BACKGROUND: Experimental studies in animals and observational studies in humans suggest that regular aspirin use may decrease the risk of colorectal adenomas, the precursors to most colorectal cancers. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial to determine the effect of aspirin on the incidence of colorectal adenomas. We randomly assigned 635 patients with previous colorectal cancer to receive either 325 mg of aspirin per day or placebo. We determined the proportion of patients with adenomas, the number of recurrent adenomas, and the time to the development of adenoma between randomization and subsequent colonoscopic examinations. Relative risks were adjusted for age, sex, cancer stage, the number of colonoscopic examinations, and the time to a first colonoscopy. The study was terminated early by an independent data and safety monitoring board when statistically significant results were reported during a planned interim analysis. RESULTS: A total of 517 randomized patients had at least one colonoscopic examination a median of 12.8 months after randomization. One or more adenomas were found in 17 percent of patients in the aspirin group and 27 percent of patients in the placebo group (P=0.004). The mean (+/-SD) number of adenomas was lower in the aspirin group than the placebo group (0.30+/-0.87 vs. 0.49+/-0.99, P=0.003 by the Wilcoxon test). The adjusted relative risk of any recurrent adenoma in the aspirin group, as compared with the placebo group, was 0.65 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.46 to 0.91). The time to the detection of a first adenoma was longer in the aspirin group than in the placebo group (hazard ratio for the detection of a new polyp, 0.64; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.43 to 0.94; P=0.022). CONCLUSIONS: Daily use of aspirin is associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of colorectal adenomas in patients with previous colorectal cancer.