A

Andrew M. Lowy

UC San Diego Health System

ORCID: 0000-0002-7106-0735

Publishes on Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research, Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics, Cancer Research and Treatments. 848 papers and 23.9k citations.

848Publications
23.9kTotal Citations

Is this you? Claim your profile.

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

Top publicationsby citations

Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology
Margaret A. Tempero, Mokenge P. Malafa, Mahmoud M. Al-Hawary et al.|Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network|2021
Cited by 1.3kOpen Access

Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death among men and women in the United States. A major challenge in treatment remains patients' advanced disease at diagnosis. The NCCN Guidelines for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma provides recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up for patients with pancreatic cancer. Although survival rates remain relatively unchanged, newer modalities of treatment, including targeted therapies, provide hope for improving patient outcomes. Sections of the manuscript have been updated to be concordant with the most recent update to the guidelines. This manuscript focuses on the available systemic therapy approaches, specifically the treatment options for locally advanced and metastatic disease.

Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma, Version 2.2017, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology
Margaret A. Tempero, Mokenge P. Malafa, Mahmoud M. Al-Hawary et al.|Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network|2017
Cited by 1k

Ductal adenocarcinoma and its variants account for most pancreatic malignancies. High-quality multiphase imaging can help to preoperatively distinguish between patients eligible for resection with curative intent and those with unresectable disease. Systemic therapy is used in the neoadjuvant or adjuvant pancreatic cancer setting, as well as in the management of locally advanced unresectable and metastatic disease. Clinical trials are critical for making progress in treatment of pancreatic cancer. The NCCN Guidelines for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma focus on diagnosis and treatment with systemic therapy, radiation therapy, and surgical resection.

Mutant p53 drives metastasis and overcomes growth arrest/senescence in pancreatic cancer
Jennifer P. Morton, Paul Timpson, Saadia A. Karim et al.|Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences|2009
Cited by 680Open Access

TP53 mutation occurs in 50-75% of human pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDAC) following an initiating activating mutation in the KRAS gene. These p53 mutations frequently result in expression of a stable protein, p53(R175H), rather than complete loss of protein expression. In this study we elucidate the functions of mutant p53 (Trp53(R172H)), compared to knockout p53 (Trp53(fl)), in a mouse model of PDAC. First we find that although Kras(G12D) is one of the major oncogenic drivers of PDAC, most Kras(G12D)-expressing pancreatic cells are selectively lost from the tissue, and those that remain form premalignant lesions. Loss, or mutation, of Trp53 allows retention of the Kras(G12D)-expressing cells and drives rapid progression of these premalignant lesions to PDAC. This progression is consistent with failed growth arrest and/or senescence of premalignant lesions, since a mutant of p53, p53(R172P), which can still induce p21 and cell cycle arrest, is resistant to PDAC formation. Second, we find that despite similar kinetics of primary tumor formation, mutant p53(R172H), as compared with genetic loss of p53, specifically promotes metastasis. Moreover, only mutant p53(R172H)-expressing tumor cells exhibit invasive activity in an in vitro assay. Importantly, in human PDAC, p53 accumulation significantly correlates with lymph node metastasis. In summary, by using 'knock-in' mutations of Trp53 we have identified two critical acquired functions of a stably expressed mutant form of p53 that drive PDAC; first, an escape from Kras(G12D)-induced senescence/growth arrest and second, the promotion of metastasis.

Preoperative and postoperative chemoradiation strategies in patients treated with pancreaticoduodenectomy for adenocarcinoma of the pancreas.
F R Spitz, James L. Abbruzzese, J E Lee et al.|Journal of Clinical Oncology|1997
Cited by 540

PURPOSE: The effects of preoperative versus postoperative fluorouracil (5-FU)-based chemotherapy and irradiation on treatment toxicity, duration of treatment, tumor recurrence, and survival were compared in patients who underwent potentially curative therapy for adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head during a 5-year period. METHODS: From July 1990 to July 1995, 142 patients with localized adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head deemed resectable on the basis of radiographic images were treated with curative intent using a multimodality approach involving either preoperative or postoperative chemoradiation. Patients with biopsy confirmation of adenocarcinoma and a low-density mass in the pancreatic head identified by computed tomography (CT) received preoperative chemoradiation. Patients without a mass on CT or in whom the preoperative biopsy was negative underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy with planned postoperative chemoradiation. Protocol-based preoperative chemoradiation consisted of external-beam irradiation at a dose of 50.4 Gy (standard fractionation; 1.8 Gy/d, 5 d/wk) or 30 Gy (rapid fractionation; 3 Gy/d, 5 d/wk) combined with continuous infusion 5-FU (300 mg/m2/d, 5 d/wk). Postoperative chemoradiation combined 50.4 Gy of external-beam irradiation (standard fractionation) with continuous-infusion 5-FU. RESULTS: No patient who received preoperative chemoradiation experienced a delay in surgery because of chemoradiation toxicity, but six of 25 eligible patients (24%) did not receive postoperative chemoradiation because of delayed recovery after pancreaticoduodenectomy. No significant differences in toxicities from chemoradiation were observed between groups. Patients treated with rapid-fractionation preoperative chemoradiation had a significantly (P < .01) shorter duration of treatment (median, 62.5 days) compared with patients who received postoperative chemoradiation (median, 98.5 days) or standard-fractionation preoperative chemoradiation (median, 91.0 days). At a median followup of 19 months, no significant differences in survival were observed between treatment groups. No patient who received preoperative chemoradiation and pancreaticoduodenectomy experienced a local recurrence; peritoneal (regional) recurrence occurred in 10% of these patients. Local or regional recurrence occurred in 21% of patients who received pancreaticoduodenectomy and postoperative chemoradiation. CONCLUSION: Delivery of preoperative and postoperative chemoradiation in patients who underwent potentially curative pancreaticoduodenectomy for adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head resulted in similar treatment toxicity, patterns of tumor recurrence, and survival. Rapid-fractionation preoperative chemoradiation ensured the delivery of all components of therapy to all eligible patients with a significantly shorter duration of treatment than with standard-fractionation chemoradiation given either before or after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Prolonged recovery after pancreaticoduodenectomy prevents the delivery of postoperative adjuvant chemoradiation in up to one fourth of eligible patients.