Search

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is one of the most common malignant tumors. In this study, we develop a clinically useful computational pathology platform for NSCLC that can be a foundation for multiple downstream applications and provide immediate value for patient care optimization and individualization. We train the primary multi-class tissue segmentation algorithm on a substantial, high-quality, manually annotated dataset of whole-slide images with lung adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinomas. We investigate two downstream applications. NSCLC subtyping algorithm is trained and validated using a large, multi-institutional (n = 6), multi-scanner (n = 5), international cohort of NSCLC cases (slides/patients 4,097/1,527). Moreover, we develop four AI-derived, fully explainable, quantitative, prognostic parameters (based on tertiary lymphoid structure and necrosis assessment) and validate them for different clinical endpoints. The computational platform enables the high-precision, quantitative analysis of H&E-stained slides. The developed prognostic parameters facilitate robust and independent risk stratification of patients with NSCLC., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests The authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: MET amplification is a common resistance mechanism to EGFR inhibition in EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Several trials showed encouraging results with combined EGFR and MET inhibition (EGFRi/METi). However, MET amplification has been inconsistently defined and frequently included both polysomy and true amplification., Methods: This is a multicenter, real-world analysis in patients with disease progression on EGFR inhibition and MET copy number gain (CNG), defined as either true amplification (MET to centromere of chromosome 7 ratio [MET-CEP7] ≥ 2) or polysomy (gene copy number ≥ 5, MET-CEP7 < 2)., Results: A total of 43 patients with MET CNG were included, 42 of whom were detected by FISH. Twenty-three, 7, and 14 received EGFRi/METi, METi, and SoC, respectively. Patients in the EGFRi/METi cohort exhibited a superior real-world clinical benefit rate, defined as stable disease or better, of 82% (95% confidence interval [CI], 60-95) compared to METi (29%, 4-71) and SoC (50%, 23-77). Median real-world progression-free survival was longer with EGFRi/METi with 9.8 vs. 4.3 months with METi (hazard ratio [HR], 0.19, 95% CI, 0.06-0.57) and 3.7 months with SoC (0.41, 0.18-0.91), respectively. Overall survival was numerically improved. Interaction analysis with treatment and type of CNG (amplification vs. polysomy) suggests that differences were exclusively driven by MET-amplified patients receiving EGFRi/METi (HR for OS, 0.09, 0.01-0.54)., Conclusion: In this real-world study, EGFRi/METi showed clinical benefit over METi and SoC. Future studies should focus on the differential impact of the type of MET CNG with a focus on true MET amplification as predictor of response., Competing Interests: Disclosure F. A. received support for attending meetings and speaker's honoraria from AstraZeneca, and consultant fees from IQVIA. P. C. received research funding from AstraZeneca, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, Novartis, Roche, and Takeda, speaker's honoraria from AstraZeneca, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Roche, Pfizer, Thermo Fisher, and Takeda, support for attending meetings from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, Gilead, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda, and personal fees for participating to advisory boards from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Pfizer, Novartis, MSD, Takeda and Roche, all outside the submitted work. H.-D. H. received personal fees for participating to advisory boards from Amgen, speaker's honoraria from Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Bristol-Myers Squibb. C. F. W. received personal fees for participating to advisory boards from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai, Lilly, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda, consultancy fees from Mylan/Viatris, Alvotech, Roche, support for attending meetings from Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Lilly. A. Ri. received speaker's honoraria and consulting fees from Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Lilly, GSK, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech. H. Z. received support for attending meetings from Janssen, speaker's honoraria from Pierre Fabre, and Roche. A. L. received support for attending meetings from Abbvie. D. K.-G. received consultant fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, MSD, Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GSK, Novartis, Takeda, Sanofi, and Janssen, support for attending meetings from Takeda, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Janssen. R. B. received honoraries for lectures and advisory boards for AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Illumina, Janssen, Lilly, Merck-Serono, MSD, Novartis, Qiagen, Pfizer, Roche, Targos MP Inc. R.B. is a Co-Founder and Co-Owner of Targos Inc / Kassel (previous); Gnothis Inc / Stockholm (current); Timer Therapeutics Inc / Fulda & Freiburg (current). M. D. received personal fees for participating in advisory boards from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Diaceutics, Biocartis, Sophia Genetics, and ThermoFisher. F. C. A. has received research grants from Novartis, support for attending meetings and/or travel from Amgen, and consultant fees from IQVIA. S. H. has received research grants from Novartis and travel support from BeiGene. J. A. S. received personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Amgen, LEO pharma, Novartis, and Takeda. J. W. received speaker's honoraria and personal fees for participating in advisory boards from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Blueprint, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, Ignyta, Janssen, Lilly, Loxo, Merck, Mirati, MSD, Novartis, Nuvalent, Pfizer, Roche, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, and Turning Point and received institutional research grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca. M. S. received research grants from AstraZeneca, consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Novartis, Lilly, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, Amgen, Takeda, Johnson, Merck-Serono, and GSK, and speaker's honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Novartis, Lilly, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, Amgen, Takeda, Johnson, CureVac, BioNTech, Merck-Serono, GSK, Daiichi, and Pfizer. S. M. has received research grants from Novartis and Pfizer, personal fees from Eli Lilly, Janssen, and Astra Zeneca as well as support for attending meetings and/or travel from Eli Lilly, and Janssen. A. S. has received speaker's honoraria from Agilent, Aignostics, Amgen, Astellas, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, BMS, Eli Lilly, Illumina, Incyte, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Qlucore, Roche, Seagen, Servier, Takeda, and Thermo Fisher, and institutional research grants from Bayer, BMS, Chugai, and Incyte. All other authors declared no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In 2019, we reported the first efficacy and safety analysis of EUCROSS, a phase II trial investigating crizotinib in ROS1 fusion-positive lung cancer. At that time, overall survival (OS) was immature and the effect of crizotinib on intracranial disease control remained unclear. Here, we present the final analysis of OS, systemic and intracranial activity, and the impact of co-occurring aberrations., Materials and Methods: EUCROSS was a prospective, single-arm, phase II trial. The primary endpoint was best overall response rate (ORR) using RECIST 1.1. Secondary and exploratory endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), OS, and efficacy in pre-defined subgroups., Results: Median OS of the intention-to-treat population (N = 34) was 54.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 20.3 months-not reached (NR); median follow-up 81.4 months] and median all-cause PFS of the response-evaluable population (N = 30) was 19.4 months (95% CI 10.1-32.2 months). Time on treatment was significantly correlated with OS (R = 0.82; P < 0.0001). Patients with co-occurring TP53 aberrations (28%) had a significantly shorter OS [hazard ratio (HR) 11; 95% CI 2.0-56.0; P = 0.006] and all-cause PFS (HR 4.2; 95% CI 1.2-15; P = 0.025). Patients with central nervous system (CNS) involvement at baseline (N = 6; 20%) had a numerically shorter median OS and all-cause PFS. Median intracranial PFS was 32.2 months (95% CI 23.7 months-NR) and the rate of isolated CNS progression was 24%., Conclusions: Our final analysis proves the efficacy of crizotinib in ROS1-positive lung cancer, but also highlights the devastating impact of TP53 mutations on survival and treatment efficacy. Additionally, our data show that CNS disease control is durable and the risk of CNS progression while on crizotinib treatment is low., Competing Interests: Disclosures SM reports research grants from Novartis and Pfizer, personal fees from Eli Lilly, Janssen, and AstraZeneca as well as support for attending meetings and/or travel from Eli Lilly and Janssen. JS reports personal fees from Pfizer, Janssen, Merck Sharp Dohme, Lilly, Boehringer-Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Amgen, LEO Pharma, Novartis, Takeda, and Sanofi as well as support for meetings and/or travels from AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Lilly. EF reports personal fees from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beigene, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Medical Trends, Medscape, Merck-Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Peervoice, Peptomyc, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Takeda, Turning Point Pharmaceuticals, and Touch Oncology as well as support for attending meetings and/or travel from AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Roche. CG reports personal fees from Roche, Sanofi, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Lilly, Takeda, Novartis, AstraZeneca, and Pfizer. JC reports grants from Pfizer, Roche, and Bristol-Myers Squibb, personal fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Roche, Eli Lilly, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Takeda, Janssen, Sanofi, and Pfizer, as well as support for attending meetings and/or travel from Merck Sharp Dohme. JF reports personal fees from AstraZeneca. EC i C reports personal fees from Pfizer. RNF reports a research grant from Bristol-Myers Squibb and personal fees from Janssen. AI reports personal fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Sanofi, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda as well as support for attending meetings and/or travel from Roche and Pfizer. LN reports research grants from Novartis, Pfizer, Janssen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Amgen, Siemens, and Dracen as well as personal fees from Pfizer, Janssen, AstraZeneca, and Roche. MR reports personal fees as well as support for attending meetings and/or travel from AstraZeneca, Amgen, Beigene, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mirati, Biontech, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Roche, and Samsung Biopis. RR reports personal fees from Novartis and Janssen. DS reports personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Roche, Healthcare Consulting Cologne, and AbbVie as well as support for attending meetings and/or travel from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Roche, and AbbVie. MS reports research grants from Amgen, Dracen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Siemens Healthineers, and Takeda, personal fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Siemens Healthineers, and Takeda as well as support for attending meetings and/or travel from Janssen and Pfizer. MP reports research grants from Pfizer, Roche, and Bristol-Myers Squibb, personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Takeda, Pfizer, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche, and Sanofi as well as support for attending meetings and/or travel from Merck Sharp & Dohme. SM-B reports personal fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Molecular Health, Novartis, Pfizer, Qiagen, QuIP, and DLS. MS reports a research grant from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Roche, Astra Zeneca, Pfizer, BioNTech, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CureVac, Daiichi Sankyo, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Takeda, Janssen, and Amgen as well as support for attending meetings and/or travel from Pfizer and Bristol-Myers Squibb. RB reports personal fees from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Illumina, Janssen, Lilly, Merck-Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Qiagen, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and Targos MP Inc. RB is a co-owner and shareholder of Gnothis Inc. (Stockholm) and TimerTherapeutix (Germany). JW reports research grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer, personal fees and support for attending meetings and/or travel from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Blueprint, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Chugai, Daichi Sankyo, Janssen, Lilly, Loxo, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Nuvalent, Pfizer, Roche, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, and Turning Point Pharmaceuticals. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Introduction: MET fusions have been described only rarely in NSCLC. Thus, data on patient characteristics and treatment response are limited. We here report histopathologic data, patient demographics, and treatment outcome including response to MET tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy in MET fusion-positive NSCLC., Methods: Patients with NSCLC and MET fusions were identified mostly by RNA sequencing within the routine molecular screening program of the national Network Genomic Medicine, Germany., Results: We describe a cohort of nine patients harboring MET fusions. Among these nine patients, two patients had been reported earlier. The overall frequency was 0.29% (95% confidence interval: 0.15-0.55). The tumors were exclusively adenocarcinoma. The cohort was heterogeneous in terms of age, sex, or smoking status. We saw five different fusion partner genes (KIF5B, TRIM4, ST7, PRKAR2B, and CAPZA2) and several different breakpoints. Four patients were treated with a MET TKI leading to two partial responses, one stable disease, and one progressive disease. One patient had a BRAF V600E mutation as acquired resistance mechanism., Conclusions: MET fusions are very rare oncogenic driver events in NSCLC and predominantly seem in adenocarcinomas. They are heterogeneous in terms of fusion partners and breakpoints. Patients with MET fusion can benefit from MET TKI therapy., (Copyright © 2023 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The discovery of frequent 8p11-p12 amplifications in squamous cell lung cancer (SQLC) has fueled hopes that FGFR1, located inside this amplicon, might be a therapeutic target. In a clinical trial, only 11% of patients with 8p11 amplification (detected by FISH) responded to FGFR kinase inhibitor treatment. To understand the mechanism of FGFR1 dependency, we performed deep genomic characterization of 52 SQLCs with 8p11-p12 amplification, including 10 tumors obtained from patients who had been treated with FGFR inhibitors. We discovered somatically altered variants of FGFR1 with deletion of exons 1-8 that resulted from intragenic tail-to-tail rearrangements. These ectodomain-deficient FGFR1 variants (ΔEC-FGFR1) were expressed in the affected tumors and were tumorigenic in both in vitro and in vivo models of lung cancer. Mechanistically, breakage-fusion-bridges were the source of 8p11-p12 amplification, resulting from frequent head-to-head and tail-to-tail rearrangements. Generally, tail-to-tail rearrangements within or in close proximity upstream of FGFR1 were associated with FGFR1 dependency. Thus, the genomic events shaping the architecture of the 8p11-p12 amplicon provide a mechanistic explanation for the emergence of FGFR1-driven SQLC. Specifically, we believe that FGFR1 ectodomain-deficient and FGFR1-centered amplifications caused by tail-to-tail rearrangements are a novel somatic genomic event that might be predictive of therapeutically relevant FGFR1 dependency.

Background: ROS1 fusions are well treatable aberrations in NSCLC. Besides solvent-front mutations (SFM) in resistance to targeted therapy, small-scale ROS1 mutations are largely unknown. We exploratively analyzed the clinical and molecular characteristics of small-scale ROS1 mutations in NSCLC patients without activating ROS1 fusions or SFMs., Methods: Next-generation sequencing was performed on tissue samples from NSCLC patients within the Network Genomic Medicine. Patients with ROS1 fusions and SFMs were excluded. We analyzed clinical characteristics of patients harboring small-scale ROS1-mutations, ROS1- and co-occurring mutations, and their response to systemic therapy., Results: Of 10,396 patients analyzed, 101 (1.0%) patients harbored small-scale ROS1 mutations. Most patients were male (73.3%) and smokers (96.6%). Nearly half of the patients presented with squamous-cell carcinoma (SqCC, 40.4%). Most mutations were transversions (50.5%), and 66% were in the kinase domain. Besides TP53 mutations (65.3%), KRAS (22.8%), EGFR (5.9%), PIK3CA (9.9%) and FGFR1-4 mutations (8.9%) co-occurred. In 10 (9.9%) patients, ROS1 mutation was the only aberration detected. Median overall survival (mOS) differed significantly in patients with or without KRAS co-mutations (9.7 vs 21.5 months, p = 0.02) and in patients treated with or without immune-checkpoint blockade (ICB) during treatment (21.5 vs 4.4 months, p = 0.003)., Conclusion: The cohort's clinical characteristics contrasted ROS1-fused cohorts. Co-occurrence of KRAS mutations led to shortened survival and patients benefited from ICB. Our data does not support the idea of ROS1 small-scale mutations as strong oncogenic drivers in NSCLC, but rather as relevant bystanders altering the efficacy of treatment approaches., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Resistance to MET inhibition occurs inevitably in MET-dependent non-small cell lung cancer and the underlying mechanisms are insufficiently understood. We describe resistance mechanisms in patients with MET exon 14 skipping mutation (METΔ ex14 ), MET amplification, and MET fusion and report treatment outcomes after switching therapy from type I to type II MET inhibitors., Materials and Methods: Pre- and post-treatment biopsies were analysed by NGS (next generation sequencing), digital droplet PCR (polymerase chain reaction), and FISH (fluorescense in situ hybridization). A patient-derived xenograft model was generated in one case., Results: Of 26 patients with MET tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment, eight had paired pre- and post-treatment biopsies (Three with MET amplification, three with METΔ ex14 , two with MET fusions (KIF5B-MET and PRKAR2B-MET).) In six patients, mechanisms of resistance were detected, whereas in two cases, the cause of resistance remained unclear. We found off-target resistance mechanisms in four cases with KRAS mutations and HER2 amplifications appearing. Two patients exhibited second-site MET mutations (p.D1246N and p. Y1248H). Three patients received type I and type II MET tyrosine kinase inhibitors sequentially. In two cases, further progressive disease was seen hereafter. The patient with KIF5B-MET fusion received three different MET inhibitors and showed long-lasting stable disease and a repeated response after switching therapy, respectively., Conclusion: Resistance to MET inhibition is heterogeneous with on- and off-target mechanisms occurring regardless of the initial MET aberration. Switching therapy between different types of kinase inhibitors can lead to repeated responses in cases with second-site mutations. Controlled clinical trials in this setting with larger patient numbers are needed, as evidence to date is limited to preclinical data and case series., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has made a remarkable development in recent decades with respect to its perception. In the late 1990s it was the "problem child" as the main cause of cancer with increasing tendencies, especially in women and with a pronounced stigmatization. It is now the role model as a biologically rational targeted treatment based on molecular dependencies of the tumor with a vast improvement of the traditionally poor survival times. Molecular tumor boards have long followed the NSCLC example in the assessment of targeted treatment approaches for other tumor entities. This review article gives an overview of the current possibilities for targeted treatment of NSCLC, which nowadays are applicable for nearly one third of all patients with NSCLC., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature.)

Introduction: Rebiopsies of non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) are mainly performed to (i) cover the evolution of potentially amenable resistance mechanisms against a targeted therapy, and (ii) to identify new therapeutic targets which were not detected in the initial diagnostic biopsy. Comprehensive systematic analyses evaluating the value of rebiopsies are missing., Methods: Clinical databases from two large comprehensive cancer center networks were queried following prespecified criteria to identify prospectively entered NSCLC cases with at least one rebiopsy at disease progression. Clinicopathological and biomarker findings including multigene sequencing were correlated with clinical outcomes., Results: From a total of 17,477 stage IV NSCLC patients, a cohort of 403 evaluable patients undergoing at least one rebiopsy of a primary tumor or metastasis was retrieved. Changes in biomarker profiles as compared to baseline were observed in 48.9%. In 31.3% of cases, findings of potential therapeutic relevance were revealed, including 18 patients (4.4%) with a targetable marker only detected at rebiopsy. New findings were more frequent (greater than50%) in NSCLC with EGFR/ALK/ROS1 alterations, including mutations of the dominant oncogene, TP53 mutations, and MET or ERBB2 amplifications. Patients undergoing rebiopsy exhibited superior overall survival compared to a control group, irrespective of presence (HR 0.28) or absence (HR 0.20, both p < 0.001) of a therapeutically targetable aberration., Conclusions: Rebiopsies at progression of advanced NSCLC are strongly supported by a high rate of clinically relevant findings. Current clinical practice selects a patient population with exceptional outcomes, which merits further characterization., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Treatment of patients with solid tumors and KRAS mutations remains disappointing. One option is the combined inhibition of pathways involved in RAF-MEK-ERK and PI3K-AKT-mTOR., Methods: Patients with relapsed solid tumors were treated with escalating doses of everolimus (E) 2.5-10.0 mg/d in a 14-day run-in phase followed by combination therapy with sorafenib (S) 800 mg/d from day 15. KRAS mutational status was assessed retrospectively in the escalation phase. Extension phase included KRAS-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) only. Pharmacokinetic analyses were accompanied by pharmacodynamics assessment of E by FDG-PET. Efficacy was assessed by CT scans every 6 weeks of combination., Results: Of 31 evaluable patients, 15 had KRAS mutation, 4 patients were negative for KRAS mutation, and the KRAS status remained unknown in 12 patients. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was not reached. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was defined as 7.5 mg/d E + 800 mg/d S due to toxicities at previous dose level (10 mg/d E + 800 mg/d S) including leucopenia/thrombopenia III° and pneumonia III° occurring after the DLT interval. The metabolic response rate in FDG-PET was 17% on day 5 and 20% on day 14. No patient reached partial response in CT scan. Median progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 3.25 and 5.85 months, respectively., Conclusions: Treatment of patients with relapsed solid tumors with 7.5 mg/d E and 800 mg/d S is safe and feasible. Early metabolic response in FDG-PET was not confirmed in CT scan several weeks later. The combination of S and E is obviously not sufficient to induce durable responses in patients with KRAS-mutant solid tumors., (© 2020 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: MAP2K1 mutations are rare in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and considered to be mutually exclusive from known driver mutations. Activation of the MEK1-cascade is considered pivotal in resistance to targeted therapy approaches, and MAP2K1 K57 N mutation could be linked to resistance in preclinical models. We set out this study to detect MAP2K1 mutations and potentially targetable co-mutations using a molecular multiplex approach., Methods: Between 2012 and 2018, we routinely analyzed 14.512 NSCLC patients with two next-generation sequencing (NGS) panels. In a subset of patients, fluorescence in-situ hybridization was performed to detect rearrangements or amplifications. We assessed clinical parameters and co-occurring mutations and compared treatment outcomes of different forms of systemic therapy., Results: We identified 66 (0.5%) patients with MAP2K1 mutations. Both adenocarcinoma (n = 62) and squamous cell carcinoma (n = 4) histology. The presence of the mutations was linked to smoking, and transversions were more common than transitions. K57 N was the most frequent MAP2K1 mutation (n = 25). Additional mutations were found in 57 patients (86.4%). Mutations of TP53 were detected in 33 patients, followed by KEAP1 mutations in 28.1%. 24 patients (36.4%) had either MAP2K1-only or a co-occurring aberration considered targetable, including EGFR mutations, a BRAF V600E mutation and ROS1 rearrangements. Outcome analyses revealed a trend toward benefit from pemetrexed treatment., Conclusion: Our analysis shows that MAP2K1-mutated NSCLC patients might frequently present with potentially targetable aberrations. Their role in providing resistance in these subtypes and the possible therapeutic opportunities justify further analyses of this rare NSCLC subgroup., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Over the past years, EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) revolutionized treatment response. 1st-generation (reversible) EGFR TKI and later the 2nd -generation irreversible EGFR TKI Afatinib were aimed to improve treatment response. Nevertheless, diverse resistance mechanisms develop within the first year of therapy. Here, we evaluate the prevalence of acquired resistance mechanisms towards reversible and irreversible EGFR TKI., Methods: Rebiopsies of patients after progression to EGFR TKI therapy (> 6 months) were targeted to histological and molecular analysis. Multiplexed targeted sequencing (NGS) was conducted to identify acquired resistance mutations (e.g. EGFR p.T790M). Further, Fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) was applied to investigate the status of bypass mechanisms like, MET or HER2 amplification., Results: One hundred twenty-three rebiopsy samples of patients that underwent first-line EGFR TKI therapy (PFS ≥6 months) were histologically and molecularly profiled upon clinical progression. The EGFR p.T790M mutation is the major mechanism of acquired resistance in patients treated with reversible as well as irreversible EGFR TKI. Nevertheless a statistically significant difference for the acquisition of T790M mutation has been identified: 45% of afatinib- vs 65% of reversible EGFR TKI treated patients developed a T790M mutation (p-value 0.02). Progression free survival (PFS) was comparable in patients treated with irreversible EGFR irrespective of the sensitising primary mutation or the acquisition of p.T790M., Conclusions: The EGFR p.T790M mutation is the most prominent mechanism of resistance to reversible and irreversible EGFR TKI therapy. Nevertheless there is a statistically significant difference of p.T790M acquisition between the two types of TKI, which might be of importance for clinical therapy decision.

Clinical data confirmed that patients with ROS1 rearrangement are sensitive to specific inhibitors. Therefore, reliable detection of ROS1 rearrangements is essential. Several diagnostic techniques are currently available. However, previous studies were hampered by the low number of ROS1-positive samples. Thirty-five samples, including 32 ROS1 fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH)-positive and three ROS1 FISH-negative samples were evaluated by ROS1 chromogenic in situ hybridization, ROS proto-oncogene 1, receptor tyrosine kinase (ROS1) immunohistochemistry (IHC), an Agilent SureSelect XT HS custom panel, the Archer FusionPlex Comprehensive Thyroid and Lung panel, and a custom NanoString fusion panel. Some samples were additionally analyzed with the Illumina TruSight Tumor 170 assay. Eleven samples were ROS1 FISH positive by a break-apart signal pattern. In all 11 samples, a ROS1 fusion was confirmed by at least one other method. The other 21 samples tested ROS1 FISH positive by an isolated 3' green signal pattern. Ten of 21 samples could be confirmed by at least two other methods. The other 11 samples tested negative by ROS1 IHC and at least one other method, indicating a false-positive ROS1 FISH result. Our study found that all ROS1 FISH-positive samples with isolated 3' green signals should be confirmed by another method. When sufficient material is available, extraction-based parallel sequencing approaches for the verification of these cases might be preferable., (Copyright © 2019 American Society for Investigative Pathology and the Association for Molecular Pathology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: ROS1 rearrangements are found in 1% of lung cancer patients. Therapeutic efficacy of crizotinib in this subset has been shown in early phase trials in the United States and East Asia. Here we present data on efficacy and safety of a prospective phase II trial evaluating crizotinib in European ROS1-positive patients (EUCROSS)., Patients and Methods: The trial was a multicenter, single-arm phase II trial (Clinicaltrial.gov identifier: NCT02183870). Key eligibility criteria included patients who were 18 years of age or older with advanced/metastatic lung cancer and centrally confirmed ROS1-rearranged lung cancer (fluorescence-in situ hybridization). Treatment included 250 mg crizotinib twice daily. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1). Key secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, efficacy by independent radiologic review, safety, health-related quality of life, and molecular characterization of tumor tissue., Results: Thirty-four patients received treatment. Four patients were excluded from efficacy analysis. Investigator ORR was 70% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 51-85; 21 of 30 patients) and median PFS was 20.0 months (95% CI: 10.1-not reached). Two patients with ROS1 wild-type sequences assessed by DNA sequencing had progression as best response. CD74-ROS1-positive patients had a trend towards a higher ORR and longer median PFS. TP53-co-mutant patients had a significantly shorter median PFS than wild-type patients (7.0 months, 95% CI: 1.7-20.0 versus 24.1 months, 95% CI: 10.1-not reached; p = 0.022). Treatment-related adverse events were documented in 33 of 34 patients (97%)., Conclusions: Crizotinib is highly effective and safe in patients with ROS1-rearranged lung cancer. ROS1-/TP53-co-aberrant patients had a significantly worse outcome compared to TP53 wild-type patients., (Copyright © 2019 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Although KRAS mutations in NSCLC have been considered mutually exclusive driver mutations for a long time, there is now growing evidence that KRAS-mutated NSCLC represents a genetically heterogeneous subgroup. We sought to determine genetic heterogeneity with respect to cancer-related co-mutations and their correlation with different KRAS mutation subtypes., Methods: Diagnostic samples from 4507 patients with NSCLC were analyzed by next-generation sequencing by using a panel of 14 genes and, in a subset of patients, fluorescence in situ hybridization. Next-generation sequencing with an extended panel of 14 additional genes was performed in 101 patients. Molecular data were correlated with clinical data. Whole-exome sequencing was performed in two patients., Results: We identified 1078 patients with KRAS mutations, of whom 53.5% had at least one additional mutation. Different KRAS mutation subtypes showed different patterns of co-occurring mutations. Besides mutations in tumor protein p53 gene (TP53) (39.4%), serine/threonine kinase 11 gene (STK11) (19.8%), kelch like ECH associated protein 1 gene (KEAP1) (12.9%), and ATM serine/threonine kinase gene (ATM) (11.9%), as well as MNNG HOS Transforming gene (MET) amplifications (15.4%) and erb-b2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 gene (ERBB2) amplifications (13.8%, exclusively in G12C), we found rare co-occurrence of targetable mutations in EGFR (1.2%) and BRAF (1.2%). Whole-exome sequencing of two patients with co-occurring phosphatidylinositol-4,5-bisphosphate 3-kinase catalytic subunit alpha gene (PIK3CA) mutation revealed clonality of mutated KRAS in one patient and subclonality in the second, suggesting different evolutionary backgrounds., Conclusion: KRAS-mutated NSCLC represents a genetically heterogeneous subgroup with a high frequency of co-occurring mutations in cancer-associated pathways, partly associated with distinct KRAS mutation subtypes. This diversity might have implications for understanding the variability of treatment outcome in KRAS-mutated NSCLC and for future trial design., (Copyright © 2019 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Osimertinib, a third-generation irreversible mutant-selective inhibitor of EGFR kinase activity was clinically evaluated in the AURA trials, where it showed high clinical efficacy and a favorable toxicity profile in patients with acquired exon 20-EGFR pT790M mutation. We provide the clinical data of the German expanded access program that further characterizes the efficacy and safety of osimertinib in a heterogeneous patient population outside clinical trials., Methods: We performed a retrospective data analysis on patients who were included into the German osimertinib EAP., Results: Of 81 patients enrolled, 51 patients (62.9%) with sufficient case report form data were available for efficacy and safety analysis. Unconfirmed overall response rate was 80.0% with 2 patients (3.9%) achieving a complete remission and 37 patients (72.5%) having a partial remission. Disease control rate was 95.9% and only two patients showed refractory disease. Disease control rate did not correlate with clinical characteristics and was independent of number as well as type of the previous therapy line(s). Estimated progression-free survival was 10.1 months (95% CI 9.2-11.0 months). Osimertinib showed a favorable toxicity profile with no dose reductions in our observation period, even in patients with low performance status. Median survival from first diagnosis to data cut-off was 47.3 months (95% CI 43.3-51.9 months). Repeated tissue/liquid biopsy of three patients in our cohort who showed disease progression revealed an amplification of MET., Conclusions: We confirm safety and efficacy of osimertinib with high response rates among all subgroups, including patients with poor performance status and multiple prior therapy lines. Amplification of MET might mediate acquired resistance to osimertinib.

Background: We analyzed whether co-occurring mutations influence the outcome of systemic therapy in ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Patients and Methods: ALK-rearranged stage IIIB/IV NSCLC patients were analyzed with next-generation sequencing and fluorescence in situ hybridization analyses on a centralized diagnostic platform. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were determined in the total cohort and in treatment-related sub-cohorts. Cox regression analyses were carried out to exclude confounders., Results: Among 216 patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC, the frequency of pathogenic TP53 mutations was 23.8%, while other co-occurring mutations were rare events. In ALK/TP53 co-mutated patients, median PFS and OS were significantly lower compared with TP53 wildtype patients [PFS 3.9 months (95% CI: 2.4-5.6) versus 10.3 months (95% CI: 8.6-12.0), P < 0.001; OS 15.0 months (95% CI: 5.0-24.9) versus 50.0 months (95% CI: 22.9-77.1), P = 0.002]. This difference was confirmed in all treatment-related subgroups including chemotherapy only [PFS first-line chemotherapy 2.6 months (95% CI: 1.3-4.1) versus 6.2 months (95% CI: 1.8-10.5), P = 0.021; OS 2.0 months (95% CI: 0.0-4.6) versus 9.0 months (95% CI: 6.1-11.9), P = 0.035], crizotinib plus chemotherapy [PFS crizotinib 5.0 months (95% CI: 2.9-7.2) versus 14.0 months (95% CI: 8.0-20.1), P < 0.001; OS 17.0 months (95% CI: 6.7-27.3) versus not reached, P = 0.049] and crizotinib followed by next-generation ALK-inhibitor [PFS next-generation inhibitor 5.4 months (95% CI: 0.1-10.7) versus 9.9 months (95% CI: 6.4-13.5), P = 0.039; OS 7.0 months versus 50.0 months (95% CI: not reached), P = 0.001)., Conclusions: In ALK-rearranged NSCLC co-occurring TP53 mutations predict an unfavorable outcome of systemic therapy. Our observations encourage future research to understand the underlying molecular mechanisms and to improve treatment outcome of the ALK/TP53 co-mutated subgroup.

Purpose: KEAP1 and NFE2L2 mutations are associated with impaired prognosis in a variety of cancers and with squamous cell carcinoma formation in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, little is known about frequency, histology dependence, molecular and clinical presentation as well as response to systemic treatment in NSCLC. Experimental Design: Tumor tissue of 1,391 patients with NSCLC was analyzed using next-generation sequencing (NGS). Clinical and pathologic characteristics, survival, and treatment outcome of patients with KEAP1 or NFE2L2 mutations were assessed. Results: KEAP1 mutations occurred with a frequency of 11.3% ( n = 157) and NFE2L2 mutations with a frequency of 3.5% ( n = 49) in NSCLC patients. In the vast majority of patients, both mutations did not occur simultaneously. KEAP1 mutations were found mainly in adenocarcinoma (AD; 72%), while NFE2L2 mutations were more common in squamous cell carcinoma (LSCC; 59%). KEAP1 mutations were spread over the whole protein, whereas NFE2L2 mutations were clustered in specific hotspot regions. In over 80% of the patients both mutations co-occurred with other cancer-related mutations, among them also targetable aberrations like activating EGFR mutations or MET amplification. Both patient groups showed different patterns of metastases, stage distribution and performance state. No patient with KEAP1 mutation had a response on systemic treatment in first-, second-, or third-line setting. Of NFE2L2 -mutated patients, none responded to second- or third-line therapy. Conclusions: KEAP1 - and NFE2L2 -mutated NSCLC patients represent a highly heterogeneous patient cohort. Both are associated with different histologies and usually are found together with other cancer-related, partly targetable, genetic aberrations. In addition, both markers seem to be predictive for chemotherapy resistance. Clin Cancer Res; 24(13); 3087-96. ©2018 AACR ., (©2018 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose In addition to prospective trials for non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) that are driven by less common genomic alterations, registries provide complementary information on patient response to targeted therapies. Here, we present the results of an international registry of patients with RET-rearranged NSCLCs, providing the largest data set, to our knowledge, on outcomes of RET-directed therapy thus far. Methods A global, multicenter network of thoracic oncologists identified patients with pathologically confirmed NSCLC that harbored a RET rearrangement. Molecular profiling was performed locally by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction, fluorescence in situ hybridization, or next-generation sequencing. Anonymized data-clinical, pathologic, and molecular features-were collected centrally and analyzed by an independent statistician. Best response to RET tyrosine kinase inhibition administered outside of a clinical trial was determined by RECIST v1.1. Results By April 2016, 165 patients with RET-rearranged NSCLC from 29 centers across Europe, Asia, and the United States were accrued. Median age was 61 years (range, 29 to 89 years). The majority of patients were never smokers (63%) with lung adenocarcinomas (98%) and advanced disease (91%). The most frequent rearrangement was KIF5B-RET (72%). Of those patients, 53 received one or more RET tyrosine kinase inhibitors in sequence: cabozantinib (21 patients), vandetanib (11 patients), sunitinib (10 patients), sorafenib (two patients), alectinib (two patients), lenvatinib (two patients), nintedanib (two patients), ponatinib (two patients), and regorafenib (one patient). The rate of any complete or partial response to cabozantinib, vandetanib, and sunitinib was 37%, 18%, and 22%, respectively. Further responses were observed with lenvantinib and nintedanib. Median progression-free survival was 2.3 months (95% CI, 1.6 to 5.0 months), and median overall survival was 6.8 months (95% CI, 3.9 to 14.3 months). Conclusion Available multikinase inhibitors had limited activity in patients with RET-rearranged NSCLC in this retrospective study. Further investigation of the biology of RET-rearranged lung cancers and identification of new targeted therapeutics will be required to improve outcomes for these patients.

Background: Somatic mutations of the PIK3CA gene have been described in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but limited data is available on their biological relevance. This study was performed to characterize PIK3CA-mutated NSCLC clinically and genetically., Patients and Methods: Tumor tissue collected consecutively from 1144 NSCLC patients within a molecular screening network between March 2010 and March 2012 was analyzed for PIK3CA mutations using dideoxy-sequencing and next-generation sequencing (NGS). Clinical, pathological, and genetic characteristics of PIK3CA-mutated patients are described and compared with a control group of PIK3CA-wildtype patients., Results: Among the total cohort of 1144 patients we identified 42 (3.7%) patients with PIK3CA mutations in exon 9 and exon 20. These mutations were found with a higher frequency in sqamous cell carcinoma (8.9%) compared to adenocarcinoma (2.9%, p<0.001). The most common PIK3CA mutation was exon 9 E545K. The majority of patients (57.1%) had additional oncogenic driver aberrations. With the exception of EGFR-mutated patients, non of the genetically defined subgroups in this cohort had a significantly better median overall survival. Further, PIK3CA-mutated patients had a significantly higher incidence of malignancy prior to lung cancer (p<0.001)., Conclusion: PIK3CA-mutated NSCLC represents a clinically and genetically heterogeneous subgroup in adenocarcinomas as well as in squamous cell carcinomas with a higher prevalence of these mutations in sqamous cell carcinoma. PIK3CA mutations have no negative impact on survival after surgery or systemic therapy. However, PIK3CA mutated lung cancer frequently develops in patients with prior malignancies.