BACKGROUND: The clinicopathologic characteristics, acquired resistance patterns, and outcomes among patients with atypical EGFR mutations and HER2 alterations remain underexplored. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A single-center retrospective review was conducted. Oncogenes assessed include typical EGFR (t-EGFR; exon 19 del and L858R), atypical EGFR (a-EGFR; G719X, exon 20, L861Q), HER2 (exon 19, exon 20, amplifications), gene fusions (ALK, ROS1, RET), RAS (KRAS, NRAS), and RAF (BRAF V600E). Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), disease control rate, and objective response rate (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1) were collected. RESULTS: Among 570 patients, we found 55 a-EGFR mutations (13 G719X, 38 exon 20, 4 L861Q) and 31 HER2 alterations (2 exon 19 mutations, 27 exon 20 insertions, 2 amplifications). Patients with EGFR and HER2 alterations had increased lung and bone metastases relative to patients with gene fusions, RAS/RAF mutations, and no identified driver oncogenes (P < .001). Patients with EGFR exon 20 insertions had a median PFS to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) of 5 months and an OS of 16 months-significantly worse than exon 19 del and L858R (Bonferroni correction; P < .001), but not G719X or L861Q. Relative to t-EGFR mutations, T790M and MET amplification occurred less frequently as acquired resistance mechanisms among a-EGFR samples (P < .001). Ten patients with a-EGFR mutations and HER2 alterations received single-agent immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with no radiographic responses and a median PFS of 2 months. CONCLUSION: EGFR and HER2-mutated NSCLC have a high rate of synchronous lung and bone metastases. Patients with a-EGFR mutations have inferior responses to EGFR-directed therapies with lower rates of acquired T790M and MET amplification. Responses to ICIs are uniformly poor. Novel therapeutic approaches are needed.
BACKGROUND: The clinicopathologic characteristics, acquired resistance patterns, and outcomes among patients with atypical EGFR mutations and HER2 alterations remain underexplored. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A single-center retrospective review was conducted. Oncogenes assessed include typical EGFR (t-EGFR; exon 19 del and L858R), atypical EGFR (a-EGFR; G719X, exon 20, L861Q), HER2 (exon 19, exon 20, amplifications), gene fusions (ALK, ROS1, RET), RAS (KRAS, NRAS), and RAF (BRAFV600E). Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), disease control rate, and objective response rate (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1) were collected. RESULTS: Among 570 patients, we found 55 a-EGFR mutations (13 G719X, 38 exon 20, 4 L861Q) and 31 HER2 alterations (2 exon 19 mutations, 27 exon 20 insertions, 2 amplifications). Patients with EGFR and HER2 alterations had increased lung and bone metastases relative to patients with gene fusions, RAS/RAF mutations, and no identified driver oncogenes (P < .001). Patients with EGFR exon 20 insertions had a median PFS to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) of 5 months and an OS of 16 months-significantly worse than exon 19 del and L858R (Bonferroni correction; P < .001), but not G719X or L861Q. Relative to t-EGFR mutations, T790M and MET amplification occurred less frequently as acquired resistance mechanisms among a-EGFR samples (P < .001). Ten patients with a-EGFR mutations and HER2 alterations received single-agent immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with no radiographic responses and a median PFS of 2 months. CONCLUSION:EGFR and HER2-mutated NSCLC have a high rate of synchronous lung and bone metastases. Patients with a-EGFR mutations have inferior responses to EGFR-directed therapies with lower rates of acquired T790M and MET amplification. Responses to ICIs are uniformly poor. Novel therapeutic approaches are needed.
Authors: Bob T Li; Dara S Ross; Dara L Aisner; Jamie E Chaft; Meier Hsu; Severine L Kako; Mark G Kris; Marileila Varella-Garcia; Maria E Arcila Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2015-12-24 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: Pasi A Jänne; Sai-Hong I Ou; Dong-Wan Kim; Geoffrey R Oxnard; Renato Martins; Mark G Kris; Frank Dunphy; Makoto Nishio; Joseph O'Connell; Cloud Paweletz; Ian Taylor; Hui Zhang; Zelanna Goldberg; Tony Mok Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2014-11-05 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: William Pao; Vincent Miller; Maureen Zakowski; Jennifer Doherty; Katerina Politi; Inderpal Sarkaria; Bhuvanesh Singh; Robert Heelan; Valerie Rusch; Lucinda Fulton; Elaine Mardis; Doris Kupfer; Richard Wilson; Mark Kris; Harold Varmus Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2004-08-25 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: J Guillermo Paez; Pasi A Jänne; Jeffrey C Lee; Sean Tracy; Heidi Greulich; Stacey Gabriel; Paula Herman; Frederic J Kaye; Neal Lindeman; Titus J Boggon; Katsuhiko Naoki; Hidefumi Sasaki; Yoshitaka Fujii; Michael J Eck; William R Sellers; Bruce E Johnson; Matthew Meyerson Journal: Science Date: 2004-04-29 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: David Jackman; William Pao; Gregory J Riely; Jeffrey A Engelman; Mark G Kris; Pasi A Jänne; Thomas Lynch; Bruce E Johnson; Vincent A Miller Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-11-30 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: J Mazières; F Barlesi; T Filleron; B Besse; I Monnet; M Beau-Faller; S Peters; E Dansin; M Früh; M Pless; R Rosell; M Wislez; P Fournel; V Westeel; F Cappuzzo; A Cortot; D Moro-Sibilot; J Milia; O Gautschi Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2015-11-23 Impact factor: 32.976