Lisa M Hess1, Yimei Han2, Yajun Emily Zhu2, Naleen Raj Bhandari2, Anthony Sireci3. 1. Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, 46254, USA. Hess_lisa_m@lilly.com. 2. Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, 46254, USA. 3. Loxo Oncology at Lilly, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company, Stamford, CT, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Contradictory and limited data are available about the presentation and outcomes of patients with RET-fusion positive metastatic NSCLC as compared to patients without RET fusions. This observational study utilizing a linked electronic health records (EHR) database to genomics testing results was designed to compare characteristics, tumor response, progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) outcomes by RET fusion status among patients with metastatic NSCLC treated with standard therapies. METHODS: Adult patients with metastatic NSCLC with linked EHR and genomics data were eligible who received systemic anti-cancer therapy on or after January 1, 2011. Adjusted, using all available baseline covariates, and unadjusted analyses were conducted to compare tumor response, PFS and OS between patients with RET-fusion positive and RET-fusion negative disease as detected by next-generation sequencing. Tumor response outcomes were analysed using Fisher's exact test, and time-to-event analyses were conducted using Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: There were 5807 eligible patients identified (RET+ cohort, N = 46; RET- cohort, N = 5761). Patients with RET fusions were younger, more likely to have non-squamous disease and be non-smokers and had better performance status (all p < 0.01). In unadjusted analyses, there were no significant differences in tumor response (p = 0.17) or PFS (p = 0.06) but OS was significantly different by RET status (hazard ratio, HR = 1.91, 95% CI:1.22-3.0, p = 0.005). There were no statistically significant differences by RET fusion status in adjusted analyses of either PFS or OS (PFS HR = 1.24, 95% CI:0.86-1.78, p = 0.25; OS HR = 1.52, 95% CI: 0.95-2.43, p = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with RET fusions have different baseline characteristics that contribute to favorable OS in unadjusted analysis. However, after adjusting for baseline covariates, there were no significant differences in either OS or PFS by RET status among patients treated with standard therapy prior to the availability of selective RET inhibitors.
BACKGROUND: Contradictory and limited data are available about the presentation and outcomes of patients with RET-fusion positive metastatic NSCLC as compared to patients without RET fusions. This observational study utilizing a linked electronic health records (EHR) database to genomics testing results was designed to compare characteristics, tumor response, progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) outcomes by RET fusion status among patients with metastatic NSCLC treated with standard therapies. METHODS: Adult patients with metastatic NSCLC with linked EHR and genomics data were eligible who received systemic anti-cancer therapy on or after January 1, 2011. Adjusted, using all available baseline covariates, and unadjusted analyses were conducted to compare tumor response, PFS and OS between patients with RET-fusion positive and RET-fusion negative disease as detected by next-generation sequencing. Tumor response outcomes were analysed using Fisher's exact test, and time-to-event analyses were conducted using Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: There were 5807 eligible patients identified (RET+ cohort, N = 46; RET- cohort, N = 5761). Patients with RET fusions were younger, more likely to have non-squamous disease and be non-smokers and had better performance status (all p < 0.01). In unadjusted analyses, there were no significant differences in tumor response (p = 0.17) or PFS (p = 0.06) but OS was significantly different by RET status (hazard ratio, HR = 1.91, 95% CI:1.22-3.0, p = 0.005). There were no statistically significant differences by RET fusion status in adjusted analyses of either PFS or OS (PFS HR = 1.24, 95% CI:0.86-1.78, p = 0.25; OS HR = 1.52, 95% CI: 0.95-2.43, p = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS:Patients with RET fusions have different baseline characteristics that contribute to favorable OS in unadjusted analysis. However, after adjusting for baseline covariates, there were no significant differences in either OS or PFS by RET status among patients treated with standard therapy prior to the availability of selective RET inhibitors.
Authors: Yoshiyuki Suehara; Maria Arcila; Lu Wang; Adnan Hasanovic; Daphne Ang; Tatsuo Ito; Yuki Kimura; Alexander Drilon; Udayan Guha; Valerie Rusch; Mark G Kris; Maureen F Zakowski; Naiyer Rizvi; Raya Khanin; Marc Ladanyi Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2012-10-10 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Alice T Shaw; Beow Y Yeap; Mari Mino-Kenudson; Subba R Digumarthy; Daniel B Costa; Rebecca S Heist; Benjamin Solomon; Hannah Stubbs; Sonal Admane; Ultan McDermott; Jeffrey Settleman; Susumu Kobayashi; Eugene J Mark; Scott J Rodig; Lucian R Chirieac; Eunice L Kwak; Thomas J Lynch; A John Iafrate Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-08-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Alexander Drilon; Geoffrey R Oxnard; Daniel S W Tan; Herbert H F Loong; Melissa Johnson; Justin Gainor; Caroline E McCoach; Oliver Gautschi; Benjamin Besse; Byoung C Cho; Nir Peled; Jared Weiss; Yu-Jung Kim; Yuichiro Ohe; Makoto Nishio; Keunchil Park; Jyoti Patel; Takashi Seto; Tomohiro Sakamoto; Ezra Rosen; Manisha H Shah; Fabrice Barlesi; Philippe A Cassier; Lyudmila Bazhenova; Filippo De Braud; Elena Garralda; Vamsidhar Velcheti; Miyako Satouchi; Kadoaki Ohashi; Nathan A Pennell; Karen L Reckamp; Grace K Dy; Jürgen Wolf; Benjamin Solomon; Gerald Falchook; Kevin Ebata; Michele Nguyen; Binoj Nair; Edward Y Zhu; Luxi Yang; Xin Huang; Elizabeth Olek; S Michael Rothenberg; Koichi Goto; Vivek Subbiah Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2020-08-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Sanjay Popat; Stephen V Liu; Nicolas Scheuer; Grace G Hsu; Alexandre Lockhart; Sreeram V Ramagopalan; Frank Griesinger; Vivek Subbiah Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2022-06-17 Impact factor: 17.694
Authors: Oliver Illini; Maximilian Johannes Hochmair; Hannah Fabikan; Christoph Weinlinger; Amanda Tufman; Aurélie Swalduz; Kristina Lamberg; Sayed M S Hashemi; Florian Huemer; Anders Vikström; Martin Wermke; Gudrun Absenger; Alfredo Addeo; Shantanu Banerji; Antonio Calles; Stephen Clarke; Massimo Di Maio; Alice Durand; Michaël Duruisseaux; Malinda Itchins; Okko-Sakari Kääränien; Florian Krenn; Eckart Laack; Adrianus Johannes de Langen; Katja Mohorcic; Georg Pall; Antonio Passaro; Gerald Prager; Achim Rittmeyer; Jeffrey Rothenstein; Michael Schumacher; Ewald Wöll; Arschang Valipour Journal: Ther Adv Med Oncol Date: 2021-06-11 Impact factor: 8.168