Comprehensive assessment of germline pathogenic variant detection in tumor-only sequencing.

BACKGROUND: Tumor-only sequencing, implemented for the identification of somatic variants, is oftentimes used for the detection of actionable germline variants. We sought to determine whether tumor-only sequencing assays are suitable for detection of actionable germline variants, given their importance for the delivery of targeted therapies and risk-reducing measures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The detection of germline variants affecting moderate- and high-penetrance cancer susceptibility genes (CSGs) by tumor-only sequencing was compared to clinical germline testing in 21 333 cancer patients who underwent tumor and germline testing using the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-authorized Memorial Sloan Kettering-Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Targets (MSK-IMPACT) assay. Seven homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), two DNA damage response (DDR) and four mismatch repair (MMR) genes, as well as NF1, RB1 and TP53 were included in the analysis. FDA-authorized and New York State Department of Health-approved sequencing methods for germline, tumor/normal and tumor-only sequencing assays and analytical pipelines were employed. RESULTS: In patients who underwent tumor and germline sequencing, as compared to clinical genetic testing, tumor-only sequencing failed to detect 10.5% of clinically actionable pathogenic germline variants in CSGs, including 18.8%, 12.8% and 7.3% of germline variants in MMR, DDR and HRD genes, respectively. The sensitivity for detection of pathogenic germline variants by tumor-only sequencing was 89.5%. Whilst the vast majority of pathogenic germline exonic single-nucleotide variants (SNVs) and small indels were detected by tumor-only sequencing, large percentages of germline copy number variants, intronic variants and repetitive element insertions were not detected. CONCLUSIONS: Tumor-only sequencing is adequate for the detection of clinically actionable germline variants, particularly for SNVs and small indels; however, a small subset of alterations affecting HRD, DDR and MMR genes may not be detected optimally. Therefore, for high-risk patients with negative tumor-only sequencing results, clinical genetic testing could be considered given the impact of these variants on therapy and genetic counseling.

APOBEC mutagenesis, kataegis, chromothripsis in EGFR-mutant osimertinib-resistant lung adenocarcinomas.

BACKGROUND: Studies of targeted therapy resistance in lung cancer have primarily focused on single-gene alterations. Based on prior work implicating apolipoprotein b mRNA-editing enzyme, catalytic polypeptide-like (APOBEC) mutagenesis in histological transformation of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutant lung cancers, we hypothesized that mutational signature analysis may help elucidate acquired resistance to targeted therapies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: APOBEC mutational signatures derived from an Food and Drug Administration-cleared multigene panel [Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets (MSK-IMPACT)] using the Signature Multivariate Analysis (SigMA) algorithm were validated against the gold standard of mutational signatures derived from whole-exome sequencing. Mutational signatures were decomposed in 3276 unique lung adenocarcinomas (LUADs), including 93 paired osimertinib-naïve and -resistant EGFR-mutant tumors. Associations between APOBEC and mechanisms of resistance to osimertinib were investigated. Whole-genome sequencing was carried out on available EGFR-mutant lung cancer samples (10 paired, 17 unpaired) to investigate large-scale genomic alterations potentially contributing to osimertinib resistance. RESULTS: APOBEC mutational signatures were more frequent in receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK)-driven lung cancers (EGFR, ALK, RET, and ROS1; 25%) compared to LUADs at large (20%, P < 0.001); across all subtypes, APOBEC mutational signatures were enriched in subclonal mutations (P < 0.001). In EGFR-mutant lung cancers, osimertinib-resistant samples more frequently displayed an APOBEC-dominant mutational signature compared to osimertinib-naïve samples (28% versus 14%, P = 0.03). Specifically, mutations detected in osimertinib-resistant tumors but not in pre-treatment samples significantly more frequently displayed an APOBEC-dominant mutational signature (44% versus 23%, P < 0.001). EGFR-mutant samples with APOBEC-dominant signatures had enrichment of large-scale genomic rearrangements (P = 0.01) and kataegis (P = 0.03) in areas of APOBEC mutagenesis. CONCLUSIONS: APOBEC mutational signatures are frequent in RTK-driven LUADs and increase under the selective pressure of osimertinib in EGFR-mutant lung cancer. APOBEC mutational signature enrichment in subclonal mutations, private mutations acquired after osimertinib treatment, and areas of large-scale genomic rearrangements highlights a potentially fundamental role for APOBEC mutagenesis in the development of resistance to targeted therapies, which may be potentially exploited to overcome such resistance.

ESMO recommendations on the standard methods to detect RET fusions and mutations in daily practice and clinical research.

Aberrant activation of RET is a critical driver of growth and proliferation in diverse solid tumours. Multikinase inhibitors (MKIs) showing anti-RET activities have been tested in RET-altered tumours with variable results. The low target specificity with consequent increase in side-effects and off-target toxicities resulting in dose reduction and drug discontinuation are some of the major issues with MKIs. To overcome these issues, new selective RET inhibitors such as pralsetinib (BLU-667) and selpercatinib (LOXO-292) have been developed in clinical trials, with selpercatinib recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The results of these trials showed marked and durable antitumour activity and manageable toxicity profiles in patients with RET-altered tumours. The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Translational Research and Precision Medicine Working Group (TR and PM WG) launched a collaborative project to review the available methods for the detection of RET gene alterations, their potential applications and strategies for the implementation of a rational approach for the detection of RET fusion genes and mutations in human malignancies. We present here recommendations for the routine clinical detection of targetable RET rearrangements and mutations.

Enrichment of kinase fusions in ESR1 wild-type, metastatic breast cancer revealed by a systematic analysis of 4854 patients.

BACKGROUND: Kinase fusions are rare and poorly characterized in breast cancer (BC). We aimed to characterize kinase fusions within a large cohort of advanced BC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 4854 patients with BC were analyzed by Memorial Sloan Kettering-Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets (MSK-IMPACT) targeted DNAseq and MSK-Fusion targeted RNAseq during the study time period. RESULTS: Twenty-seven of 4854 (0.6%) patients harbored fusions: 11 FGFR (five FGFR2, three FGFR3, three FGFR1), five BRAF, four NTRK1, two RET, two ROS1, one ALK, one ERBB2, and one MET. A history of endocrine therapy was present in 15 (56%) of fusion-positive BC; eight of the 15 cases had available pre-treatment samples, of which six were fusion-negative. None of the fusion-positive BC samples harbored ESR1 hotspot mutations. Two patients with acquired LMNA-NTRK1 fusions and metastatic disease received larotrectinib and demonstrated clinical benefit. CONCLUSION: Kinase fusions in BC are extremely rare, and appear to be enriched in hormone-resistant, metastatic carcinomas and mutually exclusive with ESR1 mutations. The present study expands the spectrum of genetic alterations activating mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling that can substitute for ESR1 mutations in this setting. Molecular testing at progression after endocrine therapy should include fusion testing, particularly in the absence of ESR1 hotspot alterations, in an effort to identify additional therapeutic options which may provide substantial clinical benefit.

Clinical and molecular correlates of PD-L1 expression in patients with lung adenocarcinomas.

BACKGROUND: Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression is the only FDA-approved biomarker for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in patients with lung adenocarcinoma, but sensitivity is modest. Understanding the impact of molecular phenotype, clinical characteristics, and tumor features on PD-L1 expression is largely unknown and may improve prediction of response to ICI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We evaluated patients with lung adenocarcinoma for whom PD-L1 testing and targeted next-generation sequencing (using MSK-IMPACT) was performed on the same tissue sample. Clinical and molecular features were compared across PD-L1 subgroups to examine how molecular phenotype associated with tumor PD-L1 expression. In patients treated with anti-PD-(L)1 blockade, we assessed how these interactions impacted efficacy. RESULTS: A total of 1586 patients with lung adenocarcinoma had paired PD-L1 testing and targeted next-generation sequencing. PD-L1 negativity was more common in primary compared to metastatic samples (P < 0.001). The distribution of PD-L1 expression (lymph nodes enriched for PD-L1 high; bones predominantly PD-L1 negative) and predictiveness of PD-L1 expression on ICI response varied by organ. Mutations in KRAS, TP53, and MET significantly associated with PD-L1 high expression (each P < 0.001, Q < 0.001) and EGFR and STK11 mutations associated with PD-L1 negativity (P < 0.001, Q = 0.01; P = 0.001, Q < 0.001, respectively). WNT pathway alterations also associated with PD-L1 negativity (P = 0.005). EGFR and STK11 mutants abrogated the predictive value of PD-L1 expression on ICI response. CONCLUSION: PD-L1 expression and association with ICI response vary across tissue sample sites. Specific molecular features are associated with differential expression of PD-L1 and may impact the predictive capacity of PD-L1 for response to ICIs.

Identifying patients with NTRK fusion cancer.

Due to the efficacy of tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) inhibitor therapy and the recent Food and Drug Administration approval of larotrectinib, it is now clinically important to accurately and efficiently identify patients with neurotrophic TRK (NTRK) fusion-driven cancer. These oncogenic fusions occur when the kinase domain of NTRK1, NTRK2 or NTRK3 fuse with any of a number of N-terminal partners. NTRK fusions are characteristic of a few rare types of cancer, such as secretory carcinoma of the breast or salivary gland and infantile fibrosarcoma, but they are also infrequently seen in some common cancers, such as melanoma, glioma and carcinomas of the thyroid, lung and colon. There are multiple methods for identifying NTRK fusions, including pan-TRK immunohistochemistry, fluorescence in situ hybridisation and sequencing methods, and the advantages and drawbacks of each are reviewed here. While testing algorithms will obviously depend on availability of various testing modalities and economic considerations for each individual laboratory, we propose triaging specimens based on histology and other molecular findings to most efficiently identify tumours harbouring these treatable oncogenic fusions.

Identifying patients with NTRK fusion cancer.

Due to the efficacy of tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) inhibitor therapy and the recent Food and Drug Administration approval of larotrectinib, it is now clinically important to accurately and efficiently identify patients with neurotrophic TRK (NTRK) fusion-driven cancer. These oncogenic fusions occur when the kinase domain of NTRK1, NTRK2 or NTRK3 fuse with any of a number of N-terminal partners. NTRK fusions are characteristic of a few rare types of cancer, such as secretory carcinoma of the breast or salivary gland and infantile fibrosarcoma, but they are also infrequently seen in some common cancers, such as melanoma, glioma and carcinomas of the thyroid, lung and colon. There are multiple methods for identifying NTRK fusions, including pan-TRK immunohistochemistry, fluorescence in situ hybridisation and sequencing methods, and the advantages and drawbacks of each are reviewed here. While testing algorithms will obviously depend on availability of various testing modalities and economic considerations for each individual laboratory, we propose triaging specimens based on histology and other molecular findings to most efficiently identify tumours harbouring these treatable oncogenic fusions.

ESMO recommendations on the standard methods to detect NTRK fusions in daily practice and clinical research.

BACKGROUND: NTRK1, NTRK2 and NTRK3 fusions are present in a plethora of malignancies across different histologies. These fusions represent the most frequent mechanism of oncogenic activation of these receptor tyrosine kinases, and biomarkers for the use of TRK small molecule inhibitors. Given the varying frequency of NTRK1/2/3 fusions, crucial to the administration of NTRK inhibitors is the development of optimal approaches for the detection of human cancers harbouring activating NTRK1/2/3 fusion genes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Experts from several Institutions were recruited by the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Translational Research and Precision Medicine Working Group (TR and PM WG) to review the available methods for the detection of NTRK gene fusions, their potential applications, and strategies for the implementation of a rational approach for the detection of NTRK1/2/3 fusion genes in human malignancies. A consensus on the most reasonable strategy to adopt when screening for NTRK fusions in oncologic patients was sought, and further reviewed and approved by the ESMO TR and PM WG and the ESMO leadership. RESULTS: The main techniques employed for NTRK fusion gene detection include immunohistochemistry, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), RT-PCR, and both RNA-based and DNA-based next generation sequencing (NGS). Each technique has advantages and limitations, and the choice of assays for screening and final diagnosis should also take into account the resources and clinical context. CONCLUSION: In tumours where NTRK fusions are highly recurrent, FISH, RT-PCR or RNA-based sequencing panels can be used as confirmatory techniques, whereas in the scenario of testing an unselected population where NTRK1/2/3 fusions are uncommon, either front-line sequencing (preferentially RNA-sequencing) or screening by immunohistochemistry followed by sequencing of positive cases should be pursued.

Germline-focussed analysis of tumour-only sequencing: recommendations from the ESMO Precision Medicine Working Group.

It is increasingly common in oncology practice to perform tumour sequencing using large cancer panels. For pathogenic sequence variants in cancer susceptibility genes identified on tumour-only sequencing, it is often unclear whether they are of somatic or constitutional (germline) origin. There is wide-spread disparity regarding both the extent to which systematic 'germline-focussed analysis' is carried out upon tumour sequencing data and for which variants follow-up analysis of a germline sample is carried out. Here we present analyses of paired sequencing data from 17 152 cancer samples, in which 1494 pathogenic sequence variants were identified across 65 cancer susceptibility genes. From these analyses, the European Society of Medical Oncology Precision Medicine Working Group Germline Subgroup has generated (i) recommendations regarding germline-focussed analyses of tumour-only sequencing data, (ii) indications for germline follow-up testing and (iii) guidance on patient information-giving and consent.

Ultra-deep next-generation sequencing of plasma cell-free DNA in patients with advanced lung cancers: results from the Actionable Genome Consortium.

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive genotyping using plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) has the potential to obviate the need for some invasive biopsies in cancer patients while also elucidating disease heterogeneity. We sought to develop an ultra-deep plasma next-generation sequencing (NGS) assay for patients with non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLC) that could detect targetable oncogenic drivers and resistance mutations in patients where tissue biopsy failed to identify an actionable alteration. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Plasma was prospectively collected from patients with advanced, progressive NSCLC. We carried out ultra-deep NGS using cfDNA extracted from plasma and matched white blood cells using a hybrid capture panel covering 37 lung cancer-related genes sequenced to 50 000× raw target coverage filtering somatic mutations attributable to clonal hematopoiesis. Clinical sensitivity and specificity for plasma detection of known oncogenic drivers were calculated and compared with tissue genotyping results. Orthogonal ddPCR validation was carried out in a subset of cases. RESULTS: In 127 assessable patients, plasma NGS detected driver mutations with variant allele fractions ranging from 0.14% to 52%. Plasma ddPCR for EGFR or KRAS mutations revealed findings nearly identical to those of plasma NGS in 21 of 22 patients, with high concordance of variant allele fraction (r = 0.98). Blinded to tissue genotype, plasma NGS sensitivity for de novo plasma detection of known oncogenic drivers was 75% (68/91). Specificity of plasma NGS in those who were driver-negative by tissue NGS was 100% (19/19). In 17 patients with tumor tissue deemed insufficient for genotyping, plasma NGS identified four KRAS mutations. In 23 EGFR mutant cases with acquired resistance to targeted therapy, plasma NGS detected potential resistance mechanisms, including EGFR T790M and C797S mutations and ERBB2 amplification. CONCLUSIONS: Ultra-deep plasma NGS with clonal hematopoiesis filtering resulted in de novo detection of targetable oncogenic drivers and resistance mechanisms in patients with NSCLC, including when tissue biopsy was inadequate for genotyping.

EGFR mutation subtypes and response to immune checkpoint blockade treatment in non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although EGFR mutant tumors exhibit low response rates to immune checkpoint blockade overall, some EGFR mutant tumors do respond to these therapies; however, there is a lack of understanding of the characteristics of EGFR mutant lung tumors responsive to immune checkpoint blockade. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed de-identified clinical and molecular data on 171 cases of EGFR mutant lung tumors treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors from the Yale Cancer Center, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, University of California Los Angeles, and Dana Farber Cancer Institute. A separate cohort of 383 EGFR mutant lung cancer cases with sequencing data available from the Yale Cancer Center, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and The Cancer Genome Atlas was compiled to assess the relationship between tumor mutation burden and specific EGFR alterations. RESULTS: Compared with 212 EGFR wild-type lung cancers, outcomes with programmed cell death 1 or programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-(L)1) blockade were worse in patients with lung tumors harboring alterations in exon 19 of EGFR (EGFRΔ19) but similar for EGFRL858R lung tumors. EGFRT790M status and PD-L1 expression did not impact response or survival outcomes to immune checkpoint blockade. PD-L1 expression was similar across EGFR alleles. Lung tumors with EGFRΔ19 alterations harbored a lower tumor mutation burden compared with EGFRL858R lung tumors despite similar smoking history. CONCLUSIONS: EGFR mutant tumors have generally low response to immune checkpoint inhibitors, but outcomes vary by allele. Understanding the heterogeneity of EGFR mutant tumors may be informative for establishing the benefits and uses of PD-(L)1 therapies for patients with this disease.

Clinical and molecular characterization of patients with cancer of unknown primary in the modern era.

BACKGROUND: On the basis of historical data, patients with cancer of unknown primary (CUP) are generally assumed to have a dismal prognosis with overall survival of less than 1 year. Treatment is typically cytotoxic chemotherapy guided by histologic features and the pattern of metastatic spread. The purpose of this study was to provide a clinical and pathologic description of patients with CUP in the modern era, to define the frequency of clinically actionable molecular alterations in this population, to determine how molecular testing can alter therapeutic decisions, and to investigate novel uses of next-generation sequencing in the evaluation and treatment of patients with CUP. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Under Institutional Review Board approval, we identified all CUP patients evaluated at our institution over a recent 2-year period. We documented demographic information, clinical outcomes, pathologic evaluations, next-generation sequencing of available tumor tissue, use of targeted therapies, and clinical trial enrollment. RESULTS: We identified 333 patients with a diagnosis of CUP evaluated at our institution from 1 January 2014 through 30 June 2016. Of these patients, 150 had targeted next-generation sequencing carried out on available tissue. Median overall survival in this cohort was 13 months. Forty-five of 150 (30%) patients had potentially targetable genomic alterations identified by tumor molecular profiling, and 15 of 150 (10%) received targeted therapies. Dominant mutation signatures were identified in 21 of 150 (14%), largely implicating exogenous mutagen exposures such as ultraviolet radiation and tobacco. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CUP represent a heterogeneous population, harboring a variety of potentially targetable alterations. Next-generation sequencing may provide an opportunity for CUP patients to benefit from novel personalized therapies.

Clinical outcomes with pemetrexed-based systemic therapies in RET-rearranged lung cancers.

BACKGROUND: RET rearrangements are targetable, oncogenic lung cancer drivers. While previous series have shown durable clinical benefit with pemetrexed-based therapies in ALK- and ROS1-rearranged lung cancers, the benefits of pemetrexed-based treatments in patients with RET-rearranged lung cancers relative to other genomic subsets have not previously been explored. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of patients with pathologically confirmed stage IIIB/IV lung adenocarcinomas and evidence of a RET, ROS1, or ALK rearrangement, or a KRAS mutation was conducted. Patients were eligible if they received treatment with pemetrexed alone or in combination. The primary outcome of progression-free survival (PFS), and secondary outcomes of overall response rate (ORR, RECIST v1.1), time to progression (TTP), and time to treatment discontinuation were compared between RET-rearranged and groups of ROS1-rearranged, ALK-rearranged, and KRAS-mutant lung cancers. RESULTS: We evaluated 104 patients. Patients with RET-rearranged lung cancers (n = 18) had a median PFS of 19 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 12-not reached (NR)] that was comparable with patients with ROS1- (23 months, 95% CI 14-NR, n = 10) and ALK-rearranged (19 months, 95% CI 15-36, n = 36) lung cancers, and significantly improved compared with patients with KRAS-mutant lung cancers (6 months, 95% CI 5-9, P < 0.001, n = 40). ORR (45%), median TTP (20 months, 95% CI 17-NR), and median time to treatment discontinuation (21 months, 95% CI 6-NR) in patients with RET-rearranged lung cancers were not significantly different compared with patients with ALK- and ROS1-rearranged lung cancers, and improved compared with patients with KRAS-mutant lung cancers. CONCLUSION: Durable benefits with pemetrexed-based therapies in RET-rearranged lung cancers are comparable with ALK- and ROS1-rearranged lung cancers. When selecting therapies for patients with RET-rearranged lung cancers, pemetrexed-containing regimens should be considered.

What hides behind the MASC: clinical response and acquired resistance to entrectinib after ETV6-NTRK3 identification in a mammary analogue secretory carcinoma (MASC).

BACKGROUND: Mammary analogue secretory carcinoma (MASC) is a recently described pathologic entity. We report the case of a patient with an initial diagnosis of salivary acinic cell carcinoma later reclassified as MASC after next-generation sequencing revealed an ETV6-NTRK3 fusion. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This alteration was targeted with the pan-Trk inhibitor entrectinib (Ignyta), which possesses potent in vitro activity against cell lines containing various NTRK1/2/3 fusions. RESULTS: A dramatic and durable response was achieved with entrectinib in this patient, followed by acquired resistance that correlated with the appearance of a novel NTRK3 G623R mutation. Structural modeling predicts that this alteration sterically interferes with drug binding, correlating to decreased sensitivity to drug inhibition observed in cell-based assays. CONCLUSIONS: This first report of clinical activity with TrkC inhibition and the development of acquired resistance in an NTRK3-rearranged cancer emphasize the utility of comprehensive molecular profiling and targeted therapy for rare malignancies (NCT02097810).

Epidermal growth factor receptor exon 20 insertions in advanced lung adenocarcinomas: Clinical outcomes and response to erlotinib.

BACKGROUND: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) exon 20 insertions (exon20ins) represent approximately 10% of EGFR-mutant lung adenocarcinomas, and are associated with resistance to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Clinical outcomes in comparison with patients with sensitizing EGFR mutations are not well established. METHODS: Patients with stage IV lung adenocarcinomas with EGFR exon20ins were identified through routine molecular testing. Clinicopathologic data were collected. Overall survival (OS) was measured from the diagnosis of stage IV disease, and in patients treated with EGFR TKIs, the time to progression (TTP) on erlotinib was measured. RESULTS: One thousand eight hundred and eighty-two patients with stage IV lung adenocarcinomas were identified: 46 patients had EGFR exon20ins (2%), and 258 patients had an EGFR exon 19 deletion (exon19del)/L858R point mutation (14%). Among 11 patients with lung adenocarcinomas with EGFR exon20ins who received erlotinib, 3 patients (27%) had a partial response (FQEA, 1; ASV, 1; and unknown variant, 1). TTP for patients with EGFR exon20ins and patients with EGFR exon19del/L858R on erlotinib were 3 and 12 months, respectively (P < .01). Responses to chemotherapy were similar for patients with lung adenocarcinomas with EGFR exon20ins and patients with lung adenocarcinomas with EGFR exon19del/L858R. Median OS from the diagnosis of stage IV disease for patients with EGFR exon20ins and patients with EGFR exon19del/L858R was 26 months (95% confidence interval, 19 months-not reached n = 46) and 31 months (95% confidence interval, 28-33 months; n = 258), respectively (P = .53). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients with advanced lung adenocarcinomas harboring EGFR exon20ins do not respond to EGFR TKI therapy. Standard chemotherapy should be used as first-line therapy. These patients have an OS similar to that of patients with sensitizing EGFR mutations. Individuals with certain variants such as FQEA and ASV may respond to erlotinib.

Poor response to erlotinib in patients with tumors containing baseline EGFR T790M mutations found by routine clinical molecular testing.

BACKGROUND: EGFR T790M is the most common mutation associated with acquired resistance to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Baseline EGFR T790M mutations in EGFR TKI-naïve patients have been reported, but the frequency and their association with response to EGFR TKIs remain unclear. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The frequency of baseline EGFR T790M as detected by routine molecular genotyping was determined by reviewing clinical results obtained at our institution from 2009 to 2013. We also collected outcome data for treatment with EGFR TKIs. RESULTS: To define the incidence of EGFR T790M, we reviewed 2774 sequentially tested patients with lung cancer who underwent molecular testing using a mass spectrometry-based assay, and 11 (0.5%) had baseline EGFR T790M. Compiling results from several molecular techniques, we observed EGFR T790M in tumors from 20 patients who had not previously been treated with an EGFR TKI. In all cases, EGFR T790M occurred concurrently with another EGFR mutation, L858R (80%, 16/20), or exon 19 deletion (20%, 4/20). Two percent of all pre-treatment EGFR-mutant lung cancers harbored an EGFR T790M mutation. Thirteen patients received erlotinib monotherapy as treatment for metastatic disease. The response rate was 8% (1/13, 95% confidence interval 0%-35%). For the patients who received erlotinib, the median progression-free survival was 2 months and the median overall survival was 16 months. CONCLUSIONS: De novo EGFR T790M mutations are rare (<1%) when identified by standard sensitivity methods. TKI therapy for patients with baseline EGFR T790M detected by standard molecular analysis has limited benefit.

The EWS-WT1 translocation product induces PDGFA in desmoplastic small round-cell tumour.

Chromosomal translocations resulting in chimaeric transcription factors underlie specific malignancies, but few authentic target genes regulated by these fusion proteins have been identified. Desmoplastic small round-cell tumour (DSRT) is a multiphenotypic primitive tumour characterized by massive reactive fibrosis surrounding nests of tumour cells. The t(11;22)(p13;q12) chromosomal translocation that defines DSRT produces a chimaeric protein containing the potential transactivation domain of the Ewing-sarcoma protein (EWS) fused to zinc fingers 2-4 of the Wilms tumour suppressor and transcriptional repressor WT1 (refs 2,3). By analogy with other EWS fusion products, the EWS-WT1 chimaera may encode a transcriptional activator whose target genes overlap with those repressed by WT1 (ref. 4). To characterize its functional properties, we generated osteosarcoma cell lines with tightly regulated inducible expression of EWS-WT1. Expression of EWS-WT1 induced the expression of endogenous platelet-derived growth factor-A (PDGFA), a potent secreted mitogen and chemoattractant whose promoter contains the many potential WT1-binding sites. Native PDGFA was not regulated by wild-type WT1, indicating a difference in target gene specificity between this tumour suppressor and its oncogenic derivative. PDGFA was expressed within tumour cells in primary DSRT specimens, but it was absent in Wilms tumours expressing WT1 and Ewing sarcomas with an EWS-Fli translocation. We conclude that the oncogenic fusion of EWS to WT1 in DSRT results in the induction of PDGFA, a potent fibroblast growth factor that contributes to the characteristic reactive fibrosis associated with this unique tumour.

Nomogram to predict the presence of EGFR activating mutation in lung adenocarcinoma.

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tumour genotyping is crucial to guide treatment decisions regarding the use of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors in nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, some patients may not be able to obtain tumour testing, either because tissue is limited and/or tests are not routinely offered. Here, we aimed to build a model-based nomogram to allow for prediction of the presence of EGFR mutations in NSCLC. We retrospectively collected clinical and pathological data on 3,006 patients with NSCLC who had their tumours genotyped for EGFR mutations at five institutions worldwide. Variables of interest were integrated in a multivariate logistic regression model. In the 2,392 non-Asian patients with lung adenocarcinomas, the most important predictors of harbouring EGFR mutation were: lower tobacco smoking exposure (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.37-0.46), longer time interval between smoking cessation and diagnosis (OR 2.19, 95% CI 1.71-2.80), advanced stage (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.18-2.13), and papillary (OR 4.57, 95% CI 3.14-6.66) or bronchioloalveolar (OR 2.84, 95% CI 1.98-4.06) histologically predominant subtype. A nomogram was established and showed excellent discriminating accuracy: the concordance index on an independent validation dataset was 0.84. As clinical practices transition to incorporating genotyping as part of routine care, this nomogram could be highly useful to predict the presence of EGFR mutations in lung adenocarcinoma in non-Asian patients when mutational profiling is not available or possible.