EGFR T790M: revealing the secrets of a gatekeeper.

Non-small-cell lung cancers that harbor activating mutations in the EGFR gene represent an important molecularly defined subset of lung cancer. Despite dramatic initial responses with first- and second-generation EGFR-directed tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs) against these cancers, the development of a dominant and frequent resistance mechanism through a threonine-methionine amino acid substitution at position 790 (T790M) of EGFR has limited the long-term efficacy of these targeted therapies. This "gatekeeper" EGFR T790M alteration remains the only validated and relevant second-site resistance mutation for EGFR, allowing for focused research to understand and overcome EGFR T790M-mediated resistance. The current review focuses on EGFR T790M by discussing mechanisms of resistance mediated by EGFR T790M, reviewing development of novel third-generation EGFR TKIs targeting EGFR T790M, and highlighting current research on overcoming resistance to third-generation EGFR T790M TKIs.

Relationship between physician-adjudicated adverse events and patient-reported health-related quality of life in a phase II clinical trial (NCT01143402) of patients with metastatic uveal melanoma.

PURPOSE: Clinical trials commonly use physician-adjudicated adverse event (AE) assessment via the common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) for decision-making. Patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data are becoming more frequent in oncology; however, the relationship between physician-adjudicated AE assessment and HRQoL is understudied. METHODS: Data from a phase II trial (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01143402) where patients with metastatic uveal melanoma were randomized to receive selumetinib, an oral MEK inhibitor, or chemotherapy were analyzed. Patients reported HRQoL at baseline, after 1 month, and end of treatment (n = 118), whereas physicians adjudicated AEs via CTCAE. Mean HRQoL scores were compared between patient randomization arms, as well as between those patients who did/did not receive dose modifications. RESULTS: Ninety-four percent had a CTCAE grade ≥1 for at least one treatment-associated AE, with 18% undergoing dose modification due to toxicity. Mean HRQoL scores did not significantly differ at each of the three time points. Patient and physician-adjudicated reports of nausea were significantly correlated at the start (r = 0.31, p < 0.01) and end of treatment (r = 0.42, p < 0.05). There were no significant correlations between need for dose modification and HRQoL scores. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the high rate of physician-adjudicated AEs and need for dose modifications with selumetinib, patient-reported HRQoL was not impacted by treatment. Since HRQoL did not differ in the subgroup of patients who received dosage reductions due to AEs, patients may be willing to tolerate select AEs without dose modification (if medically appropriate). More research is needed to determine how to best integrate HRQoL data into clinical trial conduct.