Overcoming MET-mediated resistance in oncogene-driven NSCLC.

This study evaluates the efficacy of combining targeted therapies with MET or SHP2 inhibitors to overcome MET-mediated resistance in different NSCLC subtypes. A prevalence study was conducted for MET amplification and overexpression in samples from patients with NSCLC who relapsed on ALK, ROS1, or RET tyrosine kinase inhibitors. MET-mediated resistance was detected in 37.5% of tissue biopsies, which allow the detection of MET overexpression, compared to 7.4% of liquid biopsies. The development of drug resistance by MET overexpression was confirmed in EGFRex19del-, KRASG12C-, HER2ex20ins-, and TPM3-NTRK1-mutant cell lines. The combination of targeted therapy with MET or SHP2 inhibitors was found to overcome MET-mediated resistance in both in vitro and in vivo assays. This study highlights the importance of considering MET overexpression as a resistance driver to NSCLC targeted therapies to better identify patients who could potentially benefit from combination approaches with MET or SHP2 inhibitors.

Brief Report: Clinical Response, Toxicity, and Resistance Mechanisms to Osimertinib Plus MET Inhibitors in Patients With EGFR-Mutant MET-Amplified NSCLC.

Introduction: MET amplification is a known resistance mechanism to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment in EGFR-mutant NSCLC. Dual EGFR-MET inhibition has been reported with success in overcoming such resistance and inducing clinical benefit. Resistance mechanisms to dual EGFR-MET inhibition require further investigation and characterization. Methods: Patients with NSCLC with both MET amplification and EGFR mutation who have received crizotinib, capmatinib, savolitinib, or tepotinib plus osimertinib (OSI) after progression on OSI at MD Anderson Cancer Center were included in this study. Molecular profiling was completed by means of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and next-generation sequencing (NGS). Radiological response was assessed on the basis of Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Results: From March 2016 to March 2022, 23 treatments with dual MET inhibitor and osi were identified with a total of 20 patients included. Three patients received capmatinib plus OSI after progression on crizotinib plus OSI. Median age was 64 (38-89) years old and 75% were female. MET amplification was detected by FISH in 14 patients in the tissue, NGS in 10 patients, and circulating tumor DNA in three patients. Median MET gene copy number was 13.6 (6.4-20). Overall response rate was 34.8% (eight of 23). In assessable patients, tumor shrinkage was observed in 82.4% (14 of 17). Median time on treatment was 27 months. Two of three patients responded to capmatinib plus OSI after progression on crizotinib plus OSI. Dual EGFR-MET inhibition was overall well tolerated. Two patients on crizotinib plus OSI and one pt on capmatinib plus OSI discontinued therapy due to pneumonitis. One pt discontinued crizotinib plus OSI due to gastrointestinal toxicity. Six patients were still on double TKI treatment. At disease progression to dual EGFR-MET inhibition, FISH and NGS on tumor and plasma were completed in six patients. Notable resistance mechanisms observed include acquired MET D1246H (n = 1), acquired EGFR C797S (n = 2), FGFR2 fusion (n = 1, concurrent with C797S), and EGFR G796S (n = 1, concurrent with C797S). Four patients lost MET amplification. Conclusions: Dual EGFR and MET inhibition yielded high clinical response rate after progression on OSI. Resistance mechanisms to EGFR-MET double TKI inhibition include MET secondary mutation, EGFR secondary mutation, or loss of MET amplification.

The Preclinical Pharmacology of Tepotinib-A Highly Selective MET Inhibitor with Activity in Tumors Harboring MET Alterations.

The mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor (MET) proto-oncogene encodes the MET receptor tyrosine kinase. MET aberrations drive tumorigenesis in several cancer types through a variety of molecular mechanisms, including MET mutations, gene amplification, rearrangement, and overexpression. Therefore, MET is a therapeutic target and the selective type Ib MET inhibitor, tepotinib, was designed to potently inhibit MET kinase activity. In vitro, tepotinib inhibits MET in a concentration-dependent manner irrespective of the mode of MET activation, and in vivo, tepotinib exhibits marked, dose-dependent antitumor activity in MET-dependent tumor models of various cancer indications. Tepotinib penetrates the blood-brain barrier and demonstrates strong antitumor activity in subcutaneous and orthotopic brain metastasis models, in-line with clinical activity observed in patients. MET amplification is an established mechanism of resistance to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI), and preclinical studies show that tepotinib in combination with EGFR TKIs can overcome this resistance. Tepotinib is currently approved for the treatment of adult patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer harboring MET exon 14 skipping alterations. This review focuses on the pharmacology of tepotinib in preclinical cancer models harboring MET alterations and demonstrates that strong adherence to the principles of the Pharmacological Audit Trail may result in a successful discovery and development of a precision medicine.

Deficiency of the splicing factor RBM10 limits EGFR inhibitor response in EGFR-mutant lung cancer.

Molecularly targeted cancer therapy has improved outcomes for patients with cancer with targetable oncoproteins, such as mutant EGFR in lung cancer. Yet, the long-term survival of these patients remains limited, because treatment responses are typically incomplete. One potential explanation for the lack of complete and durable responses is that oncogene-driven cancers with activating mutations of EGFR often harbor additional co-occurring genetic alterations. This hypothesis remains untested for most genetic alterations that co-occur with mutant EGFR. Here, we report the functional impact of inactivating genetic alterations of the mRNA splicing factor RNA-binding motif 10 (RBM10) that co-occur with mutant EGFR. RBM10 deficiency decreased EGFR inhibitor efficacy in patient-derived EGFR-mutant tumor models. RBM10 modulated mRNA alternative splicing of the mitochondrial apoptotic regulator Bcl-x to regulate tumor cell apoptosis during treatment. Genetic inactivation of RBM10 diminished EGFR inhibitor-mediated apoptosis by decreasing the ratio of (proapoptotic) Bcl-xS to (antiapoptotic) Bcl-xL isoforms of Bcl-x. RBM10 deficiency was a biomarker of poor response to EGFR inhibitor treatment in clinical samples. Coinhibition of Bcl-xL and mutant EGFR overcame the resistance induced by RBM10 deficiency. This study sheds light on the role of co-occurring genetic alterations and on the effect of splicing factor deficiency on the modulation of sensitivity to targeted kinase inhibitor cancer therapy.

Effect of Osimertinib on CTCs and ctDNA in EGFR Mutant Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients: The Prognostic Relevance of Liquid Biopsy.

INTRODUCTION: Liquid biopsy is a useful tool for monitoring treatment outcome in solid tumors, including lung cancer. The relevance of monitoring CTCs and plasma ctDNA as predictors of clinical outcome was assessed in EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients treated with osimertinib. METHODS: Forty-seven EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients who had progressed on prior first- or second-generation EGFR inhibitors were enrolled in the study and treated with osimertinib, irrespective of the presence of the T790M mutation in the primary tumor or the plasma. Peripheral blood was collected at baseline (n = 47), post-Cycle 1 (n = 47), and at the end of treatment (EOT; n = 39). CTCs were evaluated in 32 patients at the same time points (n = 32, n = 27, and n = 21, respectively) and phenotypic characterization was performed using triple immunofluorescence staining (CK/VIM/CD45). RESULTS: Osimertinib resulted in an ORR of 34% (2 CR) and a DCR of 76.6%. The median PFS and OS values were 7.5 (range, 0.8-52.8) and 15.1 (range, 2.1-52.8) months, respectively. ctDNA was detected in 61.7%, 27.7%, and 61.5% of patients at baseline, post-Cycle 1, and EOT, respectively. CTCs (CK+/CD45-) were detected in 68.8%, 48.1%, and 61.9% of patients at the three time points, respectively. CTCs expressing both epithelial and mesenchymal markers (CK+/VIM+/CD45-) were detected in 56.3% and 29.6% of patients at baseline and post-Cycle 1, respectively. The detection of ctDNA at baseline and post-Cycle 1 was associated with shorter PFS and OS, whereas the ctDNA clearance post-Cycle 1 resulted in a significantly longer PFS and OS. Multivariate analysis revealed that male sex and the detection of ctDNA at baseline were independent predictors of shorter PFS (HR: 2.6, 95% C.I.: 1.2-5.5, p = 0.015 and HR: 3.0, 95% C.I.: 1.3-6.9; p = 0.009, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The decrease in both CTCs and ctDNA occurring early during osimertinib treatment is predictive of better outcome, implying that liquid biopsy monitoring may be a valuable tool for the assessment of treatment efficacy.

INSIGHT 2: a phase II study of tepotinib plus osimertinib in MET-amplified NSCLC and first-line osimertinib resistance.

MET amplification (METamp), a mechanism of acquired resistance to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors, occurs in up to 30% of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) progressing on first-line osimertinib. Combining osimertinib with a MET inhibitor, such as tepotinib, an oral, highly selective, potent MET tyrosine kinase inhibitor, may overcome METamp-driven resistance. INSIGHT 2 (NCT03940703), an international, open-label, multicenter phase II trial, assesses tepotinib plus osimertinib in patients with advanced/metastatic EGFR-mutant NSCLC and acquired resistance to first-line osimertinib and METamp, determined centrally by fluorescence in situ hybridization (gene copy number ≥5 and/or MET/CEP7 ≥2) at time of progression. Patients will receive tepotinib 500 mg (450 mg active moiety) plus osimertinib 80 mg once-a-day. The primary end point is objective response, and secondary end points include duration of response, progression-free survival, overall survival and safety. Trial registration number: NCT03940703 (clinicaltrials.gov).

Osimertinib is used to treat a type of lung cancer that has specific changes (mutations) in a gene called EGFR. Although tumors will usually shrink (respond) during treatment with osimertinib, they can stop responding, or become resistant, to osimertinib. A common cause of resistance is 'MET amplification', which describes when extra copies of a gene called MET are present. Lung cancer that is resistant to osimertinib due to MET amplification could be treated by combining osimertinib with a treatment that blocks MET, such as tepotinib. INSIGHT 2 is an ongoing study that is designed to learn about the effects and safety of tepotinib combined with osimertinib, in patients with lung cancer that has stopped responding to osimertinib because of MET amplification. A plain language version of this article is available and is published alongside the paper online: www.futuremedicine.com/doi/suppl/10.2217/fon-2021-1406.

First-line osimertinib in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer and with a coexisting low allelic fraction of Thr790Met.

AIM OF THE STUDY: The AZENT (NCT02841579) study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of first-line osimertinib in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor(EGFR)mutation-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and with a coexisting low allelic fraction of Thr790Met. METHODS: In this multicentre, single-arm, open-label, phase IIa study, patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC harbouring centrally confirmedEGFR Thr790Met mutation received 80 mg osimertinib daily. The primary end-point was objective response rate (ORR). The secondary end-points included disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. Efficacy was assessed as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours, version 1.1. Blood samples collected at baseline, end of week 2 and disease progression were analysed using next-generation sequencing. As osimertinib was approved as a first-line therapy during the trial, this led to early termination of phase II; thus, analysis is considered exploratory. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were enrolled and received osimertinib. All 22 patients were included in the efficacy and safety analysis. At the data cutoff, 10 (50%) patients remained on treatment. The median duration of follow-up was 24.4 months (interquartile range 12.9 to 26.0). The ORR was 77.3% (17/22 [95% confidence interval {CI} 54.6 to 89.3]). The DCR was 86.4% (19/22, [95% CI 65.1 to 97.1]). The median PFS was 23.1 months (95% CI 14.1 to NE). The median OS was 28·4 months (95% CI 25.6 to NE). CONCLUSION: Despite early study termination, osimertinib first-line therapy yields an overall PFS of 23.1 months in EGFR-mutant patients harbouring a coexisting low allelic fraction of EGFR Thr790Met mutation.

BRCA1 Expression and Outcome in Patients With EGFR-Mutant NSCLC Treated With Gefitinib Alone or in Combination With Olaparib.

INTRODUCTION: DNA repair capacity, as exemplified by BRCA1 gene expression, is related with outcome to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC. Olaparib, a PARP inhibitor, reduces BRCA1 expression. Olaparib was tested in combination with gefitinib versus gefitinib single agent, as a first-line therapy for patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC in the GOAL study (trial registration: NCT01513174). Here, we report the results of the biomarker-related prespecified secondary objectives of the GOAL study. METHODS: We evaluated the impact of BRCA1 mRNA expression in 91 patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC. Of those 91 patients, 51 were randomized to treatment with gefitinib and 40 were randomized to treatment with gefitinib plus olaparib. We explored in vitro whether BRCA1 mRNA levels are related with outcome to gefitinib plus olaparib. The expression levels of 53BP1, CtIP, and AXL were also explored and correlated with the treatment outcome. RESULTS: Overall, as what happened in the GOAL study, no statistically significant difference was observed in median progression-free survival (PFS) between the two treatment arms, for the 91 patients of the present study (p = 0.2419). For patients with high BRCA1 mRNA expression (BRCA1-high group), median PFS was 12.9 months in the gefitinib plus olaparib arm, compared with 9.2 months in the gefitinib arm (p = 0.0449). In the gefitinib arm, median PFS was 9.1 months for the BRCA1-high group and 10.2 months for the BRCA1-low group (p = 0.0193). We observed a more pronounced synergism of gefitinib plus olaparib in cells with higher BRCA1 compared with those with low BRCA1 mRNA expression. CONCLUSIONS: High BRCA1 mRNA expression identified patients with NSCLC who benefited from gefitinib plus olaparib in the GOAL phase 2 clinical trial.

Combined FGFR and Akt pathway inhibition abrogates growth of FGFR1 overexpressing EGFR-TKI-resistant NSCLC cells.

EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) resistance in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients is inevitable. Identification of resistance mechanisms and corresponding targeting strategies can lead to more successful later-line treatment in many patients. Using spectrometry-based proteomics, we identified increased fibroblast growth factor receptor 1 (FGFR1) expression and Akt activation across erlotinib, gefitinib, and osimertinib EGFR-TKI-resistant cell line models. We show that while combined EGFR-TKI and FGFR inhibition showed some efficacy, simultaneous inhibition of FGFR and Akt or PI3K induced superior synergistic growth inhibition of FGFR1-overexpressing EGFR-TKI-resistant NSCLC cells. This effect was confirmed in vivo. Only dual FGFR and Akt inhibition completely blocked the resistance-mediating signaling pathways downstream of Akt. Further, increased FGFR1 expression was associated with significantly lower PFS in EGFR-TKI-treated NSCLC patients, and increased FGFR1 were demonstrated in a few post- vs. pre-EGFR-TKI treatment clinical biopsies. The superior therapeutic benefit of combining FGFR and Akt inhibitors provide the rationale for clinical trials of this strategy.

Biomarker Discovery and Outcomes for Comprehensive Cell-Free Circulating Tumor DNA Versus Standard-of-Care Tissue Testing in Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: Treatment guidelines for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) recommend broad molecular profiling for targeted therapy selection. This study prospectively assessed comprehensive next-generation sequencing (NGS) of cell-free circulating tumor DNA (cfDNA) compared with standard-of-care (SOC) tissue-based testing to identify guideline-recommended alterations in aNSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with treatment-naïve aNSCLC were tested using a well-validated NGS cfDNA panel, and results were compared with SOC tissue testing. The primary objective was noninferiority of cfDNA vs. tissue analysis for the detection of two guideline-recommended biomarkers (EGFR and ALK) and an additional six actionable biomarkers. Secondary analyses included tissue versus cfDNA biomarker discovery, overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) to targeted therapy, and positive predictive value (PPV) of cfDNA. RESULTS: The primary objective was met with cfDNA identifying actionable mutations in 46 patients versus 48 by tissue (P < .05). In total, 0/186 patients were genotyped for all eight biomarkers with tissue, compared with 90.8% using cfDNA. Targetable alterations or KRAS were identified in 80.7% when cfDNA was used first versus 57.1% when tissue was used first. PPV for cfDNA-detected EGFR was 100.0% (25/25). ORR and PFS in patients receiving targeted therapy based on tissue or cfDNA were similar to those previously reported. CONCLUSION: This prospective study confirms a previous report that comprehensive cfDNA testing is noninferior to SOC tissue testing in detecting aNSCLC-recommended biomarkers. Furthermore, cfDNA-based first-line therapy produced outcomes similar to tissue-based testing, demonstrating the clinical utility of comprehensive cfDNA genotyping as the initial genotyping modality in patients with treatment-naïve aNSCLC when tissue is insufficient or when all actionable biomarkers cannot be rapidly assessed.

SHP2 Inhibition Influences Therapeutic Response to Tepotinib in Tumors with MET Alterations.

Tepotinib is an oral MET inhibitor approved for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring MET exon 14 (METex14) skipping mutations. Examining treatment-naive or tepotinib-resistant cells with MET amplification or METex14 skipping mutations identifies other receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) that co-exist in cells prior to tepotinib exposure and become more prominent upon tepotinib resistance. In a small cohort of patients with lung cancer with MET genetic alterations treated with tepotinib, gene copy number gains of other RTKs were found at baseline and affected treatment outcome. An Src homology 2 domain-containing phosphatase 2 (SHP2) inhibitor delayed the emergence of tepotinib resistance and synergized with tepotinib in treatment-naive and tepotinib-resistant cells as well as in xenograft models. Alternative signaling pathways potentially diminish the effect of tepotinib monotherapy, and the combination of tepotinib with an SHP2 inhibitor enables the control of tumor growth in cells with MET genetic alterations.

SRC and PIM1 as potential co-targets to overcome resistance in MET deregulated non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: The role of MET alterations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is increasing and several targeted agents are under evaluation. MET exon 14 skipping mutations and MET amplifications are associated with potential sensitivity to MET inhibition, though resistance mechanisms are emerging. In MET addicted cells, MET inhibition leads to activation of proviral integration site for Moloney murine leukemia virus-1 (PIM1). PIM1 and proto-oncogene tyrosine-protein kinase Src (SRC) can regulate the expression of receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs), potentially inducing resistance to MET inhibition through cross-activation. METHODS: We evaluated the activity of class I-II MET inhibitors, the SRC inhibitor dasatinib, and pan-PIM inhibitors in four MET addicted cell lines. We assessed the effect of the dual MET/PIM and MET/SRC inhibition on cell viability and at the protein level. We evaluated RNA expression profiles of the cell lines. Advanced NSCLCs were also screened for MET alterations. RESULTS: All cell lines were sensitive to class I-II MET inhibitors. All cell lines were resistant to single PIM and SRC inhibition. Dual MET/PIM inhibition was synergistic or additive in MET amplified cell lines and dual MET/SRC inhibition was highly synergistic in all MET addicted cell lines. The addition of an SRC inhibitor partially prevents the RTKs cross-activation. MET alterations were found in 9 out of 97 evaluable samples (9.3%); median overall survival in MET altered patients was 5 months (95% CI, 3 m-NA). CONCLUSIONS: We identified a potential role of PIM inhibition in MET amplified tumors and of SRC inhibition in MET addicted tumors. Potential applications of this new treatment strategy warrant further evaluation.

Combination of gefitinib and olaparib versus gefitinib alone in EGFR mutant non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): A multicenter, randomized phase II study (GOAL).

OBJECTIVES: Progression-free survival (PFS) and response rate to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) varies in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) driven byEGFR mutations, suggesting that other genetic alterations may influence oncogene addiction. Low BRCA1 mRNA levels correlate with longer PFS in erlotinib-treated EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients. Since the poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, olaparib, may attenuate and/or prevent BRCA1 expression, the addition of olaparib to gefitinib could improve outcome in EGFR-mutant advanced NSCLC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: GOAL was a multicenter, randomized phase IB/II study performed in two countries, Spain and Mexico. Eligible patients were 18 years or older, treatment-naïve, pathologically confirmed stage IV NSCLC, with centrally confirmed EGFR mutations and measurable disease. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive gefitinib 250 mg daily or gefitinib 250 mg daily plus olaparib 200 mg three times daily in 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was PFS. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), response rate, safety and tolerability. RESULTS: Between September 2013, and July 2016, 182 patients underwent randomization, 91 received gefitinib and 91 received gefitinib plus olaparib. There were no differences in gender, age, smoking status, performance status, presence of bone and brain metastases or type ofEGFR mutation. Median PFS was 10.9 months (95 % CI 9.3-13.3) in the gefitinib arm and 12.8 months (95 % CI 9.1-14.7) in the gefitinib plus olaparib arm (HR 1.38, 95 % CI 1.00-1.92; p = 0.124). The most common adverse events were anemia, 78 % in gefitinib plus olaparib group, 38 % in gefitinib arm, diarrhea, 65 % and 60 %, and fatigue, 40 % and 32 %, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The gefitinib plus olaparib combination did not provide significant benefit over gefitinib alone. The combination's safety profile showed an increase in hematological and gastrointestinal toxicity, compared to gefitinib alone, however, no relevant adverse events were noted.

Mechanisms of resistance to osimertinib.

The introduction of epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) has significantly improved the prognosis of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with EGFR mutations. The most common mechanism of acquired resistance to first- and second-generation EGFR TKIs is represented by the secondary T790M mutation. Osimertinib, a third-generation TKI designed to target both EGFR sensitizing mutations and T790M, was first approved for the treatment of EGFR T790M mutation-positive NSCLC patients in progression after EGFR TKI therapy. The FLAURA study demonstrated that first-line treatment of EGFR mutant patients with osimertinib significantly improved progression free survival (PFS) over first-generation EGFR-TKIs, thus leading to its approval also in this setting. Moreover, osimertinib has shown significant central nervous system (CNS) activity and a favorable safety profile. The current review focuses on the clinical development of osimertinib, the mechanisms of acquired resistance identified in patients receiving osimertinib and the strategies currently under evaluation to overcome resistance.

Precision medicine and its implementation in patients with NTRK fusion genes: perspective from developing countries.

Precision oncology is the field that places emphasis on the diagnosis and treatment of tumors that harbor specific genomic alterations susceptible to inhibition or modulation. Although most alterations are only present in a minority of patients, a substantial effect on survival can be observed in this subgroup. Mass genome sequencing has led to the identification of a specific driver in the translocations of the tropomyosin receptor kinase family (NTRK) in a subset of rare tumors both in children and in adults, and to the development and investigation of Larotrectinib. This medication was granted approval by the US Food and Drug Administration for NTRK-positive tumors, regardless of histology or age group, as such, larotrectinib was the first in its kind to be approved under the premise that molecular pattern is more important than histology in terms of therapeutic approach. It yielded significant results in disease control with good tolerability across a wide range of diseases including rare pediatric tumors, salivary gland tumors, gliomas, soft-tissue sarcomas, and thyroid carcinomas. In addition, and by taking different approaches in clinical trial design and conducting allocation based on biomarkers, the effects of target therapies can be isolated and quantified. Moreover, and considering developing nations and resource-limited settings, precision oncology could offer a tool to reduce cancer-related disability and hospital costs. In addition, developing nations also present patients with rare tumors that lack a chance of treatment, outside of clinical trials. This, in turn, offers the possibility for international collaboration, and contributes to employment, education, and health service provisions. The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Signaling Pathways, Metabolism, and PD-1/PD-L1 Antibodies.

Treatment of advanced (metastatic) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is currently mainly based on immunotherapy with antibodies against PD-1 or PD-L1, alone, or in combination with chemotherapy. In locally advanced NSCLC and in early resected stages, immunotherapy is also employed. Tumor PD-L1 expression by immunohistochemistry is considered the standard practice. Response rate is low, with median progression free survival very short in the vast majority of studies reported. Herein, numerous biological facets of NSCLC are described involving driver genetic lesions, mutations ad fusions, PD-L1 glycosylation, ferroptosis and metabolic rewiring in NSCLC and lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD). Novel concepts, such as immune-transmitters and the effect of neurotransmitters in immune evasion and tumor growth, the nascent relevance of necroptosis and pyroptosis, possible new biomarkers, such as gasdermin D and gasdermin E, the conundrum of K-Ras mutations in LUADs, with the growing recognition of liver kinase B1 (LKB1) and metabolic pathways, including others, are also commented. The review serves to charter diverse treatment solutions, depending on the main altered signaling pathways, in order to have effectual immunotherapy. Tumor PDCD1 gene (encoding PD-1) has been recently described, in equilibrium with tumor PD-L1 (encoded by PDCD1LG1). Such description explains tumor hyper-progression, which has been reported in several studies, and poises the fundamental criterion that IHC PD-L1 expression as a biomarker should be revisited.

Correction to: The Present and Future of Liquid Biopsies in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Combining Four Biosources for Diagnosis, Prognosis, Prediction, and Disease Monitoring.

The original version of this review article unfortunately contained a mistake in the Funding section.

Src-Homology 2 Domain-Containing Phosphatase 2 in Resected EGFR Mutation-Positive Lung Adenocarcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: EGFR mutation-positive lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) displays impaired phosphorylation of ERK and Src-homology 2 domain-containing phosphatase 2 (SHP2) in comparison with EGFR wild-type LUADs. We hypothesize that SHP2 expression could be predictive in patients positive with resected EGFR mutation versus patients with EGFR wild-type LUAD. METHODS: We examined resected LUAD cases from Japan and Spain. mRNA expression levels of AXL, MET, CDCP1, STAT3, YAP1, and SHP2 were analyzed by quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. The activity of SHP2 inhibitors plus erlotinib were tested in EGFR-mutant cell lines and analyzed by cell viability assay, Western blot, and immunofluorescence. RESULTS: A total of 50 of 100 EGFR mutation-positive LUADs relapsed, among them, patients with higher SHP2 mRNA expression revealed shorter progression-free survival, in comparison with those having low SHP2 mRNA (hazard ratio: 1.83; 95% confidence interval: 1.05-3.23; p = 0.0329). However, SHP2 was not associated with prognosis in the remaining 167 patients with wild-type EGFR. In EGFR-mutant cell lines, the combination of SHP099 or RMC-4550 (SHP2 inhibitors) with erlotinib revealed synergism via abrogation of phosphorylated AKT (S473) and ERK1/2 (T202/Y204). Although erlotinib translocates phosphorylated SHP2 (Y542) into the nucleus, either RMC-4550 alone, or in combination with erlotinib, relocates SHP2 into the cytoplasm membrane, limiting AKT and ERK1/2 activation. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated SHP2 mRNA levels are associated with recurrence in resected EGFR mutation-positive LUADs, but not in EGFR wild-type. EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors can enhance SHP2 activation, hindering adjuvant therapy. SHP2 inhibitors could improve the benefit of adjuvant therapy in EGFR mutation-positive LUADs.