Search

Purpose: The uncommon EGFR exon 19 deletion (ex19del), L747_A750>P, demonstrates reduced sensitivity to osimertinib compared with the common ex19del, E746_A750del in preclinical models. The clinical efficacy of osimertinib in patients with non–small cell lung cancer harboring L747_A750>P and other uncommon ex19dels is not known. Experimental Design: The AACR GENIE database was interrogated to characterize the frequency of individual ex19dels relative to other variants, and a multicenter retrospective cohort was used to compare clinical outcomes for patients with tumors harboring E746_A750del, L747_A750>P, and other uncommon ex19dels who received osimertinib in the first line (1L) or in second or later lines of therapy and were T790M+ (≥2L). Results: ex19dels comprised 45% of EGFR mutations, with 72 distinct variants ranging in frequency from 28.1% (E746_A750del) to 0.03%, with L747_A750>P representing 1.8% of the EGFR mutant cohort. In our multi-institutional cohort (N = 200), E746_A750del was associated with significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) with 1L osimertinib versus L747_A750>P [median 21.3 months (95% confidence interval, 17.0–31.7) vs. 11.7 months (10.8–29.4); adjusted HR 0.52 (0.28–0.98); P = 0.043]. Osimertinib efficacy in patients with other uncommon ex19dels varied on the basis of the specific mutation present. Conclusions: The ex19del L747_A750>P is associated with inferior PFS compared with the common E746_A750del mutation in patients treated with 1L osimertinib. Understanding differences in osimertinib efficacy among EGFR ex19del subtypes could alter management of these patients in the future.

Supplementary Table S1. Descriptive analysis of patient characteristics and outcomes for those with tumors harboring uncommon exon 19 deletions treated with osimertinib. Each variant represented ≤2.5% of the study cohort. Patients with + for “Smoking History” are those with either a prior or current smoking history. PFS=Progression free survival; OS= Overall survival; à denotes patients who have not yet experienced an event for a time to event endpoint.

Supplementary Figure S1. Multi-institution cohort of patients with tumors harboring EGFR Exon 19 deletions. Primary analyses were performed on patients with tumors harboring E746_A750del and L747_A750>P, while investigation into additional uncommon variants was descriptive only. Patient numbers do not reflect the true prevalence of each variant since this cohort is selectively enriched for uncommon exon 19 deletions.

Purpose:The uncommon EGFR exon 19 deletion (ex19del), L747_A750>P, demonstrates reduced sensitivity to osimertinib compared with the common ex19del, E746_A750del in preclinical models. The clinical efficacy of osimertinib in patients with non–small cell lung cancer harboring L747_A750>P and other uncommon ex19dels is not known.Design:The AACR GENIE database was interrogated to characterize the frequency of individual ex19dels relative to other variants, and a multicenter retrospective cohort was used to compare clinical outcomes for patients with tumors harboring E746_A750del, L747_A750>P, and other uncommon ex19dels who received osimertinib in the first line (1L) or in second or later lines of therapy and were T790M+ (≥2L).Results:ex19dels comprised 45% of EGFR mutations, with 72 distinct variants ranging in frequency from 28.1% (E746_A750del) to 0.03%, with L747_A750>P representing 1.8% of the EGFR mutant cohort. In our multi-institutional cohort (N = 200), E746_A750del was associated with significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) with 1L osimertinib versus L747_A750>P [median 21.3 months (95% confidence interval, 17.0–31.7) vs. 11.7 months (10.8–29.4); adjusted HR 0.52 (0.28–0.98); P = 0.043]. Osimertinib efficacy in patients with other uncommon ex19dels varied on the basis of the specific mutation present.Conclusions:The ex19del L747_A750>P is associated with inferior PFS compared with the common E746_A750del mutation in patients treated with 1L osimertinib. Understanding differences in osimertinib efficacy among EGFR ex19del subtypes could alter management of these patients in the future.

Supplemental Tables 1-11

Supplemental Methods 2

Supplemental Figure 1. Consort diagram summarizing the molecular workflow of cases.

Supplemental Figure 3. Comparison of overall and recurrence-free survival in TP53-wild type and TP53-mutant IMAs

Supplemental Methods 1

Purpose:Invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma (IMA) is a unique subtype of lung adenocarcinoma, characterized genomically by frequent KRAS mutations or specific gene fusions, most commonly involving NRG1. Comprehensive analysis of a large series of IMAs using broad DNA- and RNA-sequencing methods is still lacking, and it remains unclear whether molecular subtypes of IMA differ clinicopathologically.Experimental Design:A total of 200 IMAs were analyzed by 410-gene DNA next-generation sequencing (MSK-IMPACT; n = 136) or hotspot 8-oncogene genotyping (n = 64). Driver-negative cases were further analyzed by 62-gene RNA sequencing (MSK-Fusion) and those lacking fusions were further tested by whole-exome sequencing and whole-transcriptome sequencing (WTS).Results:Combined MSK-IMPACT and MSK-Fusion testing identified mutually exclusive driver alterations in 96% of IMAs, including KRAS mutations (76%), NRG1 fusions (7%), ERBB2 alterations (6%), and other less common events. In addition, WTS identified a novel NRG2 fusion (F11R–NRG2). Overall, targetable gene fusions were identified in 51% of KRAS wild-type IMAs, leading to durable responses to targeted therapy in some patients. Compared with KRAS-mutant IMAs, NRG1-rearranged tumors exhibited several more aggressive characteristics, including worse recurrence-free survival (P < 0.0001).Conclusions:This is the largest molecular study of IMAs to date, where we demonstrate the presence of a major oncogenic driver in nearly all cases. This study is the first to document more aggressive characteristics of NRG1-rearranged IMAs, ERBB2 as the third most common alteration, and a novel NRG2 fusion in these tumors. Comprehensive molecular testing of KRAS wild-type IMAs that includes fusion testing is essential, given the high prevalence of alterations with established and investigational targeted therapies in this subset.

Supplementary Figures S1-S6, Table S1-S3, and eMethods

Purpose:MET tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) can achieve modest clinical outcomes in MET exon 14–altered lung cancers, likely secondary to primary resistance. Mechanisms of primary resistance remain poorly characterized and comprehensive proteomic analyses have not previously been performed.Experimental Design:We performed hybrid capture-based DNA sequencing, targeted RNA sequencing, cell-free DNA sequencing, selected reaction monitoring mass spectrometry (SRM-MS), and immunohistochemistry on patient samples of MET exon 14–altered lung cancers treated with a MET TKI. Associations between overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and putative genomic alterations and MET protein expression were evaluated.Results:Seventy-five of 168 MET exon 14–altered lung cancers received a MET TKI. Previously undescribed (zygosity, clonality, whole-genome duplication) and known (copy-number focality, tumor mutational burden, mutation region/type) genomic factors were not associated with ORR/PFS (P > 0.05). In contrast, MET expression was associated with MET TKI benefit. Only cases with detectable MET expression by SRM-MS (N = 15) or immunochemistry (N = 22) responded to MET TKI therapy, and cancers with H-score ≥ 200 had a higher PFS than cancers below this cutoff (10.4 vs. 5.5 months, respectively; HR, 3.87; P = 0.02).Conclusions:In MET exon 14–altered cancers treated with a MET TKI, a comprehensive analysis of previously unknown and known genomic factors did not identify a genomic mechanism of primary resistance. Instead, MET expression correlated with benefit, suggesting the potential role of interrogating the proteome in addition to the genome in confirmatory prospective trials.

Supplemental Figure 4. Comparison of overall and recurrence-free survival in CDKN2A-wild type and CDKN2A-mutant IMAs.

Supplemental Figure 2. Detailed graphical visualizations of the F11R-NRG2 fusion.

PURPOSEAlthough NRG1 fusions are oncogenic drivers across multiple tumor types including lung cancers, these are difficult to study because of their rarity. The global eNRGy1 registry was thus established to characterize NRG1 fusion–positive lung cancers in the largest and most diverse series to date.METHODSFrom June 2018 to February 2020, a consortium of 22 centers from nine countries in Europe, Asia, and the United States contributed data from patients with pathologically confirmed NRG1 fusion–positive lung cancers. Profiling included DNA-based and/or RNA-based next-generation sequencing and fluorescence in situ hybridization. Anonymized clinical, pathologic, molecular, and response (RECIST v1.1) data were centrally curated and analyzed.RESULTSAlthough the typified never smoking (57%), mucinous adenocarcinoma (57%), and nonmetastatic (71%) phenotype predominated in 110 patients with NRG1 fusion–positive lung cancer, further diversity, including in smoking history (43%) and histology (43% nonmucinous and 6% nonadenocarcinoma), was elucidated. RNA-based testing identified most fusions (74%). Molecularly, six (of 18) novel 5′ partners, 20 unique epidermal growth factor domain–inclusive chimeric events, and heterogeneous 5′/3′ breakpoints were found. Platinum-doublet and taxane-based (post–platinum-doublet) chemotherapy achieved low objective response rates (ORRs 13% and 14%, respectively) and modest progression-free survival medians (PFS 5.8 and 4.0 months, respectively). Consistent with a low programmed death ligand-1 expressing (28%) and low tumor mutational burden (median: 0.9 mutations/megabase) immunophenotype, the activity of chemoimmunotherapy and single-agent immunotherapy was poor (ORR 0%/PFS 3.3 months and ORR 20%/PFS 3.6 months, respectively). Afatinib achieved an ORR of 25%, not contingent on fusion type, and a 2.8-month median PFS.CONCLUSIONNRG1 fusion–positive lung cancers were molecularly, pathologically, and clinically more heterogeneous than previously recognized. The activity of cytotoxic, immune, and targeted therapies was disappointing. Further research examining NRG1-rearranged tumor biology is needed to develop new therapeutic strategies.

PURPOSE Local therapy prolongs progression-free survival in patients with oligometastatic non–small-cell lung cancers treated with chemotherapy. We previously reported that local therapy also prolongs survival and time to next therapy in patients on tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) for EGFR-mutant lung adenocarcinomas. Here, we investigate the role of local therapy in patients progressing on TKIs for ALK/ ROS1/ RET-rearranged lung adenocarcinomas. MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients with advanced ALK/ ROS/ RET-rearranged lung adenocarcinomas who underwent radiation, surgery, or percutaneous thermal ablation from 2012 to 2020 for progression on an ALK/ROS1/RET TKI were included. Progression patterns were identified. Times from local therapy to progression, next therapy, and death were measured. RESULTS Sixty-one patients with ALK (n = 37), ROS1 (n = 12), and RET (n = 12) fusions were identified. Patients received radiotherapy (92%), surgery (13%), and percutaneous thermal ablation (8%). Local therapy was administered for solitary/oligoprogressive (94%) or polyprogressive (6%) disease. For most patients (85%), local therapy addressed all progressing sites. The median times from any local therapy to subsequent progression and next systemic therapy were 6.8 months (95% CI, 5.1 to 8.1) and 10 months (95% CI, 8.4 to 15.3), respectively. Third or greater local therapy was associated with shorter time to progression and next therapy than first/second local therapies (hazard ratio, 4.97; P < .001 and hazard ratio, 2.48; P < .001). The median overall survival from first local therapy was 34 months (95% CI, 26 to not reached). CONCLUSION Local therapy for progression on ALK, ROS1, or RET TKIs is associated with clinically meaningful time on continued TKI therapy beyond progression, especially earlier in the course of disease.

Purpose: Current standard initial therapy for advanced, ROS proto-oncogene 1, receptor tyrosine kinase fusion (ROS1)-positive (ROS1+) non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is crizotinib or entrectinib. Lorlatinib, a next-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase/ROS1 inhibitor, recently demonstrated efficacy in ROS1+ NSCLC, including in crizotinib-pretreated patients. However, mechanisms of lorlatinib resistance in ROS1+ disease remain poorly understood. Here, we assessed mechanisms of resistance to crizotinib and lorlatinib. Experimental Design: Biopsies from patients with ROS1+ NSCLC progressing on crizotinib or lorlatinib were profiled by genetic sequencing. Results: From 55 patients, 47 post-crizotinib and 32 post-lorlatinib biopsies were assessed. Among 42 post-crizotinib and 28 post-lorlatinib biopsies analyzed at distinct timepoints, ROS1 mutations were identified in 38% and 46%, respectively. ROS1 G2032R was the most commonly occurring mutation in approximately one third of cases. Additional ROS1 mutations included D2033N (2.4%) and S1986F (2.4%) post-crizotinib and L2086F (3.6%), G2032R/L2086F (3.6%), G2032R/S1986F/L2086F (3.6%), and S1986F/L2000V (3.6%) post-lorlatinib. Structural modeling predicted ROS1L2086F causes steric interference to lorlatinib, crizotinib, and entrectinib, while it may accommodate cabozantinib. In Ba/F3 models, ROS1L2086F, ROS1G2032R/L2086F, and ROS1S1986F/G2032R/L2086F were refractory to lorlatinib but sensitive to cabozantinib. A patient with disease progression on crizotinib and lorlatinib and ROS1 L2086F received cabozantinib for nearly 11 months with disease control. Among lorlatinib-resistant biopsies, we also identified MET amplification (4%), KRAS G12C (4%), KRAS amplification (4%), NRAS mutation (4%), and MAP2K1 mutation (4%). Conclusions: ROS1 mutations mediate resistance to crizotinib and lorlatinib in more than one third of cases, underscoring the importance of developing next-generation ROS1 inhibitors with potency against these mutations, including G2032R and L2086F. Continued efforts are needed to elucidate ROS1-independent resistance mechanisms.

Purpose: MET tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) can achieve modest clinical outcomes in MET exon 14–altered lung cancers, likely secondary to primary resistance. Mechanisms of primary resistance remain poorly characterized and comprehensive proteomic analyses have not previously been performed. Experimental Design: We performed hybrid capture-based DNA sequencing, targeted RNA sequencing, cell-free DNA sequencing, selected reaction monitoring mass spectrometry (SRM-MS), and immunohistochemistry on patient samples of MET exon 14–altered lung cancers treated with a MET TKI. Associations between overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and putative genomic alterations and MET protein expression were evaluated. Results: Seventy-five of 168 MET exon 14–altered lung cancers received a MET TKI. Previously undescribed (zygosity, clonality, whole-genome duplication) and known (copy-number focality, tumor mutational burden, mutation region/type) genomic factors were not associated with ORR/PFS (P > 0.05). In contrast, MET expression was associated with MET TKI benefit. Only cases with detectable MET expression by SRM-MS (N = 15) or immunochemistry (N = 22) responded to MET TKI therapy, and cancers with H-score ≥ 200 had a higher PFS than cancers below this cutoff (10.4 vs. 5.5 months, respectively; HR, 3.87; P = 0.02). Conclusions: In MET exon 14–altered cancers treated with a MET TKI, a comprehensive analysis of previously unknown and known genomic factors did not identify a genomic mechanism of primary resistance. Instead, MET expression correlated with benefit, suggesting the potential role of interrogating the proteome in addition to the genome in confirmatory prospective trials.

PURPOSE Although MET exon 14 ( METex14)–altered lung cancers were first identified more than a decade and a half ago, the frequency of CNS metastatic disease remains poorly defined. Furthermore, the seminal trial of crizotinib in these patients (PROFILE 1001) did not report patterns of CNS response or progression. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with pathologically confirmed, advanced non–small-cell lung cancers (NSCLC) harboring a METex14 alteration by targeted DNA/RNA sequencing were studied. The incidence of brain metastases and the outcomes of MET inhibition with crizotinib were analyzed. RESULTS Eighty-three patients with METex14-altered metastatic NSCLC were identified. The incidence of CNS metastases at diagnosis was 17% (95% CI, 10% to 27%). The lifetime incidence was 36% (95% CI, 26% to 47%); 83% of patients had parenchymal disease, and 17% had leptomeningeal disease. The probability of having brain metastasis at 1, 2, and 3 years was 24%, 35%, and 38%, respectively. Fifty-four patients received crizotinib. The median time to radiologic CNS progression was 5.8 months (range, 3.7-20.0 months). Patterns of crizotinib progression were as follows: intracranial only in 10% of patients, intracranial and extracranial in 12%, and extracranial only in 78%. In patients with brain metastases before treatment, the median time on crizotinib was 7.5 months (range, 7.2-11.7 months). CONCLUSION CNS metastases, including leptomeningeal disease, occurred in more than a third of patients with METex14-altered lung cancers. In crizotinib-treated patients with or without CNS metastases, CNS failure was seen in less than a quarter of patients on progression.

Structured Abstract Background Patients with lung cancers may have disproportionately severe COVID-19 outcomes. Understanding the patient-specific and cancer-specific features that impact severity of COVID-19 may inform optimal cancer care during this pandemic. Patients and methods We examined consecutive patients with lung cancer and confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 (n=102) at a single center from March 12-May 6, 2020. Thresholds of severity were defined a priori as hospitalization, ICU/intubation/DNI (a composite metric of severe disease including ICU stay, intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation, and/or transition to do not intubate [DNI]), or death. Recovery was defined as >14 days from COVID-19 test and >3 days since symptom resolution. HLA alleles were inferred from MSK-IMPACT (n=46) and compared to controls with lung cancer and no known non-COVID-19 (n=5166). Results COVID-19 was severe in patients with lung cancer (62% hospitalized, 25% died). Although severe, COVID-19 accounted for a minority of overall lung cancer-deaths during the pandemic (11% overall). Determinants of COVID-19 severity were largely patient-specific features, including smoking status and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (Odds ratios for severe COVID-19 2.9, 95% CI 1.07-9.44 comparing the median [23.5 pack-years] to never and 3.87, 95% CI 1.35-9.68, respectively). Cancer-specific features, including prior thoracic surgery/radiation and recent systemic therapies did not impact severity. HLA supertypes were generally similar in mild or severe cases of COVID-19 compared to non-COVID-19 controls. Most patients recovered from COVID-19, including 25% patients initially requiring intubation. Among hospitalized patients, hydroxychloroquine did not improve COVID-19 outcomes. Conclusion COVID-19 is associated with high burden of severity in patients with lung cancer. Patient-specific features, rather than cancer-specific features or treatments, are the greatest determinants of severity., Highlights • COVID-19 is associated with high burden of severity in patients with lung cancer. • Patient-specific features, rather than cancer-specific features or treatments, are the greatest determinants of severity.

Introduction: ROS1 fusions are oncogenic drivers in 1% to 3% of NSCLCs. The activity of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy (chemotherapy with ICI [chemo-ICI]) in these tumors and their immunophenotype have not been systematically described. Methods: In this multi-institutional retrospective study, tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression and tumor mutational burden (TMB) were evaluated in patients with ROS1-rearranged NSCLC. Time-to-treatment discontinuation (TTD) and objective response rate (ORR) (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors [RECIST] version 1.1) were calculated for patients treated with ICI or chemo-ICI in the metastatic setting. Results: A total of 184 patients were identified. Among 146 assessable cases, PD-L1 expression was less than 1% in 60 (41%), 1% to 49% in 35 (24%), and greater than or equal to 50% in 51 tumors (35%). Of 100 (92%) TMB-assessable tumors, 92 had less than 10 mutations per megabase. TMB was significantly lower for ROS1-rearranged tumors (n = 97) compared with tumors with EGFR (n = 1250) or KRAS alterations (n = 1653) and all other NSCLC tumors (n = 2753) evaluated with Memorial Sloan Kettering-Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets (median TMB = 2.6 versus 3.5, 7.0, and 6.1 mutations per megabase, p < 0.001). Among patients treated with ICI, median TTD was 2.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.0–4.2 mo; n = 28) and ORR 13% (2 of 16 RECIST-assessable; 95% CI: 2%–38%). Among patients treated with chemo-ICI, median TTD was 10 months (95% CI: 4.7–14.1 mo; n = 11) and ORR 83% (5 of 6 RECIST-assessable; 95% CI: 36%–100%). There was no difference in PD-L1 expression (p = 0.91) or TMB (p = 0.83) between responders and nonresponders. Conclusions: Most ROS1-rearranged NSCLCs have low PD-L1 expression and TMB. The activity of ICI in these tumors is modest. In contrast, chemo-ICI can achieve meaningful activity.

PURPOSE: Although NRG1 fusions are oncogenic drivers across multiple tumor types including lung cancers, these are difficult to study because of their rarity. The global eNRGy1 registry was thus established to characterize NRG1 fusion–positive lung cancers in the largest and most diverse series to date. METHODS: From June 2018 to February 2020, a consortium of 22 centers from nine countries in Europe, Asia, and the United States contributed data from patients with pathologically confirmed NRG1 fusion–positive lung cancers. Profiling included DNA-based and/or RNA-based next-generation sequencing and fluorescence in situ hybridization. Anonymized clinical, pathologic, molecular, and response (RECIST v1.1) data were centrally curated and analyzed. RESULTS: Although the typified never smoking (57%), mucinous adenocarcinoma (57%), and nonmetastatic (71%) phenotype predominated in 110 patients with NRG1 fusion–positive lung cancer, further diversity, including in smoking history (43%) and histology (43% nonmucinous and 6% nonadenocarcinoma), was elucidated. RNA-based testing identified most fusions (74%). Molecularly, six (of 18) novel 5′ partners, 20 unique epidermal growth factor domain–inclusive chimeric events, and heterogeneous 5′/3′ breakpoints were found. Platinum-doublet and taxane-based (post–platinum-doublet) chemotherapy achieved low objective response rates (ORRs 13% and 14%, respectively) and modest progression-free survival medians (PFS 5.8 and 4.0 months, respectively). Consistent with a low programmed death ligand-1 expressing (28%) and low tumor mutational burden (median: 0.9 mutations/megabase) immunophenotype, the activity of chemoimmunotherapy and single-agent immunotherapy was poor (ORR 0%/PFS 3.3 months and ORR 20%/PFS 3.6 months, respectively). Afatinib achieved an ORR of 25%, not contingent on fusion type, and a 2.8-month median PFS. CONCLUSION: NRG1 fusion–positive lung cancers were molecularly, pathologically, and clinically more heterogeneous than previously recognized. The activity of cytotoxic, immune, and targeted therapies was disappointing. Further research examining NRG1-rearranged tumor biology is needed to develop new therapeutic strategies.

Purpose:Invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma (IMA) is a unique subtype of lung adenocarcinoma, characterized genomically by frequent KRAS mutations or specific gene fusions, most commonly involving NRG1. Comprehensive analysis of a large series of IMAs using broad DNA- and RNA-sequencing methods is still lacking, and it remains unclear whether molecular subtypes of IMA differ clinicopathologically.Experimental Design:A total of 200 IMAs were analyzed by 410-gene DNA next-generation sequencing (MSK-IMPACT; n = 136) or hotspot 8-oncogene genotyping (n = 64). Driver-negative cases were further analyzed by 62-gene RNA sequencing (MSK-Fusion) and those lacking fusions were further tested by whole-exome sequencing and whole-transcriptome sequencing (WTS).Results:Combined MSK-IMPACT and MSK-Fusion testing identified mutually exclusive driver alterations in 96% of IMAs, including KRAS mutations (76%), NRG1 fusions (7%), ERBB2 alterations (6%), and other less common events. In addition, WTS identified a novel NRG2 fusion (F11R–NRG2). Overall, targetable gene fusions were identified in 51% of KRAS wild-type IMAs, leading to durable responses to targeted therapy in some patients. Compared with KRAS-mutant IMAs, NRG1-rearranged tumors exhibited several more aggressive characteristics, including worse recurrence-free survival (P < 0.0001).Conclusions:This is the largest molecular study of IMAs to date, where we demonstrate the presence of a major oncogenic driver in nearly all cases. This study is the first to document more aggressive characteristics of NRG1-rearranged IMAs, ERBB2 as the third most common alteration, and a novel NRG2 fusion in these tumors. Comprehensive molecular testing of KRAS wild-type IMAs that includes fusion testing is essential, given the high prevalence of alterations with established and investigational targeted therapies in this subset.

Purpose: EGFR exon 20 insertions (ex20ins) are an uncommon genotype in non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) for which targeted therapies are under development. We sought to describe treatment outcomes and genomic and immunophenotypic characteristics of these tumors. Experimental Design: We identified sequential patients with NSCLC with EGFR ex20ins and compared their clinical outcomes and pathologic features with other patients with NSCLC. Results: Among 6,290 patients with NSCLC, 106 (2%) had EGFR ex20ins. Patients with EGFR ex20ins were more likely to be Black (14% vs. 6%; P < 0.001) or Asian (22% vs. 10%; P < 0.001) compared with all other patients with NSCLC. Median tumor mutational burden (TMB; 3.5 vs. 5.9; P < 0.001) and proportion of tumors with PD-L1 expression ≥1% (22% vs. 60%; P < 0.001) were lower in EGFR ex20ins compared with other NSCLCs (TMB, n = 5,851 and PD-L1 expression, n = 282) and EGFR del 19/L858R (median TMB, 3.5; P = 0.001 and 39% PD-L1 ≥ 1%; P = 0.02). Compared with a 2:1 cohort of patients with metastatic NSCLC without targetable alterations (n = 192), EGFR ex20ins patients had longer overall survival (median 20 vs. 12 months; HR, 0.56; P = 0.007) and longer time to treatment discontinuation (TTD) for platinum chemotherapy (median, 7 vs. 4 months; HR, 0.6; P = 0.02) and no improvement in TTD for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI; HR, 1.75; P = 0.05). Conclusions: With better outcomes on platinum chemotherapy, patients with EGFR ex20ins NSCLC have improved prognosis, lower PD-L1 expression and TMB, and derive less benefit from ICIs compared with patients with NSCLC without targetable oncogenes. Improving molecularly targeted therapies could provide greater benefit for patients with EGFR ex20ins.

e21112 Background: EGFR exon 19 deletions (del19) are largely considered to have uniform sensitivity to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Approximately 70% of del19 tumors harbor the most common deletion, E756_A750del; however, many “uncommon” variants comprise the remainder of this group. In preclinical studies, the uncommon del19, L747_A750 > P, demonstrates diminished sensitivity to the third generation TKI, osimertinib [. Identifying differences in clinical outcomes with osimertinib treatment could have therapeutic implications for patients (pts) with EGFR del19 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: We conducted a multi-center retrospective cohort study of pts with metastatic EGFR del19 NSCLC treated with osimertinib. We compared progression free survival (PFS, time from TKI initiation to clinically significant growth of existing lesions or new lesions on imaging or death) and overall survival (OS) of pts with tumors harboring E746_A750del and L747_A750 > P who received osimertinib in the first line (1L) or in second or later lines of therapy and were T790M+ (≥2L). The Kaplan Meier method and Cox model were used to estimate PFS and OS, and multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the odds of achieving PFS > 12 months. Multivariable analyses adjusted for baseline covariates- age, sex, race, and smoking. Results: From March 2013 to December 2021, 86 pts with EGFR E746_A750del and 36 with L747_A750 > P were treated with osimertinib. For 1L osimertinib, E746_A750del was associated with significantly prolonged PFS vs. L747_A750 > P (median 21.3 months (95% CI 17.0-31.7) vs. 11.7 months (10.8-29.4)) in the adjusted analysis (hazard ratio [HR] 0.52 [95% CI, 0.28-0.98, p = 0.043]). Pts with the common del19 mutation were more likely to achieve PFS > 12 months with 1L osimertinib than those with the L747_A750 > P mutation (Odds Ratio 4.14 (1.41-12.15), p 0.0097). OS exhibited a similar trend with a median OS that that was not reached (NR) at 40 months of follow-up among those with E746_A750del vs 26 months for L747_A750 > P (adjusted HR 0.52 [95% CI, 0.23-1.19], p = 0.120). For pts treated with ≥2L osimertinib, there was also a trend towards favorable PFS and OS for pts with tumors harboring E746_A750del. Conclusions: The del19 mutation L747_A750 > P is associated with inferior PFS compared to the common E746_A750del mutation in pts treated with 1L osimertinib. Understanding differences in osimertinib efficacy among EGFR del19 subtypes could alter management of these pts in the future.[Table: see text]

Purpose/Objective(s) Local therapy (LTX) prolongs progression-free and overall survival (OS) in patients with oligometastatic non-small cell lung cancer. We previously reported substantial LTX benefit in time to progression or next therapy (TTP/TTNT) in patients with EGFR-mutant lung adenocarcinoma treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI). Here, we investigate the role of LTX in patients who progressed on TKI for ALK/ROS1/RET-rearranged stage IV lung adenocarcinoma. Materials/Methods This single-institution IRB-approved retrospective review included all patients with pathologically confirmed stage IV ALK/ROS1-rearranged or RET fusion-positive lung adenocarcinoma who underwent radiation therapy (RT), surgery, or percutaneous thermal ablation (PTA) from 2012 to 2020 for progressive disease (PD) while on an ALK, ROS1, or RET TKI and for whom TKI therapy was continued post LTX. Patients receiving consolidative LTX after initial response to TKI without PD were not included. PD was classified as solitary- (one site), oligo- (2-5 sites), or poly- (> 5 sites) PD. TTP and TTNT were measured from start of any LTX. OS was evaluated from start of first LTX and from diagnosis. Significance was assessed with the Kruskal-Wallis test and Cox Univariate Analysis. Results 61 eligible patients (37 ALK, 12 ROS1, 12 RET; 37 female, median age 62 at LTX) were identified. Most common TKIs were alectinib (34), selpercatinib (17), and crizotinib (11). 92% of patients underwent RT (82 RT courses: median dose 27 Gy, 72% ≤5 fractions), 13% and 8% underwent surgery and PTA, respectively, with 13% undergoing > 1 LTX modality. In 87% of interventions, LTX addressed all sites of PD. PD prior to LTX was predominantly oligoPD (94%). Most frequent LTX sites were brain (41%), bone (28%), and lung (27%). Subsequent PD after LTX was also mostly oligoPD (81%; 38% solitary). In-field local failure occurred in 19%. Median follow-up post LTX was 18 mo. Median TTP and TTNT from LTX were 5.1 and 7.8 mo, respectively. TTP and TTNT were not significantly different in the sub-cohort in which all sites of PD were treated with LTX. Median OS was 51 mo from diagnosis and 19.4 mo from first LTX. TTP was significantly shorter for ≥3rd LTX course v. Conclusion Local therapy for PD on ALK, ROS1 or RET TKIs was associated with clinically meaningful time on continued TKI therapy beyond progression.

The efficacy of the highly selective RET inhibitor selpercatinib is now established in RET-driven cancers, and we sought to characterize the molecular determinants of response and resistance. We find that the pre-treatment genomic landscape does not shape the variability of treatment response except for rare instances of RAS-mediated primary resistance. By contrast, acquired selpercatinib resistance is driven by MAPK pathway reactivation by one of two distinct routes. In some patients, on- and off-target pathway reactivation via secondary RET solvent front mutations or MET amplifications are evident. In other patients, rare RET-wildtype tumor cell populations driven by an alternative mitogenic driver are selected for by treatment. Multiple distinct mechanisms are often observed in the same patient, suggesting polyclonal resistance may be common. Consequently, sequential RET-directed therapy may require combination treatment with inhibitors targeting alternative MAPK effectors, emphasizing the need for prospective characterization of selpercatinib-treated tumors at the time of monotherapy progression.

PURPOSE: Although MET exon 14 (METex14)–altered lung cancers were first identified more than a decade and a half ago, the frequency of CNS metastatic disease remains poorly defined. Furthermore, the seminal trial of crizotinib in these patients (PROFILE 1001) did not report patterns of CNS response or progression. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with pathologically confirmed, advanced non–small-cell lung cancers (NSCLC) harboring a METex14 alteration by targeted DNA/RNA sequencing were studied. The incidence of brain metastases and the outcomes of MET inhibition with crizotinib were analyzed. RESULTS: Eighty-three patients with METex14-altered metastatic NSCLC were identified. The incidence of CNS metastases at diagnosis was 17% (95% CI, 10% to 27%). The lifetime incidence was 36% (95% CI, 26% to 47%); 83% of patients had parenchymal disease, and 17% had leptomeningeal disease. The probability of having brain metastasis at 1, 2, and 3 years was 24%, 35%, and 38%, respectively. Fifty-four patients received crizotinib. The median time to radiologic CNS progression was 5.8 months (range, 3.7-20.0 months). Patterns of crizotinib progression were as follows: intracranial only in 10% of patients, intracranial and extracranial in 12%, and extracranial only in 78%. In patients with brain metastases before treatment, the median time on crizotinib was 7.5 months (range, 7.2-11.7 months). CONCLUSION: CNS metastases, including leptomeningeal disease, occurred in more than a third of patients with METex14-altered lung cancers. In crizotinib-treated patients with or without CNS metastases, CNS failure was seen in less than a quarter of patients on progression.

Background The tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) pathway controls appetite, balance, and pain sensitivity. While these functions are reflected in the on-target adverse events (AEs) observed with TRK inhibition, these AEs remain under-recognized, and pain upon drug withdrawal has not previously been reported. As TRK inhibitors are approved by multiple regulatory agencies for TRK or ROS1 fusion-positive cancers, characterizing these AEs and corresponding management strategies is crucial. Patients and methods Patients with advanced or unresectable solid tumors treated with a TRK inhibitor were retrospectively identified in a search of clinical databases. Among these patients, the frequency, severity, duration, and management outcomes of AEs including weight gain, dizziness or ataxia, and withdrawal pain were characterized. Results Ninety-six patients with 15 unique cancer histologies treated with a TRK inhibitor were identified. Weight gain was observed in 53% [95% confidence interval (CI), 43%–62%] of patients and increased with time on TRK inhibition. Pharmacologic intervention, most commonly with glucagon-like peptide 1 analogs or metformin, appeared to result in stabilization or loss of weight. Dizziness, with or without ataxia, was observed in 41% (95% CI, 31%–51%) of patients with a median time to onset of 2 weeks (range, 3 days to 16 months). TRK inhibitor dose reduction was the most effective intervention for dizziness. Pain upon temporary or permanent TRK inhibitor discontinuation was observed in 35% (95% CI, 24%–46%) of patients; this was more common with longer TRK inhibitor use. TRK inhibitor reinitiation was the most effective intervention for withdrawal pain. Conclusions TRK inhibition-related AEs including weight gain, dizziness, and withdrawal pain occur in a substantial proportion of patients receiving TRK inhibitors. This safety profile is unique relative to other anticancer therapies and warrants careful monitoring. These on-target toxicities are manageable with pharmacologic intervention and dose modification.

9049 Background: ROS1 fusions are oncogenic drivers in various cancers types, including 1-3% of non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). Immunotherapy approvals for NSCLC include ROS1-rearranged carcinomas, but the activity of immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) as monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy (chemo-ICI) therapy, as well as the immunophenotypic characteristics of these tumors, have not been described in a large data set. Methods: In this multi-institutional study, patients with ROS1-rearranged NSCLC were identified retrospectively. Tumor PD-L1 expression and tumor mutational burden (TMB) were assessed as part of routine clinical care. In patients who received ICI monotherapy or chemo-ICI in the metastatic setting, time to treatment discontinuation (TTD) and objective response rate (ORR; RECIST v. 1.1) were calculated. TTD was assessed with Kaplan-Meier methods; patients remaining on treatment were censored at last follow up. Results: 184 patients with ROS1-rearranged NSCLC were identified. Among 146 PD-L1 evaluable cases, PD-L1 expression was < 1% in 60 (41%), 1-49% in 35 (24%) and ≥50% in 51 (35%) tumors. Ninety-two of 100 (92%) TMB-evaluable tumors had < 10 mutations/megabase (mut/Mb). TMB was significantly lower for ROS1-rearranged NSCLCs (n = 97) vs. ROS1-wild type tumors (n = 5,380) evaluated with next-generation sequencing using MSK-IMPACT (median 2.6 vs. 5.9 mut/Mb, p < 0.001). Twenty-eight patients received ICI monotherapy and 11 patients received chemo-ICI. The median TTD was 2.1 months (95% CI: 1.0-4.2; n = 28) for single-agent ICI therapy and 10 months (95% CI: 4.7-14.1; n = 11) for chemo-ICI therapy. The ORR was 13% (2/16 RECIST-evaluable; 95% CI: 2-38%) for ICI monotherapy and 83% (5/6 RECIST-evaluable; 95% CI: 36-100%) for chemo-ICI therapy. There was no difference in PD-L1 tumor expression (p = 0.9) or TMB (p = 0.8) between responders and non-responders and no correlation between PD-L1 tumor expression (rho = 0.16, p = 0.6) or TMB (rho = 0.03, p = 0.9) and maximum change in sum of target lesions. Conclusions: Most ROS1-rearranged NSCLCs have low or no PD-L1 expression and low TMB. The activity of checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy is disappointing in ROS1-driven NSCLC. In contrast, combination chemoimmunotherapy can achieve clinically meaningful activity.

IMPORTANCE: The combination of erlotinib and bevacizumab as initial treatment of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR [OMIM 131550])–mutant lung cancers improves progression-free survival (PFS) compared with erlotinib alone. Because osimertinib prolongs PFS compared with erlotinib, this trial was designed to study the combination of osimertinib and bevacizumab as first-line treatment. OBJECTIVES: To determine the safety and tolerability of osimertinib and bevacizumab combination treatment and assess the 12-month PFS of the combination in patients with metastatic EGFR-mutant lung cancers. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIANTS: From August 15, 2016, to May 15, 2018, 49 patients with metastatic EGFR-mutant lung cancers were enrolled in this interventional clinical trial, conducted at a single academic cancer center. In the phase 1 portion of the study, a standard 3 + 3 dose de-escalation design was used to determine the maximum tolerated dose of osimertinib and bevacizumab. In the phase 2 portion of the study, patients were treated at the maximum tolerated dose defined in the phase 1 portion. Statistical analysis was performed from August 1 to October 1, 2019. INTERVENTIONS: All patients received osimertinib, 80 mg daily, and bevacizumab, 15 mg/kg once every 3 weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary objective of the phase 2 portion of the study was to determine the number of patients receiving the combination of osimertinib and bevacizumab who were progression free at 12 months. Secondary end points included overall response rate, median PFS, overall survival, and definition of the toxic effects of the combination treatment. RESULTS: Among the 49 patients in the study (34 women; median age, 60 years [range, 36-83 years]), PFS at 12 months was 76% (95% CI, 65%-90%). The overall response rate was 80% (95% CI, 67%-91%), and median PFS was 19 months (95% CI, 15-24 months). Of the 6 patients with measurable central nervous system disease, all had a partial or complete central nervous system response. Persistent detection of EGFR-mutant circulating tumor (ct)DNA at 6 weeks was associated with shorter median PFS (clearance at 6 weeks, 16.2 months [95% CI, 13 months to not reached]; and no clearance at 6 weeks, 9.8 months [95% CI, 4 months to not reached]; P = .04) and median overall survival (clearance at 6 weeks, not reached; and no clearance at 6 weeks, 10.1 months [95% CI, 6 months to not reached]; P = .002). Identified mechanisms of resistance included squamous cell transformation (n = 2) pleomorphic transformation (n = 1), and acquired EGFR L718Q (n = 1) and C797S (n = 1) mutations. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The combination of osimertinib and bevacizumab met the study’s prespecified effectiveness end point. Persistent EGFR-mutant circulating tumor DNA at 6 weeks was associated with early progression and shorter survival. A randomized phase 3 study comparing osimertinib and bevacizumab with osimertinib alone is planned. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02803203

9042 Background: MET exon 14 alterations occur in ~3% of patients (pts) with NSCLC. Although clinical and genomic features of MET exon 14 mutant (mut) NSCLC are better characterized in the metastatic setting, less is known about early-stage disease for this molecular subtype. Methods: Clinicopathologic and genomic data were collected from patients (pts) with resected stage I-III MET exon 14 mutant NSCLC at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI) and the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC). We estimated the disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients from the date of surgical resection. The prevalence of MET exon 14 mutations in stage I-III NSCLC was assessed using OncoPanel NGS v3.0 at DFCI. Results: The prevalence of MET exon 14 alterations in resected tumors of pts with stage I-III NSCLC at DFCI using Oncopanel v3 was 2.8% (17/613) overall: 2.9% (16/542) in non-squamous and 1.4% (1/71) in squamous histology. We identified 131 pts with resected stage I-III (I = 73, II = 28, III = 30) MET exon 14 mut NSCLC at DFCI (Oncopanel v1-v3) and MSKCC (MSK-IMPACT), with a median age of 71 years (yrs) (range: 43-88). There were no significant differences in sex, smoking status, or type of MET alteration across stages. In stage I resected tumors there was a higher proportion of adenocarcinoma histology compared to stages II and III (p = 0.009). The median harmonized TMB (mTMB) was similar across stages (p = 0.43). Common genomic co-alterations included MET amplification (amp) (5.3%), CDK4/ 6 amp (19.1%), MDM2 amp (35.1%), TP53 mut (17.6%) and CDKN2A/ B loss (9.2%). The median DFS in stage I, II, and III NSCLC was 8.3 yrs (95% CI: 3.1-8.3), 2.6 yrs (95% CI: 1.0-2.6), and 2.1 yrs (95% CI: 0.7-2.7), respectively (p = 0.017). The median OS in stage I, II, and III NSCLC was 9.2 yrs (95% CI: 8.5 -10.5), not reached (NR) (95% CI: NR-NR), and 4.1 yrs (95% CI: 3.6-4.1), respectively (p = 0.052). Concurrent MET amp was independently associated with worse DFS (HR: 4.9, 95% CI: 1.8-13.1; p = 0.002) in multivariate analysis. Conclusions: MET exon 14 mutations are present in 2.8% of resected stage I-III NSCLCs. Given the prevalence of this molecular alteration in early-stage NSCLC, clinical trials exploring the role of adjuvant and neoadjuvant MET targeted therapies in this population may be warranted.