Background: Patients with lung cancers may have disproportionately severe coronavirus disease 2019 outcomes. Understanding the patient-specific and cancer-specific features that impact the 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 ¼ 102) at a single center from 12 March 2020 to 6 May 2020. Thresholds of severity were defined a priori as hospitalization, intensive care unit/intubation/do not intubate ([ICU/intubation/DNI] a composite metric of severe disease), or death. Recovery was defined as >14 days from COVID-19 test and >3 days since symptom resolution. Human leukocyte antigen (HLA) alleles were inferred from MSK-IMPACT (n ¼ 46) and compared with controls with lung cancer and no known non-COVID-19 (n ¼ 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 ratio for severe COVID-19 2.9, 95% confidence interval 1.07e9.44 comparing the median (23.5 packyears) to never-smoker and 3.87, 95% confidence interval 1.35e9.68, respectively]. Cancer-specific features, including prior thoracic surgery/radiation and recent systemic therapies did not impact severity. Human leukocyte antigen supertypes were generally similar in mild or severe cases of COVID-19 compared with 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.

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.

IMPORTANCEThe 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. From August 15, 2016, to May 15, 2018 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. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIANTSINTERVENTIONS All patients received osimertinib, 80 mg daily, and bevacizumab, 15 mg/kg once every 3 weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe 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 RELEVANCEThe 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.

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.