The significance of estimation errors resulting in molecular testing failures with implications for patient care is unknown, but the current study suggests false-negative test results may occur.

Introduction: The EGFR-A763_Y764insFQEA is a unique exon 20 insertion mutation (w5% to 6% of exon 20 insertions), which, at the structural and enzyme kinetic level, more closely resembles EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)sensitizing mutants, such as EGFR exon 19 indels and L858R. A limited number of preclinical models and clinical reports have studied the response of this mutant to EGFR TKIs. Methods: We used models of EGFR-A763_Y764insFQEA and more typical EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations to probe representative first-(gefitinib, erlotinib), second-(afatinib), third-generation (osimertinib), and in-development EGFR exon 20-specific (poziotinib, mobocertinib [TAK-788]) TKIs. We also compiled outcomes of EGFR-A763_Y764insFQEAmutated lung cancers treated with EGFR TKIs. Results: Cells driven by EGFR-A763_Y764insFQEA were consistently sensitive to EGFR TKIs (as opposed to those driven by typical EGFR exon 20 insertions [A767_V769du-pASV, D770_N771insSVD and H773_V774insH]), which were only inhibited by in-development EGFR TKIs at doses below those affecting wild-type EGFR. Most case instances (62.5% [95% confidence interval: 39%-86%], n ¼ 16) with lung cancers harboring EGFR-A763_Y764insFQEA responded to clinically available EGFR TKIs (including osimertinib) and to in-development EGFR exon 20-specific TKIs (including mobocertinib) with prolonged periods of progression-free survival in some cases. Median overall survival for EGFR TKI-treated cases was 22 months (95% confidence interval: 16-25). Mechanisms of acquired TKI resistance of this mutant remain underreported, but do seem to align with those of common mutations. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the largest report to confirm that the EGFR-A763_Y764insFQEA mutation is sen-*Corresponding author. Disclosure: Dr. Costa reports receiving personal fees (consulting fees and honoraria) and nonfinancial support (institutional research support) from Takeda/Millennium Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, and Pfizer; and nonfinancial support (institutional research support) from Merck Sharp and Dohme Corporation, Merrimack Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Clovis Oncology, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, and Tesaro, all outside of the submitted work. Dr. Rangachari reports receiving nonfinancial support (institutional research support) from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novocure, and AbbVie/Stemcentrx, all outside of the submitted work. Dr. VanderLaan reports receiving personal fees (consulting fees and honoraria) from Gala Therapeutics, Flatiron Health, Caris Life Sciences, and Foundation Medicine, all outside of the submitted work. Dr. Kobayashi reports receiving research support from Boehringer Ingelheim, MiNA Therapeutics, and Taiho Therapeutics; and personal fees (honoraria) from Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Takeda Pharmaceuticals outside of the submitted work. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest.

BackgroundHistological transformation of oncogene-driven lung adenocarcinoma to small cell lung cancer (SCLC) following treatment with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) is a well-described phenomenon. Whether a similar transformation may drive acquired resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPIs) in non-SCLC (NSCLC) is uncertain. Hence, tissue biopsies are not universally recommended at progression of NSCLC on ICPIs, unlike TKIs.Case presentationWe report a case of a woman in her mid-60s with a 35 pack-years tobacco history and stage IV squamous cell lung carcinoma with no targetable genomic alterations, whose disease progressed within 4 months of first line carboplatin/gemcitabine therapy. Her treatment was switched to second line nivolumab monotherapy which resulted in sustained partial response lasting 21 months. She subsequently developed rapid, bulky progression of mediastinal disease. Biopsy showed transformation to SCLC. Comparison of genomic profiling results from the initial NSCLC diagnosis and SCLC transformation revealed near-identical tumor profiles. Her disease responded to next line carboplatin/etoposide, though lasting for only 10 months. She died 14 months after detection of neuroendocrine transformation of her NSCLC.Systematic reviewWe performed a systematic review of the literature to identify similar cases of NSCLC-to-small cell transformation on ICPIs. Nine patients, including our index case, were identified, with seven (77.8%) on nivolumab and two (22.2%) on pembrolizumab monotherapy. Median survival time since small cell transformation was 13.0 months (95% CI 2.0 to 16.0). Using our patient case as a framework, we further discuss the lack of consensus criteria to distinguish small cell transformation from de novo metachronous SCLC.ConclusionsHistological transformation to SCLC is a potential mechanism of acquired resistance to ICPIs in NSCLC. Repeat tissue biopsies should be considered at the time of progression, similar to oncogene-directed therapies. Prospective larger studies are warranted to further characterize NSCLC-to-small cell transformation on ICPIs using molecular fingerprinting with paired tumor genomic profiles, evaluation of neuroendocrine features at baseline and consideration of initial response.

ROS1 -rearranged (also known as ROS1 fusion-positive) non-small-cell lung cancer is an uncommon but distinct molecular subgroup seen in approximately 1–2% of cases. Oncogene addiction due to constitutive ROS1 tyrosine kinase activation has allowed development of molecularly targeted therapies with remarkable anti-tumor activity. Both crizotinib and entrectinib, multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have now received approval by the FDA for treatment of patients with advanced ROS1 -rearranged lung cancers; however, the clinical efficacy and safety of these drugs have been derived from expansion cohorts of single-arm phase I or basket clinical trials with relatively small populations of this clinically and molecularly distinct subgroup. Both drugs lead to high objective response rates (approximately 70–80%) and have manageable side effects, although only entrectinib has potent intracranial efficacy. Lorlatinib is an oral brain-penetrant ALK/ROS1 TKI with activity in both TKI-naïve and some crizotinib-resistant settings (albeit with limited potency against the crizotinib/entrectinib-resistant ROS1 -G2032R mutation). We describe cases of advanced ROS1 -rearranged lung cancer receiving crizotinib, entrectinib, and/or lorlatinib in first and later line treatment settings to dissect the current state of evidence supporting management decisions for these patients. The next generation ROS1 TKIs (repotrectinib and DS-6051b), owing to their broad activity against kinase mutations including ROS1 -G2032R in preclinical studies, hold promise to transform the current treatment paradigm and permit even further gains with regards to long-term outcomes in this subset of patients.