Purpose: Non-small-cell lung cancers harboring EML4-ALK rearrangements are sensitive to crizotinib. However, despite initial response, most patients will eventually relapse, and monitoring EML4-ALK rearrangements over the course of treatment may help identify these patients. However, challenges associated with serial tumor biopsies have highlighted the need for blood-based assays for the monitoring of biomarkers. Platelets can sequester RNA released by tumor cells and are thus an attractive source for the non-invasive assessment of biomarkers. Methods: EML4-ALK rearrangements were analyzed by RT-PCR in platelets and plasma isolated from blood obtained from 77 patients with non-small-cell lung cancer, 38 of whom had EML4-ALK-rearranged tumors. In a subset of 29 patients with EML4-ALK-rearranged tumors who were treated with crizotinib, EML4-ALK rearrangements in platelets were correlated with progression-free and overall survival. Results: RT-PCR demonstrated 65% sensitivity and 100% specificity for the detection of EML4-ALK rearrangements in platelets. In the subset of 29 patients treated with crizotinib, progression-free survival was 3.7 months for patients with EML4-ALK+ platelets and 16 months for those with EML4-ALK− platelets (hazard ratio, 3.5; P = 0.02). Monitoring of EML4-ALK rearrangements in the platelets of one patient over a period of 30 months revealed crizotinib resistance two months prior to radiographic disease progression. Conclusions: Platelets are a valuable source for the non-invasive detection of EML4-ALK rearrangements and may prove useful for predicting and monitoring outcome to crizotinib, thereby improving clinical decisions based on radiographic imaging alone.
Although median survival after LM-diagnosis in EGFR-mutated NSCLC-patients was poor, a substantial part of the patients had a prolonged survival of more than 6 months. PS of 0-1 at time of diagnosis of LM was associated with prolonged survival. No other patient- or treatment-related characteristics were identified. Further research is warranted to identify treatment strategies that improve survival in EGFR+ NSCLC-patients with LM.
Background:Data on non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with non-classic epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations are scarce, especially in non-Asian populations. The purpose of this study was to evaluate prevalence, clinical characteristics and outcome on EGFR-TKI treatment according to type of EGFR mutation in a Dutch cohort of NSCLC patients.Methods:We retrospectively evaluated a cohort of 240 EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients. Data on demographics, clinical and tumour-related features, EGFR-TKI treatment and clinical outcome were collected and compared between patients with classic EGFR mutations, EGFR exon 20 insertions and other uncommon EGFR mutations.Results:Classic EGFR mutations were detected in 186 patients (77.5%) and non-classic EGFR mutations in 54 patients (22.5%); 23 patients with an exon 20 insertion (9.6%) and 31 patients with an uncommon EGFR mutation (12.9%). Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) on EGFR-TKI treatment were 2.9 and 9.7 months, respectively, for patients with an EGFR exon 20 insertion, and 6.4 and 20.2 months, respectively, for patients with an uncommon EGFR mutation. Patients with a double uncommon EGFR mutation that included G719X/L861Q/S768I had longer PFS and OS on EGFR-TKI treatment compared with patients with a single G719X/L861Q/S768I EGFR mutation (both P=0.02).Conclusions:In our Dutch cohort, prevalence and genotype distribution of non-classic EGFR mutations were in accordance with previously reported data. The PFS and OS on EGFR-TKI treatment in patients with an uncommon EGFR mutation were shorter compared with patients with classic EGFR mutations, but varied among different uncommon EGFR mutations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.