Osimertinib and Selpercatinib Efficacy, Safety, and Resistance in a Multicenter, Prospectively Treated Cohort of EGFR-Mutant and RET Fusion-Positive Lung Cancers.

PURPOSE: Acquired RET fusions have been reported at resistance to treatment with EGFR inhibitors in EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, a multicenter cohort of patients with EGFR-mutant lung cancers treated with osimertinib and selpercatinib for RET fusion-mediated osimertinib resistance has not previously been published. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who received selpercatinib in combination with osimertinib on a prospective expanded access clinical trial (NCT03906331) and single-patient compassionate use programs across five countries were centrally analyzed. All patients had advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC with a RET fusion detected from tissue or plasma following osimertinib therapy. Clinicopathologic and outcomes data were collected. RESULTS: Fourteen patients with EGFR-mutant and RET fusion-positive lung cancers who experienced prior progression on osimertinib received osimertinib and selpercatinib. EGFR exon 19 deletions (±T790M, 86%) and non-KIF5B fusions (CCDC6-RET 50%, NCOA4-RET 36%) predominated. Osimertinib 80 mg daily and selpercatinib 80 mg twice daily were the most commonly administered dosages. The response rate, disease control rate, and median treatment duration were 50% [95% confidence interval (CI), 25%-75%, n = 12], 83% (95% CI, 55%-95%), and 7.9 months (range, 0.8-25+), respectively. Resistance was complex, involving EGFR on-target (EGFR C797S), RET on-target (RET G810S), and off-target (EML4-ALK/STRN-ALK, KRAS G12S, BRAF V600E) mechanisms; RET fusion loss; or polyclonal mechanisms. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC with an acquired RET fusion as a mechanism of EGFR inhibitor resistance, the addition of selpercatinib to osimertinib was feasible and safe and offered clinical benefit, supporting the prospective evaluation of this combination. See related commentary by Krebs and Popat, p. 2951.

Consolidation treatment of durvalumab after chemoradiation in real-world patients with stage III unresectable non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Treatment for stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) of unresectable disease mainly involves concurrent chemoradiation (CRT). Post-CRT consolidation treatment with durvalumab is a major therapeutic advance that provides survival benefit in this group of patients. However, the performance of this treatment strategy remains to be studied in a real-world setting. METHODS: A total of 31 patients who had disease control post-CRT were included in the durvalumab early access program (EAP) as an intent-to-treat cohort and retrospectively reviewed for post-CRT progression-free survival (PFS) and time to metastatic disease or death (TMDD). The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) at the initiation of durvalumab was analyzed in 29 patients. RESULTS: The median time from the completion of concurrent CRT to the initiation of durvalumb was 2.8 months. The objective response was 25.8% and the 12 month PFS and TMDD-free rate were 56.4% and 66.9%, respectively. The low NLR patients showed a significantly longer post-CRT PFS (not reach vs. 12.0 months [95% CI: 5.5-not estimable]; P = 0.040; the hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.23 [95% CI: 0.05-1.00]; P = 0.048) and the 12 month post-CRT PFS rate (82.5 vs. 42.6%). The post-CRT TMDD (not reach vs. 12.6 months, [95% CI: 10.8-not estimable]; P = 0.010; the hazard ratio for distant metastasis or death, 0.11 [95% CI: 0.01-0.88]; P = 0.037) and 12 month post-CRT TMDD-free rate (90.9 vs. 57.1%) were also significantly higher in the low NLR patients. CONCLUSIONS: Durvalumab consolidation treatment in real-world patients showed substantial efficacy and the correlation with the NLR level warrants further investigation.

Contribution of airway eosinophils in airway wall remodeling in asthma: Role of MMP-10 and MET.

BACKGROUND: Eosinophils play an important role in the pathophysiology of asthma being implicated in airway epithelial damage and airway wall remodeling. We determined the genes associated with airway remodeling and eosinophilic inflammation in patients with asthma. METHODS: We analyzed the transcriptomic data from bronchial biopsies of 81 patients with moderate-to-severe asthma of the U-BIOPRED cohort. Expression profiling was performed using Affymetrix arrays on total RNA. Transcription binding site analysis used the PRIMA algorithm. Localization of proteins was by immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: Using stringent false discovery rate analysis, MMP-10 and MET were significantly overexpressed in biopsies with high mucosal eosinophils (HE) compared to low mucosal eosinophil (LE) numbers. Immunohistochemical analysis confirmed increased expression of MMP-10 and MET in bronchial epithelial cells and in subepithelial inflammatory and resident cells in asthmatic biopsies. Using less-stringent conditions (raw P-value < 0.05, log2 fold change > 0.5), we defined a 73-gene set characteristic of the HE compared to the LE group. Thirty-three of 73 genes drove the pathway annotation that included extracellular matrix (ECM) organization, mast cell activation, CC-chemokine receptor binding, circulating immunoglobulin complex, serine protease inhibitors, and microtubule bundle formation pathways. Genes including MET and MMP10 involved in ECM organization correlated positively with submucosal thickness. Transcription factor binding site analysis identified two transcription factors, ETS-1 and SOX family proteins, that showed positive correlation with MMP10 and MET expression. CONCLUSION: Pathways of airway remodeling and cellular inflammation are associated with submucosal eosinophilia. MET and MMP-10 likely play an important role in these processes.