Update on Lorlatinib: Role in Reducing the Risk of Disease Progression in ALK-Positive NSCLC.

Lorlatinib is an oral third-generation inhibitor of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) with activity in advanced ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in both the first and subsequent line setting. Superior systemic and intracranial efficacy of lorlatinib over crizotinib, a first-generation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), in treatment-naïve patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC was demonstrated by the phase 3 CROWN trial. Lorlatinib retains anti-tumor effect against single and some compound ALK resistance mutations after disease progression on first- and second-generation ALK TKIs. Currently, alectinib, brigatinib, ceritinib, crizotinib and lorlatinib are approved for treatment of advanced ALK-positive NSCLC. However, no head-to-head studies have directly compared lorlatinib to second-generation ALK inhibitors. Herein, we aim to provide an overview of the efficacy and safety of lorlatinib and discuss where lorlatinib stands in the therapeutic approach to advanced ALK-positive NSCLC.

Exploratory Analysis of Brigatinib Activity in Patients With Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer and Brain Metastases in Two Clinical Trials.

Purpose In patients with crizotinib-treated, anaplastic lymphoma kinase gene ( ALK)-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (ALK-positive NSCLC), initial disease progression often occurs in the CNS. We evaluated brigatinib, a next-generation ALK inhibitor, in patients with ALK-positive NSCLC with brain metastases. Patients and Methods Patients with ALK-positive NSCLC received brigatinib (90 to 240 mg total daily) in a phase I/II trial (phI/II; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01449461) and in the subsequent randomized phase II trial ALTA (ALK in Lung Cancer Trial of AP26113; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02094573; patients in arm A received 90 mg once daily; patients in arm B received 180 mg once daily with 7-day lead-in at 90 mg). Primary end points (systemic objective response rates [ORRs]) were previously reported. Independent review committees assessed intracranial efficacy in patients with baseline brain metastases. Results Most patients with ALK-positive NSCLC had baseline brain metastases (50 of 79 [63%], phI/II; 80 of 112 [71%] and 73 of 110 [66%] in ALTA arms A and B, respectively), many of whom had no prior brain radiotherapy (23 of 50 [46%], phI/II; 32 of 80 [40%], ALTA arm A; 30 of 73 [41%], arm B). All patients, except four in phI/II, had received crizotinib. Among patients with measurable (≥ 10 mm) brain metastases, confirmed intracranial ORR was 53% (eight of 15; 95% CI, 27% to 79%) in phI/II, 46% (12 of 26; 95% CI, 27% to 67%) in ALTA arm A, and 67% (12 of 18; 95% CI, 41% to 87%) in arm B. Intracranial ORRs were similar in subsets without prior radiation or progression postradiation. Among patients with any baseline brain metastases, median intracranial progression-free survival (iPFS) was 14.6 months (95% CI, 12.7 to 36.8 months), phI/II; 15.6 months (95% CI, 9.0 to 18.3 months), ALTA arm A; 18.4 months (95% CI, 12.8 months to not reached), ALTA arm B. Conclusion Brigatinib yielded substantial intracranial responses and durable iPFS in ALK-positive, crizotinib-treated NSCLC, with highest iPFS in patients receiving 180 mg once daily (with lead-in).

Phase Ib/II Trial of NC-6004 (Nanoparticle Cisplatin) Plus Gemcitabine in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors.

Purpose: NC-6004, a novel cisplatin nanoparticle developed using micellar technology exhibits sustained release of cisplatin and selective distribution to tumors. Preclinical data demonstrated a favorable tolerability profile and preserved or improved antitumor activity compared with cisplatin across animal models. We evaluated the safety and tolerability of NC-6004 and gemcitabine using a Bayesian continual reassessment model (N-CRM) to determine the optimal dose.Experimental Design: Patients with advanced solid tumors received NC-6004 at 60 to 180 mg/m2 on day 1 and gemcitabine at 1,250 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks. Dose escalation of NC-6004 began with a single patient run-in until a dose-limiting toxicity occurred at 180 mg/m2 Cohorts of four patients were enrolled at doses predicted by the N-CRM. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was defined as having the greatest probability of target toxicity <25%. Quality of life was assessed using EORTC-QLQ-C30.Results: Among 22 patients, the most common grade III/IV hematologic adverse events were leukopenia (68%) and thrombocytopenia (59%). Of 20 pretreated patients evaluable for response, half were previously exposed to a platinum agent. The MTD was 135 mg/m2 Nine patients were treated at the MTD with median treatment duration of 15 weeks (range, 3-50). Tumor shrinkage occurred in 11 (55%), partial responses in 3 (15%), and stable disease in 14 (70%). Most patients reported stable or improved EORTC QLQ-C30 scores.Conclusions: Greater cisplatin equivalent doses were achieved with no clinically significant neuro-, oto-, or nephrotoxicity. These data demonstrate tolerability and promising activity of NC-6004 in combination with gemcitabine. Clin Cancer Res; 24(1); 43-51. ©2017 AACR.

Hypermutated Circulating Tumor DNA: Correlation with Response to Checkpoint Inhibitor-Based Immunotherapy.

Purpose: Tumor mutational burden detected by tissue next-generation sequencing (NGS) correlates with checkpoint inhibitor response. However, tissue biopsy may be costly and invasive. We sought to investigate the association between hypermutated blood-derived circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and checkpoint inhibitor response.Experimental Design: We assessed 69 patients with diverse malignancies who received checkpoint inhibitor-based immunotherapy and blood-derived ctDNA NGS testing (54-70 genes). Rates of stable disease (SD) ≥6 months, partial and complete response (PR, CR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were assessed based on total and VUS alterations.Results: Statistically significant improvement in PFS was associated with high versus low alteration number in variants of unknown significance (VUS, >3 alterations versus VUS ≤3 alterations), SD ≥6 months/PR/CR 45% versus 15%, respectively; P = 0.014. Similar results were seen with high versus low total alteration number (characterized plus VUS, ≥6 vs. <6). Statistically significant OS improvement was also associated with high VUS alteration status. Two-month landmark analysis showed that responders versus nonresponders with VUS >3 had a median PFS of 23 versus 2.3 months (P = 0.0004).Conclusions: Given the association of alteration number on liquid biopsy and checkpoint inhibitor-based immunotherapy outcomes, further investigation of hypermutated ctDNA as a predictive biomarker is warranted. Clin Cancer Res; 23(19); 5729-36. ©2017 AACR.

Activity and safety of brigatinib in ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer and other malignancies: a single-arm, open-label, phase 1/2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene rearrangements are oncogenic drivers of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Brigatinib (AP26113) is an investigational ALK inhibitor with potent preclinical activity against ALK mutants resistant to crizotinib and other ALK inhibitors. We aimed to assess brigatinib in patients with advanced malignancies, particularly ALK-rearranged NSCLC. METHODS: In this ongoing, single-arm, open-label, phase 1/2 trial, we recruited patients from nine academic hospitals or cancer centres in the USA and Spain. Eligible patients were at least 18 years of age and had advanced malignancies, including ALK-rearranged NSCLC, and disease that was refractory to available therapies or for which no curative treatments existed. In the initial dose-escalation phase 1 stage of the trial, patients received oral brigatinib at total daily doses of 30-300 mg (according to a standard 3 + 3 design). The phase 1 primary endpoint was establishment of the recommended phase 2 dose. In the phase 2 expansion stage, we assessed three oral once-daily regimens: 90 mg, 180 mg, and 180 mg with a 7 day lead-in at 90 mg; one patient received 90 mg twice daily. We enrolled patients in phase 2 into five cohorts: ALK inhibitor-naive ALK-rearranged NSCLC (cohort 1), crizotinib-treated ALK-rearranged NSCLC (cohort 2), EGFRT790M-positive NSCLC and resistance to one previous EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (cohort 3), other cancers with abnormalities in brigatinib targets (cohort 4), and crizotinib-naive or crizotinib-treated ALK-rearranged NSCLC with active, measurable, intracranial CNS metastases (cohort 5). The phase 2 primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with an objective response. Safety and activity of brigatinib were analysed in all patients in both phases of the trial who had received at least one dose of treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01449461. FINDINGS: Between Sept 20, 2011, and July 8, 2014, we enrolled 137 patients (79 [58%] with ALK-rearranged NSCLC), all of whom were treated. Dose-limiting toxicities observed during dose escalation included grade 3 increased alanine aminotransferase (240 mg daily) and grade 4 dyspnoea (300 mg daily). We initially chose a dose of 180 mg once daily as the recommended phase 2 dose; however, we also assessed two additional regimens (90 mg once daily and 180 mg once daily with a 7 day lead-in at 90 mg) in the phase 2 stage. four (100% [95% CI 40-100]) of four patients in cohort 1 had an objective response, 31 (74% [58-86]) of 42 did in cohort 2, none (of one) did in cohort 3, three (17% [4-41]) of 18 did in cohort 4, and five (83% [36-100]) of six did in cohort 5. 51 (72% [60-82]) of 71 patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC with previous crizotinib treatment had an objective response (44 [62% (50-73)] had a confirmed objective response). All eight crizotinib-naive patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC had a confirmed objective response (100% [63-100]). Three (50% [95% CI 12-88]) of six patients in cohort 5 had an intracranial response. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events across all doses were increased lipase concentration (12 [9%] of 137), dyspnoea (eight [6%]), and hypertension (seven [5%]). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events (excluding neoplasm progression) reported in at least 5% of all patients were dyspnoea (ten [7%]), pneumonia (nine [7%]), and hypoxia (seven [5%]). 16 (12%) patients died during treatment or within 31 days of the last dose of brigatinib, including eight patients who died from neoplasm progression. INTERPRETATION: Brigatinib shows promising clinical activity and has an acceptable safety profile in patients with crizotinib-treated and crizotinib-naive ALK-rearranged NSCLC. These results support its further development as a potential new treatment option for patients with advanced ALK-rearranged NSCLC. A randomised phase 2 trial in patients with crizotinib-resistant ALK-rearranged NSCLC is prospectively assessing the safety and efficacy of two regimens assessed in the phase 2 portion of this trial (90 mg once daily and 180 mg once daily with a 7 day lead-in at 90 mg). FUNDING: ARIAD Pharmaceuticals.

Ovarian stimulation in young adult cancer survivors on targeted cancer therapies.

OBJECTIVE: To describe a clinical approach to and outcomes of IVF in reproductive-aged cancer survivors receiving targeted cancer therapies. DESIGN: Case report. SETTING: Not applicable. PATIENT(S): The first case is of a female patient with metastatic lung cancer receiving long-term crizotinib, an anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibitor. The second case is of a female patient with metastatic colon cancer receiving long-term denosumab, a RANKL antibody. Both patients presented desiring fertility. INTERVENTION(S): In vitro fertilization. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Live birth and embryo banking. RESULT(S): The potential impact of targeted therapy on oocytes and pregnancy was investigated via literature review and pharmaceutical company inquiries. After oncologic, fertility, and psychological counseling, both survivors underwent ovarian stimulation, IVF, and preimplantation genetic screening. One couple achieved live births of dizygotic twins via gestational surrogacy. The second couple froze one euploid blastocyst for future fertility. Both survivors are stable from their cancer standpoints. CONCLUSION(S): Successful fertility treatments are possible in the context of exposure to crizotinib and denosumab.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma, Version 3.2016.

These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (MPM). These NCCN Guidelines Insights discuss systemic therapy regimens and surgical controversies for MPM. The NCCN panel recommends cisplatin/pemetrexed (category 1) for patients with MPM. The NCCN panel also now recommends bevacizumab/cisplatin/pemetrexed as a first-line therapy option for patients with unresectable MPM who are candidates for bevacizumab. The complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for MPM, available at NCCN.org, addresses all aspects of management for MPM including diagnosis, evaluation, staging, treatment, surveillance, and therapy for recurrence and metastasis; NCCN Guidelines are intended to assist with clinical decision-making.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 4.2016.

These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates in the 2016 NCCN Guidelines for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC; Versions 1-4). These NCCN Guidelines Insights will discuss new immunotherapeutic agents, such as nivolumab and pembrolizumab, for patients with metastatic NSCLC. For the 2016 update, the NCCN panel recommends immune checkpoint inhibitors as preferred agents (in the absence of contraindications) for second-line and beyond (subsequent) therapy in patients with metastatic NSCLC (both squamous and nonsquamous histologies). Nivolumab and pembrolizumab are preferred based on improved overall survival rates, higher response rates, longer duration of response, and fewer adverse events when compared with docetaxel therapy.

Precision Oncology: The UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center PREDICT Experience.

By profiling their patients' tumors, oncologists now have the option to use molecular results to match patients with drug(s) based on specific biomarkers. In this observational study, 347 patients with solid advanced cancers and next-generation sequencing (NGS) results were evaluated. Outcomes for patients who received a "matched" versus "unmatched" therapy following their NGS results were compared. Eighty-seven patients (25%) were treated with a "matched" therapy, 93 (26.8%) with an "unmatched" therapy. More patients in the matched group achieved stable disease (SD) ≥ 6 months/partial response (PR)/complete response (CR), 34.5% vs. 16.1%, (P ≤ 0.020 multivariable or propensity score methods). Matched patients had a longer median progression-free survival (PFS; 4.0 vs. 3.0 months, P = 0.039 in the Cox regression model). In analysis using PFS1 (PFS on the prior line of therapy) as a comparator to PFS after NGS, as expected, the unmatched group demonstrated a PFS2 significantly shorter than PFS1 (P = 0.009); however, this shortening was not observed in the matched patients (P = 0.595). Furthermore, 45.3% of the matched patients (24/53) had a PFS2/PFS1 ratio ≥1.3 compared with 19.3% of patients (11/57) in the unmatched group (P = 0.004 univariable and P ≥ 0.057 in multivariable/propensity score analysis). Patients with a "matching-score" (the number of matched drugs divided by the number of aberrations; unmatched patients had a score of zero) > 0.2 had a median overall survival (OS) of 15.7 months compared with 10.6 months when their matching-score was ≤ 0.2, (P = 0.040 in the Cox regression model). Matched versus unmatched patients had higher rates of SD ≥ 6 months/PR/CR and longer PFS, and improvement in OS correlated with a higher matching score in multivariable analysis. Mol Cancer Ther; 15(4); 743-52. ©2016 AACR.

Molecular inimitability amongst tumors: implications for precision cancer medicine in the age of personalized oncology.

Tumor sequencing has revolutionized oncology, allowing for detailed interrogation of the molecular underpinnings of cancer at an individual level. With this additional insight, it is increasingly apparent that not only do tumors vary within a sample (tumor heterogeneity), but also that each patient's individual tumor is a constellation of unique molecular aberrations that will require an equally unique personalized therapeutic regimen. We report here the results of 439 patients who underwent Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendment (CLIA)-certified next generation sequencing (NGS) across histologies. Among these patients, 98.4% had a unique molecular profile, and aside from three primary brain tumor patients with a single genetic lesion (IDH1 R132H), no two patients within a given histology were molecularly identical. Additionally, two sets of patients had identical profiles consisting of two mutations in common and no other anomalies. However, these profiles did not segregate by histology (lung adenocarcinoma-appendiceal cancer (KRAS G12D and GNAS R201C), and lung adenocarcinoma-liposarcoma (CDK4 and MDM2 amplification pairs)). These findings suggest that most advanced tumors are molecular singletons within and between histologies, and that tumors that differ in histology may still nonetheless exhibit identical molecular portraits, albeit rarely.

Emergence of RET rearrangement co-existing with activated EGFR mutation in EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients who had progressed on first- or second-generation EGFR TKI.

OBJECTIVES: The gatekeeper mutation T790M mutation is the responsible for the majority of the resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in patients with EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Other previously described resistance mechanisms include HER2 amplification, MET amplification, PIK3CA mutation, epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT), small cell transformation have also been identified. However other resistance mechanisms remains to be discovered. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Hybrid-capture based comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) was performed on pre- and post-EGFR TKI progression EGFR-mutated NSCLC tumor samples during routine clinical care. We identify two paired pre- and post-EGFR TKI progression EGFR-mutated NSCLC patient tumor samples where both post EGFR TKI samples harbored in-frame CCDC6-RET rearrangements but not in the pre-EGFR TKI tumor samples. Furthermore analysis of the clinical database revealed one additional NCOA4-RET rearrangement co-existing with activated EGFR mutation in an EGFR-mutated NSCLC patient who had progressed on afatinib. None of the known resistance mechanisms to EGFR TKI including EGFR T790M, EGFR amplification, HER2 amplification, MET amplification, PIK3CA mutation, BRAF mutation, EMT or small cell transformation was identified in the three post progression samples that now harbored RET rearrangements. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: This is the first report of RET rearrangement co-existing with activated EGFR mutations in EGFR-mutated patients who had progressed on either first- or second generation EGFR TKI. As such, RET rearrangement may serve as a potential resistance mechanism to EGFR TKI in EGFR-mutated NSCLC.

Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 6.2015.

These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates to the 2015 NCCN Guidelines for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC). Appropriate targeted therapy is very effective in patients with advanced NSCLC who have specific genetic alterations. Therefore, it is important to test tumor tissue from patients with advanced NSCLC to determine whether they have genetic alterations that make them candidates for specific targeted therapies. These NCCN Guidelines Insights describe the different testing methods currently available for determining whether patients have genetic alterations in the 2 most commonly actionable genetic alterations, notably anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene rearrangements and sensitizing epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations.

Non-small cell lung cancer, version 1.2015.

This selection from the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) focuses on the principles of radiation therapy (RT), which include the following: (1) general principles for early-stage, locally advanced, and advanced/metastatic NSCLC; (2) target volumes, prescription doses, and normal tissue dose constraints for early-stage, locally advanced, and advanced/palliative RT; and (3) RT simulation, planning, and delivery. Treatment recommendations should be made by a multidisciplinary team, including board-certified radiation oncologists who perform lung cancer RT as a prominent part of their practice.

Molecular tumor board: the University of California-San Diego Moores Cancer Center experience.

OBJECTIVE: DNA sequencing tests are enabling physicians to interrogate the molecular profiles of patients' tumors, but most oncologists have not been trained in advanced genomics. We initiated a molecular tumor board to provide expert multidisciplinary input for these patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A team that included clinicians, basic scientists, geneticists, and bioinformatics/pathway scientists with expertise in various cancer types attended. Molecular tests were performed in a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments environment. RESULTS: Patients (n = 34, since December 2012) had received a median of three prior therapies. The median time from physician order to receipt of molecular diagnostic test results was 27 days (range: 14-77 days). Patients had a median of 4 molecular abnormalities (range: 1-14 abnormalities) found by next-generation sequencing (182- or 236-gene panels). Seventy-four genes were involved, with 123 distinct abnormalities. Importantly, no two patients had the same aberrations, and 107 distinct abnormalities were seen only once. Among the 11 evaluable patients whose treatment had been informed by molecular diagnostics, 3 achieved partial responses (progression-free survival of 3.4 months, ≥6.5 months, and 7.6 months). The most common reasons for being unable to act on the molecular diagnostic results were that patients were ineligible for or could not travel to an appropriately targeted clinical trial and/or that insurance would not cover the cognate agents. CONCLUSION: Genomic sequencing is revealing complex molecular profiles that differ by patient. Multidisciplinary molecular tumor boards may help optimize management. Barriers to personalized therapy include access to appropriately targeted drugs.

Hypersensitivity reactions to carboplatin and cisplatin in non-small cell lung cancer.

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment has changed in the past ten years due to the acceptance of platinum-based adjuvant chemotherapy. In the event of relapse, patients are often retreated with platinum agents. Hypersensitivity reactions to carboplatin are well documented among gynecologic oncology patients. Now that adjuvant chemotherapy is a component of NSCLC treatment, platinum hypersensitivity is also a concern in the lung cancer population. A 74-year-old male developed relapsed NSCLC two years after a lobectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy including carboplatin. He was treated with a carboplatin containing regimen, and experienced hypersensitivity during his 2(nd) cycle (post-relapse). We briefly report four additional cases of platinum sensitivity in NSCLC patients, to highlight the increasing likelihood of platinum hypersensitivity in this "at risk" group. Hypersensitivity reactions to platinum chemotherapeutics occur in NSCLC patients, and patients and treating medical staff should be aware of this serious, treatment-related complication.

A stochastic Markov chain model to describe lung cancer growth and metastasis.

A stochastic Markov chain model for metastatic progression is developed for primary lung cancer based on a network construction of metastatic sites with dynamics modeled as an ensemble of random walkers on the network. We calculate a transition matrix, with entries (transition probabilities) interpreted as random variables, and use it to construct a circular bi-directional network of primary and metastatic locations based on postmortem tissue analysis of 3827 autopsies on untreated patients documenting all primary tumor locations and metastatic sites from this population. The resulting 50 potential metastatic sites are connected by directed edges with distributed weightings, where the site connections and weightings are obtained by calculating the entries of an ensemble of transition matrices so that the steady-state distribution obtained from the long-time limit of the Markov chain dynamical system corresponds to the ensemble metastatic distribution obtained from the autopsy data set. We condition our search for a transition matrix on an initial distribution of metastatic tumors obtained from the data set. Through an iterative numerical search procedure, we adjust the entries of a sequence of approximations until a transition matrix with the correct steady-state is found (up to a numerical threshold). Since this constrained linear optimization problem is underdetermined, we characterize the statistical variance of the ensemble of transition matrices calculated using the means and variances of their singular value distributions as a diagnostic tool. We interpret the ensemble averaged transition probabilities as (approximately) normally distributed random variables. The model allows us to simulate and quantify disease progression pathways and timescales of progression from the lung position to other sites and we highlight several key findings based on the model.

A retrospective review of the frequency and nature of acute hypersensitivity reactions at a medium-sized infusion center: comparison to reported values and inconsistencies found in literature.

PURPOSE: To evaluate acute hypersensitivity reactions at the UCSD Moores Cancer Center in San Diego, compare our findings to those reported previously in the literature, and examine the effectiveness of the objective grading scale as represented by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using the available pharmacy and electronic medical record data from 2006-2010, we examined our reported hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) using the CTCAE v.3.0 and v.4.0. A thorough literature review was also performed to compare our findings with those previously reported. RESULTS: We found 222 cases of HSRs, of which 50% were due to immunotherapeutics. Most were grade 1 or 2 by any CTCAE criteria. The clinical presentation of HSRs varied between drug classes. Using different versions of grading schema led to inconsistencies in ~50% of all HSRs. Fifty-two percent of all cases not due to blood products were rechallenged on the same day. The reported literature HSR frequencies for each causative agent showed a striking variability, possibly indicating that previous studies used a wide variety of grading and reporting systems for adverse events. CONCLUSION: HSRs are common in clinical practice, and most are mild or moderate. There are inconsistencies in reporting HSRs between studies. The existence of several grading schema and subjective definitions of hypersensitivity could be contributing to poor clinical generalizability. Along with an improved system of reporting HSRs to minimize underreporting, a standard system of objectively assessing HSRs is necessary for purposes of research and clinical practice.

Terminal respiratory unit type lung adenocarcinoma is associated with distinctive EGFR immunoreactivity and EGFR mutations.

Approximately 10% to 20% of nonsmall cell lung cancer patients respond to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors, such as gefitinib. Responders are mostly nonsmokers and women with tumors displaying bronchioloalveolar features. Mutations of the tyrosine kinase domain of the EGFR gene have been associated with a clinical response to gefitinib. A recent study reported that the terminal respiratory unit (TRU)-type adenocarcinoma shares the clinical profile and EGFR mutations of gefitinib responders. EGFR immunoreactivity in this context has not been reported in the literature. We performed a detailed immunohistochemical analysis of EGFR expression on 124 consecutive lung resection specimens for malignancy, to survey the EGFR immunoreactivity in lung cancers in general and to correlate EGFR immunoreactivity with EGFR mutations and TRU-type histology. EGFR positivity was seen most frequently in squamous cell carcinomas (77%), followed by TRU-type adenocarcinomas (63%), large cell carcinomas (23%), and non-TRU-type adenocarcinomas (12%). A distinctive basally oriented cytoplasmic positivity was observed exclusively in TRU-type adenocarcinomas. EGFR mutation was identified in 6 of 54 cases studied and all 6 cases were TRU-type adenocarcinomas. Five of six cases with EGFR mutation were positive for EGFR immunostain with the basal cytoplasmic localization. In conclusion, EGFR immunoreactivity with basal cytoplasmic pattern was exclusively seen in TRU-type adenocarcinoma and a subset of these cases was seen with EGFR mutations in the responders to EGFR inhibitor therapy.