Elsevier

Clinical Lung Cancer

Volume 17, Issue 5, September 2016, Pages 384-390
Clinical Lung Cancer

Original Study
Nonsquamous, Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients Who Carry a Double Mutation of EGFR, EML4-ALK or KRAS: Frequency, Clinical-Pathological Characteristics, and Response to Therapy

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cllc.2015.11.004Get rights and content

Abstract

Background

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and v-Ki-ras2 Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS) mutations, and echinoderm microtubule-associated protein-like 4 (EML4) anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) translocation are generally considered to be mutually exclusive. However, concomitant mutations are found in a small number of patients and the effect of these on response to targeted therapy is still unknown.

Patients and Methods

We considered 380 non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients who underwent nonsequential testing for EGFR and EML4-ALK translocation. KRAS mutation analysis was also performed on 282 patients.

Results

We found 1.6%, 1.1%, and 2.5% of patients who showed a double mutation comprising EGFR and EML4-ALK, EGFR and KRAS, and EML4-ALK and KRAS, respectively. Twenty-eight patients with EGFR mutation underwent first-line therapy with a tyrosine kinase receptor; a clinical benefit was observed in 81.8% of patients with EGFR mutations only and in 67% of those who also showed an EML4-ALK translocation. Twelve patients with an EML4-ALK translocation received crizotinib and 7 of these had disease progression within 3 months (2 had a concomitant KRAS mutation and 1 had a concomitant EGFR mutation). Two patients showed stable disease, 1 of whom also had a KRAS mutation. Two patients obtained a partial response and 1 had a complete response; all harbored an EML4-ALK translocation only. The median overall survival of patients who carried an EML4-ALK translocation alone or concomitant with a KRAS mutation was 57.1 (range, 10.7-not reached) and 10.7 (range, 4.6-not reached) months, respectively.

Conclusion

Concomitant EGFR, EML4-ALK, or KRAS mutations can occur in NSCLC. Concomitant KRAS mutation and EML4-ALK translocation represents the most common double alteration and confers a poor prognosis.

Introduction

Treatment of advanced nonsquamous (NS) non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients has changed in recent years as a result of the definition of druggable features and the increased availability of targeted agents. Mutations of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene are present in approximately 15% of patients in Western countries and in 50% in Asia.1, 2 These mutations have been shown to be predictive of response to specific tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) such as gefitinib, erlotinib, or afatinib, which are used as first-line therapy in this setting.3, 4, 5 Echinoderm microtubule-associated protein-like 4 (EML4)-anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) translocation defines another group of patients (approximately 3%-5%)6 who are particularly sensitive to targeted therapies such as crizotinib, alectinib, and ceritinib7, 8, 9: the first is superior to chemotherapy in first- and advanced-lines of treatment, and the remaining 2 are currently under evaluation and are showing promising activity at recurrence after crizotinib.9, 10 For these reasons, it is important to determine EGFR mutations and EML4-ALK translocation before any treatment decision is made. Finally, v-Ki-ras2 Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS) mutations are present in approximately 25% of patients with NS-NSCLC11, 12; data on their ability to predict response to TKIs are conflicting and their correlation with resistance to therapy (TKIs and chemotherapy), has not been unequivocally defined.13, 14, 15 In general, EML4-ALK translocation and EGFR and KRAS mutations are considered to be mutually exclusive, as reported in several studies.16, 17, 18 However, some case reports19, 20, 21, 22, 23 and studies performed prevalently in Asian24, 25, 26 or Caucasian27, 28, 29 case series have suggested that these mutations might overlap. Moreover, little is known of the role they play in response to TKIs. In fact, in some studies it was hypothesized that this double alteration might represent a resistance mechanism to TKIs,19, 23 and others have reported an increased sensitivity to TKIs in patients with an EGFR mutation and EML4-ALK translocation.21, 22 Similarly, few data are available on concomitant KRAS mutations and EGFR or EML4-ALK alterations.

In the present study we analyzed the prevalence of overlapping mutations among EGFR, KRAS, and EML4-ALK in patients treated for NS-NSCLC and evaluated their clinical response to targeted therapies.

Section snippets

Patients and Methods

We evaluated 380 patients with NS-NSCLC who underwent nonsequential testing for EGFR and KRAS mutations and EML4-ALK translocation in medical oncology units of the wide catchment area of Romagna (Area Vasta Romagna [AVR]) between January 2010 and December 2013. All patients had a histologically or cytologically confirmed diagnosis of NS-NSCLC. The clinical-pathological characteristics of patients are listed in Table 1. The study was approved by the AVR institutional review board.

Formalin-fixed

Results

Among the 380 patients analyzed for EML4-ALK translocation and EGFR mutations, 32 (8.4%) showed an EML4-ALK translocation and 44 (11.6%) had an EGFR mutation: 27 (61.4%) had an exon 19 deletion, 13 (30.0%) an exon 21 L858R mutation (1 of which with a concomitant T790M mutation), 2 (4.6%) an exon 21 L861Q mutation, and 2 (4.6%) an exon 18 G719S mutation. KRAS mutations were evaluated in 282 patients, 92 of whom (32.6%) showed a mutation: G12C in 44 patients (48%), G12V in 19 (21%), G12D in 9

Discussion

The EGFR and KRAS mutations and the EML4-ALK translocations have long been considered mutually exclusive.16, 17, 18 However, there is increasing evidence that double mutations, albeit rare, can be concomitantly present.19, 20, 21, 22, 23 This phenomenon can, in fact, be explained by the concept of tumor heterogeneity according to which different mutations of tyrosine kinase receptors might coexist, not only in different clones of tumor cells,30 but also in the same tumor cell, as we and others

Conclusion

Our study showed that concomitant mutations involving EGFR, EML4-ALK, and KRAS are possible, albeit rare, in advanced NS-NSCLC patients and that their presence might have a detrimental effect on response to treatment. For these reasons, the mutational status of NS-NSCLC patients should be determined at the time of diagnosis to allow the best therapeutic strategy to be chosen.

Disclosure

The authors have stated that they have no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Grainne Tierney and Ursula Elbling for editing the manuscript.

References (36)

  • J.K. Won et al.

    Concomitant ALK translocation and EGFR mutation in lung cancer: a comparison of direct sequencing and sensitive assays and the impact on responsiveness to tyrosine kinase inhibitor

    Ann Oncol

    (2015)
  • F. Cabillic et al.

    Parallel FISH and immunohistochemical studies of ALK status in 3244 non–small-cell lung cancers reveal major discordances

    J Thorac Oncol

    (2014)
  • G. Rossi et al.

    Concomitant EGFR and KRAS mutations in ALK-rearranged lung cancer

    Ann Oncol

    (2015)
  • N. Mar et al.

    Targeting HER2 in the treatment of non–small-cell lung cancer

    Lung Cancer

    (2015)
  • A.L. Tufman et al.

    Preselection based on clinical characteristics in German non–small-cell lung cancer patients screened for EML4-ALK translocation

    J Thorac Oncol

    (2014)
  • T. Sasaki et al.

    The biology and treatment of EML4-ALK non–small-cell lung cancer

    Eur J Cancer

    (2010)
  • T. Tanaka et al.

    Frequency of and variables associated with the EGFR mutation and its subtypes

    Int J Cancer

    (2010)
  • A. Marchetti et al.

    EGFR mutations in non–small-cell lung cancer: analysis of a large series of cases and development of a rapid and sensitive method for diagnostic screening with potential implications on pharmacologic treatment

    J Clin Oncol

    (2005)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text