Background
Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality, which accounts for more than 80% of lung cancers, with lung adenocarcinoma (ADC) being the most common histological type.
RET (
Rearranged during transfection) gene fusions are present in approximately 1–2% of NSCLC and have emerged as a targetable oncogenic driver for NSCLC patients [
1‐
4].
The fusion of
RET with another unrelated gene occurs due to an aberrant DNA repair process [
2]. The resulting fusion product activates various downstream signaling pathways that play essential roles in cell proliferation and survival [
5]. Previous studies have shown that
RET fusion-positive (
RET+) NSCLC patients testing negative for
EGFR/
ALK/
BRAF/
ROS1 are usually young never-smokers with ADC [
6‐
9]. While the most common
RET fusion partners in NSCLC patients are
KIF5B and
CCDC6, other reported partners include
NCOA4,
TRIM33, etc. [
10]. The overall survival of
CCDC6-RET+ baseline patients was nearly three times longer than those with
KIF5B-RET fusions (median: 113.5 vs. 37.7 months,
P = 0.009) [
11]. Besides, treatment responses of
RET inhibitors were heterogeneous among baseline
RET+ patients harboring different fusion variants [
9,
11‐
14], highlighting the importance of fusion partner types in clinical outcomes toward targeted therapy.
More recently, receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK) fusions have emerged as a rare but targetable acquired resistance (AR) mechanism in
EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients on EGFR-TKI treatment. Notably,
RET fusions are the most commonly reported RTK fusions that mediate AR to EGFR-TKIs [
15]. Within secondary
RET fusions,
CCDC6-RET is the most common fusion variant, followed by
NCOA4-RET. Interestingly, NSCLC patients harboring
KIF5B-RET fusions showed minimal response after RET TKI (RXDX-105) treatment, whereas the response rate was 67% in non-
KIF5B-RET+ NSCLC patients [
16]. Dual blockade of
EGFR driver mutation and
RET fusion, such as
CCDC6-RET and
NCOA4-RET, demonstrated safety and clinical efficacy in both clinical and preclinical studies [
17].
To date, two highly potent
RET-specific TKIs, selpercatinib and pralsetinib, have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of advanced or metastatic
RET-altered NSCLC and thyroid cancers. Selpercatinib and pralsetinib effectively against
RET alterations, including
CCDC6-RET and
KIF5B-RET fusions,
RET activating mutations (C634W and M918T), and
RET gatekeeper mutations V804L/M/E [
18,
19]. Remarkably, selpercatinib has > 100-times selectivity against VEGFR2, and pralsetinib has 87-times selectivity against VEGFR2 and 20-times selectivity against JAK1 [
20]. Findings from the phase I/II LIBRETTO-001 trial (NCT03157128) demonstrated that selpercatinib has an overall response rate (ORR) of 64% in previously treated NSCLC patients and ORR of 85% in treatment-naïve
RET-altered NSCLC patients [
21]. In addition, the antitumor potential of selpercatinib is irrespective of specific
RET fusion types. On the other hand, initial data from the phase I/II ARROW trial (NCT03037385) demonstrated that pralsetinib has a high potency and durable activity and is well-tolerated in adult patients with metastatic
RET-altered NSCLC. The ORR in previously treated patients was 61%, and ORR in treatment-naïve patients was 70% [
22]. Most treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) of selpercatinib and pralsetinib are mild and controllable, including anemia, elevated alanine aminotransferase and hypertension [
5,
20]. However, the safety profiles of these two
RET inhibitors need to be further studied, given that some safety warnings have been reported [
20‐
24].
In this study, we delineated the mutational profiles of 380 baseline and 71 EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients who acquired RET fusions after resistance to EGFR-TKIs by targeted NGS and revealed RET fusion partners associated with primary and acquired patients. We also investigated the impact of co-occurring genetic alterations in RET-rearranged NSCLC patients, which might explain the poor prognosis of patients harboring secondary RET fusions.
Discussion
With comprehensive genomic profiling, clinicians can use the knowledge of specific clinical features associated with individual alterations to optimize therapeutic decision-making. Here, we retrospectively analyzed the mutational profiles of 451 patients carrying either baseline or acquired RET fusions to characterize the roles of RET fusions in NSCLC.
As a rare oncogenic driver mutation,
RET rearrangement occurs in 1–2% of NSCLC patients [
1,
2]. It has been shown that
RET-rearranged NSCLC patients are more likely associated with ADC. Consistent with this notion, we found that 76.1% of patients developed ADC as the predominant histological type in the baseline cohort. On the other hand, a much-debated question is whether baseline
RET fusions can correlate with the patient’s gender or age [
8,
40,
41]. Hence, we compared clinical characteristics of baseline patients with
RET fusions, such as gender and age. Our results showed that primary
RET fusions were more likely to occur in females than males (55.3% vs. 44.7%,
P = 0.038) and were associated with younger patients (58.9% vs. 41.1%,
P < 0.001). The controversy could be due to variations in the subject’s ethnicity, genetic background, environmental factors, and even lifestyles. Then, we compared whether the distribution of specific
RET fusions differed in baseline and acquired
RET+ patients. We found that the predominant fusion type in baseline patients was
KIF5B-RET, whereas
CCDC6-RET was most frequently identified in patients who acquired
RET fusions at resistance to EGFR-TKIs. The proportion of patients harboring
NCOA4-RET fusions also increased from 1.0 to 16.2% in acquired
RET+ patients. These results were consistent with previous findings, suggesting that
KIF5B-RET and non-
KIF5B-RET fusions might have different functionalities in EGFR-TKI progression [
17,
35]. Lastly, we characterized mutational profiles of the 380 baseline patients and demonstrated that concurrent gene alterations, such as
SMAD4 mutations and
MYC copy-number gain, were more frequently associated with
KIF5B-RET than
CCDC6-RET fusions in baseline
RET-rearranged NSCLC patients. Our results may provide insights into why NSCLC patients harboring
KIF5B-RET fusions have a nearly three times shorter overall survival than those harboring
CCDC6-RET fusions.
The diversity and complexity of molecular mechanisms underlying the acquired adaptation of cancer cells to targeted therapies, such as EGFR-TKIs, is an area of active investigation. In this study, we demonstrated that
RET fusions, as a rare but actionable AR mechanism to EGFR-TKIs, confer a poor prognosis in
EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients. It has been previously suggested that patients harboring
TP53 and
RB1 co-mutations are at unique risk of histologic transition from ADC to SCC or eventually small cell transformation [
42]. Here, our results showed that
RET+ patients with co-occurring
TP53 and
RB1 double-mutations had significantly shorter PFS than wild-type patients, highlighting the role of
TP53 and
RB1 in controlling cell proliferation and disease progression. In addition,
ERBB2 copy-number gain can also present a similar effect, resulting in reduced PFS in patients who acquired
RET fusions at resistance to EGFR-TKIs. It should also be noted that prognostic-related factors being examined in the survival analyses, including bypass pathway gene alterations,
TP53 and
RB1 co-mutations, and
ERBB2 copy-number gain, were not completely independent. The limited sample size may have impaired the statistical power to achieve significant results. Further studies using larger cohorts that consider additional variables need to be undertaken to better understand prognostic factors associated with the patient's survival.
In the final part of our study, we compared the incidence of secondary
RET fusions in NSCLC patients who progressed on different EGFR-TKI therapies. A ten-fold higher incidence of
RET fusions was observed in patients who underwent third-generation EGFR-TKI treatment than those treated with front-line 1st-/2nd-G EGFR-TKIs. This result was consistent with a previous finding which suggested that
RET fusions were significantly enriched after 3rd-G EGFR-TKI treatment [
15]. As previously mentioned, selpercatinib and pralsetinib have been granted FDA approval, showing equipotent for treating
RET-rearranged NSCLC and thyroid cancer with minor and controllable adverse effects. The ORR of previously treated
RET+ NSCLC patients on selpercatinib and pralsetinib were 64% and 61%, respectively, while the median PFS of previously treated patients on these two
RET inhibitors was 16.5 months and 17.1 months, respectively [
21,
22]. Given the high efficacy and mild side effects of the two
RET-specific inhibitors, it is worth investigating their clinical utility to treat
EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients who acquired
RET oncogenic alterations after TKI resistance, especially those receiving 3rd-G EGFR-TKIs.
Despite efforts we made to systemically characterize the mutational profiles of baseline and acquired RET+ patients, there are limitations in our study. We did not validate the authenticity of RET fusions with hitherto unreported partner genes. However, we reasoned that patients without known driver mutations might harbor functional RET fusions since RET fusions usually occur mutually exclusively. Due to the unavailability of RET-specific inhibitors during the patient’s treatment, we could not evaluate the PFS of baseline patients with different RET fusion partners on RET-specific inhibitors or patients with acquired RET fusions after EGFR-TKI resistance. However, dynamic monitoring of these acquired RET+ patients is currently ongoing. We intend to investigate the treatment outcomes for EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients harboring acquired RET fusions on the follow-up RET-specific inhibitor therapy upon obtaining more data on these patients.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.