Prognostic Significance of the Loss of Heterozygosity of KRAS in Early-Stage Lung Adenocarcinoma

Lung cancer is a common disease with a poor prognosis. Genomic alterations involving the KRAS gene are common in lung carcinomas, although much is unknown about how different mutations, deletions, and expressions influence the disease course. The first approval of a KRAS-directed inhibitor was recently approved by the FDA. Mutations in the KRAS gene have been associated with poor prognosis for lung adenocarcinomas, but implications of the loss of heterozygosity (LOH) of KRAS have not been investigated. In this study, we have assessed the LOH of KRAS in early-stage lung adenocarcinoma by analyzing DNA copy number profiles and have investigated the effect on patient outcome in association with mRNA expression and somatic hotspot mutations. KRAS mutation was present in 36% of cases and was associated with elevated mRNA expression. LOH in KRAS was associated with a favorable prognosis, more prominently in KRAS mutated than in wild-type patients. The presence of both LOH and mutation in KRAS conferred a better prognosis than KRAS mutation alone. For wild-type tumors, no difference in prognosis was observed between patients with and without LOH in KRAS. Our study indicates that LOH in KRAS is an independent prognostic factor that may refine the existing prognostic groups of lung adenocarcinomas.

Treating KRAS-mutant NSCLC: latest evidence and clinical consequences

KRAS mutations represent one of the most prevalent oncogenic driver mutations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). For many years we have unsuccessfully addressed KRAS mutation as a unique disease. The recent widespread use of comprehensive genomic profiling has identified different subgroups with prognostic implications. Moreover, recent data recognizing the distinct biology and therapeutic vulnerabilities of different KRAS subgroups have allowed us to explore different treatment approaches. Small molecules that selectively inhibit KRAS G12C or use of immune checkpoint inhibitors based on co-mutation status are some examples which anticipate that personalized treatment for this challenging disease is finally on the horizon.

KRAS-Mutant Lung Cancers in the Era of Targeted Therapy

KRAS-mutant lung cancers account for approximately 25% of non-small cell lung carcinomas, thus representing an enormous burden of cancer worldwide. KRAS mutations are clear drivers of tumor growth and are characterized by a complex biology involving the interaction between mutant KRAS, various growth factor pathways, and tumor suppressor genes. While KRAS mutations are classically associated with a significant smoking history, they are also identified in a substantial proportion of never-smokers. These mutations are found largely in lung adenocarcinomas with solid growth patterns and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes. A variety of tools are available for diagnosis including Sanger sequencing, multiplex mutational hotspot profiling, and next-generation sequencing. The prognostic and predictive roles of KRAS status remain controversial. It has become increasingly clear, however, that KRAS mutations drive primary resistance to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibition. Until recently, mutant KRAS was not thought of as a clinically-targetable driver in lung cancers. With the expansion of our knowledge regarding the biology of KRAS-mutant lung cancers and the role of MEK and PI3K/mTOR inhibition, the face of targeted therapeutics for this genomic subset of patients is slowly beginning to change.

Recombinant expression of different mutant K-ras gene in pancreatic cancer Bxpc-3 cells and its effects on chemotherapy sensitivity

K-ras is a member of ras gene family which is involved in cell survival, proliferation and differentiation. When a mutation occurs in ras gene, the activation of Ras proteins may be prolonged to induce oncogenesis. However, the relationship between K-ras mutation and clinical outcomes in pancreatic cancer patients treated with chemotherapy agents is still under debate. In this study, we constructed five pAcGFP1-C3 plasmids for different types of K-ras gene (WT, G12V, G12R, G12D, and G13D) and stably transfected human pancreatic cancer Bxpc-3 cells with these genes. The wild type and mutant clones showed a comparable growth and expression of K-Ras-GFP fusion protein. The expression of some K-ras mutations resulted in a reduced sensitivity to gefitinib, 5-FU, docetaxel and gemcitabine, while showed no effects on erlotinib or cisplatin. Moreover, compared with the wild type clone, K-Ras downstream signals (phospho-Akt and/or phospho-Erk) were increased in K-ras mutant clones. Interestingly, different types of K-ras mutation had non-identical K-Ras downstream signal activities and drug responses. Our results are the first to reveal the relationship between different K-ras mutation and drug sensitivities of these anti-cancer drugs in pancreatic cancer cells in vitro.

KRAS mutations as prognostic and predictive markers in non-small cell lung cancer

A greater understanding of non-small-cell lung cancer at a molecular level has led to the identification of an increasing number of driver mutations. Extensive research of the KRAS gene as well as specific mutations has established its role in tumorigenesis. Nevertheless, the role of KRAS oncogene in non-small-cell lung cancer remains unclear. Recent studies indicated that mutant KRAS could be predictive of lack of response to chemotherapy, but large pooled analysis failed to confirm this result. The predictive value of KRAS mutation and EGFR-TKI treatment is more ambiguous with some recent evidence suggesting that it may be a negative predictive biomarker. This review provides an overview of RAS biology, assesses the utility of KRAS as a prognostic marker, and evaluates its role as a predictive marker for response to chemotherapy and EGFR-TKIs. In addition, we review some current studies that are targeting the KRAS pathway.

A pooled exploratory analysis of the effect of tumor size and KRAS mutations on survival benefit from adjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy in node-negative non-small cell lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

The staging of node-negative non-small-cell lung cancer is modified in the 7th edition TNM classification. Here, we pool data from the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group JBR.10 trial and the Cancer and Leukemia Group B-9633 trial to explore the prognostic and predictive effects of the new T-size descriptors and KRAS mutation status.

METHODS

Node-negative patients were reclassified as T2a (>3-≤5 cm), T2b (>5-≤7 cm), T3 (>7 cm) or T ≤ 3 cm (≤3 cm, but other T2 characteristics).

RESULTS

Of 538 eligible patients, 288 (53.5%) were T2a, 111 (21%) T2b, 62 (11.5%) T3, whereas 77 (14%) T≤3 cm were excluded to avoid confounding. KRAS mutations were detected in 104 of 390 patients (27%). T-size was prognostic for disease-free survival (p = 0.03), but borderline for overall survival (OS; p = 0.10), on multivariable analysis. Significant interaction between the prognostic value of KRAS and tumor size was observed for OS (p = 0.01), but not disease-free survival (p = 0.10). There was a nonsignificant trend (p = 0.24) for increased chemotherapy effect on OS with advancing T-size (hazard ratio [HR] T2a 0.90, [0.63-1.30]; T2b 0.69, [0.38-1.24]; and T3 0.57, [0.28-1.17]). The HR for chemotherapy effect on OS in T2a patients with KRAS wild-type tumors was 0.81 (p = 0.36), whereas a trend for detrimental effect was observed in those with mutant tumors (HR 2.11; p = 0.09; interaction p = 0.05). Similar trends were observed in T2b to T3 patients with wild-type (HR 0.86; p = 0.62), and KRAS mutant tumors (HR 1.16; p = 0.74; interaction p = 0.58).

CONCLUSION

Chemotherapy effect seems to increase with tumor size. However, this small study could not identify subgroups of patients who did or did not derive significant benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy based on T-size or KRAS status.

How close are we to customizing chemotherapy in early non-small cell lung cancer?

Although surgery is the only potentially curative treatment for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), 5-year survival rates range from 77% for stage IA tumors to 23% in stage IIIA disease. Adjuvant chemotherapy has recently been established as a standard of care for resected stage II-III NSCLC, on the basis of large-scale clinical trials employing third-generation platinum-based regimens. As the overall absolute 5-year survival benefit from this approach does not exceed 5% and potential long-term complications are an issue of concern, the aim of customized adjuvant systemic treatment is to optimize the toxicity/benefit ratio, so that low-risk individuals are spared from unnecessary intervention, while avoiding undertreatment of high-risk patients, including those with stage I disease. Therefore, the application of reliable prognostic and predictive biomarkers would enable to identify appropriate patients for the most effective treatment.This is an overview of the data available on the most promising clinicopathological and molecular biomarkers that could affect adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy decisions for operable NSCLC in routine practice. Among the numerous candidate molecular biomarkers, only few gene-expression profiling signatures provide clinically relevant information warranting further validation. On the other hand, real-time quantitative polymerase-chain reaction strategy involving relatively small number of genes offers a practical alternative, with high cross-platform performance. Although data extrapolation from the metastatic setting should be cautious, the concept of personalized, pharmacogenomics-guided chemotherapy for early NSCLC seems feasible, and is currently being evaluated in randomized phase 2 and 3 trials. The mRNA and/or protein expression levels of excision repair cross-complementation group 1, ribonucleotide reductase M1 and breast cancer susceptibility gene 1 are among the most potential biomarkers for early disease, with stage-independent prognostic and predictive values, the clinical utility of which is being validated prospectively. Inter-assay discordance in determining the biomarker status and association with clinical outcomes is noteworthing.