Clinical Validation of Discordant Trunk Driver Mutations in Paired Primary and Metastatic Lung Cancer Specimens

OBJECTIVES

To propose an operating procedure for validation of discordant trunk driver mutations.

METHODS

Concordance of trunk drivers was examined by next-generation sequencing in 15 patients with two to three metastatic lung cancers and 32 paired primary and metastatic lung cancers.

RESULTS

Tissue identity was confirmed by genotyping 17 single-nucleotide polymorphisms within the panel. All except three pairs showed concordant trunk drivers. Quality assessment conducted in three primary and metastatic pairs with discordant trunk drivers indicates metastasis from a synchronous or remote lung primary in two patients. Review of literature revealed high discordant rates of EGFR and KRAS mutations, especially when Sanger sequencing was applied to examine primary and lymph node metastatic tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

Trunk driver mutations are highly concordant in primary and metastatic tumors. Discordance of trunk drivers, once confirmed, may suggest a second primary cancer. Guidelines are recommended to establish standard operating procedures for validation of discordant trunk drivers.

Severe immune-related adverse events are common with sequential PD-(L)1 blockade and osimertinib

BACKGROUND

Concurrent programmed death-ligand-1 (PD-(L)1) plus osimertinib is associated with severe immune related adverse events (irAE) in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Now that PD-(L)1 inhibitors are routinely used as adjuvant and first-line treatments, sequential PD-(L)1 inhibition followed by osimertinib use may become more frequent and have unforeseen serious toxicity.

METHODS

We identified patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC who were treated with PD-(L)1 blockade and EGFR- tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), irrespective of drug or sequence of administration (total n = 126). Patient records were reviewed to identify severe (NCI-CTCAE v5.0 grades 3-4) toxicity.

RESULTS

Fifteen percent [6 of 41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 7% to 29%] of all patients treated with sequential PD-(L)1 blockade followed later by osimertinib developed a severe irAE. Severe irAEs were most common among those who began osimertinib within 3 months of prior PD-(L)1 blockade (5 of 21, 24%, 95% CI 10% to 45%), as compared with >3-12 months (1 of 8, 13%, 95% CI 0% to 50%), >12 months (0 of 12, 0%, 95% CI 0% to 28%). By contrast, no severe irAEs were identified among patients treated with osimertinib followed by PD-(L)1 (0 of 29, 95% CI 0% to 14%) or PD-(L)1 followed by other EGFR-TKIs (afatinib or erlotinib, 0 of 27, 95% CI 0% to 15%). IrAEs occurred at a median onset of 20 days after osimertinib (range 14-167 days). All patients with irAEs required steroids and most required hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

PD-(L)1 blockade followed by osimertinib is associated with severe irAE and is most frequent among patients who recently received PD-(L)1 blockade. No irAEs were observed when osimertinib preceded PD-(L)1 blockade or when PD-(L)1 was followed by other EGFR-TKIs. This association appears to be specific to osimertinib, as no severe irAEs occurred with administration of other EGFR-TKIs.