{Reference Type}: Journal Article {Title}: A Large Real-World Study on the Effectiveness of the Combined Inhibition of EGFR and MET in EGFR-Mutant Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer After Development of EGFR-TKI Resistance. {Author}: Liu L;Qu J;Heng J;Zhou C;Xiong Y;Yang H;Jiang W;Zeng L;Zhu S;Zhang Y;Tan J;Hu C;Deng P;Yang N; {Journal}: Front Oncol {Volume}: 11 {Issue}: 0 {Year}: 2021 {Factor}: 5.738 {DOI}: 10.3389/fonc.2021.722039 {Abstract}: BACKGROUND: MET proto-oncogene amplification (amp) is an important mechanism underlying acquired resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). However, the optimal treatment strategy after acquiring MET-amp-mediated EGFR-TKI resistance remains controversial. Our study compared three treatment strategies for patients with EGFR-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who were detected with MET-amp at EGFR-TKI progression using next-generation sequencing.
METHODS: Of the 70 patients included in the study, 38 received EGFR-TKI + crizotinib, 10 received crizotinib monotherapy, and 22 received chemotherapy. Clinical outcomes and molecular profiles were analyzed.
RESULTS: The objective response rate was 48.6% for EGFR-TKI + crizotinib group, 40.0% for crizotinib monotherapy group, and 18.2% for chemotherapy group. Patients who received EGFR-TKI + crizotinib had significantly longer progression-free survival than those who received crizotinib or chemotherapy (5.0 vs. 2.3 vs. 2.9 months, p = 0.010), but overall survival was comparable (10.0 vs. 4.1 vs. 8.5 months, p = 0.088). TP53 mutation (58.5%) and EGFR-amp (42.9%) were frequent concurrent mutations of the cohort. Progression-free survival was significantly longer for patients with either concurrent TP53 mutation (n = 17) (6.0 vs. 2.3 vs. 2.9 months, p = 0.009) or EGFR-amp (n = 13) (5.0 vs. 1.2 vs. 2.4 months, p = 0.016) in the EGFR-TKI + crizotinib group than the other two regimen. Potential acquired resistance mechanisms to EGFR-TKI + crizotinib included EGFR-T790M (n = 2), EGFR-L718Q (n = 1), EGFR-S645C (n = 1), MET-D1228H (n = 1), BRAF-V600E (n = 1), NRAS-Q61H (n = 1), KRAS-amp (n = 1), ERBB2-amp (n = 1), CDK4-amp (n = 1), and MYC-amp (n = 1).
CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides real-world clinical evidence from a large cohort that simultaneous inhibition of EGFR and MET could be a more effective therapeutic strategy for patients with MET-amp acquired from EGFR-TKI therapy.