Click
here to close Hello! We notice that
you are using Internet Explorer, which is not supported by Echinobase
and may cause the site to display incorrectly. We suggest using a
current version of Chrome,
FireFox,
or Safari.
J Transl Med
2016 Oct 19;141:296. doi: 10.1186/s12967-016-1061-z.
Show Gene links
Show Anatomy links
Clinical outcomes in ALK-rearranged lung adenocarcinomas according to ALK fusion variants.
Cha YJ
,
Kim HR
,
Shim HS
.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clinical outcomes of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-rearranged non-small cell lung cancer according to ALK fusion variants are not clear. We aimed to investigate the prevalence of ALK fusion variants and to compare clinical outcomes according to ALK fusion variants.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients with advanced ALK-rearranged adenocarcinoma treated with chemotherapy and ALK inhibitors. ALK rearrangement was identified by fluorescence in situ hybridization and confirmed by immunohistochemistry. Peptide nucleic acid-mediated quantitative polymerase chain reaction assays, designed to detect 28 types of echinoderm microtubule-associated protein-like 4 (EML)-ALK rearrangements, were performed. Clinicopathological analysis and treatment outcomes with platinum-based chemotherapy, pemetrexed therapy, and ALK inhibitors-including crizotinib and ceritinib-were evaluated.
RESULTS: A total of 52 patients with ALK-rearranged lung adenocarcinoma were enrolled. EML4-ALK variant 1 (v1) was the most common variant (38.5 %) followed by the non-EML4 variant (36.5 %), EML4-ALK variant 3a/b (19.2 %), and EML4-ALK variant 2 (5.8 %). No clinicopathological distinction was found between the different ALK fusion variants. Treatment response rates for each therapeutic agent did not differ according to ALK fusion variant. However, EML4 variants, especially v1, showed significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) on pemetrexed treatment than did non-EML4 variants (median 31.1 months versus 5.7 months, P = 0.003). PFS with platinum-based chemotherapy and ALK inhibitors did not differ according to ALK fusion variant. Multivariate survival analysis using Cox's regression model revealed v1 as the only predictive factor for prolonged PFS on pemetrexed.
CONCLUSIONS: Among ALK fusion variants, v1 is the most common subtype. It showed superior progression-free survival on pemetrexed than did non-EML4 variants. No survival difference was demonstrated between variants treated with crizotinib or ceritinib.
Fig. 2. Kaplan–Meier curves of progression free survival of patients treated with platinum-based chemotherapy, according to the ALK fusion variants. a
EML4 (N = 27) versus non-EML4 (N = 13). b Demonstration of progression free survival of each variant (v1, N = 17; v2, N = 1; v3a/b, N = 9; non-EML4, N = 13). Each symbol on the plot marks a censored patient. v1, EML4-ALK variant 1; v2, EML4-ALK variant 2; v3a/b, EML4-ALK variant 3a/b
Fig. 3. Kaplan–Meier curves of progression free survival of patients treated with pemetrexed as any line, according to the ALK fusion variants. a
EML4 (N = 24) versus non-EML4 (N = 11). b Demonstration of progression free survival of each variant (v1, N = 17; v2, N = 1; v3a/b, N = 6; non-EML4, N = 11). Each symbol on the plot marks a censored patient. v1, EML4-ALK variant 1; v2, EML4-ALK variant 2; v3a/b, EML4-ALK variant 3a/b
Fig. 4. Kaplan–Meier curves of progression free survival of patients treated with crizotinib and ceritinib according to the ALK fusion variants. a
EML4 (N = 20) versus non-EML4 (N = 12) on crizotinib. b Demonstration of progression free survival of each variant (v1, N = 10; v2, N = 2; v3a/b, N = 8; non-EML4, N = 12) on crizotinib. c
EML4 (N = 9) versus non-EML4 (N = 5) on ceritinib. d Demonstration of progression free survival of each variant (v1, N = 5; v2, N = 1; v3a/b, N = 3; non-EML4, N = 5) on ceritinib. Each symbol on the plot marks a censored patient. v1, EML4-ALK variant 1; v2, EML4-ALK variant 2; v3a/b, EML4-ALK variant 3a/b
Camidge,
Activity and safety of crizotinib in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: updated results from a phase 1 study.
2012, Pubmed
Camidge,
Activity and safety of crizotinib in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: updated results from a phase 1 study.
2012,
Pubmed
Camidge,
Anaplastic lymphoma kinase gene rearrangements in non-small cell lung cancer are associated with prolonged progression-free survival on pemetrexed.
2011,
Pubmed
Cha,
Screening of ROS1 rearrangements in lung adenocarcinoma by immunohistochemistry and comparison with ALK rearrangements.
2014,
Pubmed
Christensen,
Cytoreductive antitumor activity of PF-2341066, a novel inhibitor of anaplastic lymphoma kinase and c-Met, in experimental models of anaplastic large-cell lymphoma.
2007,
Pubmed
Eisenhauer,
New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1).
2009,
Pubmed
Gadgeel,
Safety and activity of alectinib against systemic disease and brain metastases in patients with crizotinib-resistant ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (AF-002JG): results from the dose-finding portion of a phase 1/2 study.
2014,
Pubmed
Heuckmann,
Differential protein stability and ALK inhibitor sensitivity of EML4-ALK fusion variants.
2012,
Pubmed
Hofman,
Immunohistochemistry to identify EGFR mutations or ALK rearrangements in patients with lung adenocarcinoma.
2012,
Pubmed
Kim,
Detection of ALK gene rearrangement in non-small cell lung cancer: a comparison of fluorescence in situ hybridization and chromogenic in situ hybridization with correlation of ALK protein expression.
2011,
Pubmed
Kim,
Activity and safety of ceritinib in patients with ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (ASCEND-1): updated results from the multicentre, open-label, phase 1 trial.
2016,
Pubmed
Kwak,
Anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibition in non-small-cell lung cancer.
2010,
Pubmed
Lee,
Anaplastic lymphoma kinase translocation: a predictive biomarker of pemetrexed in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.
2011,
Pubmed
Li,
Genotyping and genomic profiling of non-small-cell lung cancer: implications for current and future therapies.
2013,
Pubmed
Li,
ALK-rearranged lung cancer in Chinese: a comprehensive assessment of clinicopathology, IHC, FISH and RT-PCR.
2013,
Pubmed
Li,
Large-scale screening and molecular characterization of EML4-ALK fusion variants in archival non-small-cell lung cancer tumor specimens using quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction assays.
2014,
Pubmed
,
Echinobase
Ou,
Rapid and dramatic radiographic and clinical response to an ALK inhibitor (crizotinib, PF02341066) in an ALK translocation-positive patient with non-small cell lung cancer.
2010,
Pubmed
Rimkunas,
Analysis of receptor tyrosine kinase ROS1-positive tumors in non-small cell lung cancer: identification of a FIG-ROS1 fusion.
2012,
Pubmed
Seto,
CH5424802 (RO5424802) for patients with ALK-rearranged advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (AF-001JP study): a single-arm, open-label, phase 1-2 study.
2013,
Pubmed
Shaw,
Crizotinib versus chemotherapy in advanced ALK-positive lung cancer.
2013,
Pubmed
Shaw,
Crizotinib in ROS1-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer.
2014,
Pubmed
Shaw,
Ceritinib in ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer.
2014,
Pubmed
Shaw,
Pemetrexed-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced, ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer.
2013,
Pubmed
Soda,
Identification of the transforming EML4-ALK fusion gene in non-small-cell lung cancer.
2007,
Pubmed
,
Echinobase
Takahashi,
Clinicopathologic features of non-small-cell lung cancer with EML4-ALK fusion gene.
2010,
Pubmed
,
Echinobase
Yoshida,
Comprehensive histologic analysis of ALK-rearranged lung carcinomas.
2011,
Pubmed
Yoshida,
Frequent ALK rearrangement and TTF-1/p63 co-expression in lung adenocarcinoma with signet-ring cell component.
2011,
Pubmed
Yoshida,
Differential Crizotinib Response Duration Among ALK Fusion Variants in ALK-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.
2016,
Pubmed
