Epidermal growth factor receptor mutation status in pulmonary adenocarcinoma: Multi-institutional data discussion at national conference of "Lung Cancer Management in Indian context".
肺腺癌的表皮生长因子受体突变状态: “印度背景下的肺癌管理” 全国会议上的多机构数据讨论。
- 作者列表："Nakra T","Mehta A","Bal A","Nambirajan A","Mishra D","Midha D","Gupta N","Arora N","Gupta P","Gupta P","Singh V","Jain D
:The presence of activating mutations in the tyrosine kinase domain of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene in adenocarcinomas of lung confers sensitivity to tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy. The prevalence of EGFR mutations varies among different ethnicities and demographic profile. This multi-institutional data was compiled to determine the EGFR mutation status in Indians patients with lung adenocarcinoma. Cohorts represented by 4 tertiary care hospitals participated in data discussion at a national conference entitled as 'Lung Cancer Management in Indian Context'. The clinicopathologic data and EGFR mutation rate in the patients of lung adenocarcinoma screened in these cohorts were collected and analyzed. The sample types included both surgical and cytological specimens. A variety of methods were used including immunohistochemistry, polymerase chain reaction, Sanger sequencing and next generation sequencing. A total of 3436 cases of treatment naïve lung adenocarcinoma were tested for EGFR mutations. The overall frequency of EGFR mutations observed was 30.03%. The most common baseline mutation detected was exon 19 deletion followed by L858R point mutation in exon 21. Dual mutations were observed in 6.5% of cases and were predominantly combinations of exon 19 deletion and T790M point mutation in exon 20. Incidence of EGFR mutations was higher among females and non-smokers diagnosed with lung adenocarcinomas. The most common histology in EGFR mutant cases was acinar predominant adenocarcinomas. With nearly one-third of Indian patients with lung adenocarcinoma harboring EGFR mutations, routine testing for these mutations is important to get the benefit of targeted therapy.
: 肺腺癌中表皮生长因子受体 (EGFR) 基因酪氨酸激酶结构域激活突变的存在赋予了酪氨酸激酶抑制剂治疗的敏感性。EGFR 突变的患病率在不同种族和人口特征之间存在差异。这个多机构的数据被编译以确定印度肺腺癌患者的 EGFR 突变状态。由 4 家三级甲等医院代表的队列参加了题为 “印度肺癌管理” 的全国会议上的数据讨论。收集并分析在这些队列中筛选出的肺腺癌患者的临床病理资料和 EGFR 突变率。样本类型包括手术和细胞学标本。使用了多种方法，包括免疫组织化学、聚合酶链反应、 Sanger 测序和下一代测序。对 3436 例初治肺腺癌进行 EGFR 突变检测。观察到的 EGFR 突变的总体频率为 30.03%。检测到的最常见的基线突变是 19 号外显子缺失，其次是 21 号外显子的 L858R 点突变。在 6.5% 的病例中观察到双重突变，主要是外显子 19 缺失和外显子 20 T790M 点突变的组合。诊断为肺腺癌的女性和不吸烟者中 EGFR 突变的发生率较高。EGFR 突变病例中最常见的组织学是腺泡型腺癌。近 3分之1 的印度肺腺癌患者携带 EGFR 突变，常规检测这些突变对于获得靶向治疗的益处非常重要。
METHODS:BACKGROUND:The objectives of this study are to assess the chest drainage volumes of patients undergoing anatomic resection of non-small cell lung carcinoma and to determine the safety and effectiveness of administering enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis. METHODS:A total of 77 patients were included in the study. A study was conducted on the first group of 42 patients in which enoxaparin prophylaxis (enoxaparin, 40 mg) was subcutaneously injected once a day for a period of three days after the patients underwent anatomic pulmonary resection between March 2016 and March 2018. An enoxaparin-free group was identified and included 35 patients who received no enoxaparin prophylaxis after undergoing anatomic pulmonary resection between February 2013 and February 2016. We compared the changes in hemoglobin (Hb) levels, postoperative 3-day drainage volume, transfusion volume, pulmonary complications and length of stay between the two groups. RESULTS:No differences in postoperative Hb levels, chest drainage volume, transfusion volume, postoperative complications, and length of stay were observed between the two groups. Deep-vein thrombosis was noted in a patient in the enoxaparin-free group. No major bleeding was noted in either group. CONCLUSION:We found that for patients undergoing anatomic resection of primary lung cancer, the blood transfusion and chest drainage volumes did not differ, regardless of whether the patients were given enoxaparin. To the best of our knowledge, the impact of low-molecular-weight heparin on chest tube drainage volume for patients undergoing anatomic resection of non-small cell lung carcinoma has not been investigated before.
METHODS::The aim of the present study was to compare the safety and efficacy of cryoablation (CA) and microwave ablation (MWA) as treatments for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC treated with CA (n=45) or MWA (n=56) were enrolled in the present study. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); the secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) time and adverse events (AEs). The median PFS times between the two groups were not significantly different (P=0.36): CA, 10 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 7.5-12.4] vs. MWA, 11 months (95% CI, 9.5-12.4). The OS times between the two groups were also not significantly different (P=0.07): CA, 27.5 months (95% CI, 22.8-31.2 months) vs. MWA, 18 months (95% CI, 12.5-23.5). For larger tumors (>3 cm), patients treated with MWA had significantly longer median PFS (P=0.04; MWA, 10.5 months vs. CA, 7.0 months) and OS times (P=0.04; MWA, 24.5 months vs. CA, 14.5 months) compared patients treated with CA. However, for smaller tumors (≤3 cm), median PFS (P=0.79; MWA, 11.0 months vs. CA, 13.0 months) and OS times (P=0.39; MWA, 30.0 months vs. CA, 26.5 months) between the two groups did not differ significantly. The incidence rates of AEs were similar in the two groups (P>0.05). The number of applicators, tumor size and length of the lung traversed by applicators were associated with a higher risk of pneumothorax and intra-pulmonary hemorrhage in the two groups. Treatment with CA resulted in significantly less intraprocedural pain compared with treatment with MWA (P=0.001). Overall, the present study demonstrated that CA and MWA were comparably safe and effective procedures for the treatment of small tumors. However, treatment with MWA was superior compared with CA for the treatment of large tumors.
METHODS:BACKGROUND:BRAF mutations occurring in 1%-5% of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are therapeutic targets for these cancers but the impact of the exact mutation on clinical activity is unclear. The French National Cancer Institute (INCA) launched the AcSé vemurafenib trial to assess the efficacy and safety of vemurafenib in cancers with various BRAF mutations. We herein report the results of the NSCLC cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS:Tumour samples were screened for BRAF mutations in INCA-certified molecular genetic centres. Patients with BRAF-mutated tumours progressing after ≥1 line of treatment were proposed vemurafenib 960 mg twice daily. Between October 2014 and July 2018, 118 patients were enrolled in the NSCLC cohort. The primary outcome was the objective response rate (ORR) assessed every 8 weeks (RECIST v1.1). A sequential Bayesian approach was planned with an inefficacy bound of 10% for ORR. If no early stopping occurred, the treatment was of interest if the estimated ORR was ≥30% with a 90% probability. Secondary outcomes were tolerance, response duration, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS:Of the 118 patients enrolled, 101 presented with a BRAFV600 mutation and 17 with BRAFnonV600 mutations; the median follow-up was 23.9 months. In the BRAFnonV600 cohort, no objective response was observed and this cohort was stopped. In the BRAFV600 cohort, 43/96 patients had objective responses. The mean Bayesian estimated success rate was 44.9% [95% confidence intervals (CI) 35.2%-54.8%]. The ORR had a 99.9% probability of being ≥30%. Median response duration was 6.4 months, median PFS was 5.2 months (95% CI 3.8-6.8), and OS was 10 months (95% CI 6.8-15.7). The vemurafenib safety profile was consistent with previous publications. CONCLUSION:Routine biomarker screening of NSCLC should include BRAFV600 mutations. Vemurafenib monotherapy is effective for treating patients with BRAFV600-mutated NSCLC but not those with BRAFnonV600 mutations. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02304809.