Next Article in Journal
Aqueous Humor Cytokines in Non-Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy
Previous Article in Journal
Clinical and Polysomnographic Features Associated with Poor Sleep Quality in Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Medicina
Volume 58
Issue 7
10.3390/medicina58070908
medicina-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Histological Transformation after Acquired Resistance to the Third-Generation EGFR-TKI in Patients with Advanced EGFR-Mutant Lung Adenocarcinoma

by
Po-Hsin Lee
1,2,3,4,
Yen-Hsiang Huang
1,2,5,
Ho Lin
6,
Kuo-Hsuan Hsu
7,
Kun-Chieh Chen
8,9,10,
Jeng-Sen Tseng
1,2,5,11,*,
Gee-Chen Chang
5,8,9,10 and
Tsung-Ying Yang
1,6
1
Division of Chest Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, No.1650, Sect. 4, Taiwan Boulevard, Taichung 407, Taiwan
2
College of Medicine, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, No.155, Sec. 2, Linong St., Taipei 112, Taiwan
3
Program in Translational Medicine, National Chung Hsing University, No. 145, Xingda Rd., Taichung 402, Taiwan
4
Rong Hsing Research Center for Translational Medicine, National Chung Hsing University, No. 145, Xingda Rd., Taichung 402, Taiwan
5
Institute of Biomedical Sciences, National Chung Hsing University, No. 145, Xingda Rd., Taichung 402, Taiwan
6
Department of Life Sciences, National Chung Hsing University, No. 145, Xingda Rd., Taichung 402, Taiwan
7
Division of Critical Care and Respiratory Therapy, Department of Internal Medicine, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, No.1650, Sect. 4, Taiwan Boulevard, Taichung 407, Taiwan
8
Division of Pulmonary Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, No.110, Sec. 1, Jianguo N. Road, Taichung 402, Taiwan
9
School of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, No.110, Sec. 1, Jianguo N. Road, Taichung 402, Taiwan
10
Institute of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, No.110, Sec. 1, Jianguo N. Road, Taichung 402, Taiwan
11
Department of Post-Baccalaureate Medicine, College of Medicine, National Chung Hsing University, No. 145, Xingda Rd., Taichung 402, Taiwan
 
add Show full affiliation list
 
remove Hide full affiliation list
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Medicina 2022, 58(7), 908; https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina58070908
Submission received: 13 June 2022 / Revised: 3 July 2022 / Accepted: 5 July 2022 / Published: 8 July 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Oncology)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Background and Objectives: Third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) is one of the standard-of-care therapies in patients with EGFR-mutant lung adenocarcinoma; however, acquired resistance inevitably developed. Despite the proposition of histological transformation being one of the resistance mechanisms, its incidence and influence on outcome remain unclear. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective study conducted at Taichung Veterans General Hospital on patients with advanced EGFR-mutant lung adenocarcinoma receiving the third-generation EGFR-TKI. Only patients receiving rebiopsy were included in the analysis. Results: A total of 55 patients were studied. Eight patients (14.5%) showed histological transformation, including three small cell carcinoma, three squamous cell carcinoma, one large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma, and one with a mixture of adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma components. The median treatment duration of the third-generation EGFR-TKI before rebiopsy was numerically longer in patients with histological transformation than those without (16.0 vs. 10.9 months). Both the overall survival time from the start of third-generation EGFR-TKI initiation (30.8 vs. 41.2 months) and from rebiopsy (6.6 vs. 12.9 months) to mortality were numerically shorter amongst the transformed population. All patients in the transformed group did not respond to the next line of systemic treatment. One patient with histological transformation receiving local treatment for the metastatic site had a longer overall survival. Conclusions: Repeating biopsy to identify histological transformation should be considered in patients with progression to the third-generation EGFR-TKI. Histological transformations could contribute to the acquired resistance with the implication of a worse prognosis. Further studies are needed to determine the optimal therapy for these patients.

1. Introduction

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have been used, since their invention, as the first-line treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients harboring EGFR mutations. The third-generation EGFR-TKI is one standard-of-care therapy for patients with EGFR-mutant lung adenocarcinoma [1]. However, TKI is not a curative treatment for lung cancer, with acquired resistance inevitably developed [2]. The resistance mechanisms to third generation covered both EGFR-dependent as well as independent ones. The possible molecular mechanisms of resistance include on-target mutations or amplified EGFR pathways, activation of those molecular pathways bypass or downstream, epithelial–mesenchymal transition, and histological transformation [3]. In lung adenocarcinoma patients experiencing disease progression to EGFR-TKI, histological transformation into small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) [4,5], squamous-cell carcinoma (SqCC) [6], and sarcomatoid carcinoma are known [7,8,9]. Concomitant mutations of p53 and Rb1 predict a higher risk of subsequent SCLC transformation [4].
Despite reports on histological transformation being one of the mechanisms of resistance to the third-generation EGFR-TKI, the incidence of histological transformation and its influence on patient outcomes remain unclear. Most research studies on such histological transformations focused on patients with acquired resistance to first- or second-generation EGFR-TKI and the incidence varies from 5% to 14% [10,11,12]. Our present study aimed to identify the incidence of histological transformation after the third-generation EGFR-TKI treatment and to characterize the clinical prognoses of these patients.

2. Material and Methods

2.1. Patients

This retrospective study was conducted on patients diagnosed with EGFR-mutant lung adenocarcinoma treated at the Taichung Veterans General Hospital in Taiwan. All patients received the third-generation EGFR-TKI during the period from January 2014 to June 2021. We enrolled patients who received rebiopsy after the disease progression to the third-generation EGFR-TKI. Those patients who had received rebiopsy within 3 months after the start of the third-generation EGFR-TKI were excluded as they indicated primary resistance to the treatment. Patients with wild-type or unknown EGFR mutation status were also excluded. Our study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Taichung Veterans General Hospital (IRB No. CF12019 and No. CF15271). Written informed consents for clinical data records and genetic testing were obtained from all patients. Experiments were carried out in accordance with the approved guidelines and regulations.

2.2. Data Records and Response Evaluation

Clinical data for our analysis included patients’ age, gender, smoking status, the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS), histological types, EGFR mutation status, tumor stage, history of treatments, and survival status. The staging of lung cancer TNM (tumor, node, and metastases) was conducted according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system (8th edition) [13]. Unidimensional measurements as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 were adopted [14]. Oncogenic mutation analyses of EGFR status were performed according to the manufacturer’s protocol for the MassARRAY system (Sequenom, San Diego, CA, USA) (details see previously published report) [15]. Some patients received analysis by the cobas EGFR mutation test v2 (Roche MolecularSystems, Inc, Branchburg, NJ, USA).

2.3. Statistics Analyses

To compare intergroup differences for categorical and continuous variables, Fisher’s exact test and Mann–Whitney U test were used, respectively. Two-tailed p values  <  0.05 were considered statistically significant differences. The overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method, whereas the between-group differences were assessed using the stratified log-rank test. OS was analyzed from the start of the third-generation EGFR-TKI treatment to mortality and from rebiopsy to mortality. All analyses were performed with the IBM SPSS Statistics package, version 23 (IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA).

3. Results

3.1. Patient Characteristics

The selection algorithm of participants is illustrated in Figure 1, and patient characteristics are shown in Table 1. A total of 481 patients received the third-generation EGFR-TKI within the study period. Rebiopsy was made after disease progression to the third-generation EGFR-TKI in 60 patients. A total of 55 patients were analyzed, after excluding five patients (three receiving rebiopsy within three months of EGFR-TKI initiation, one with wild-type EGFR, and one with unknown EGFR status).
Their median age was 58 years. Of these patients, 34 (61.8%) were female, 44 (80%) were non-smokers, and eight (14.5%) received the third-generation EGFR-TKI as first-line treatment. Regarding the types of third-generation EGFR-TKI, most patients (n = 53) received osimertinib, while the other two received almonertinib. Baseline EGFR mutations of these patients are as follows: 22 (40%) EGFR exon 19 deletion (19Del), 19 (34.5%) exon 21 L858R substitution, nine (16.4%) primary exon 20 T790M, and five (9.1%) uncommon or complex mutation. In addition to those patients with primary T790M, another 30 (54.5%) patients had acquired T790M before the third-generation EGFR-TKI treatment. The median duration of the third-generation EGFR-TKI treatment before rebiopsy was 11.0 months. The median duration from rebiopsy to third-generation EGFR-TKI discontinuation was 1.0 month.

3.2. Comparison of Characteristics of Patients with/without Histological Transformation

The characteristics of patients with or without histological transformation after the third-generation EGFR-TKI treatment are shown in Table 1. The histological transformation was found in eight (14.5%) patients, while the pathologic results of the remaining 47 (85.5%) patients remained adenocarcinoma. No patients receiving the third-generation EGFR-TKI as first-line treatment had developed the histological transformation. More males had histological transformation (five of 21 patients (23.8%) vs. three of 34 patients (8.8%)). The median treatment time of the third-generation EGFR-TKI before rebiopsy was longer in patients with histological transformation than in those without (16.0 vs. 10.9 months). Such differences were statistically insignificant.

3.3. Clinical Outcomes and Overall Survival in Patients with Histological Transformation

Clinical data and outcomes of patients with histological transformation are shown in Table 2. In terms of transformed histological types, three patients were squamous cell carcinoma (SqCC), three were small cell lung carcinoma (SCLC), one was large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC), and one was a mixture of adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma components. One patient experienced two transformations, initially SqCC and later sarcomatoid carcinoma [7].
Three patients received genetic testing from tissues obtained from the rebiopsy. The initial EGFR status of patient No. 1 was exon 21 L858R. She developed EGFR T790M after resistance to erlotinib and chemotherapy. The EGFR status maintained L858R plus T790M in the rebiopsy specimen. In patient No.2, the initial EGFR mutation assay showed 19Del. After showing resistance to gefitinib and chemotherapy, T790M developed. He experienced squamous cell carcinoma transformation, and the EGFR status revealed 19Del plus T790M. Another episode of histological transformation into sarcomatoid carcinoma occurred 11 months later and the EGFR mutation assay showed 19Del as well as loss of T790M mutation. Patient No. 8 had received an operation for lung cancer, but the tumor recurred. He harbored EGFR L858R mutation and gefitinib was prescribed. He underwent the third-generation EGFR-TKI treatment after disease progression, despite negative T790M findings in the rebiopsy specimen. Small cell transformation developed 5.1 months later and the next-generation sequencing using the FoundationOne CDx method was performed. Results were mutations of EGFR L858R, RB1 p.R445X, and TP53 c.96 + 1G > T.
Aside from two patients who deteriorated and died shortly after histological transformation, the remaining six patients in the transformation group did not respond to the next line of treatment. Patients No. 5 and No. 6 had already received the etoposide before histological transformation, so we did not prescribe platinum plus etoposide as the next line of treatment for the histological change. Patient No. 4 already received platinum and gemcitabine before histological transformation, so docetaxel and etoposide were prescribed after squamous cell transformation.
Both overall survivals from the start of third-generation EGFR-TKI treatment (30.8 (95% CI, 21.6–40.0) vs. 41.2 (95% CI, 24.5–57.9) months, p = 0.174) and from the start of rebiopsy (6.6 (95% CI, 3.5–9.7) vs. 12.9 (95% CI, 10.6–15.3) months, p = 0.100) were numerically shorter amongst the transformed population (Figure 2A,B). There was no statistical difference in survival between patients with SqCC transformation and with SCLC transformation. Overall survivals from the start of third-generation EGFR-TKI treatment were 30.8 (95% CI, 3.4–58.2) for patients transformed into SqCC, and 23.8 (95% CI, 21.8–25.8) months for patients transformed into neuroendocrine carcinoma (including SCLC and LCNEC); whereas survivals from the start of rebiopsy were 2.5 months (95% CI, 0.0–10.9) and 6.6 months (95% CI, 4.2–9.0), respectively. We noted the limited number of patients developing histological transformation had wide-ranged survival times.

4. Discussion

The reported incidence of histological transformation from NSCLC to SCLC in patients treated with first- or second-generation EGFR-TKI varies from 5% to 14% [10,11,12]. In the study conducted by Sequist et al., 8 (21.6%) of the 37 NSCLC patients harboring EGFR mutations who had tumor biopsy after acquiring drug resistance to first- or second-generation EGFR-TKI showed phenotypic changes. Amongst those with histological transformation, five (14%) were SCLC transformation, two were epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT), and the remaining one was sarcomatoid transformation. The median time from TKI start to small cell transformation was 22.0 months (range 14.0 to ≥36.0 months), whereas the median time to histological transformation (SCLC, EMT, and sarcomatoid transformation) was 16.0 months (range 11.0 to ≥36.0 months) [12]. In another study, which analyzed 58 EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients developing small cell transformation after EGFR-TKI treatment, their median time since diagnosis of advanced NSCLC to SCLC transformation was 17.8 months; however, the EGFR-TKI prescribed in the study was not limited to the first- or second-generation, and 33% of these patients received the third-generation EGFR-TKI treatment. The median overall survival since diagnosis was 31.5 months, whereas the median survival since the time of SCLC transformation was only 10.9 months [5]. In our present study, we shared clinical themes similar to the previous studies. In total, 4 out of our 55 patients transformed into neuroendocrine carcinoma (7.3%). The median time from TKI start to histological transformation was 16.0 months. The overall survival of patients transforming into SCLC from the start of the third-generation EGFR-TKI was 23.8 months, and from rebiopsy was 6.6 months.
The actual incidence of SqCC transformation after first- or second-generation EGFR-TKI treatment remains unknown. Clery et al. reviewed 15 lung adenocarcinoma patients with activated EGFR mutations. They developed the SqCC transformation after receiving first- or second-generation EGFR-TKIs. SqCC transformation mostly occurred in female patients (86.7%). Apart from the original EGFR mutation, 2 of the 15 cases showed an additional PIK3CA mutation in the rebiopsy samples [16]. Another case series regarding NSCLC patients with changed phenotype to SqCC after EGFR-TKI treatment showed an 11.5 month median time from TKI start to SqCC transformation. Overall survival from NSCLC diagnosis was 20 months or from SqCC onset was 3.5 months [6]. In our present study, the rate of SqCC transformation after the third-generation EGFR-TKI was 7.3%. The median time from TKI start to SqCC transformation was 13.3 months. Overall survival of patients transforming into SqCC from the start of third-generation EGFR-TKI was 30.8 months and from rebiopsy was 2.5 months.
Regarding histological transformation after third-generation EGFR-TKI treatment, Schoenfeld et al. analyzed post-osimertinib-treated tumor tissues from 71 patients. Histological transformation after osimertinib treatment occurred in three of 16 (18.8%) patients with osimertinib as first-line treatment and in seven of 55 (12.7%) patients with osimertinib as second-line or later treatment. Their overall transformation rate was therefore 14.1%. Amongst these patients, their transformed histological types were SqCC (five patients) and SCLC (five patients) [17]. In our present study, the overall transformation rate was similar (14.5%). The rate of SqCC transformation was actually identical to neuroendocrine carcinoma transformation (7.3% vs. 7.3%). None of our patients using the third-generation EGFR-TKI as first-line treatment had developed any histological transformation; however, only eight patients using first-line third-generation EGFR-TKI had received rebiopsy in our cohort.
In previous studies, both platinum plus etoposide and taxanes have yielded high response rates after histological transformation [5,18]. Ferrer et al. analyzed 48 patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC and 13 with non–EGFR-mutant who had developed small cell transformation and 45% of the patients with EGFR-mutant and 40% of non-EFGR-mutant patients achieved an objective response to platinum plus etoposide treatment [18]; however, Ho et al. put forward a different opinion. They found that Sin3 and NuRD pathways, which are two major histone deacetylase (HDAC) complexes, were up-regulated in the EGFR-mutant SCLC. Furthermore, trichostatin A, a pan-HDAC inhibitor, has better inhibitory efficacy than cisplatin-etoposide in SCLC-transforming cells [19]. In our study, those patients who transformed into SCLC did not respond to platinum plus etoposide treatment. Moreover, the next-line treatment for patients with histological transformation into SqCC was also ineffective. Most of our patients had dismal outcomes after histological transformation. One exception is patient No. 8. He had disease progression into pleural metastasis after osimertinib treatment. He received an excisional biopsy of the metastatic tumor and the pathologic finding was SCLC. Cisplatin, etoposide, and atezolizumab were therefore prescribed; however, bilateral lower limb weakness appeared and an MRI of the T-L spine showed T spine vertebral metastasis with intra-dural invasion. Laminectomy with tumor removal was performed and the pathologic findings remained SCLC. Subsequent radiotherapy for the metastatic sites was applied. He was further treated with paclitaxel, bevacizumab, and atezolizumab. He remained in relatively stable conditions until now (no evidence of disease progression for ≥7 months). Yu et al. proposed that local therapy is an optional treatment strategy for patients with advanced EGFR-mutant lung cancers and with acquired resistance to EGFR-TKI [20]. Further research works are required to explore appropriate treatments and to evaluate the role of local ablative treatment for patients with such histological transformation.
The mechanisms of histological transformation are under investigation. Marcoux et al. studied 67 patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC undergoing SCLC transformations. In addition to the original EGFR mutation, the more common mutations in SCLC samples include TP53 (79%) and Rb1 (58%) [5]. In another study, 5% of patients with EGFR-mutant lung cancers showed concurrent RB1 and TP53 changes. These patients typically have a high risk for small cell transformation (18%) [21]. Aside from RB1 and TP53 losses, the SOX family mutation, PI3K/AKT pathway, MYC and AURKA amplification, as well as Notch signaling downregulation, may underlie mechanisms of transformation [22]. In regard to squamous cell transformation, Schoenfeld et al. characterized the mechanisms of resistance to osimertinib. Five patients with squamous transformation presented with considerable genomic complexity, including acquired the PIK3CA mutation, chromosome 3q amplification, and FGF amplification [23]. Furthermore, patients with a transformation from adenocarcinoma to sarcomatoid carcinoma after EGFR-TKI treatment experience epithelial-to-mesenchymal transitions [24]. Tumors sometimes metastasize to unusual sites such as the pancreas, kidney, and digestive tract in patients with sarcomatoid transformation [25]. These patients were found to have MET amplification, MET copy number gains, and high levels of PD-L1 expression [8,9].
The major limitations of this study are as follows. First, its retrospective nature and the limited number of cases receiving rebiopsy after third-generation EGFR-TKI. Second, rebiopsy after progression to third-generation EGFR-TKI was not performed for all patients. Third, limited by the available biopsy specimens, we were unable to clearly determine whether the histological types other than adenocarcinoma had come from a post-EGFR-TKI treated transformation or from pre-existed mixed histology. Fourth, not all the patients with histological transformation received biopsy before the initiation of third-generation EGFR-TKI; therefore, the timing of histological transformation development was not clear. Because of these limitations, our results should be interpreted with caution.

5. Conclusions

Rebiopsy should be considered in patients with progression to the third-generation EGFR-TKI to identify histological transformation. The possible histological types of transformation include SCLC, SqCC, and sarcomatoid carcinoma. Histological transformations may contribute to the acquired resistance and may imply a worse prognosis. Local therapy is likely an option for patients not well responding to systemic antineoplastic treatments.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: P.-H.L. and Y.-H.H.; Methodology: P.-H.L. and J.-S.T.; Software: P.-H.L. and J.-S.T.; Validation: P.-H.L. and J.-S.T.; Formal Analysis: P.-H.L.; Investigation: P.-H.L.; Resources: Y.-H.H., K.-H.H. and K.-C.C.; Data Curation: Y.-H.H.; Writing—Original Draft Preparation: P.-H.L.; Writing—Review and Editing: J.-S.T.; Supervision: H.L., G.-C.C. and T.-Y.Y.; All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board of Taichung Veterans General Hospital (IRB No. CF12019 and No. CF15271).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Ramalingam, S.; Gray, J.; Ohe, Y.; Cho, B.; Vansteenkiste, J.; Zhou, C.; Planchard, D. Osimertinib vs. comparator EGFR-TKI as first-line treatment for EGFRm advanced NSCLC (FLAURA): Final overall survival analysis. Ann. Oncol. 2019, 30, v914–v915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Wu, S.-G.; Shih, J.-Y. Management of acquired resistance to EGFR TKI–targeted therapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Mol. Cancer 2018, 17, 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Leonetti, A.; Sharma, S.; Minari, R.; Perego, P.; Giovannetti, E.; Tiseo, M. Resistance mechanisms to osimertinib in EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer. Br. J. Cancer 2019, 121, 725–737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Minari, R.; Bordi, P.; Del Re, M.; Facchinetti, F.; Mazzoni, F.; Barbieri, F.; Tiseo, M. Primary resistance to osimertinib due to SCLC transformation: Issue of T790M determination on liquid re-biopsy. Lung Cancer 2018, 115, 21–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Marcoux, N.; Gettinger, S.N.; O’Kane, G.; Arbour, K.C.; Neal, J.W.; Husain, H.; Evans, T.L.; Brahmer, J.R.; Muzikansky, A.; Bonomi, P.D.; et al. EGFR-Mutant Adenocarcinomas That Transform to Small-Cell Lung Cancer and Other Neuroendocrine Carcinomas: Clinical Outcomes. J. Clin. Oncol. 2019, 37, 278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Roca, E.; Pozzari, M.; Vermi, W.; Tovazzi, V.; Baggi, A.; Amoroso, V.; Berruti, A. Outcome of EGFR-mutated adenocarcinoma NSCLC patients with changed phenotype to squamous cell carcinoma after tyrosine kinase inhibitors: A pooled analysis with an additional case. Lung Cancer 2019, 127, 12–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Lee, P.-H.; Chang, G.-C. Transformations first into squamous-cell carcinoma and later into sarcomatoid carcinoma after acquired resistance to osimertinib in a patient with EGFR-mutant lung adenocarcinoma: Case report. Clin. Lung Cancer 2021, 22, e536–e541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Hsieh, M.-S.; Lin, M.-W.; Lee, Y.-H. Lung adenocarcinoma with sarcomatoid transformation after tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment and chemotherapy. Lung Cancer 2019, 137, 76–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Zheng, J.; Zhu, J.; Zhang, K.; Yuan, M.; Chen, M.; Chen, R.; Li, X. Temporal Heterogeneity of Resistance Mechanisms to EGFR-TKI Identified in a Patient with Lung Adenocarcinoma and Sarcomatoid Transformation. Clin. Lung Cancer 2020, 21, e255–e257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Yu, H.A.; Arcila, M.E.; Rekhtman, N.; Sima, C.S.; Zakowski, M.F.; Pao, W.; Kris, M.G.; Miller, V.A.; Ladanyi, M.; Riely, G.J. Analysis of Tumor Specimens at the Time of Acquired Resistance to EGFR-TKI Therapy in 155 Patients with EGFR-Mutant Lung Cancers. Clin. Cancer Res. 2013, 19, 2240–2247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Oser, M.G.; Niederst, M.J.; Sequist, L.V.; Engelman, J.A. Transformation from non-small-cell lung cancer to small-cell lung cancer: Molecular drivers and cells of origin. Lancet Oncol. 2015, 16, e165–e172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Sequist, L.V.; Waltman, B.A.; Dias-Santagata, D.; Digumarthy, S.; Turke, A.B.; Fidias, P.; Bergethon, K.; Shaw, A.T.; Gettinger, S.; Cosper, A.K.; et al. Genotypic and Histological Evolution of Lung Cancers Acquiring Resistance to EGFR Inhibitors. Sci. Transl. Med. 2011, 3, 75ra26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Goldstraw, P.; Chansky, K.; Crowley, J.; Rami-Porta, R.; Asamura, H.; Eberhardt, W.E.; Nicholson, A.G.; Groome, P.; Mitchell, A.; Bolejack, V.; et al. The IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project: Proposals for Revision of the TNM Stage Groupings in the Forthcoming (Eighth) Edition of the TNM Classification for Lung Cancer. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2016, 11, 39–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Eisenhauer, E.A.; Therasse, P.; Bogaerts, J.; Schwartz, L.H.; Sargent, D.; Ford, R.; Dancey, J.; Arbuck, S.; Gwyther, S.; Mooney, M.; et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: Revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur. J. Cancer 2009, 45, 228–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Hsu, K.-H.; Ho, C.-C.; Hsia, T.-C.; Tseng, J.-S.; Su, K.-Y.; Wu, M.-F.; Chiu, K.-L.; Yang, T.-Y.; Chen, K.-C.; Ooi, H.; et al. Identification of Five Driver Gene Mutations in Patients with Treatment-Naïve Lung Adenocarcinoma in Taiwan. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0120852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Clery, E.; Pisapia, P.; Vigliar, E.; Malapelle, U.; Bellevicine, C.; Troncone, G.; Schmitt, F.C. Role of Cytomorphology in the Era of Liquid Biopsy. Acta Cytol. 2019, 63, 497–505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Schoenfeld, A.J.; Chan, J.M.; Rizvi, H.; Rekhtman, N.; Daneshbod, Y.; Kubota, D.; Chang, J.C.; Arcila, M.E.; Ladanyi, M.; Somwar, R.; et al. Tissue-based molecular and histological landscape of acquired resistance to osimertinib given initially or at relapse in patients with EGFR-mutant lung cancers. J. Clin. Oncol. 2019, 37, 9028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Ferrer, L.; Levra, M.G.; Brevet, M.; Antoine, M.; Mazieres, J.; Rossi, G.; Chiari, R.; Westeel, V.; Poudenx, M.; Letreut, J.; et al. A Brief Report of Transformation from NSCLC to SCLC: Molecular and Therapeutic Characteristics. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2019, 14, 130–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Lin, C.-A.; Yu, S.-L.; Chen, H.-Y.; Chen, H.-W.; Lin, S.-U.; Chang, C.-C.; Yu, C.-J.; Yang, P.-C.; Ho, C.-C. EGFR-Mutant SCLC Exhibits Heterogeneous Phenotypes and Resistance to Common Antineoplastic Drugs. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2019, 14, 513–526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Yu, H.A.; Sima, C.S.; Huang, J.; Solomon, S.B.; Rimner, A.; Paik, P.; Pietanza, M.C.; Azzoli, C.G.; Rizvi, N.A.; Krug, L.M.; et al. Local Therapy with Continued EGFR Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Therapy as a Treatment Strategy in EGFR-Mutant Advanced Lung Cancers That Have Developed Acquired Resistance to EGFR Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2013, 8, 346–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Offin, M.; Chan, J.M.; Tenet, M.; Rizvi, H.A.; Shen, R.; Riely, G.J.; Rekhtman, N.; Daneshbod, Y.; Quintanal-Villalonga, A.; Penson, A.; et al. Concurrent RB1 and TP53 Alterations Define a Subset of EGFR-Mutant Lung Cancers at risk for Histologic Transformation and Inferior Clinical Outcomes. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2019, 14, 1784–1793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Yin, X.; Li, Y.; Wang, H.; Jia, T.; Wang, E.; Luo, Y.; Wei, Y.; Qin, Z.; Ma, X. Small cell lung cancer transformation: From pathogenesis to treatment. In Semin in Cancer Biol; Academic Press: Cambridge, UK, 2022; Volume 8. [Google Scholar]
  23. Schoenfeld, A.J.; Chan, J.M.; Kubota, D.; Sato, H.; Rizvi, H.; Daneshbod, Y.; Chang, J.C.; Paik, P.K.; Offin, M.; Arcila, M.E.; et al. Tumor Analyses Reveal Squamous Transformation and Off-Target Alterations as Early Resistance Mechanisms to First-line Osimertinib in EGFR-Mutant Lung Cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 2020, 26, 2654–2663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  24. Legras, A.; Pécuchet, N.; Imbeaud, S.; Pallier, K.; Didelot, A.; Roussel, H.; Gibault, L.; Fabre, E.; Le Pimpec-Barthes, F.; Laurent-Puig, P.; et al. Epithelial-to-Mesenchymal Transition and MicroRNAs in Lung Cancer. Cancers 2017, 9, 101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  25. Baldovini, C.; Rossi, G.; Ciarrocchi, A. Approaches to Tumor Classification in Pulmonary Sarcomatoid Carcinoma. Lung Cancer Targets Ther. 2019, 10, 131–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Medicina 58 00908 g001 550
Figure 1. Algorithm for inclusion of study participants. * Includes one patient with transformation into squamous cell carcinoma in the first rebiopsy and into sarcomatoid carcinoma in the second rebiopsy.
Figure 1. Algorithm for inclusion of study participants. * Includes one patient with transformation into squamous cell carcinoma in the first rebiopsy and into sarcomatoid carcinoma in the second rebiopsy.
Medicina 58 00908 g001
Medicina 58 00908 g002 550
Figure 2. Influence of histological transformation on overall survey. Survival from the start of the third-generation EGFR-TKI to mortality (A) or from rebiopsy to mortality (B).
Figure 2. Influence of histological transformation on overall survey. Survival from the start of the third-generation EGFR-TKI to mortality (A) or from rebiopsy to mortality (B).
Medicina 58 00908 g002
Table
Table 1. Characteristics of patients with or without histological transformation after the third-generation EGFR-TKI treatment.
Table 1. Characteristics of patients with or without histological transformation after the third-generation EGFR-TKI treatment.
Total (N = 55) Without Transformation (N = 47) With Transformation (N = 8) p Value &
Age, median (IQR; 25–75%)58 (53.0–62.6) 59.0 (53.0–65.0) 55.0 (51.5–59.0) 0.262
Gender, n (%)0.238
  Male 21 (38.2%) 16 (34%) 5 (62.5%)
  Female 34 (61.8%) 31 (66%) 3 (37.5%)
Smoking, n (%)0.654
  No 44 (80.0%) 38 (80.9%) 6 (75%)
  Yes 11 (20.0%) 9 (19.1%) 2 (25%)
ECOG PS, n (%)1.000
  0–1 53 (96.4%) 45 (95.7%) 8 (100%)
  ≥2 2 (3.6%) 2 (4.3%) 0 (0%)
Third-generation EGFR-TKI as first-line treatment, n (%)0.587
  Yes 8 (14.5%) 8 (17%) 0 (0%)
  No 47 (85.5%) 39 (83%) 8 (100%)
Baseline EGFR mutation, n (%) 0.754
  19del 22 (40.0%) 18 (38.3%) 4 (50.0%)
  L858R 19 (34.5%) 16 (34.0%) 3 (37.5%)
  Uncommon or compound mutation 5 (9.1%) 5 (10.6%) 0 (0%)
  Primary T790M 9 (16.4%) 8 (17.0%) 1 (12.5%)
    19del + T790M5 (9.1%)4 (8.5%)1 (12.5%)
    L858R + T790M3 (5.5%)3 (6.4%)0 (0%)
    19del + G719C + T790M1 (1.8%)1 (2.1%)0 (0%)
Emergence of T790M, n (%)0.520
  Yes 30 (54.5%) 25 (53.%) 5 (62.5%)
  No 8 (14.5%) 6 (12.8%) 2 (25.0%)
  N/A 8 (14.5%) 8 (17.0%) 0 (0%)
  Primary T790M 9 (16.4%) 8 (17.0%) 1 (12.5%)
Treatment duration of third-generation EGFR-TKI before biopsy(months), median (IQR; 25–75%)11.0 (6.0~19.1) 10.9 (5.7~21.9) 16.0 (7.9~18.1) 0.489
Interval between third-generation EGFR-TKI discontinuation to rebiopsy(months), median (IQR; 25–75%)−1.0 (−5.1~2.2) −1.0 (−5.1~2.2) −1.1 (−5.1~2.7) 0.842
ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; TKI, tyrosine, kinase inhibitor; T790M, Thr790Met; N/A, not available. & Age, Treatment duration of third-generation EGFR-TKI, Interval between third-generation EGFR-TKI discontinuation to rebiopsy by Mann–Whitney U test; otherwise by Fisher’s exact test.
Table
Table 2. Clinical data and outcomes of lung cancer patients developing histological transformation after the third-generation EGFR-TKI treatment. F, female; M, male; L858R, Leu858Arg; 19del; exon 19 deletion; T790M, Thr790Met; C/T, chemotherapy; R/T, radiotherapy; OP, operation; ADC, adenocarcinoma; SqCC, squamous cell carcinoma; LCNEC, large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma; SCLC, small cell carcinoma; N/A, not available; PD, disease progression.
Table 2. Clinical data and outcomes of lung cancer patients developing histological transformation after the third-generation EGFR-TKI treatment. F, female; M, male; L858R, Leu858Arg; 19del; exon 19 deletion; T790M, Thr790Met; C/T, chemotherapy; R/T, radiotherapy; OP, operation; ADC, adenocarcinoma; SqCC, squamous cell carcinoma; LCNEC, large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma; SCLC, small cell carcinoma; N/A, not available; PD, disease progression.
No12345678
Age, years5544536256515560
GenderFMFMMMFM
SmokingNNNYNYNN
Baseline EGFR mutationL858R19del19del + T790M19delL858R19del19delL858R
Treatment before third-generation EGFR-TKIC/T, erlotinibgefitinib, C/Tafatinib afatinib, C/T,
erlotinib		erlotinib, R/T,
C/T		erlotinib, C/Tgefitinib, C/TOP, gefitinib
Pathologic finding of biopsy before third-generation EGFR-TKIPericadial effusion cell block: ADCPrimary tumor rebiopsy: ADCPrimary tumor rebiopsy: ADCMetastatic lung tumor biopsy: ADCPrimary tumor rebiopsy: ADCPrimary tumor rebiopsy: ADCPrimary tumor rebiopsy: ADCBiopsy not performed
Emergence of T790M before third-generation EGFR-TKIYYPrimary T790MNYYYN
Third-generation EGFR-TKI treatment duration, months1042.216.57.215.91618.65.1
Rebiopsy siteTongueSpine (1st), chest wall (2nd)BoneLungLungLiverLungPleura
Histological transformationSqCCSqCC (1st), sarcomatoid (2nd)mixture of ADC and SqCCSqCC LCNECSCLCSCLCSCLC
Genetic test from rebiopsy tissueL858R + T790M19del + T790M(1st),
19del alone(2nd)		N/AN/AN/AN/AN/AL858R, RB1, TP53 (by NGS)
Treatment after transformationgemcitabine
+ R/T		OP + R/T
+ gemcitabine 		hospicedocetaxel
+ etoposide 		irinotecancarboplatin + irinotecan carboplatin
+ etoposide 		carboplatin
+ etoposide
Response to the treatmentN/APDN/APDPDPDPDPD
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Lee, P.-H.; Huang, Y.-H.; Lin, H.; Hsu, K.-H.; Chen, K.-C.; Tseng, J.-S.; Chang, G.-C.; Yang, T.-Y. Histological Transformation after Acquired Resistance to the Third-Generation EGFR-TKI in Patients with Advanced EGFR-Mutant Lung Adenocarcinoma. Medicina 2022, 58, 908. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina58070908

AMA Style

Lee P-H, Huang Y-H, Lin H, Hsu K-H, Chen K-C, Tseng J-S, Chang G-C, Yang T-Y. Histological Transformation after Acquired Resistance to the Third-Generation EGFR-TKI in Patients with Advanced EGFR-Mutant Lung Adenocarcinoma. Medicina. 2022; 58(7):908. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina58070908

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lee, Po-Hsin, Yen-Hsiang Huang, Ho Lin, Kuo-Hsuan Hsu, Kun-Chieh Chen, Jeng-Sen Tseng, Gee-Chen Chang, and Tsung-Ying Yang. 2022. "Histological Transformation after Acquired Resistance to the Third-Generation EGFR-TKI in Patients with Advanced EGFR-Mutant Lung Adenocarcinoma" Medicina 58, no. 7: 908. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina58070908

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop