4.7 Article

Sequential ALK Inhibitors Can Select for Lorlatinib-Resistant Compound ALK Mutations in ALK-Positive Lung Cancer

Journal

CANCER DISCOVERY
Volume 8, Issue 6, Pages 714-729

Publisher

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-17-1256

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NCI [R01CA164273]
  2. National Foundation for Cancer Research
  3. AACR-AstraZeneca Fellowship in Lung Cancer Research [17-40-12-DARD]
  4. Be a Piece of the Solution
  5. Evan Spirito Foundation
  6. Targeting a Cure for Lung Cancer Research Fund at MGH

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The cornerstone of treatment for advanced ALK-positive lung cancer is sequential therapy with increasingly potent and selective ALK inhibitors. The third-generation ALK inhibitor lorlatinib has demonstrated clinical activity in patients who failed previous ALK inhibitors. To define the spectrum of ALK mutations that confer lorlatinib resistance, we performed accelerated mutagenesis screening of Ba/F3 cells expressing EML4-ALK. Under comparable conditions, N-ethyl-N-nitrosourea (ENU) mutagenesis generated numerous crizotinib-resistant but no lorlatinib-resistant clones harboring single ALK mutations. In similar screens with EML4-ALK containing single ALK resistance mutations, numerous lorlatinib-resistant clones emerged harboring compound ALK mutations. To determine the clinical relevance of these mutations, we analyzed repeat biopsies from lorlatinib-resistant patients. Seven of 20 samples (35%) harbored compound ALK mutations, including two identified in the ENU screen. Whole-exome sequencing in three cases confirmed the stepwise accumulation of ALK mutations during sequential treatment. These results suggest that sequential ALK inhibitors can foster the emergence of compound ALK mutations, identification of which is critical to informing drug design and developing effective therapeutic strategies. (c) 2018 AACR.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available