Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39110039›Full record

ArticleNeuro-oncology2024

Osimertinib-induced DNA resistance mutations in cerebrospinal fluid of epidermal growth factor receptor-mutated non-small-cell lung carcinoma patients developing leptomeningeal metastases: Osimertinib Resistance Analysis-leptomeningeal metastases study.

J W Tijmen van der Wel, Mirjam C Boelens, Merel Jebbink, Sietske A Smulders, Klaartje W Maas, Merel J A Luitse, Annette Compter, Robin P B Boltjes, Nik Sol, Kim Monkhorst and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuro-oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. FLAURA2: evidence for escalated first-line therapy inTranslational cancer research · 2025
    Article
  6. Advancing leptomeningeal metastases treatment inTranslational lung cancer research · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

J W Tijmen van der WelDepartment of Thoracic Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9128-1930
Mirjam C BoelensDepartment of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Merel JebbinkDepartment of Thoracic Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0290-804X
Sietske A SmuldersDepartment of Pulmonary Diseases, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands.
Klaartje W MaasDepartment of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Merel J A LuitseDepartment of Neuro-oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1678-2134
Annette CompterDepartment of Neuro-oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9732-2150
Robin P B BoltjesDepartment of Neuro-oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Nik SolDepartment of Neuro-oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1782-1852
Kim MonkhorstDepartment of Pulmonary Diseases, Haaglanden Medical Center, The Hague, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8690-3811
Daan van den BroekDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2765-7139
Egbert F SmitDepartment of Pulmonary Diseases, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7329-6995
Adrianus J de LangenDepartment of Thoracic Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7343-633X

Funding

Dutch Cancer SocietyThe Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDiagnosis and treatment of leptomeningeal metastases (LM) in epidermal growth factor receptor mutation-positive (EGFRm +) non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) is challenging. We aimed to identify resistance mechanisms (RM) to osimertinib in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and plasma.

methodsEGFRm + patients with new or progressive LM during osimertinib were enrolled. NGS Ampliseq was performed on DNA isolated from CSF. Patients were prescribed osimertinib dose escalation (DE, 160 mg QD) following lumbar puncture. Clinical and radiological response was evaluated 4 weeks after osimertinib DE.

resultsTwenty-eight patients were included. The driver mutation was identified in 93% of CSF samples (n = 26). Seven (27%) harbored ≥1 RM. Twenty-five patients (89%) were prescribed osimertinib DE. Four weeks afterwards, symptoms improved in 5 patients, stabilized in 9 and worsened in 11 patients. Twenty-one (84%) patients underwent MR imaging. Four showed radiological improvement, 14 stabilization, and 3 worsening.

conclusionsIn 27% of patients, an RM was found in CSF ctDNA, none of which are targetable at the time of writing, and the clinical efficacy of osimertinib DE seems limited. There is much to gain in diagnostic as well as therapeutic strategies in EGFRm + NSCLC LM.

Indexed as

AcrylamidesAniline CompoundsCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungDrug Resistance, NeoplasmErbB ReceptorsLung NeoplasmsMeningeal CarcinomatosisMutationAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntineoplastic AgentsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIndolesAcrylamidesAniline CompoundsAntineoplastic AgentsEGFR protein, humanErbB ReceptorsIndolesosimertinibProtein Kinase InhibitorsPyrimidinesEGFRleptomeningeal metastasesNSCLCosimertinibresistance

Identifiers

PMID39110039
PMCPMC11630515

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.