Trial reportClinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research2025
Liquid and Tissue Biopsies for Identifying MET Exon 14 Skipping NSCLC: Analyses from the Phase II VISION Study of Tepotinib.
Trial report in Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy and safety of tepotinib in Asian patients with advanced NSCLC with MET exon 14 skipping enrolled in VISION.British journal of cancer · 2024Trial
- Targeting MET in 2025: From Exon 14 Skipping to MET-Amplified Acquired Resistance in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Comparative analysis of ctDNA monitoring strategies in advanced NSCLC with MET exon 14 skipping mutations treated with ensartinib.NPJ precision oncology · 2026Article
- Review
- The Landscape ofJTO clinical and research reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe VISION trial of tepotinib, a selective MET inhibitor, enrolled patients with non-small cell lung cancer and prospectively detected MET exon 14 (METex14) skipping in liquid biopsies (LBx) and/or tissue biopsies (TBx). We evaluated patient characteristics and outcomes according to METex14 positivity in LBx (LBx-positive) or TBx (TBx-positive). EXPERIMENTAL
designMETex14 was centrally assessed by next-generation sequencing of ctDNA from LBx (Guardant360/ArcherMET) and/or RNA from TBx (Oncomine Focus/ArcherMET) or, in Japan only, local TBx PCR. Parallel LBx/TBx testing was recommended but not mandatory. Eligibility required LBx-positive or TBx-positive status. ctDNA burden was analyzed in patients with baseline Guardant360 data.
resultsMETex14 was detected in 469 of 7,937 prescreened/screened patients, 313 of whom were enrolled (TBx-positive, n = 208; LBx-positive, n = 178). LBx-positive patients had higher radiographic tumor burden than TBx-positive patients, including higher median sum of target lesion diameters per RECIST v1.1 (67.1 vs. 55.2 mm) and more patients with ≥3 target lesions (27.5% vs. 18.8%). In 180 TBx-positive patients with matching LBx results, objective response rates were slightly higher in TBx-positive/LBx-positive patients, but TBx-positive/LBx-negative patients had longer duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival. In ctDNA analysis (n = 165), detectable baseline ctDNA burden was associated with shorter progression-free survival and overall survival.
conclusionsTepotinib had robust, durable activity in TBx-positive/LBx-negative and TBx-positive/LBx-positive patients. Although LBx is a complementary method to TBx for detecting METex14, it may preferentially select patients with higher tumor burden and poorer prognosis. Undetectable METex14 in baseline ctDNA (due to low ctDNA shedding) may define more favorable treatment outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.