ArticleScientific reports2025
MET exon 14 skipping mutations in non-small-cell lung cancer a 3 years screening experience.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical value of blood circulating tumor RNA (ctRNA) in liquid biopsy of lung cancer: a narrative review.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Review
- Mutations of Kinases and GTPases in Cancers.Cancers · 2026Article
- Article
- MET Exon 14 Skipping Mutations in Lung Cancer: Clinical-Pathological Characteristics and Immune Microenvironment.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
MET exon 14 skipping is an oncogenic driver observed in 1 to 4% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MET exon 14 mutations affect splice sites and are highly heterogeneous which makes them difficult to detect. Because of the approval of capmatinib for patients with MET exon 14 mutated tumors and the related poor response to immunotherapy (ICI) for a subset of patients with MET mutated tumors, MET screening has become mandatory for first line treatment decision. Here we report our testing experience based on 1143 consecutive NSCLC addressed for molecular diagnosis. Two strategies using either DNA sequencing (NGS) and fragment analysis or DNA-RNA sequencing (NGS) were developed and validated to accurately detect MET exon 14 alterations including large deletions. For patients with MET tumors (n = 46), demographic characteristics, treatments and outcomes were obtained from medical records and discussed. 46 MET exon 14 alterations were identified, 4 were not called by DNA sequencing and rescued by fragment analysis or RNA sequencing. Sixty-seven percent tumors had a high PD-L1 expression > 50 and 42% of cases had co-occurring alterations, mainly TP53 mutations (24%) and PIK3CA mutations (9%). Response to MET inhibitors (Crizotinib and Capmatinib) was evaluated for 15 patients. The ORR (Objective Response Rate) and the median of PFS (Progression Free Survival) were 44% and 5.5 months [1.6-18.2 months] respectively. Thirteen patients were treated by immunotherapy, ORR and median PFS (Progression Free Survival) median were 30% and 4 months [0.7-55.5 months] respectively. The response to immunotherapy was not correlated with PD-L1 status but smokers seemed to better respond to ICIs. This study highlights that a multimodal approach may be necessary to detect MET exon 14 mutations as large deletions may not be detected by DNA sequencing. Targeted DNA-ARN sequencing strategies broadly interrogate the diverse druggable genomic variations and permits direct detection of altered splicing or gene fusions. Because patients with MET exon 14 mutated tumors, demonstrate low response to immunotherapy despite high PDL1 and because MET exon 14 is druggable the detection of MET mutations is mandatory to optimize treatment.
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.