Management of lung cancer has transformed over the past decade and is no longer considered a singular disease as it now has multiple sub-classifications based on molecular markers. The current treatment paradigm requires a multidisciplinary approach. One of the most important facets of lung cancer outcomes however relies on early detection. Early detection has become crucial, and recent effects have shown success in lung cancer screening programs and early detection. In this narrative review, we evaluate low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening and how this screening modality may be underutilized. The barriers to broader implementation of LDCT screening is also explored as well as approaches to address these barriers. Current developments in diagnosis, biomarkers, and molecular testing in early-stage lung cancer are evaluated as well. Improving approaches to screening and early detection can ultimately lead to improved outcomes for patients with lung cancer.

Background: The molecular and clinical features of KRAS-mutated lung cancer patients treated with immunotherapy have yet to be characterized, which could guide the development of therapeutics targeting KRAS with potential immuno-oncology treatment combinations. Research Question: Do KRAS-mutated patients with different subtypes and comutations have different clinical responses and overall survival (OS) to checkpoint inhibitors? Study Design and Methods: 87 patients with NSCLC at the City of Hope who received immune checkpoint inhibitors were identified and analyzed retrospectively. Tumor genomic alterations were extracted from the clinical data with next-generation sequencing using various platforms. Demographic, clinical, molecular, and pathological information was collected with the approval of the institutional review board of the City of Hope. OS was calculated if it was available at the study time point, and responses were determined according to the RECIST v1.1. Results: Among 87 patients, 32 had a KRAS G12C mutation (36.8%), 19 had G12V (21.9%), 18 had G12D (20.7%), 6 had G12A (6.9%), 3 had G12R (3.45%), and 10 had amplification (11.49%) and other uncommon mutations. G12D had a statistically significant Odds Ratio (OR) between patients who had responses and progression of the disease (OR (95% CI) = 0.31 (0.09–0.95), p < 0.05), with 5 G12D-mutated patients having responses and 11 G12D-mutated patients having progression of the disease. In the univariate analysis with OS, there was a trend of better OS in the G12D-mutated patients, with no statistically significant difference in terms of OS between the patients who had G12D mutation and the patients who had other KRAS mutations (HR (95% CI) = 0.53 (0.21–1.36), p = 0.185). The median OS was significantly worse with KRAS comutation CDKN2A/B loss (4.2 vs. 16.9 months, HR = 3.07 (1.09–8.69), p < 0.05) and MET (3.4 vs. 17 months, HR = 3.80 (1.44–10.05), p < 0.01), which were included for the multivariate analysis. The OS with other KRAS comutations was not statistically significant, including STK11 and KEAP1. Conclusion: KRAS mutation subtypes such as G12D and comutations such as CDKN2/A and MET may modulate the immunotherapy responses and outcomes in lung cancer.

The development of EGFR small-molecule inhibitors has provided significant benefit for the affected patient population. Unfortunately, current inhibitors are no curative therapy, and their development has been driven by on-target mutations that interfere with binding and thus inhibitory activity. Genomic studies have revealed that, in addition to these on-target mutations, there are also multiple off-target mechanisms of EGFR inhibitor resistance and novel therapeutics that can overcome these challenges are sought. Resistance to competitive 1st-generation and covalent 2nd- and 3rd-generation EGFR inhibitors is overall more complex than initially thought, and novel 4th-generation allosteric inhibitors are expected to suffer from a similar fate. Additional nongenetic mechanisms of resistance are significant and can include up to 50% of the escape pathways. These potential targets have gained recent interest and are usually not part of cancer panels that look for alterations in resistant patient specimen. We discuss the duality between genetic and nongenetic EGFR inhibitor drug resistance and summarize current team medicine approaches, wherein clinical developments, hand in hand with drug development research, drive potential opportunities for combination therapy.

In recent decades, cancer biology and medicine have ushered in a new age of precision medicine through high-throughput approaches that led to the development of novel targeted therapies and immunotherapies for different cancers. The availability of multifaceted high-throughput omics data has revealed that cancer, beyond its genomic heterogeneity, is a complex system of microenvironments, sub-clonal tumor populations, and a variety of other cell types that impinge on the genetic and non-genetic mechanisms underlying the disease. Thus, a systems approach to cancer biology has become instrumental in identifying the key components of tumor initiation, progression, and the eventual emergence of drug resistance. Through the union of clinical medicine and basic sciences, there has been a revolution in the development and approval of cancer therapeutic drug options including tyrosine kinase inhibitors, antibody–drug conjugates, and immunotherapy. This ‘Team Medicine’ approach within the cancer systems biology framework can be further improved upon through the development of high-throughput clinical trial models that utilize machine learning models, rapid sample processing to grow patient tumor cell cultures, test multiple therapeutic options and assign appropriate therapy to individual patients quickly and efficiently. The integration of systems biology into the clinical network would allow for rapid advances in personalized medicine that are often hindered by a lack of drug development and drug testing.

Introduction: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) alterations exist in 15–50% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) diagnoses. Although effective therapeutics have been developed in the form of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI), various mechanisms of resistance lead to treatment failure after exposure to EGFR TKI-based therapy. Of these, histologic transformation (HT) into small cell lung cancer (SCLC) represents approximately 14% of cases. Methods: Within a single institution, we retrospectively reviewed longitudinal data from both tissue and liquid biopsies of patients with histologic transformation after a diagnosis of EGFR-mutant NSCLC. We sought to further characterize the baseline and emergent genomic alterations after HT to SCLC in the context of TKI exposure, along with germline alterations that may contribute to lineage plasticity and outcomes. Results: Fifteen patients were included in our analysis. Of these, EGFR exon 19 deletions were the most frequent (n = 11, 73.3%), followed by L858R (n = 3, 20%) and L861Q (n = 1, 6.7%). The median time for transformation was 17 months (95%CI, 8.9–41.9 months). The median OS of our cohort was 51.6 months (95%CI, 26.3—NE) with a median OS post-transformation of 13.4 months. Recurrent genomic alterations included TP53, Rb1, PIK3CA, and BRAF. Germline testing revealed a pathogenic alteration in FBN1, with a recurrent variant of unknown significance (VUS) in PALLD. Conclusion: Post-transformation somatic mutation testing and germline testing at presentation revealed unique mutational profiles not previously reported in the setting of HT to SCLC. Further investigations are required to determine the optimal treatment and sequencing following HT.

Metastasis continues to be the primary cause of all cancer-related deaths despite the recent advancements in cancer treatments. To evaluate the role of mutations in overall survival (OS) and treatment outcomes, we analyzed 957 metastatic patients with seven major cancer types who had available molecular testing results with a FoundationOne CDx^® panel. The most prevalent genes with somatic mutations were TP53, KRAS, APC, and LRP1B. In this analysis, these genes had mutation frequencies higher than in publicly available datasets. We identified that the somatic mutations were seven mutually exclusive gene pairs and an additional fifty-two co-occurring gene pairs. Mutations in the mutually exclusive gene pair APC and CDKN2A showed an opposite effect on the overall survival. However, patients with CDKN2A mutations showed significantly shorter OS (HR: 1.72, 95% CI: 1.34–2.21, p < 0.001) after adjusting for cancer type, age at diagnosis, and sex. Five-year post metastatic diagnosis survival analysis showed a significant improvement in OS (median survival 28 and 43 months in pre-2015 and post-2015 metastatic diagnosis, respectively, p = 0.00021) based on the year of metastatic diagnosis. Although the use of targeted therapies after metastatic diagnosis prolonged OS, the benefit was not statistically significant. However, longer five-year progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly associated with targeted therapy use (median 10.9 months (CI: 9.7–11.9 months) compared to 9.1 months (CI: 8.1–10.1 months) for non-targeted therapy, respectively, p = 0.0029). Our results provide a clinically relevant overview of the complex molecular landscape and survival mechanisms in metastatic solid cancers.