MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Clinical activity of mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) inhibitors in patients with MAP2K1 (MEK1)-mutated metastatic cancers: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

2023· review· en· W4379283236 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew Dankner, Sarah Petrecca, François Fabi, Alexander Nowakowski, Charles Vincent Rajadurai, Emmanuelle Rousselle, Andrew P. Stein, David J. H. Bian, Peter Tai, Alicia Belaiche, Meredith Li, Anna-Maria Lazaratos, Andrea Quaiattini, Nicola Normanno, Maria E. Arcila, Arielle Elkrief, Marc Ladanyi, April A. N. Rose

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMelanoma and MAPK Pathways
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKRASNeuroblastoma RAS viral oncogene homologMedicineHRASMAPK/ERK pathwayCancer researchCancerColorectal cancerMutationMutantMelanomaLung cancerKinaseOncologyInternal medicineBiologyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

3125 Background: MAP2K1 (MEK1) mutations are potentially actionable driver mutations in cancer. MAP2K1 mutations can be classified into 3 classes according to molecular characteristics. The efficacy of MAPK inhibitors (MAPKi) for the treatment of MAP2K1 mutant tumors is not well understood. We sought to characterize the genomic and clinical landscape of MAP2K1 mutant tumors, and to evaluate the relationship between MAP2K1 mutation class and clinical activity of MAPKi in patients with MAP2K1 mutant metastatic solid tumors. Methods: We interrogated AACR GENIE (v13) to identify all tumors with Class 1/2/3 MAP2K1 mutant solid tumors. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data from patients with MAP2K1 mutant cancer published between 2010-22. Key inclusion criteria were: MAP2K1 mutation, solid tumor, metastatic disease, treatment with MAPKi and available treatment response data. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) and the secondary endpoints were overall response rate (RR) and duration of response (DOR). Chi-squared and Log-Rank tests were used to evaluate statistical significance of differences between groups. Results: MAP2K1 driver mutations were present in 917/167,423 (0.5%) tumors in the AACR GENIE dataset. MAP2K1 mutants were most commonly identified in melanoma, colorectal (CRC) and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In solid tumors, Class 2 mutations were the most prevalent (n=310, 63%) followed by Class 1 (n=119, 24%) and Class 3 (n=66, 13%). Co-occurring MAPK pathway activating mutations (KRAS, NRAS, HRAS, NF1, BRAF, RAF1, or EGFR) were significantly more likely (P<0.0001) to occur in Class 1 (82.3%), versus Class 2 (30.9%) or Class 3 (10.6%) MAP2K1 mutant tumors. We identified 55 patients with MAP2K1 mutant tumors who received MAPKi (n=16/30/6/3 for Class 1/2/3/unclassified, respectively). Of these, (n=22, 18, 12, 3) had melanoma, CRC, NSCLC, or other cancers, respectively. Patients were treated with BRAFi (n=12), MEKi (n=24), BRAF+MEKi (n=2), ERKi (n=1) or EGFRi (n=16). Co-occurring MAPK pathway mutations were present in 51% of tumors. In the entire cohort, the RR was 24% and median PFS was 3.3 months. The RR did not differ according to mutation class, cancer type or MAPKi regimen. However, patients with Class 2 mutations experienced longer PFS (4.0 months) and DOR (23.8 months) compared to patients with Class 1, 3 or unclassified MAP2K1 mutations (PFS 3.0 months, P=0.035; DOR 4.2 months, P=0.04). Conclusions: Class 2 MAP2K1 mutations are RAF-regulated oncogenic mutations with a relatively low incidence of co-occurring MAPK pathway activating mutations. Some patients with Class 2 MAP2K1 mutations may derive durable therapeutic benefit from MAPKi. Prospective clinical studies with MAPK inhibitors are warranted in patients with MAP2K1-mutated metastatic cancer.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.017
Bibliometrics0.0060.009
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.212
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicMelanoma and MAPK PathwaysFrench-language works237,207