Back to Authors

Walker, Phillip

0009-0009-5324-6219

Mayo Clinic

Caris Life Sciences (United States)

Citations 2

Opposing Roles of SPOP Mutations in Human Prostate and Endometrial Cancers
Cavalcante, Ludimila , Deshmukh, Sachin Kumar , Ribeiro, Jennifer R. , Carneiro, Benedito A. , Dizon, Don S. , Mattox, Tyler , Wu, Sharon , Xiu, Joanne , Nabhan, Chadi , Oberley, Matthew , Nabhan, Chadi , Antonarakis, Emmanuel S , Angara, Kartik , Walker, Phillip , Oberley, Matthew J. , Huang, Haojie , Antonarakis, Emmanuel S.

JCO Precision Oncology | September 7, 2023 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: 7 | Pages: No page available

10.1200/po.23.00088 Get It

SPOP mutations drive opposing molecular and immune landscapes in prostate and endometrial cancers, suggesting tailored therapies
Spectrum of acquired KRAS mutations in driver mutation-positive non-small cell lung cancer.
Alvarez, Jean Gabriel Bustamante , Carlisle, Jennifer W. , Patrick, C. , Reuss, Joshua E. , Gandhi, Nishant , Walker, Phillip , Nieva, Jorgé , Desai, Aakash , Vanderwalde, Ari M. , Liu, Stephen V.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | June 4, 2023 | Volume: 41 | Issue: 16_suppl | Pages: 9069-9069

10.1200/jco.2023.41.16_suppl.9069 Get It

9069 Background: With the emergence of effective targeted-therapies for KRAS G12C, and the development of promising agents for KRAS G12V and G12D among others, the identity of unique KRAS mutations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has become increasingly relevant. Acquired KRAS mutations are a known mechanism of resistance observed across driver mutation-positive (DM+) NSCLC. The incidence and diversity of these acquired alterations, and whether they differ from those observed in de novo KRAS-mutated NSCLC, is unknown. Methods: NSCLC molecular profiles were obtained using next-generation sequencing (Caris Life Sciences) with paired whole-transcriptomic sequencing (Illumina NovaSeq) and immunohistochemistry (Caris Life Sciences). Demographic data were abstracted from medical records. KRAS mutation diversity was defined for de novo KRAS-mutated ( KRASmt) NSCLC ( KRAS as only identified driver – KRASmt_dn) and DM+ NSCLC with acquired KRAS mutations (concurrent KRASmt with other known driver – KRASmt_acq). Fisher’s exact test was used to compare the distribution of unique KRAS mutations between the groups. Due to the unique biology of NSCLC with class II/III BRAF mutations, this subset was removed from the KRASmt_acq subgroup for the final analysis. Results: A total of 5932 KRASmt NSCLC samples were identified, among which 5879 were KRASmt_dn and 53 were KRASmt_acq (see table). The distribution of unique KRAS mutations was not significantly different between groups (p = 0.14). Within the KRASmt_dn group, KRAS G12C was most common (40%), followed by G12V (19%), G12D (14%), G12A (7%) and Q61H/G13C (4% each). In the KRASmt_acq group, KRAS G12C was most common (30%), followed by G12D (19%), G12V (17%), Q61H (11%), G12A (7%), and G13C (6%). The most common observed driver mutations in the KRASmt_acq group were EGFR (38%) and MET (30%). In the EGFR group, KRAS G12D (25%), Q61H/G12C (20% each), G12V/G13C (10% each), and G12F/A/R (5% each) were observed. In the MET group, KRAS G12C (25%), G12D/V/A (19% each), Q61H (12%) and G12S (6%) were seen. Among 7 patients with a documented history of smoking in the KRASmt_acq group, KRAS G12D and Q61H were most common (29% each), followed by G12V/F and G13C (14% each). Conclusions: While the distribution of unique KRAS mutations did not differ significantly between KRASmt_dn and KRASmt_acq groups, acquired KRAS mutations were seen across DM+ NSCLC subsets, among which the frequency of observed mutations appeared to vary. The functional and immunological significance of these mutations, and their impact on clinical outcomes, warrants further investigation. [Table: see text]