Interlesional Heterogeneity of EGFR Mutations: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

IF 5.8 3区 医学 Q1 GENETICS & HEREDITY
Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy Pub Date : 2026-03-01 Epub Date: 2026-02-05 DOI:10.1007/s40291-026-00829-6
Diana Ivonne Rodríguez Sánchez, Selin Asli Öztürk, Olga Maxouri, Stevie van der Mierden, Winnie Schats, Sajjad Rostami, Stephan Ursprung, Petur Snaebjornsson, Zuhir Bodalal, Regina Beets-Tan
{"title":"Interlesional Heterogeneity of EGFR Mutations: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Diana Ivonne Rodríguez Sánchez, Selin Asli Öztürk, Olga Maxouri, Stevie van der Mierden, Winnie Schats, Sajjad Rostami, Stephan Ursprung, Petur Snaebjornsson, Zuhir Bodalal, Regina Beets-Tan","doi":"10.1007/s40291-026-00829-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Activating epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations are key drivers in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and other solid tumours, predicting responses to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Tumour heterogeneity alongside sampling and technical factors may contribute to discordant EGFR status across biopsies, complicating treatment decisions. However, systematic evidence on prevalence and drivers of discordance remains limited.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024615727). MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus (2004-2024) were searched for studies reporting EGFR mutation discordance in adult solid tumours. Eligible studies compared primary and metastatic tumours (tissue-tissue), tissue and liquid biopsies (tissue-liquid), or different liquid biopsies. Data extraction and QUADAS-2 risk of bias assessment were performed independently. Discordance proportions were analysed on the logit scale with Haldane-Anscombe correction when needed. Random-effects meta-analysis was conducted using the Paule-Mandel estimator with Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman confidence intervals. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression were used to estimate pooled discordance and explore potential predictors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 154 studies (15,560 patients) predominantly involving NSCLC were included. The pooled discordance rate was 16.1% (95% confidence interval 14.2-18.2). Rates were similar for tissue-tissue (16.8%) and tissue-liquid (15.5%), but higher for liquid-liquid (34.0%). Plasma was the most-studied liquid source (16.5%), while cerebrospinal fluid showed the highest discordance (35.5%). Prior TKI exposure was associated with higher discordance (25.8%) compared with treatment-naive patients (14.6%; p = 0.003). Patients who later developed resistance also had higher baseline discordance (21.0% vs 15.0%; p = 0.042). Discordance varied by metastatic site, from 15.1% in lymph nodes to 17.9% in brain/central nervous system. Meta-regression identified TKI exposure, resistance, and mutation prevalence as predictors.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>EGFR mutation discordance is common and clinically relevant, particularly in NSCLC, but varies substantially by sampling strategy, biofluid, treatment context, and metastatic site. Given the high between-study heterogeneity and the predominance of NSCLC and Asian cohorts, pooled estimates should be interpreted as descriptive summaries rather than universally generalisable benchmarks. These findings support integrated and context-aware sampling strategies for EGFR-targeted therapy and resistance monitoring.</p>","PeriodicalId":49797,"journal":{"name":"Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"177-193"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12999597/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40291-026-00829-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Activating epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations are key drivers in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and other solid tumours, predicting responses to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Tumour heterogeneity alongside sampling and technical factors may contribute to discordant EGFR status across biopsies, complicating treatment decisions. However, systematic evidence on prevalence and drivers of discordance remains limited.

Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024615727). MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus (2004-2024) were searched for studies reporting EGFR mutation discordance in adult solid tumours. Eligible studies compared primary and metastatic tumours (tissue-tissue), tissue and liquid biopsies (tissue-liquid), or different liquid biopsies. Data extraction and QUADAS-2 risk of bias assessment were performed independently. Discordance proportions were analysed on the logit scale with Haldane-Anscombe correction when needed. Random-effects meta-analysis was conducted using the Paule-Mandel estimator with Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman confidence intervals. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression were used to estimate pooled discordance and explore potential predictors.

Results: A total of 154 studies (15,560 patients) predominantly involving NSCLC were included. The pooled discordance rate was 16.1% (95% confidence interval 14.2-18.2). Rates were similar for tissue-tissue (16.8%) and tissue-liquid (15.5%), but higher for liquid-liquid (34.0%). Plasma was the most-studied liquid source (16.5%), while cerebrospinal fluid showed the highest discordance (35.5%). Prior TKI exposure was associated with higher discordance (25.8%) compared with treatment-naive patients (14.6%; p = 0.003). Patients who later developed resistance also had higher baseline discordance (21.0% vs 15.0%; p = 0.042). Discordance varied by metastatic site, from 15.1% in lymph nodes to 17.9% in brain/central nervous system. Meta-regression identified TKI exposure, resistance, and mutation prevalence as predictors.

Conclusions: EGFR mutation discordance is common and clinically relevant, particularly in NSCLC, but varies substantially by sampling strategy, biofluid, treatment context, and metastatic site. Given the high between-study heterogeneity and the predominance of NSCLC and Asian cohorts, pooled estimates should be interpreted as descriptive summaries rather than universally generalisable benchmarks. These findings support integrated and context-aware sampling strategies for EGFR-targeted therapy and resistance monitoring.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

EGFR突变的病变间异质性:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:激活表皮生长因子受体(EGFR)突变是非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)和其他实体肿瘤的关键驱动因素,预测对酪氨酸激酶抑制剂(TKIs)的反应。肿瘤异质性以及采样和技术因素可能导致活检中EGFR状态不一致,使治疗决策复杂化。然而,关于不协调的普遍性和驱动因素的系统证据仍然有限。方法:本系统评价和荟萃分析遵循系统评价和荟萃分析首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南,并在PROSPERO注册(CRD42024615727)。检索MEDLINE、Embase和Scopus(2004-2024),查找报告成人实体瘤中EGFR突变不一致的研究。符合条件的研究比较了原发性和转移性肿瘤(组织-组织)、组织和液体活检(组织-液体)或不同的液体活检。数据提取和QUADAS-2偏倚风险评估独立进行。在logit量表上分析不一致比例,必要时进行Haldane-Anscombe校正。随机效应meta分析采用Paule-Mandel估计量和hartung - knap - sidik - jonkman置信区间。亚组分析和元回归用于估计汇总不一致性和探索潜在的预测因子。结果:共纳入154项研究(15560例患者),主要涉及非小细胞肺癌。合并不一致率为16.1%(95%置信区间为14.2 ~ 18.2)。组织-组织(16.8%)和组织-液体(15.5%)的发生率相似,但液-液较高(34.0%)。血浆是研究最多的液体来源(16.5%),脑脊液的不一致性最高(35.5%)。与未接受治疗的患者(14.6%,p = 0.003)相比,先前的TKI暴露与更高的不一致性相关(25.8%)。后来出现耐药性的患者也有更高的基线不一致性(21.0% vs 15.0%; p = 0.042)。不同转移部位的不一致性不同,从淋巴结的15.1%到脑/中枢神经系统的17.9%。meta回归确定TKI暴露、耐药性和突变流行为预测因子。结论:EGFR突变不一致是常见且与临床相关的,特别是在NSCLC中,但因采样策略、生物流体、治疗背景和转移部位而有很大差异。考虑到研究间的高度异质性以及非小细胞肺癌和亚洲队列的优势,汇总估计应被解释为描述性总结,而不是普遍适用的基准。这些发现支持egfr靶向治疗和耐药性监测的综合和情境感知采样策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
2.50%
发文量
53
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy welcomes current opinion articles on emerging or contentious issues, comprehensive narrative reviews, systematic reviews (as outlined by the PRISMA statement), original research articles (including short communications) and letters to the editor. All manuscripts are subject to peer review by international experts.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书