Loading
Life sciences · Journal article
Clinical Cancer Research · October 8, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Journal article.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Abstract Purpose: Ret proto-oncogene (RET) fusions are highly heterogeneous oncogenic drivers occurring in approximately 1-2% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). While selpercatinib and pralsetinib have dramatically improved clinical outcomes of patients, acquired resistance inevitably develops and effective therapeutic strategies following resistance remain limited. Understanding RET-dependent resistance mechanisms is critical for improving clinical outcomes for this patient population. Experimental Design: A rapid lentivirus-based mutagenesis approach, LentiMutate, was employed to identify potential secondary RET mutations conferring resistance to selective RET inhibitors (SRIs). Candidate resistance mutations were validated using Ba/F3 cell models. Biochemical and structural analysis were conducted to investigate the underlying mechanisms. Candidate mutations were evaluated against next-generation SRIs. Clinical responses after SRIs progression were retrospectively analyzed in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC using the MD Anderson real-world cohort. Results: We identified RET secondary mutations that induced SRIs resistance in a drug-specific manner. V804E/M mutations conferred resistance to selpercatinib while L730I/V and A883V mediated resistance to pralsetinib, with A883V representing a novel resistance mutation identified in this study. G810C/D/S, Y806N and E732K mutations induced resistance to both drugs. Molecular modeling suggested that both drug structure and fusion partner-mediated dimerization impacted differential sensitivity of secondary mutations. In a retrospective clinical cohort, one patient with RET fusion-positive NSCLC who acquired G810X mutations at progression on selpercatinib subsequently achieved a durable response to pralsetinib. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that secondary RET mutations can impart drug-specific effects on resistance to SRIs. These results underscore the need for precision therapy based on the specific resistance mutations present.