Purpose: To identify druggable oncogenic fusions in invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma (IMA) of the lung, a malignant type of lung adenocarcinoma in which KRAS mutations frequently occur.

Experimental Design: From an IMA cohort of 90 cases, consisting of 56 cases (62%) with KRAS mutations and 34 cases without (38%), we conducted whole-transcriptome sequencing of 32 IMAs, including 27 cases without KRAS mutations. We used the sequencing data to identify gene fusions, and then performed functional analyses of the fusion gene products.

Results: We identified oncogenic fusions that occurred mutually exclusively with KRAS mutations: CD74-NRG1, SLC3A2-NRG1, EZR-ERBB4, TRIM24-BRAF, and KIAA1468-RET. NRG1 fusions were present in 17.6% (6/34) of KRAS-negative IMAs. The CD74-NRG1 fusion activated HER2:HER3 signaling, whereas the EZR-ERBB4 and TRIM24-BRAF fusions constitutively activated the ERBB4 and BRAF kinases, respectively. Signaling pathway activation and fusion-induced anchorage-independent growth/tumorigenicity of NIH3T3 cells expressing these fusions were suppressed by tyrosine kinase inhibitors approved for clinical use.

Conclusions: Oncogenic fusions act as driver mutations in IMAs without KRAS mutations, and thus represent promising therapeutic targets for the treatment of such IMAs. Clin Cancer Res; 20(12); 3087–93. ©2014 AACR.

This article is featured in Highlights of This Issue, p. 3045

Translational Relevance

Oncogene fusions, such as the ALK, RET, and ROS1 fusions, have recently been revealed as therapeutic targets in lung adenocarcinoma (LDAC). We identified multiple druggable oncogene fusions, including those involving the NRG1, ERBB4, and BRAF genes, in invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma (IMA), a malignant type of LDAC. The fusions occurred mutually exclusively with KRAS mutations, a common driver oncogene aberration in IMA. These fusions represent potentially clinically relevant targets for treatment of IMAs that lack KRAS mutations.

Oncogene fusions have recently been identified as driver mutations and (possible) therapeutic targets in lung adenocarcinoma (LADC), a major histologic type of lung cancer (1). Such fusions include EML4- or KIF5B-ALK, KIF5B, or CCDC6-RET, and CD74-, EZR-, or SLC34A2-ROS1 (2–9). These oncogene fusions occur mutually exclusively with one another, and with other targetable oncogene aberrations such as EGFR, KRAS, BRAF, and HER2 mutations. Therefore, molecular targeted therapy combined with the identification of driver oncogene aberrations represents a powerful and promising approach to personalized treatment of LADC (10, 11).

Invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma (IMA) of the lung is composed predominantly of goblet cells. IMA is morphologically characterized by tall columnar cells with basal nuclei and a pale cytoplasm containing varying amounts of mucin (12, 13). IMAs, which constitute 2% to 10% of all LADCs in Japan, the United States, and European countries (14–16), are indicated as being more malignant than more common types of LADC, such as acinar or papillary adenocarcinoma. The KRAS mutation is the only driver aberration commonly detected in IMAs (in 50%–80% of cases). To date, no driver gene aberrations have been detected in KRAS-negative IMAs; these aberrations must be identified to facilitate the development of effective treatments for such cancers. Therefore, we performed whole-transcriptome sequencing (RNA sequencing) of IMAs lacking KRAS mutations to identify novel chimeric fusion transcripts that represent potential targets for cancer therapy.

Samples

Ninety IMAs were identified among consecutive patients with primary adenocarcinoma of the lung who were treated surgically at the National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan, from 1998 to 2013. Histologic diagnoses were based on the most recent World Health Organization classification and the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer/American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society (IASLC/ATS/ERS) criteria for LADC (13, 17). Total RNA was extracted from grossly dissected, snap-frozen tissue samples using TRIzol (Invitrogen). The study was approved by the Institutional Review Boards of the participating institutions.

RNA sequencing

RNA sequencing libraries were prepared from 1 or 2 μg of total RNA using the mRNA-Seq Sample Prep Kit or TruSeq RNA Sample Prep Kit (Illumina). The resultant libraries were subjected to paired-end sequencing of 50 or 75 bp reads on a Genome Analyzer IIx (GAIIx) or HiSeq 2000 (Illumina). Fusion transcripts were detected using the TopHat-Fusion algorithm (18). Experimental conditions for RNA sequencing are described in Supplementary Table S1.

Examinations of oncogenic properties of fusion products

To construct lentiviral vectors for expression of the CD74-NRG1, EZR-ERBB4, and TRIM24-BRAF fusion proteins, full-length cDNAs were amplified from tumor cDNA by PCR and inserted into pLenti-6/V5-DEST plasmids (Invitrogen). The integrity of each inserted cDNA was verified by Sanger sequencing. Expression of fusion products of the predicted sizes was confirmed by Western blot analysis of transiently transfected and virally infected cells (Supplementary Fig. S1A). Details of plasmid transfection, viral infection, Western blot analysis, and soft agar colony and tumorigenicity assays are described in Supplementary Materials and Methods.

We prepared an IMA cohort of 90 cases consisting of 56 (62%) cases with KRAS mutations and 34 (38%) cases without. The 34 KRAS-negative cases included two, one, and one cases with BRAF mutation, EGFR mutation, and EML4-ALK fusion, respectively; the remaining 30 were “pan negative” for representative driver aberrations in LADCs. Thirty-two cases, consisting of 27 pan-negative and five KRAS mutation-positive cases, were subjected to RNA sequencing (Supplementary Table S1). Analysis of >2 × 107 paired-end reads obtained by RNA sequencing and subsequent validation by Sanger sequencing of reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) products revealed five novel gene-fusion transcripts detected only in the pan-negative IMAs: CD74-NRG1, SLC3A2-NRG1, EZR-ERBB4, TRIM24-BRAF, and KIAA1468-RET (Fig. 1A and B; Table 1; details in Supplementary Materials and Methods; Supplementary Fig. S2 and Supplementary Table S2). RT-PCR screening of these fusions in the remaining 58 IMAs that had not been subjected to RNA sequencing revealed one additional pan-negative case with the CD74-NRG1 fusion. Thus, the CD74-NRG1 fusion, detected in five of 34 (14.7%) cases negative for KRAS mutations, was the most frequent fusion among KRAS mutation-negative IMAs. Fusions of CD74 or SLC3A2 with NRG1 were present in 17.6% (6/34) of cases. The five novel fusions were mutually exclusively with one another and were not present in any of the KRAS mutation-positive cases (Table 2).

Figure 1.

Oncogenic fusions in invasive mucinous LDAC. A, schematic representations of the wild-type proteins (top rows of each section) followed by the fusion proteins identified in this study. The breakpoints for each variant are indicated by blue arrows. TM, transmembrane domain. Locations of putative cleavage sites in the NRG1 polypeptide are indicated by dashed green lines. B, detection of gene-fusion transcripts by RT-PCR. RT-PCR products for glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) are shown below. Six IMAs (T) positive for gene fusions are shown alongside their corresponding non-cancerous lung tissues (N); labels below the gel image indicate sample IDs (see Table 1). C, pie chart showing the fraction of IMAs that harbor the indicated driver mutations.

Figure 1.

Oncogenic fusions in invasive mucinous LDAC. A, schematic representations of the wild-type proteins (top rows of each section) followed by the fusion proteins identified in this study. The breakpoints for each variant are indicated by blue arrows. TM, transmembrane domain. Locations of putative cleavage sites in the NRG1 polypeptide are indicated by dashed green lines. B, detection of gene-fusion transcripts by RT-PCR. RT-PCR products for glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) are shown below. Six IMAs (T) positive for gene fusions are shown alongside their corresponding non-cancerous lung tissues (N); labels below the gel image indicate sample IDs (see Table 1). C, pie chart showing the fraction of IMAs that harbor the indicated driver mutations.

Close modal
Table 1.

Characteristics of invasive mucinous LDACs with novel gene fusions

No.SampleSexAgeSmoking (pack/year)Gene fusionChromosome aberrationOncogene mutationaPathologic stageTTF1HNF4A
301T 55 Ever (47) CD74-NRG1 t(5;8)(q32;p12) None 1a − 
AD12-108T 68 Never CD74-NRG1  None 2b − 
AD09-404T 78 Never CD74-NRG1  None 1a − 
AD13-199T 47 Never CD74-NRG1  None 1b − 
AD13-223T 53 Never CD74-NRG1  None 1a − 
AD13-379T 66 Never SLC3A2-NRG1 t(8;11)(p12;q13) None 1b Not tested Not tested 
436T 61 Ever (41) EZR-ERBB4 t(2;6)(q25;q34) None 1b − 
AD08_127T 66 Never TRIM24-BRAF inv7(q33;q34) None 1a 
AD12-119T 62 Current (63) KIAA1468-RET t(10;18)(q21;q11) None 1a − 
No.SampleSexAgeSmoking (pack/year)Gene fusionChromosome aberrationOncogene mutationaPathologic stageTTF1HNF4A
301T 55 Ever (47) CD74-NRG1 t(5;8)(q32;p12) None 1a − 
AD12-108T 68 Never CD74-NRG1  None 2b − 
AD09-404T 78 Never CD74-NRG1  None 1a − 
AD13-199T 47 Never CD74-NRG1  None 1b − 
AD13-223T 53 Never CD74-NRG1  None 1a − 
AD13-379T 66 Never SLC3A2-NRG1 t(8;11)(p12;q13) None 1b Not tested Not tested 
436T 61 Ever (41) EZR-ERBB4 t(2;6)(q25;q34) None 1b − 
AD08_127T 66 Never TRIM24-BRAF inv7(q33;q34) None 1a 
AD12-119T 62 Current (63) KIAA1468-RET t(10;18)(q21;q11) None 1a − 

aEGFR, KRAS, BRAF, and HER2 mutations and ALK, RET, and ROS1 fusions.

Table 2.

Characteristics of 90 invasive mucinous LDACs

MutationFusion
VariableAllKRASBRAFEGFRCD74-NRG1 or SLC3A2-NRG1EZR-ERBB4TRIM24-BRAFEML4-ALKKIAA1468-RETNone (%)
Total 90 (100) 56 (62.2) 2 (2.2) 1 (1.1) 6 (6.7) 1 (1.1) 1 (1.1) 1 (1.1) 1 (1.1) 21 (23.3) 
Age (mean ± SD; y) 67.2 ± 9.7 68.1 ± 9.7 66.5 ± 3.5 50 61.2 ± 11.5 61 66 64 62 68.1 ± 9.6 
Sex 
 Male (%) 39 (43.3) 28 (50.0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1 (16.7) 1 (100) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1 (100) 8 (38.1) 
 Female (%) 51 (56.7) 28 (50.0) 2 (100) 1 (100) 5 (83.3) 0 (0) 1 (100) 1 (100) 0 (0) 13 (61.9) 
Smoking habit 
 Never smoker (%) 51 (56.7) 29 (51.8) 2 (100) 1 (100) 4 (66.7) 0 (0) 1 (100) 1 (100) 0 (0) 13 (61.9) 
 Ever smoker (%) 39 (43.3) 27 (48.2) 0 (0) 0 (0) 2 (33.3) 1 (100) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1 (100) 8 (38.1) 
MutationFusion
VariableAllKRASBRAFEGFRCD74-NRG1 or SLC3A2-NRG1EZR-ERBB4TRIM24-BRAFEML4-ALKKIAA1468-RETNone (%)
Total 90 (100) 56 (62.2) 2 (2.2) 1 (1.1) 6 (6.7) 1 (1.1) 1 (1.1) 1 (1.1) 1 (1.1) 21 (23.3) 
Age (mean ± SD; y) 67.2 ± 9.7 68.1 ± 9.7 66.5 ± 3.5 50 61.2 ± 11.5 61 66 64 62 68.1 ± 9.6 
Sex 
 Male (%) 39 (43.3) 28 (50.0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1 (16.7) 1 (100) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1 (100) 8 (38.1) 
 Female (%) 51 (56.7) 28 (50.0) 2 (100) 1 (100) 5 (83.3) 0 (0) 1 (100) 1 (100) 0 (0) 13 (61.9) 
Smoking habit 
 Never smoker (%) 51 (56.7) 29 (51.8) 2 (100) 1 (100) 4 (66.7) 0 (0) 1 (100) 1 (100) 0 (0) 13 (61.9) 
 Ever smoker (%) 39 (43.3) 27 (48.2) 0 (0) 0 (0) 2 (33.3) 1 (100) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1 (100) 8 (38.1) 

Four of the novel fusions, CD74-NRG1, SLC3A2-NRG1, EZR-ERBB4, and TRIM24-BRAF, involved rearrangements of genes encoding protein kinases or a ligand of a receptor protein kinase (NRG1/neuregulin/heregulin) for which oncogenic rearrangements have not been previously reported in lung cancer (Supplementary Fig. S3). The remaining fusion was a novel type involving the RET oncogene; fusions with RET are observed in 1% to 2% of LADCs (4, 5, 7, 8, 11). In a screen of 315 LADCs without IMA features from Japanese patients and 144 consecutive LADCs from U.S. patients, all tumors were negative for all of the NRG1, BRAF, and ERBB4 fusions, as well as the novel RET fusion. Therefore, these fusions might be driver aberrations specific to LADCs with IMA features. The four novel gene fusions were likely to have been caused by interchromosomal translocations or paracentric inversion (Table 1 and Supplementary Fig. S3). Consistently, separation of the signals generated by the probes flanking the translocation sites of NRG1 in fusion-positive tumors was observed upon FISH analysis of CD74-NRG1 fusion-positive tumors (Supplementary Fig. S4). We also confirmed overexpression of NRG1, ERBB4, and BRAF proteins in tumor cells carrying the corresponding fusions by immunohistochemical analysis, using antibodies recognizing polypeptides retained in the fusion proteins; expression of NRG1, ERBB4, and BRAF proteins was also observed in some fusion-negative cases (Supplementary Fig. S5). IMAs harboring gene fusions were obtained from both male and female patients, although NRG1 fusion-positive cases were preferentially from female never smokers (Table 1).

The CD74-NRG1 and SLC3A2-NRG1 fusion proteins, whose sequences were deduced from RNA sequencing data, contained the CD74 or SLC3A2 transmembrane domain and retained the EGF-like domain of the NRG1 protein (NRG1 III-β3 form; Fig. 1A). The NRG1 III-β3 protein has a cytosolic N-terminus and a membrane-tethered EGF-like domain, and mediates juxtacrine signals signaling through HER2:HER3 receptors (19). Because parts of CD74 or SLC3A2 replaced the transmembrane domain of wild-type NRG1 III-β3, we speculated that the membrane-tethered EGF-like domain might activate juxtacrine signaling through HER2:HER3 receptors. In addition, it was also possible that expression of these fusion proteins resulted in the production of soluble NRG1 protein due to proteolytic cleavage at sites derived from NRG1 (dashed green lines in Fig. 1A), as recently suggested for NRG1 type III proteins (20, 21). Exposing EFM-19 cells to conditioned media from H1299 human lung cancer cells expressing exogenous CD74-NRG1 fusion protein resulted in phosphorylation of endogenous ERBB2/HER2 and ERBB3/HER3 proteins, suggesting that autocrine HER2:HER3 signaling was activated by secreted NRG1 ligands generated from CD74-NRG1 polypeptides (Fig. 2A). Phosphorylation of extracellular signal—regulated kinase (ERK) and AKT, downstream mediators of HER2:HER3, was also elevated. HER2, HER3, and ERK phosphorylation was suppressed by lapatinib and afatinib, U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) that target HER kinases (22–24). Together, these observations indicate that NRG1 fusions activated HER2:HER3 signaling by juxtacrine and/or autocrine mechanisms.

Figure 2.

Oncogenic properties of gene-fusion products. A, ERBB3 activation by CD74-NRG1 fusion, demonstrated using the EFM-19 cell system. ERBB3, ERBB2, AKT, and ERK phosphorylation were examined in EFM-19 (reporter) cells treated for 30 minutes with conditioned media from H1299 cells exogenously expressing CD74-NRG1 cDNA. Phosphorylation was suppressed by HER-TKIs. B, ERBB4 activation by EZR-ERBB4 fusion. Stably transduced NIH3T3 cells were serum-starved for 24 hours and treated for 2 hours with DMSO (vehicle control) or TKIs. Phosphorylation of ERBB4 and ERK was suppressed by ERBB4-TKIs. EZR-ERBB4 protein was detected using an antibody recognizing ERBB4 polypeptides retained in the fusion protein. C, BRAF activation by TRIM24-BRAF fusion. Stably transduced NIH3T3 cells were serum-starved for 24 hours and treated for 2 hours with DMSO or kinase inhibitors. ERK phosphorylation (activation) was suppressed by sorafenib, a kinase inhibitor targeting BRAF, as well as by U0126, a MEK inhibitor. TRIM24-BRAF protein was detected using an antibody recognizing BRAF polypeptides retained in the fusion protein. D–F, anchorage-independent growth of NIH3T3 cells expressing CD74-NRG1 (D), EZR-ERBB4 (E), or TRIM24-BRAF (F) cDNA, and suppression of this growth by kinase inhibitors. Mock-, CD74-NRG1-, EZR-ERBB4-, and TRIM24-BRAF–transduced NIH3T3 cells were seeded in soft agar with DMSO alone or kinase inhibitors. Colonies > 100 μm in diameter were counted after 14 days. Column graphs show mean numbers of colonies ± SEM.

Figure 2.

Oncogenic properties of gene-fusion products. A, ERBB3 activation by CD74-NRG1 fusion, demonstrated using the EFM-19 cell system. ERBB3, ERBB2, AKT, and ERK phosphorylation were examined in EFM-19 (reporter) cells treated for 30 minutes with conditioned media from H1299 cells exogenously expressing CD74-NRG1 cDNA. Phosphorylation was suppressed by HER-TKIs. B, ERBB4 activation by EZR-ERBB4 fusion. Stably transduced NIH3T3 cells were serum-starved for 24 hours and treated for 2 hours with DMSO (vehicle control) or TKIs. Phosphorylation of ERBB4 and ERK was suppressed by ERBB4-TKIs. EZR-ERBB4 protein was detected using an antibody recognizing ERBB4 polypeptides retained in the fusion protein. C, BRAF activation by TRIM24-BRAF fusion. Stably transduced NIH3T3 cells were serum-starved for 24 hours and treated for 2 hours with DMSO or kinase inhibitors. ERK phosphorylation (activation) was suppressed by sorafenib, a kinase inhibitor targeting BRAF, as well as by U0126, a MEK inhibitor. TRIM24-BRAF protein was detected using an antibody recognizing BRAF polypeptides retained in the fusion protein. D–F, anchorage-independent growth of NIH3T3 cells expressing CD74-NRG1 (D), EZR-ERBB4 (E), or TRIM24-BRAF (F) cDNA, and suppression of this growth by kinase inhibitors. Mock-, CD74-NRG1-, EZR-ERBB4-, and TRIM24-BRAF–transduced NIH3T3 cells were seeded in soft agar with DMSO alone or kinase inhibitors. Colonies > 100 μm in diameter were counted after 14 days. Column graphs show mean numbers of colonies ± SEM.

Close modal

The EZR-ERBB4 fusion protein contained the EZR coiled-coil domain, which functions in protein dimerization, and also retained the full ERBB4 kinase domain (Fig. 1A). These features indicated that the EZR-ERBB4 protein is likely to form a homodimer via the coiled-coil domain of EZR, causing aberrant activation of the kinase function of ERBB4, similar to the situation of EZR-ROS1 fusion (5). Indeed, when the EZR-ERBB4 cDNA was exogenously expressed in NIH3T3 fibroblasts, tyrosine 1258, located in the activation loop of the ERBB4 kinase site, was phosphorylated in the absence of serum stimulation, indicating that fusion with EZR aberrantly activated the ERBB4 kinase (Fig. 2B). Consistent with this, phosphorylation of a downstream mediator ERK was also elevated. Phosphorylation of ERBB4 and ERK was suppressed by lapatinib and afatinib, which inhibit ERBB4 protein (22–24).

The TRIM24-BRAF fusion protein retained the BRAF kinase domain but lacked the N-terminal RAS-binding domain responsible for negatively regulating BRAF kinase. These features suggested that the fusion was constitutively active, as in the cases of the ESRP1-BRAF and AGTRAP-BRAF fusions in other cancers (25). When the TRIM24-BRAF cDNA was exogenously expressed in NIH3T3 cells, ERK, a downstream mediator of BRAF, was phosphorylated in the absence of serum stimulation, indicating that fusion with TRIM24 aberrantly activated BRAF kinase (Fig. 2C). ERK phosphorylation was suppressed by sorafenib, an FDA-approved drug originally identified as a RAF kinase inhibitor (26), and also by the MEK inhibitor U0126 (Fig. 2C).

Exogenous expression of fusion gene cDNAs induced anchorage-independent growth of NIH3T3 fibroblasts, indicating their transforming activities (Fig. 2D–F). This growth was suppressed by the kinase inhibitors that suppressed fusion-induced activation of signal transduction, as described above. NIH3T3 cells expressing EZR-ERBB4 or TRIM24-BRAF fusion cDNA formed tumors in nude mice (Fig. 3). Therefore, we concluded that these three fusions function as driver mutations in IMA development. We screened 200 commonly used human lung cancer cell lines, but all were negative for these three fusions (data not shown); thus, the oncogenic properties of these fusions remain unvalidated in human cancer cells.

Figure 3.

Tumorigenicity of NIH3T3 cells expressing ERZ-ERBB4 or TRIM24-BRAF fusion cDNAs. A, tumor growth in nude mice injected with NIH3T3 cells expressing empty vector, EZR-ERBB4 fusion, or TRIM24-BRAF fusion. Cells were resuspended with 50% Matrigel and injected into the right flank of nude mice. Tumor size was measured twice weekly for 5 weeks. Data are shown as mean ± SEM. B, representative tumors were photographed on day 21. The numbers in parentheses indicate the ratio of the number of mice with tumors to the number of mice receiving cell injection.

Figure 3.

Tumorigenicity of NIH3T3 cells expressing ERZ-ERBB4 or TRIM24-BRAF fusion cDNAs. A, tumor growth in nude mice injected with NIH3T3 cells expressing empty vector, EZR-ERBB4 fusion, or TRIM24-BRAF fusion. Cells were resuspended with 50% Matrigel and injected into the right flank of nude mice. Tumor size was measured twice weekly for 5 weeks. Data are shown as mean ± SEM. B, representative tumors were photographed on day 21. The numbers in parentheses indicate the ratio of the number of mice with tumors to the number of mice receiving cell injection.

Close modal

The results here suggest that the NRG1, ERBB4 and BRAF fusions are novel driver mutations involved in the development of IMAs of the lungs (Fig. 1C) and potential targets for existing TKIs. The recurrent NRG1 fusions were especially notable because NRG1 was previously identified as a regulator of goblet-cell formation in primary cultures of human bronchial epithelial cells (27); therefore, activation of the NRG1-mediated signaling pathway(s) might play a part in IMA development by contributing to both cell transformation and acquisition of goblet-cell morphology. In addition to a small fraction of known druggable aberrations (an ALK fusion and an EGFR mutation), more than 10% (11/90; 12.2%) of IMAs harbored other druggable aberrations targeted by existing kinase inhibitors: these aberrations were represented by fusions involving NRG1, ERBB4, BRAF, or RET, or BRAF mutations (Table 2, Fig. 1C). To facilitate translation of these findings to the cancer clinic, it will be necessary to establish diagnostic methods, particularly using break-apart and fusion FISH methods, capable of detecting these aberrations. Such methods will also help identify additional fusions involving other partner genes and contribute to a greater understanding of the significance of gene fusions in lung carcinogenesis.

No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Conception and design: K. Tsuta, J. Yokota, T. Yoshida, T. Kohno

Development of methodology: H. Ichikawa

Acquisition of data (provided animals, acquired and managed patients, provided facilities, etc.): T. Nakaoku, K. Tsuta, H. Ichikawa, H. Sakamoto, K. Furuta, Y. Shimada, S.-I. Watanabe, H. Nokihara, K. Yasuda, M. Hiramoto, T. Nammo, T. Ishigame, H. Okayama

Analysis and interpretation of data (e.g., statistical analysis, biostatistics, computational analysis): T. Nakaoku, K. Tsuta, M. Enari, A.J. Schetter, C.C. Harris

Writing, review, and/or revision of the manuscript: T. Nakaoku, K. Tsuta, H. Ogiwara, S.-I. Watanabe, H. Nokihara, K. Yasuda, M. Hiramoto, A.J. Schetter, C.C. Harris, Y.H. Kim, M. Mishima, T. Yoshida, T. Kohno

Administrative, technical, or material support (i.e., reporting or organizing data, constructing databases): K. Tsuta, K. Shiraishi, M. Enari, H. Ogiwara, S.-I. Watanabe, H. Okayama

Study supervision: K. Tsuta, J. Yokota

The authors thank Suenori Chiku and Hirohiko Totsuka for the analysis of sequencing data and Dai Suzuki, Kazuko Nagase, Sachiyo Mitani, Sumiko Ohnami, Yoko Odaka, and Misuzu Okuyama for technical assistance.

This work was supported, in part, by the Advanced Research for Medical Products Mining Program of the National Institute of Biomedical Innovation (NIBIO), Grants-in-Aid from the Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare for the Third-term Comprehensive 10 year Strategy for Cancer Control and for Research for Promotion of Cancer Control Programs; and the Princess Takamatsu Cancer Research Fund.

The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

1.
Pao
W
,
Hutchinson
KE
. 
Chipping away at the lung cancer genome
.
Nat Med
2012
;
18
:
349
51
.
2.
Shaw
AT
,
Engelman
JA
. 
ALK in lung cancer: past, present, and future
.
J Clin Oncol
2013
;
31
:
1105
11
.
3.
Gautschi
O
,
Zander
T
,
Keller
FA
,
Strobel
K
,
Hirschmann
A
,
Aebi
S
, et al
A patient with lung adenocarcinoma and RET fusion treated with vandetanib
.
J Thorac Oncol
2013
;
8
:
e43
4
.
4.
Drilon
A
,
Wang
L
,
Hasanovic
A
,
Suehara
Y
,
Lipson
D
,
Stephens
P
, et al
Response to Cabozantinib in Patients with RET Fusion-Positive Lung Adenocarcinomas
.
Cancer Discov
2013
;
3
:
630
5
.
5.
Takeuchi
K
,
Soda
M
,
Togashi
Y
,
Suzuki
R
,
Sakata
S
,
Hatano
S
, et al
RET, ROS1 and ALK fusions in lung cancer
.
Nat Med
2012
;
18
:
378
81
.
6.
Mano
H
. 
ALKoma: a cancer subtype with a shared target
.
Cancer Discov
2012
;
2
:
495
502
.
7.
Lipson
D
,
Capelletti
M
,
Yelensky
R
,
Otto
G
,
Parker
A
,
Jarosz
M
, et al
Identification of new ALK and RET gene fusions from colorectal and lung cancer biopsies
.
Nat Med
2012
;
18
:
382
4
.
8.
Kohno
T
,
Ichikawa
H
,
Totoki
Y
,
Yasuda
K
,
Hiramoto
M
,
Nammo
T
, et al
KIF5B-RET fusions in lung adenocarcinoma
.
Nat Med
2012
;
18
:
375
7
.
9.
Ju
YS
,
Lee
WC
,
Shin
JY
,
Lee
S
,
Bleazard
T
,
Won
JK
, et al
A transforming KIF5B and RET gene fusion in lung adenocarcinoma revealed from whole-genome and transcriptome sequencing
.
Genome Res
2012
;
22
:
436
45
.
10.
Oxnard
GR
,
Binder
A
,
Janne
PA
. 
New targetable oncogenes in non-small-cell lung cancer
.
J Clin Oncol
2013
;
31
:
1097
104
.
11.
Kohno
T
,
Tsuta
K
,
Tsuchihara
K
,
Nakaoku
T
,
Yoh
K
,
Goto
K
. 
RET fusion gene: Translation to personalized lung cancer therapy
.
Cancer Sci
2013
;
104
:
1396
400
.
12.
Travis
WD
,
Brambilla
E
,
Riely
GJ
. 
New pathologic classification of lung cancer: relevance for clinical practice and clinical trials
.
J Clin Oncol
2013
;
31
:
992
1001
.
13.
Travis
WD
,
Brambilla
E
,
Noguchi
M
,
Nicholson
AG
,
Geisinger
KR
,
Yatabe
Y
, et al
International association for the study of lung cancer/american thoracic society/european respiratory society international multidisciplinary classification of lung adenocarcinoma
.
J Thorac Oncol
2011
;
6
:
244
85
.
14.
Tsuta
K
,
Kawago
M
,
Inoue
E
,
Yoshida
A
,
Takahashi
F
,
Sakurai
H
, et al
The utility of the proposed IASLC/ATS/ERS lung adenocarcinoma subtypes for disease prognosis and correlation of driver gene alterations
.
Lung Cancer
2013
;
81
:
371
6
.
15.
Warth
A
,
Muley
T
,
Meister
M
,
Stenzinger
A
,
Thomas
M
,
Schirmacher
P
, et al
The novel histologic International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer/American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society classification system of lung adenocarcinoma is a stage-independent predictor of survival
.
J Clin Oncol
2012
;
30
:
1438
46
.
16.
Yoshizawa
A
,
Motoi
N
,
Riely
GJ
,
Sima
CS
,
Gerald
WL
,
Kris
MG
, et al
Impact of proposed IASLC/ATS/ERS classification of lung adenocarcinoma: prognostic subgroups and implications for further revision of staging based on analysis of 514 stage I cases
.
Mod Pathol
2011
;
24
:
653
64
.
17.
Travis
WD
,
Brambilla
E
,
Muller-Hermelink
HK
,
Harris
CC
editors. 
World Health Organization classification of tumors: Pathology and genetics, tumours of lung, pleura, thymus and heart
.
Lyon, France
:
IARC Press
; 
2004
.
18.
Kim
D
,
Salzberg
SL
. 
TopHat-Fusion: an algorithm for discovery of novel fusion transcripts
.
Genome Biol
2011
;
12
:
R72
.
19.
Falls
DL
. 
Neuregulins: functions, forms, and signaling strategies
.
Exp Cell Res
2003
;
284
:
14
30
.
20.
Fleck
D
,
van Bebber
F
,
Colombo
A
,
Galante
C
,
Schwenk
BM
,
Rabe
L
, et al
Dual cleavage of neuregulin 1 type III by BACE1 and ADAM17 liberates its EGF-like domain and allows paracrine signaling
.
J Neurosci
2013
;
33
:
7856
69
.
21.
Dislich
B
,
Lichtenthaler
SF
. 
The membrane-bound aspartyl protease BACE1: molecular and functional properties in Alzheimer's disease and beyond
.
Front Physiol
2012
;
3
:
8
.
22.
Majem
M
,
Pallares
C
. 
An update on molecularly targeted therapies in second- and third-line treatment in non-small cell lung cancer: focus on EGFR inhibitors and anti-angiogenic agents
.
Clin Transl Oncol
2013
;
15
:
343
57
.
23.
Perez
EA
,
Spano
JP
. 
Current and emerging targeted therapies for metastatic breast cancer
.
Cancer
2012
;
118
:
3014
25
.
24.
Nelson
V
,
Ziehr
J
,
Agulnik
M
,
Johnson
M
. 
Afatinib: emerging next-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitor for NSCLC
.
Onco Targets Ther
2013
;
6
:
135
43
.
25.
Palanisamy
N
,
Ateeq
B
,
Kalyana-Sundaram
S
,
Pflueger
D
,
Ramnarayanan
K
,
Shankar
S
, et al
Rearrangements of the RAF kinase pathway in prostate cancer, gastric cancer and melanoma
.
Nat Med
2010
;
16
:
793
8
.
26.
Wilhelm
SM
,
Adnane
L
,
Newell
P
,
Villanueva
A
,
Llovet
JM
,
Lynch
M
. 
Preclinical overview of sorafenib, a multikinase inhibitor that targets both Raf and VEGF and PDGF receptor tyrosine kinase signaling
.
Mol Cancer Ther
2008
;
7
:
3129
40
.
27.
Kettle
R
,
Simmons
J
,
Schindler
F
,
Jones
P
,
Dicker
T
,
Dubois
G
, et al
Regulation of neuregulin 1beta1-induced MUC5AC and MUC5B expression in human airway epithelium
.
Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol
2010
;
42
:
472
81
.