Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Aug 1.
Published in final edited form as: Clin Cancer Res. 2020 Nov 10;27(3):799–806. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-20-2861

Table 2.

Objective Response and Progression-Free Survival by MET Genomic Aberrations.

Factors N (%) Responses (ORR %) P value 95% CI PFS (months) P value HR 95% CI
MET Zygosity WT Copies 23 (31%) 7 (30%) 0.88 15% to 51% 7.9 0.84
CN LOH 24 (32%) 9 (38%) 21% to 57% 7.2
Heterozygous loss 5 (7%) 1 (20%) 2% to 64% 9
Amplification 9 (12%) 3 (33%) 12% to 65% 6.5

NE 14 (19%)

Whole Genome Duplication (WGD) Yes 17 (23%) 9 (53%) 0.14 31% to 74% 7.3 0.66 1.2 0.6 to 2.3
No 50 (67%) 15 (30%) 19% to 44% 8.8

NE 8 (11%)

MET Clonality Subclonal 2 (3%) 0 (0%) 0.5 0% to 71% 4.5 0.1 2.0 0.5 to 8.2
Clonal 43 (57%) 19 (44%) 30% to 59% 8.9

NE 30 (40%)

MET Focality Broad 2 (3%) 1 (50%) 1.00 9% to 91% 11.0 0.51 0.6 0.1 to 3.3
Focal 7 (9%) 2 (29%) 8% to 65% 5.5

MET non-amplified§ 65 (87%)
NE 1 (10%)

Tumor Mutational Burden (TMB) ≥4.5 mut/Mb 33 (44%) 14 (42%) 0.44 27% to 59% 7.4 0.80 0.9 0.5 to 1.7
<4.5 mut/Mb 33 (44%) 10 (30%) 17% to 47% 7.2

NE 9 (12%)

Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding.

ORR, objective response rate; PFS, progression-free survival; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; WT, wildtype; CN LOH, copy neutral loss of heterozygosity; mut, mutations; Mb, megabase;

§

MET focality can only be evaluated in MET-amplified cases; NE, not evaluable (no evaluable biomarker and/or not RECIST-evaluable)