PDF file, 130K, sFRP1 re-expression in cancer cells inhibits Wnt signaling.

PDF file, 328K, Authentication of the VHL mutant (Exon 2 c.407T>C) KIJ265T clear cell renal cell carcinoma cell line.

Supplementary Data from A Phase I Clinical Trial of the Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitor Veliparib and Weekly Topotecan in Patients with Solid Tumors

PDF file, 3984K, Methylation pattern sequencing analysis of the sFRP1 promoter.

Supplementary Data from A Phase II Clinical Trial of Ixabepilone (Ixempra; BMS-247550; NSC 710428), an Epothilone B Analog, in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

PURPOSE:Targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway improves progression free survival in multiple advanced malignancies but durable responses are uncommon. Inhibition of the VEGF pathway at multiple levels of signal transduction may improve clinical outcomes. Preclinical data with cediranib, an inhibitor of all 3 VEGF receptors, in combination with selumetinib, an inhibitor of MEK 1/2, demonstrated improved tumor control experimentally. This phase I trial was designed to test the two agents in combination to evaluate the tolerability, safety and assess disease response.METHODS:Patients with advanced solid malignancies were enrolled into this phase I trial. Cediranib and selumetinib were dosed using a toxicity-adaptive isotonic design for the dose escalation/de-escalation of each agent. Both cediranib and selumetinib were administered daily and continuously. Cycles were 28 days in length.RESULTS:Eighteen patients were enrolled. At all dose levels, dose limiting toxicities (DLT) were observed, which limited dose escalation and further evaluation. The maximum tolerated dose of cediranib and selumetinib in combination could not be determined. The best response of stable disease was observed in eight patients.CONCLUSIONS:Cediranib and selumetinib in combination on a continuous schedule was not tolerable, with patients experiencing cardiovascular and other DLTs. Intermittent schedules may be needed to establish a safe and tolerable combination of cediranib and selumetinib.

Context: Clinical applications of genomic assessment of thyroid cancers are rapidly evolving. Objectives, Design, and Setting: We studied tumor samples from patients with imminently threatening and rare thyroid cancers to identify genomic alterations that might correlate with outcomes and/or be productively therapeutically targetable. Patient Context: Progressive and metastatic, and/or rare, thyroid cancers were studied, 2012 to 2016, at Mayo Clinic sites. Intervention: The intervention was Foundation One tumor interrogation. Main Outcome Measures: Main outcome measures included genomic alterations, patient characteristics, and overall survival. Results: Samples from 55 patients were evaluated: 20 anaplastic thyroid cancers (ATCs) (36%), 25 radioactive iodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancers (DTCs)/poorly differentiated thyroid cancers (PDTCs) (45%; 14 papillary thyroid cancer [PTCs], 6 PDTCs, 5 Hurthle cell cancers), 8 medullary thyroid cancers (MTCs) (15%), and 2 others (a spindle epithelial tumor with thymus-like differentiation, and a primary thyroid sarcoma). Overall, 72% of DTCs, 79% of ATCs, and 75% of MTCs were deemed to have potentially productively targetable alterations. The most commonly encountered mutation was of TERT promoter (56% of DTCs, 68% of ATCs)-but this is not presently targetable. Targetable BRAFV600E mutations were found in 40% of DTCs/PDTCs (83% of PTCs) and 32% of ATCs; of MTCs, 75% had targetable RET mutations, and 25% HRAS mutations. Of patient tumors with nonmutated BRAFV600E, 53% of DTC/PDTCs and 69% of ATCs had other potentially productively targetable mutations. Genomic alterations in our series of poor prognosis metastatic DTC/PDTCs also closely resembled those seen in ATC. Conclusions: Whereas genomic interrogation of favorable prognosis thyroid cancer seems ill advised, potentially productively targetable mutations were demonstrated in the majority of tumors from patients with metastatic thyroid cancers requiring systemic therapy, suggesting a rationale for the selective application of this technology.

Introduction: Multikinase inhibitors have clinical activity in radioactive iodine refractory (RAIR) differentiated thyroid cancers (DTCs) but are not curative; optimal management and salvage therapies remain unclear. This study assessed clinical effects of pazopanib therapy in RAIR-DTC patients with progressive disease, examining in parallel biomarker that might forecast/precede therapeutic response. Methods: Assessment of responses and toxicities and of any association between thyroglobulin (Tg) changes cycle 1 and RECIST (response evaluation criteria in solid tumors) response to pazopanib therapy were prospectively undertaken in Tg antibody negative RAIR-DTC patients. RECIST progressive metastatic disease <6 months preceding enrollment was required. With a sample size of 68 (assuming 23 attaining partial response [PR]), there would be 90% chance of detecting a difference of >30% when the proportion of patients attaining PR whose Tg values decrease by >50% is >50% cycle 1 (one-sided α = 0.10, two sample test of proportions). Mean corpuscular volume (MCV) change or mutational status or pretreatment were also explored as early correlates of eventual RECIST response. Results: From 2009 to 2011, 60 individuals were treated and evaluated; (one additional patient withdrew; another was found ineligible before therapy initiation); 91.7% had previous systemic therapy beyond RAI. Adverse events included one death (thromboembolic) deemed possibly pazopanib associated. Twenty-two confirmed RECIST PRs resulted (36.7%, confidence interval; CI [24.6-50.1]); mean administered 4-week cycles was 10. Among 44 fully accessible patients, the Tg nadir was greater among the 20 attaining PR (median: -86.8%; interquartile range [IQR]: -90.7% to -70.9%) compared with the 28 who did not (median: -69.0%; IQR: -78.1% to -27.7%, Wilcoxon rank-sum test: p = 0.002). However, the difference in the proportion of PRs among those whose Tg fell ≥50% after cycle 1 versus those that did not were not significantly correlated (-23.5% [CI: -55.3 to 8.3]; Fisher's exact test p-value = 0.27). RECIST response was also not correlated with/predicted by early MCV change, receipt of prior therapy, or tumor mutational status. Conclusions: This trial prospectively confirmed pazopanib to have clinical activity and manageable toxicities in patients with progressive RAIR-DTC. Response to pazopanib, however, was not robustly forecast by early associated changes in Tg or MCV, by prior therapy, or by tumor mutational status. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00625846.

8047 Background: Len-Dex is a common comparator arm to test novel therapies in rrMM trials. There is interest in evaluating if the control data from one clinical trial can be borrowed to another clinical trial, thus creating SCAs which could potentially improve accrual to trials, make better go/no-go decisions, and increase patients access to promising experimental therapies (ETs). We looked at legacy rrMM trials to assess the impact of switching and pooling Len-Dex control arms among different trials when evaluating ETs. Methods: We identified 4 contemporary rrMM trials that enrolled 2,729 patients testing ET + Len-Dex vs. Len-Dex alone. We calculated progression-free survival (PFS), Hazard Ratio (HR) and 95% Confidence Interval (CI) for ET compared to the original trial control, the switch Len-Dex controls, a pooled Len-Dex control, and a matched pooled control using bootstrapping sampling methods to match the experimental arm baseline demographics and prior lines with the pooled control. Results: See table. Conclusions: In this analysis, the switch and pooled controls matched the original control for Trials 1 and 2, but not for Trials 3 and 4. The bootstrapping methods did not substantially assist in replicating the original results. This could be due to several factors including heterogeneity of the enrolled populations including different lines of therapy, different pharmacologic classes of drugs studied in the ETs, and missing prognostic data including cytogenetics. Further investigations into propensity score matching will be explored to determine if SCAs can be improved.[Table: see text]

Summary Background Adrenal cortical carcinoma (ACC) is a rare cancer with treatment options of limited efficacy, and poor prognosis if metastatic. AT-101 is a more potent inhibitor of B cell lymphoma 2 family apoptosis-related proteins than its racemic form, gossypol, which showed preliminary clinical activity in ACC. We thus evaluated the efficacy of AT-101 in patients with advanced ACC. Methods Patients with histologically confirmed metastatic, recurrent, or primarily unresectable ACC were treated with AT-101 (20 mg/day orally, 21 days out of 28-day cycles) until disease progression and/or prohibitive toxicity. The primary endpoint was objective response rate, wherein a Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) partial response rate of 25% would be considered promising and 10% not, with a Type I error of 10% and 90% power. In a 2-stage design, 2 responses were required of the first 21 assessable subjects to warrant complete accrual of 44 patients. Secondary endpoints included safety, progression-free survival and overall survival. Results This study accrued 29 patients between 2009 and 2011; median number of cycles was 2. Seven percent experienced grade 4 toxicity including cardiac troponin elevations and hypokalemia. None of the first 21 patients attained RECIST partial response; accordingly, study therapy was deemed ineffective and the trial was permanently closed. Conclusions AT-101 had no meaningful clinical activity in this study in patients with advanced ACC, but demonstrated feasibility of prospective therapeutic clinical trials in this rare cancer.

122 Background: Mixed response (MR) to systemic therapy is common and associated with a poor prognosis. MR often represents a therapeutic dilemma resulting in the discontinuation of a therapy to which a portion of the tumor is still sensitive, due to the emergence of resistance in other metastatic deposits. We hypothesize that discordant responses in patients receiving immunotherapy may be associated with genomic variation within discordant tumors. Methods: We defined MR with the following criteria: 1) At least one tumor has increased in size while another tumor has decreased; 2) One or more tumors have remained stable while another has increased; 3) One or more tumors have remained stable while another has decreased. 4) A new tumor has developed while other tumors have decreased or remained stable. Between 2012 and 2017, we identified 112 patients with a MR. Two patients with metastatic lung cancer, treated with nivolumab underwent paired, simultaneous sampling of discordant tumors. Results: Both patients treated with nivolumab demonstrated genomic heterogeneity between discordant tumors on next-generation sequencing, including one patient with SCLC. Conclusions: MR remains a common and challenging therapeutic quandary. Genomic heterogeneity and differences in TMB of metastatic tumors demonstrating a MR, may be factors that contribute to this phenomenon. Further characterization of genomic discrepancies in MR may provide insights into mechanisms of emerging resistance, as well as, more rational and effective combinatorial therapies.[Table: see text]

9105 Background: Docetaxel is a common comparator arm to test novel therapies in post-platinum mNSCLC trials. The advent of Real World Evidence (RWE) has renewed interest in the use of synthetic control arms (control arms from previously conducted randomized trials) to improve accrual to trials and increase patient access of promising experimental agents. We reviewed legacy second-line (2L) mNSCLC trials to assess the impact of switching docetaxel control arms from one trial to another and compare to an experimental regimen. Methods: We identified 5 contemporary 2L trials that enrolled 2013 patients receiving an experimental therapy vs. docetaxel: 5 immunoncology head-to-head trials (one with 2 arms) and one anti-VEGF add-on trial. Kaplan-Meier curves of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were produced for docetaxel controls. We calculated OS and PFS hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for each synthetic trial. A pooled doc arm was also compared with each experimental agent. Results: See Table. Conclusions: Both individual and pooled docetaxel switching of control arms approximated the original OS HR and 95% CI. Methods such as bootstrapped sampling and propensity score matching will be performed in an effort to more closely approximate the original trial characteristics. [Table: see text]

Introduction: Individuals receiving systemic anticancer therapies for advanced solid tumors routinely undergo imaging studies to assess the efficacy of the treatment. Mixed response (MR) to cancer therapy is a common but poorly described phenomenon. There is a paucity of data regarding both the incidence and possible mechanisms of this clinical quandary. Potential etiologies include tumor heterogeneity, differences in tumor microenvironment, and discrepancies in drug delivery to different tumor deposits. It is also possible that MR simply reflects differences in the rate of resistance emerging. MR represents a therapeutic dilemma for the clinician. Methods: Mixed tumor response was defined as: One tumor decreasing in size; one tumor increasing in size (classified as RECIST response/progressions), One tumor stable; another tumor progressing, One tumor stable; another tumor responding, New tumor; another tumor responding or remaining stable. Between 2015 and 2017, 120 restaging CT scans were reviewed of patients who had received at least 1 line of therapy for advanced cancer diagnosis which showed MR; hematologic malignancies were excluded. Charts were reviewed to determine the clinical decision that was made at the time of the MR. Results: A total of 120 scans with MR were reviewed from various solid tumor diagnoses. 38 scans were excluded due to loss of follow-up or death. Of the remaining 82 scans, therapy was switched in 30, the same therapy was continued in 50, and an additional agent was added to the current treatment in 2 cases (Table). Of the patients in which treatment was switched, 20% (6/30) showed response to treatment on the following scan. Of the cases that were kept on current treatment, none showed response on the following restaging scan which was done 6–8 weeks later. There were 4 (10%) deaths prior to the next scan in the group that had treatment switched and similarly 5 deaths (10%) prior to the next scan in the group in which treatment remained the same. Conclusion: MR is associated with a poor prognosis, irrespective of treatment decisions. These data are retrospective and our sample size is small, so definitive conclusions cannot be drawn. However, changing therapy when a MR is observed may be of benefit to some patients. A prospective evaluation to more accurately describe and understand the MR phenomenon is warranted.

AbstractPurpose: To determine the dose limiting toxicities (DLT), maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of veliparib in combination with weekly topotecan in patients with solid tumors. Correlative studies were included to assess the impact of topotecan and veliparib on poly(ADP-ribose) levels in peripheral blood mononuclear cells, serum pharmacokinetics of both agents, and potential association of germline repair gene mutations with outcome. Experimental Design: Eligible patients had metastatic nonhematologic malignancies with measurable disease. Using a 3 + 3 design, patients were treated with veliparib orally twice daily on days 1–3, 8–10, and 15–17 and topotecan intravenously on days 2, 9, and 16 every 28 days. Tumor responses were assessed by RECIST. Results: Of 58 patients enrolled, 51 were evaluable for the primary endpoint. The MTD and RP2D was veliparib 300 mg twice daily on days 1–3, 8–10, and 15–17 along with topotecan 3 mg/m2 on days 2, 9, and 16 of a 28-day cycle. DLTs were grade 4 neutropenia lasting >5 days. The median number of cycles was 2 (1–26). The objective response rate was 10%, with 1 complete and 4 partial responses. Twenty-two patients (42%) had stable disease ranging from 4 to 26 cycles. Patients with germline BRCA1, BRCA2, or RAD51D mutations remained on study longer than those without homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene mutations (median 4 vs. 2 cycles). Conclusions: Weekly topotecan in combination with veliparib has a manageable safety profile and appears to warrant further investigation.

Purpose Sorafenib and lenvatinib are oral multikinase inhibitors targeting vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) and approved for radioiodine (RAI)-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC). However, there are no approved second- or third-line therapies. MET is implicated in resistance to VEGFR inhibitors. Cabozantinib is an oral multikinase inhibitor targeting MET in addition to VEGFR and is approved for medullary thyroid cancer. In a phase I study of cabozantinib, five of eight patients with DTC previously treated with a VEGFR-targeted therapy had an objective response to cabozantinib. Patients and Methods Patients with RAI-refractory disease with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor (RECIST) measurable disease and evidence of progression on prior VEGFR-targeted therapy were enrolled in this single-arm phase II study. The cabozantinib starting dose was 60 mg/day orally but could be escalated to 80 mg if the patient did not experience a response. Patients underwent tumor assessment according to RECIST v1.1 every 8 weeks. In this study, if at least five of 25 response-evaluable patients had an objective response, cabozantinib would be considered a promising agent in this patient population. Results Twenty-five patients were enrolled. The median age was 64 years, and 64% of patients were men. Twenty-one patients had received only one prior VEGFR-targeted therapy (sorafenib, pazopanib, or cediranib), and four patients had received two such therapies. The most common treatment-related adverse events were fatigue, weight loss, diarrhea, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia, and hypertension. One drug-related death was noted. Of the 25 patients, 10 (40%) had a partial response, 13 (52%) had stable disease, and two (8%) had nonevaluable disease. The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 12.7 months and 34.7 months, respectively. Conclusion Cabozantinib demonstrated clinically significant, durable objective response activity in patients with RAI-refractory DTC who experienced disease progression while taking prior VEGFR-targeted therapy.

e17580 Background: Cabozantinib is a small molecule multiple-receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor that primarily targets MET and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 (VEGFR2). We evaluated the effect of cabozantinib on BTM in RAIR DTC. We also assessed the response of BM to cabozantinib using 18F Sodium Fluoride (NaF) PET and radionuclide bone scans. Methods: This prospective analysis was performed as part of a multicenter International Thyroid Oncology Group phase II study of cabozantinibin patients with RAIR DTC who progressed on prior VEGFR-targeted therapy (NCT01811212). BTM [serum C-telopeptide (CTx), osteocalcin, N-telopeptide (NTx), procollagen type 1 (Pc1) and urinary NTx] and NaF PET or Tc-MDP scans were done at baseline and after 8 weeks of therapy. A paired t-test was used between baseline and week 8 BTM. Results: Primary study results were presented elsewhere (Shah, et al. 2015, International Thyroid Congress) showing a response rate of 36% with cabozantinib. Of 25 patients (pts) enrolled, 21 had BM, 10 of whom were on bone-modifying agents (BMA) prior to week 8. Only 2 pts had elevated BTM at baseline. In all pts who had paired BTM, there was a statistically significant decline in all BTM except NTx by week 8 (table). Pts not on BMA also had a significant decline in CTx (p 0.0003), urine NTx (p 0.0300), and Pc1 (p 0.0030) compared to baseline. 19 pts were evaluable for overall response and there was no correlation between BTM and response rate. 6/21 patients underwent paired NaF PET scans and 4/6 had minor reduction in lesion uptake at 8 weeks. Conclusions: Interestingly, most of our patients had normal baseline BTM despite BM. Cabozantinib was associated with a strikingly significant reduction in all BTM (even when BTM were within normal limits at baseline) except NTx by week 8. Minor decreases in bone lesion uptake was noted on NaF PET in 4/6 evaluable patients. Clinical trial information: NCT01811212. [Table: see text]

Mixed response (MR) to cancer therapy is a common, but poorly described phenomenon. MR represents a therapeutic dilemma and is defined by these criteria: 1. At least one tumor has increased in size while another has decreased. 2. One or more tumors have remained stable while another has increased 3. One or more tumors have remained stable while another has decreased 4. A new tumor has developed while other tumors either decrease or remain stable. There is a paucity of data regarding both the incidence of this problem and potential mechanisms as to why it happens. Potential etiologies include: tumor heterogeneity; differences in tumor microenvironment; and discrepancies in drug delivery to different tumor deposits. It is also possible that MR simply reflects differences in the rate of resistance emerging. We sought to gain insights into MR in a patient with advanced SCC of the lung. A 65 yo female with squamous cell carcinoma of the lung received 1st-line therapy with cisplatin and gemcitabine followed by vinorelbine. She received 3rd-line therapy with nivolumab. Slight, generalized progression was observed after 4 cycles; however, the patient improved clinically, so treatment was continued. The MR was observed after cycle 8. Both a nonresponding and a responding tumor were biopsied. SCC was confirmed in both samples. NGS was performed. Genomic Profiles for Discordant SCC Lung Tumors This is the first study known to the authors to genomically profile tumors demonstrating a mixed response to systemic therapy. The clinical significance of these aberrations and discrepancies is uncertain. Nevertheless, genomic discrepancies may provide some insight into why MR occurs and this may provide evidence for rational combinatorial therapeutics in patients in who experience a MR. More importantly, it may provide insights into developing novel combinations that may prevent the occurrence of MR.

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have shown promising single-agent activity in ovarian cancers with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations (C. Scott, JCO 33:1397, 2015). Ongoing studies are testing the efficacy of PARP inhibitors in ovarian cancers with other genetic or epigenetic alterations that impair the homologous recombination (HR) pathway of DNA repair. It is less clear whether PARP inhibitor clinical activity can be enhanced in HR deficient cancers or even extended to HR proficient ovarian cancers through judicious combinations. Our preclinical studies have demonstrated that PARP inhibitors enhance the cytotoxic effects of selected therapeutic agents through a variety of mechanisms: By trapping PARP at sites of DNA damage, PARP inhibitors enhance the cytotoxicity of topotecan (A. Patel, J. Biol. Chem. 287: 4198, 2012). By inhibiting base excision repair, PARP inhibitors enhance the cytotoxicity of floxuridine (A. Huehls, Cancer Res. 71: 4944, 2011), an agent previously shown to have clinical activity in ovarian cancer. Building on the first of these observations, we conducted a phase 1 clinical trial of topotecan weekly x 3 in combination with veliparib (NCT01012817). Using a standard 3+3 design, patients were treated with veliparib PO twice daily on days 1-3, 8-10 and 15-17 and topotecan IV on days 2, 9 and 16 every 28 days. The dose-limiting toxicity was neutropenia. The MTD was veliparib 300 mg PO twice daily and topotecan 3 mg/m 2 /dose. Among 52 evaluable patients, objective responses (1 CR, 3 PRs) and stable disease (22 patients, 6 lasting ≥ 8 cycles) were observed. While there was no clear correlation between germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and clinical benefit, a patient with a germline RAD51D mutation had stable disease for 14 cycles. A phase 2 cohort in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer has just opened. Building on the second set of preclinical observations, we are also conducting a phase 1 trial of veliparib and IP floxuridine in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer confined to the peritoneal cavity (NCT01749397). Using a rolling 6 design, patients are treated with veliparib PO twice daily on days 1-10 and floxuridine IP on days 3-5 every 21 days. The trial is currently enrolling at dose level 5 (veliparib 300 mg PO twice daily on days 1-10 and floxuridine 3 gm/dose IP on days 3-5). Grade 3 toxicities in any cycle have included nausea (1), fatigue (1) and neutropenia (3). Among 20 evaluable patients, treatment duration has ranged from 2-33 cycles. These studies, which build on two different aspects of PARP1 function, illustrate two different approaches to potentially enhancing the activity of PARP inhibitors in relapsed ovarian cancer. These studies were funded in part by NIH grants P50 CA136393, R01 CA190423, and UM1 CA186686 as well as SU2C-AACR DT16-15. Citation Format: Scott H. Kaufmann, Andrea E. Wahner Hendrickson, Maria I Harrell, Michael E. Menefee, Edward J. Tanner, David G, Mutch, Elizabeth M. Swisher, and Larry M. Karnitz. PARP INHIBITOR COMBINATIONS FOR THE TREATMENT OF OVARIAN CANCER [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 11th Biennial Ovarian Cancer Research Symposium; Sep 12-13, 2016; Seattle, WA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2017;23(11 Suppl):Abstract nr IS04.

6087 Background: NTRK1-3 fusions, identified in pediatric radiation-associated thyroid cancers, are low frequency oncogenic drivers that can trigger constitutive activation of TrK1-3 tyrosine kinase domains with responsively heightened downstream signaling through RAS-MAPK, PI3K-AKT, and/or PLCγ-PKC. NTRK point mutations are rare and of largely uninvestigated oncogenic potential, but some appear oncogenic. Methods: Advanced thyroid cancer (TC) patients (pts) requiring systemic therapy at Mayo Clinic sites underwent tumor genetic interrogation using Foundation One analyses with the goal of informing salvage therapeutic strategies. In this IRB-approved study, data from pts with TCs bearing NTRK point mutations were retrospectively analyzed, as this occurrence was unexpected but potentially of prognostic and/or therapeutic relevance. Results: Five of 55 pts (9%) with advanced TCs subject to Foundation One tumor interrogation had NTRK1-3 point mutations (allele frequency, AF, 15-49%); none had fusions. All 5 tumors had microsatellite stability; 4/5 had low tumor mutation burden (2-5 mutations/megabase). NTRK mutations in 3 anaplastic TC (ATC) pts (15% prevalence) were: NTRK3 I749M (AF 15%; overall survival, OS, 15 mos), NTRK1 R744H (AF not available; OS 9.5 mos), and NTRK1 R583H (AF 20.1%; OS > 4.9 mos); NTRK2 S167Y (AF 49%; OS > 51 mos) or NTRK1 R6W (AF 42%; OS > 60 mos) were found in one papillary (PTC) and one Hürthle cell (HCC) TC pt respectively (summary table below). Conclusions: NTRK point mutations, but not fusions, were unexpectedly identified in 9% of assessed advanced TCs - but remarkably in 15% of ATCs. Mutated NTRKs, along with oncogenic p53 and TERT, may contribute to TC progression, especially in ATC, consequent to downstream activation of MAPK and PI3K-AKT pathways. We posit that NTRK point mutations may have therapeutic implications for treatment of refractory disease. [Table: see text]