Topic Highlight
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2015.
World J Gastrointest Oncol. Nov 15, 2015; 7(11): 317-327
Published online Nov 15, 2015. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v7.i11.317
Table 1 MET protein expressions on immunohistochemistry and clinical outcomes in gastric cancer
nDefinition of overexpression%Relation to clinicopathological factorsRelation to survivalRef.
Usual IHC4952+/3+, > 10%22Intestinal type, recurrenceWorse3[14]
170Cytoplasmic, 2+/3+13NDND[38]
121≥ 5%66N, stageWorse[20]
114> 30%74NAWorse3[30]
98Intensity and extensity scoring system59N, MWorse[25]
382+/3+, ≥ 25%63Intestinal typeND[22]
941≥ 50%50NANA[24]
1212Any staining98Liver metastasisND[29]
TMA438Membranous, 2+/3+, > 10%24T, N, M, stage, intestinal typeWorse[12]
436Intensity and extensity scoring system44T, N, M, diffuse typeWorse34[13]
215Cytoplasmic, > 10%69NANA[27]
182Intensity and extensity scoring system66N, intestinal type, differentiated typeWorse[19]
163Cytoplasmic 2+/3+ ≥ 10%, and positive > 75%4NDWorse3[31]
124Cytoplasmic, 3+71T, stage, intestinal typeND[23]
114Intensity and extensity scoring system82N, stageWorse[26]
3543NDLikely worse[18]
Table 2 MET mRNA expressions and clinical outcomes in gastric cancer
Relation to clinicopathological factorsRelation to survivalRef.
Cut-off value%
Tumor100Value determined by nonparametric receiver operating characteristics11MWorse[34]
45N, stage, differentiated typeND[35]
43Value of mean + 2 SD in noncancerous tissue70NAND[36]
15Intestinal typeND[22]
Serum52Detected62T, N, M, stage, recurrence, vWorse[37]
Table 3 MET gene alterations and clinical outcomes in gastric cancer
nDefinition ofpositive expression%Relation toclinicopatho-logical factorsRelation to survivalRef.
170GA or HP15 (GA7.1 HP7.6)NDND[38]
SISH381GA or HP19 (GA3.4, HP16)Intestinal (HP), M (GA), stage (GA)Worse2 (GA)[12]
RT-PCR472> 4 copies21NAWorse2[33]
266> 4 copies1.5NANA[40]
216≥ 5 copies10UnknownWorse2[41]
128≥ 4 copies30T, stageWorse2[42]
45≥ 7 copies7NDWorse[18]
SNP array193GA4NDND[44]
Polymorphism analysis34 (tumor)Any alterations59T, N, MND[47]
34 (serum)Any alterations41N, MND[47]
Table 4 Development of MET-targeting agents for gastric cancer
TypeAgentOther targetsPhaseLineCombined therapyResults or statusRef.
MET selectiveTivantinib (ARQ197)NoneII2nd/3rdNoneNo CR/PR[72]
non-ATP competitive TKIMedian PFS 1.4 mo
MET-selectiveAMG 337NoneIIAnyNoneOngoing[74]
ATP-competitive TKII2nd/3rdNone1 CR and 4 PR in 10 patients with MET -amplified tumor[73]
MultitargetedForetinibVEGFR2, RON, AXL, TIE2II1st (95%)Docetaxel, CisplatinNo CR/PR[75]
ATP-competitive TKI(GSK1363089)Median OS 7.4
CrizotinibALKITumor shrinkage in 2 patients with PFS 3.5 and 3.7 mo[39]
MET mAbOnartuzumab (MetMab )NoneIII1stmFOLFOXOngoing[77]
HGF mAbRilotumumabNoneIII1stECXSuspended[79]
(AMG 102)NoneIII1stCXSuspended[80]
NoneII1stECXMedian PFS 4.2 mo[78]
Median OS 5.6 mo