BACKGROUND The molecular landscape of lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) is often illustrated as a driver-oncogene pie chart, but identical mutations exhibit heterogeneous signaling shaped by comutations, transcriptional programs, and lineage context. We propose a lineage-integrated signaling framework using an EGFR mutation signature (mSig).METHODS We defined EGFR mSig using differentially expressed genes in EGFR-mutant (EGFR-mt) LUADs. Semisupervised clustering and machine learning models were used to test reproducibility in different combinations of datasets. We analyzed molecular subtypes, lineage markers, co-occurring mutations, and EGFR copy number alterations in EGFR mSig-defined subtypes of LUAD.RESULTS EGFR mSig showed robust classification performance (area under receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.83–0.95; mean negative predictive value = 96.3%). Validated gene expression subtypes and lung lineage markers were closely aligned with EGFR mSig status. Most EGFR mSig+ tumors, including many without EGFR mutations, belonged to the bronchioid subtype. A subset of canonical RAS mutations were mSig+ and mirrored the EGFR mutation pattern. EGFR WT/mSig– tumors were enriched for nonbronchioid subtypes and had comutations in TP53 or RAS/RAF/RTKs. We highlight a parsimonious collection of coordinated mutations, including RAS, KEAP1, STK11, TP53, and CDKN2A, that taken together suggest coordination of tumor signaling previously suggested but now reproduced and expanded.CONCLUSION A potentially novel EGFR mSig that captures the transcriptional footprint of EGFR activation revealed a subset of EGFR WT LUADs with mt-like features. mSig refines LUAD taxonomy beyond mutation-only pie-chart models by incorporating lineage and comutation context. Lineage-directed stratification with coalteration identifies clinically relevant groups across EGFR and RAS states and highlights treatment opportunities for patients currently considered oncogene-negative.FUNDING National Cancer Institute (NCI) U01CA272541, R01CA262296, U24CA264021, UG1CA233333, R01CA211939.
Minjeong Kim, Wisut Lamlertthon, Heejoon Jo, Yan Cui, Miyeon Yeon, Hyo Young Choi, Katherine A. Hoadley, Matthew P. Smeltzer, Michele C. Hayward, Matthew D. Wilkerson, Liza Makowski, D. Neil Hayes
Usage data is cumulative from March 2026 through May 2026.
| Usage | JCI | PMC |
|---|---|---|
| Text version | 1,398 | 0 |
| 516 | 0 | |
| Figure | 387 | 0 |
| Table | 48 | 0 |
| Supplemental data | 401 | 0 |
| Citation downloads | 208 | 0 |
| Totals | 2,958 | 0 |
| Total Views | 2,958 | |
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.