Lung cancer is one of the malignant tumors with the highest incidence and mortality rate in the world. In China, the incidence and mortality rates of lung cancer are the first for male tumors and the second and first for female tumors. Therefore, the treatment of lung cancer has long been a hot topic of concern for the public and the medical community. The 10th China Lung Cancer Summit Forum was held in Guangzhou on March 8, 2013. More than 100 experts and scholars in the field of lung cancer from all over China gathered to discuss the topic of resistance to small molecule EGFR TKIs in non-small cell lung cancer, which is of great concern to clinicians, and finally formed a consensus on the management of resistance to small molecule EGFR TKIs in non-small cell lung cancer. 1. For EGFR mutant lung cancer, testing for BIM and L747S is recommended to detect patients with primary resistance. Consensus level: 3 2. For mutant lung cancer resistant to EGFR TKIs, re-biopsy is recommended to clarify the molecular mechanism of resistance and encourage patients to participate in appropriate clinical trials. Consensus level: 2A 3. For asymptomatic slowly progressive mutant lung cancer with secondary resistance to EGFR TKIs, continued use of EGFR TKIs is recommended. Consensus level: 2B 4. For EGFR TKIs with isolated progression of secondary resistance, combination of local therapy with continued use of EGFR TKIs is recommended. The choice of local treatment is based on the principle of minimal trauma. Consensus level: 2B 5. EGFR mutant patients who benefit from EGFR TKIs and become resistant again after receiving cytotoxic drug therapy may be considered for EGFR TKIs. Consensus level: 2B 6. Immediate conversion to a second EGFR TKIs is not recommended for mutant lung cancer resistant to one EGFR TKI. Consensus level: 2B Summit consensus level: 1 Level A: Based on high level of evidence (rigorous meta-analysis or RCT results), the group has a unified understanding. Level 1B: Based on high level evidence (rigorous meta-analysis or RCT results), with minor controversy in the expert group. Level 2A: based on low level evidence, with unified understanding of the expert group. Grade 2B: based on low level evidence, no unified understanding in the expert group, but little controversy. Level 3: Highly controversial in the expert group