Intracranial and extracranial efficacy of lorlatinib in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer previously treated with second-generation ALK TKIs.

BACKGROUND: Lorlatinib, a potent, brain-penetrant, third-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), has substantial activity against ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study assessed the overall, intracranial, and extracranial efficacy of lorlatinib in ALK-positive NSCLC that progressed on second-generation ALK TKIs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the ongoing phase II study (NCT01970865), patients with ALK-positive advanced NSCLC treated with ≥1 prior second-generation ALK TKI ± chemotherapy were enrolled in expansion cohorts (EXP) based on treatment history. Overall, intracranial and extracranial antitumor activity were assessed independently per modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1. RESULTS: Of the 139 patients with ≥1 prior second-generation ALK TKI (EXP3B-5), 28 received one prior second-generation ALK TKI (EXP3B), 65 two prior ALK TKIs (EXP4), and 46 three prior ALK TKIs (EXP5). In EXP3B-5, the objective response rate (ORR) [95% confidence intervals] was 39.6% (31.4-48.2), intracranial ORR (IC-ORR) was 56.1% (42.4-69.3), extracranial ORR (EC-ORR) was 36.7% (28.7-45.3), median duration of response (DOR) was 9.6 months [5.6-16.7; IC-DOR, 12.4 (6.0-37.1); EC-DOR, 9.7 (6.1-33.3)], median progression-free survival was 6.6 (5.4-7.4) months, and median overall survival was 20.7 months (16.1-30.3). In EXP3B, the ORR was 42.9% (24.5-62.8), the IC-ORR was 66.7% (29.9-92.5), and the EC-ORR was 32.1% (15.9-52.4). In EXP4 and EXP5, the ORR was 38.7% (29.6-48.5), the IC-ORR was 54.2% (39.2-68.6), and the EC-ORR was 37.8% (28.8-47.5). CONCLUSIONS: Lorlatinib had clinically meaningful intracranial and extracranial antitumor activity in the post-second-generation ALK TKI setting, with elevated intracranial versus extracranial ORR, particularly in patients with fewer lines of therapy.

Updated overall survival and final progression-free survival data for patients with treatment-naive advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer in the ALEX study.

BACKGROUND: The ALEX study demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) with alectinib versus crizotinib in treatment-naive ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) at the primary data cut-off (9 February 2017). We report mature PFS (cut-off: 30 November 2018) and overall survival (OS) data up to 5 years (cut-off: 29 November 2019). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage III/IV ALK-positive NSCLC were randomized to receive twice-daily alectinib 600 mg (n = 152) or crizotinib 250 mg (n = 151) until disease progression, toxicity, withdrawal or death. Primary end point: investigator-assessed PFS. Secondary end points included objective response rate, OS and safety. RESULTS: Mature PFS data showed significantly prolonged investigator-assessed PFS with alectinib [hazard ratio (HR) 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32-0.58; median PFS 34.8 versus 10.9 months crizotinib]. Median duration of OS follow-up: 48.2 months alectinib, 23.3 months crizotinib. OS data remain immature (37% of events). Median OS was not reached with alectinib versus 57.4 months with crizotinib (stratified HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.46-0.98). The 5-year OS rate was 62.5% (95% CI 54.3-70.8) with alectinib and 45.5% (95% CI 33.6-57.4) with crizotinib, with 34.9% and 8.6% of patients still on study treatment, respectively. The OS benefit of alectinib was seen in patients with central nervous system metastases at baseline [HR 0.58 (95% CI 0.34-1.00)] and those without [HR 0.76 (95% CI 0.45-1.26)]. Median treatment duration was longer with alectinib (28.1 versus 10.8 months), and no new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Mature PFS data from ALEX confirmed significant improvement in PFS for alectinib over crizotinib in ALK-positive NSCLC. OS data remain immature, with a higher 5-year OS rate with alectinib versus crizotinib. This is the first global randomized study to show clinically meaningful improvement in OS for a next-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitor versus crizotinib in treatment-naive ALK-positive NSCLC. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER: NCT02075840.

HER2 exon 20 insertions in non-small-cell lung cancer are sensitive to the irreversible pan-HER receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor pyrotinib.

BACKGROUND: Effective targeted therapy for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) mutations remains an unmet need. This study investigated the antitumor effect of an irreversible pan-HER receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, pyrotinib. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using patient-derived organoids and xenografts established from an HER2-A775_G776YVMA-inserted advanced lung adenocarcinoma patient sample, we investigated the antitumor activity of pyrotinib. Preliminary safety and efficacy of pyrotinib in 15 HER2-mutant NSCLC patients in a phase II clinical trial are also presented. RESULTS: Pyrotinib showed significant growth inhibition of organoids relative to afatinib in vitro (P = 0.0038). In the PDX model, pyrotinib showed a superior antitumor effect than afatinib (P = 0.0471) and T-DM1 (P = 0.0138). Mice treated with pyrotinib displayed significant tumor burden reduction (mean tumor volume, -52.2%). In contrast, afatinib (25.4%) and T-DM1 (10.9%) showed no obvious reduction. Moreover, pyrotinib showed a robust ability to inhibit pHER2, pERK and pAkt. In the phase II cohort of 15 patients with HER2-mutant NSCLC, pyrotinib 400 mg resulted in a objective response rate of 53.3% and a median progression-free survival of 6.4 months. CONCLUSION: Pyrotinib showed activity against NSCLC with HER2 exon 20 mutations in both patient-derived organoids and a PDX model. In the clinical trial, pyrotinib showed promising efficacy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02535507.

Crizotinib in ROS1-rearranged advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): updated results, including overall survival, from PROFILE 1001.

BACKGROUND: In the ongoing phase I PROFILE 1001 study, crizotinib showed antitumor activity in patients with ROS1-rearranged advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here, we present updated antitumor activity, overall survival (OS) and safety data (additional 46.2 months follow-up) for patients with ROS1-rearranged advanced NSCLC from PROFILE 1001. PATIENTS AND METHODS: ROS1 status was determined by FISH or reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction. All patients received crizotinib at a starting dose of 250 mg twice daily. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients received crizotinib, with a median duration of treatment of 22.4 months. At data cut-off, treatment was ongoing in 12 patients (23%). The objective response rate (ORR) was 72% [95% confidence interval (CI), 58% to 83%], including six confirmed complete responses and 32 confirmed partial responses; 10 patients had stable disease. Responses were durable (median duration of response 24.7 months; 95% CI, 15.2-45.3). ORRs were consistent across different patient subgroups. Median progression-free survival was 19.3 months (95% CI, 15.2-39.1). A total of 26 deaths (49%) occurred (median follow-up period of 62.6 months), and of the remaining 27 patients (51%), 14 (26%) were in follow-up at data cut-off. Median OS was 51.4 months (95% CI, 29.3 to not reached) and survival probabilities at 12, 24, 36, and 48 months were 79%, 67%, 53%, and 51%, respectively. No correlation was observed between OS and specific ROS1 fusion partner. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were mainly grade 1 or 2, per CTCAE v3.0. There were no grade ≥4 TRAEs and no TRAEs associated with permanent discontinuation. No new safety signals were reported with long-term crizotinib treatment. CONCLUSIONS: These findings serve as a new benchmark for OS in ROS1-rearranged advanced NSCLC, and continue to show the clinically meaningful benefit and safety of crizotinib in this molecular subgroup. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00585195.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors for patients with advanced lung cancer and oncogenic driver alterations: results from the IMMUNOTARGET registry.

BACKGROUND: Anti-PD1/PD-L1 directed immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are widely used to treat patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The activity of ICI across NSCLC harboring oncogenic alterations is poorly characterized. The aim of our study was to address the efficacy of ICI in the context of oncogenic addiction. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study for patients receiving ICI monotherapy for advanced NSCLC with at least one oncogenic driver alteration. Anonymized data were evaluated for clinicopathologic characteristics and outcomes for ICI therapy: best response (RECIST 1.1), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) from ICI initiation. The primary end point was PFS under ICI. Secondary end points were best response (RECIST 1.1) and OS from ICI initiation. RESULTS: We studied 551 patients treated in 24 centers from 10 countries. The molecular alterations involved KRAS (n = 271), EGFR (n = 125), BRAF (n = 43), MET (n = 36), HER2 (n = 29), ALK (n = 23), RET (n = 16), ROS1 (n = 7), and multiple drivers (n = 1). Median age was 60 years, gender ratio was 1 : 1, never/former/current smokers were 28%/51%/21%, respectively, and the majority of tumors were adenocarcinoma. The objective response rate by driver alteration was: KRAS = 26%, BRAF = 24%, ROS1 = 17%, MET = 16%, EGFR = 12%, HER2 = 7%, RET = 6%, and ALK = 0%. In the entire cohort, median PFS was 2.8 months, OS 13.3 months, and the best response rate 19%. In a subgroup analysis, median PFS (in months) was 2.1 for EGFR, 3.2 for KRAS, 2.5 for ALK, 3.1 for BRAF, 2.5 for HER2, 2.1 for RET, and 3.4 for MET. In certain subgroups, PFS was positively associated with PD-L1 expression (KRAS, EGFR) and with smoking status (BRAF, HER2). CONCLUSIONS: : ICI induced regression in some tumors with actionable driver alterations, but clinical activity was lower compared with the KRAS group and the lack of response in the ALK group was notable. Patients with actionable tumor alterations should receive targeted therapies and chemotherapy before considering immunotherapy as a single agent.

Correlation of extent of ALK FISH positivity and crizotinib efficacy in three prospective studies of ALK-positive patients with non-small-cell lung cancer.

Background: In clinical trials of patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with crizotinib, evaluation of the relationship between the percentage of ALK-positive cells by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH)-particularly near the cut-off defining positive status-and clinical outcomes have been limited by small sample sizes. Patients and methods: Data were pooled from three large prospective trials (one single-arm and two randomized versus chemotherapy) of crizotinib in patients with ALK-positive NSCLC determined by Vysis ALK Break Apart FISH using a cut-off of ≥15% ALK-positive cells. Logistic regression and proportional hazards regression analyses were used to explore the association of percent ALK-positive cells with objective response and progression-free survival (PFS), respectively. Results: Of 11 081 screened patients, 1958 (18%) were ALK positive, 7512 (68%) were ALK negative, and 1540 (14%) were uninformative. Median percentage of ALK-positive cells was 58% in ALK-positive patients and 2% in ALK-negative patients. Of ALK-positive patients, 5% had 15%-19% ALK-positive cells; of ALK-negative patients, 2% had 10%-14% ALK-positive cells. Objective response rate for ALK-positive, crizotinib-treated patients with ≥20% ALK-positive cells was 56% (n = 700/1246), 55% (n = 725/1312) for those with ≥15% ALK-positive cells, and 38% for those with 15%-19% ALK-positive cells (n = 25/66). As a continuous variable, higher percentages of ALK-positive cells were estimated to be associated with larger differences in objective response and PFS between crizotinib and chemotherapy; however, tests for interaction between treatment and percentage of ALK-positive cells were not significant (objective response, P = 0.054; PFS, P = 0.17). Conclusions: Patients with ALK-positive NSCLC benefit from treatment with crizotinib across the full range of percentage of ALK-positive cells, supporting the clinical utility of the 15% cut-off. The small number of patients with scores near the cut-off warrant additional study given the potential for misclassification of ALK status due to technical or biologic reasons.

Alectinib versus crizotinib in treatment-naive anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive (ALK+) non-small-cell lung cancer: CNS efficacy results from the ALEX study.

Background: The phase III ALEX study in patients with treatment-naive advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase mutation-positive (ALK+) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) met its primary end point of improved progression-free survival (PFS) with alectinib versus crizotinib. Here, we present detailed central nervous system (CNS) efficacy data from ALEX. Patients and methods: Overall, 303 patients aged ≥18 years underwent 1:1 randomization to receive twice-daily doses of alectinib 600 mg or crizotinib 250 mg. Brain imaging was conducted in all patients at baseline and every subsequent 8 weeks. End points (analyzed by subgroup: patients with/without baseline CNS metastases; patients with/without prior radiotherapy) included PFS, CNS objective response rate (ORR), and time to CNS progression. Results: In total, 122 patients had Independent Review Committee-assessed baseline CNS metastases (alectinib, n = 64; crizotinib, n = 58), 43 had measurable lesions (alectinib, n = 21; crizotinib, n = 22), and 46 had received prior radiotherapy (alectinib, n = 25; crizotinib, n = 21). Investigator-assessed PFS with alectinib was consistent between patients with baseline CNS metastases [hazard ratio (HR) 0.40, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.25-0.64] and those without (HR 0.51, 95% CI: 0.33-0.80, P interaction = 0.36). Similar results were seen in patients regardless of prior radiotherapy. Time to CNS progression was significantly longer with alectinib versus crizotinib and comparable between patients with and without baseline CNS metastases (P < 0.0001). CNS ORR was 85.7% with alectinib versus 71.4% with crizotinib in patients who received prior radiotherapy and 78.6% versus 40.0%, respectively, in those who had not. Conclusion: Alectinib demonstrated superior CNS activity and significantly delayed CNS progression versus crizotinib in patients with previously untreated, advanced ALK+ NSCLC, irrespective of prior CNS disease or radiotherapy. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02075840.

Improved EGFR mutation detection using combined exosomal RNA and circulating tumor DNA in NSCLC patient plasma.

Background: A major limitation of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) for somatic mutation detection has been the low level of ctDNA found in a subset of cancer patients. We investigated whether using a combined isolation of exosomal RNA (exoRNA) and cell-free DNA (cfDNA) could improve blood-based liquid biopsy for EGFR mutation detection in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Patients and methods: Matched pretreatment tumor and plasma were collected from 84 patients enrolled in TIGER-X (NCT01526928), a phase 1/2 study of rociletinib in mutant EGFR NSCLC patients. The combined isolated exoRNA and cfDNA (exoNA) was analyzed blinded for mutations using a targeted next-generation sequencing panel (EXO1000) and compared with existing data from the same samples using analysis of ctDNA by BEAMing. Results: For exoNA, the sensitivity was 98% for detection of activating EGFR mutations and 90% for EGFR T790M. The corresponding sensitivities for ctDNA by BEAMing were 82% for activating mutations and 84% for T790M. In a subgroup of patients with intrathoracic metastatic disease (M0/M1a; n = 21), the sensitivity increased from 26% to 74% for activating mutations (P = 0.003) and from 19% to 31% for T790M (P = 0.5) when using exoNA for detection. Conclusions: Combining exoRNA and ctDNA increased the sensitivity for EGFR mutation detection in plasma, with the largest improvement seen in the subgroup of M0/M1a disease patients known to have low levels of ctDNA and poses challenges for mutation detection on ctDNA alone. Clinical Trials: NCT01526928.

Targeting HER2 aberrations as actionable drivers in lung cancers: phase II trial of the pan-HER tyrosine kinase inhibitor dacomitinib in patients with HER2-mutant or amplified tumors.

BACKGROUND: HER2 mutations and amplifications have been identified as oncogenic drivers in lung cancers. Dacomitinib, an irreversible inhibitor of HER2, EGFR (HER1), and HER4 tyrosine kinases, has demonstrated activity in cell-line models with HER2 exon 20 insertions or amplifications. Here, we studied dacomitinib in patients with HER2-mutant or amplified lung cancers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: As a prespecified cohort of a phase II study, we included patients with stage IIIB/IV lung cancers with HER2 mutations or amplification. We gave oral dacomitinib at 30-45 mg daily in 28-day cycles. End points included partial response rate, overall survival, and toxicity. RESULTS: We enrolled 30 patients with HER2-mutant (n = 26, all in exon 20 including 25 insertions and 1 missense mutation) or HER2-amplified lung cancers (n = 4). Three of 26 patients with tumors harboring HER2 exon 20 mutations [12%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2% to 30%] had partial responses lasting 3+, 11, and 14 months. No partial responses occurred in four patients with tumors with HER2 amplifications. The median overall survival was 9 months from the start of dacomitinib (95% CI 7-21 months) for patients with HER2 mutations and ranged from 5 to 22 months with amplifications. Treatment-related toxicities included diarrhea (90%; grade 3/4: 20%/3%), dermatitis (73%; grade 3/4: 3%/0%), and fatigue (57%; grade 3/4: 3%/0%). One patient died on study likely due to an interaction of dacomitinib with mirtazapine. CONCLUSIONS: Dacomitinib produced objective responses in patients with lung cancers with specific HER2 exon 20 insertions. This observation validates HER2 exon 20 insertions as actionable targets and justifies further study of HER2-targeted agents in specific HER2-driven lung cancers. CLINICALTRIALSGOV: NCT00818441.

The impact of socioeconomic status on access to cancer clinical trials.

Cancer clinical trials enable the development of novel agents for the potential benefit of cancer patients. Enrolment in a trial offers patients the chance of superior efficacy coupled to the risk of unanticipated toxicity. For trial results to be generalisable, the data need to be collected in patients' representative of the general cancer population. Socioeconomic deprivation is associated with poor cancer outcomes. In the developed world, the gap between the most and least deprived is widening. This mini-review explores the evidence regarding socioeconomics and access to cancer trials, highlighting the underrepresentation of deprived patients, and exploring reasons for this disparity.

A phase Ib dose-escalation study of everolimus combined with cisplatin and etoposide as first-line therapy in patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: This phase Ib study aimed to establish the feasible everolimus dose given with standard-dose etoposide plus cisplatin (EP) for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: An adaptive Bayesian dose-escalation model and investigator opinion were used to identify feasible daily or weekly everolimus doses given with EP in adults with treatment-naive extensive-stage SCLC. A protocol amendment mandated prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). Primary end point was cycle 1 dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) rate. Secondary end points included safety, relative EP dose intensity, pharmacokinetics, and tumor response. RESULTS: Patients received everolimus 2.5 or 5 mg/day without G-CSF (n=10; cohort A), 20 or 30 mg/week without G-CSF (n=18; cohort B), or 2.5 or 5 mg/day with G-CSF (n=12; cohort C); all received EP. Cycle 1 DLT rates were 50.0%, 22.2%, and 16.7% in cohorts A, B, and C, respectively. Cycle 1 DLTs were neutropenia (cohorts A and B), febrile neutropenia (all cohorts), and thrombocytopenia (cohorts A and C). The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were hematologic. Best overall response was partial response (40.0%, 61.1%, and 58.3% in cohorts A, B, and C, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Everolimus 2.5 mg/day plus G-CSF was the only feasible dose given with standard-dose EP in untreated extensive-stage SCLC.

A phase I study of sorafenib and vorinostat in patients with advanced solid tumors with expanded cohorts in renal cell carcinoma and non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: This phase I study evaluated the safety, tolerability and preliminary efficacy of sorafenib combined with vorinostat in patients with solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were treated with sorafenib 400 mg po bid daily and vorinostat 200-400 mg po days 1-14 of a 21 day cycle to establish the recommended phase II dose (RP2D). The tolerability and efficacy of the RP2D was further tested in two cohorts of 6-12 patients each with advanced RCC and NSCLC. RESULTS: 17 patients were treated in the dose escalation phase that established the RP2D at sorafenib 400 mg po bid daily, vorinostat 300 mg po days 1-14. Dose limiting toxicities (DLT) included intolerable grade 2 hand-foot syndrome and multiple grade 1 toxicities causing dose interruption for more than 14 days. Despite good tolerance in the all-comers population, the RP2D was poorly tolerated in the RCC and NSCLC cohorts with the majority being unable to finish 2 full cycles of therapy. Although there were no confirmed responses, 1 patient each with NSCLC adenocarcinoma and renal sarcoma had unconfirmed partial responses and 5 of 8 patients with RCC having durable minor responses (11-26 %), including 2 who were on treatment for nearly a year. CONCLUSIONS: Although tolerable in other tumor types, sorafenib 400 mg po bid with vorinostat 300 mg po daily days 1-14 of a 21-day cycle is not tolerable without dose reductions/delays in RCC and NSCLC patients. These patients may require lower doses than the RP2D explored within this study. No confirmed responses were seen but minor responses particularly in RCC were observed.

Q-TWiST analysis of survival benefits with brigatinib versus crizotinib in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small cell lung cancer based on results of the ALTA-1L trial.

OBJECTIVES: The ALTA-1L phase 3 open-label trial demonstrated increased progression-free survival (PFS) with brigatinib versus crizotinib in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive (ALK-positive) locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) previously untreated with ALK-targeted therapy. This post-hoc analysis of data from the ALTA-1L trial used the quality-adjusted (QA) time without symptoms of disease or toxicity (Q-TWiST) methodology to compare the QA survival benefit of brigatinib versus crizotinib in this patient population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Q-TWiST analysis was performed using final (January 29, 2021) individual patient-level blinded independent review committee (BIRC)- and investigator-assessed survival data for brigatinib (n = 137) and crizotinib (n = 138) in adult patients (N = 275) with ALK-positive locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC previously untreated with ALK-targeted therapy. Q-TWiST was compared between the two treatments. Subgroup analyses were performed in patients stratified by various clinicopathological characteristics, including presence or absence of brain metastases at baseline. RESULTS: Brigatinib was associated with significantly longer time without symptoms of disease or toxicity (P < 0.001) than crizotinib, with significantly greater Q-TWiST (mean [SE] months: BIRC-assessed, 28.2 [1.2] versus 25.1 [1.1], P = 0.045; investigator-assessed, 28.5 [1.2] versus 24.8 [1.1], P = 0.018). Relative gains in Q-TWiST with brigatinib compared to crizotinib were clinically meaningful (BIRC-assessed, 10.4%; investigator-assessed, 12.3%). Patients with brain metastases at baseline receiving brigatinib had significantly greater Q-TWiST (mean [SE] months: BIRC-assessed, 29.0 [1.9] versus 19.0 [1.9], P = 0.0001) than those receiving crizotinib. CONCLUSION: First-line brigatinib treatment was associated with significant and clinically meaningful gains in Q-TWiST compared to crizotinib in patients with ALK-positive locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC, supporting the results of the ALTA-1L trial and brigatinib as a safe and effective first-line treatment for ALK-positive NSCLC.

The cost-effectiveness of screening lung cancer patients for targeted drug sensitivity markers.

BACKGROUND: New oncology drugs are being developed in conjunction with companion diagnostics with approval restricting their use to certain biomarker-positive subgroups. We examined the impact of different predictive biomarker screening techniques and population enrichment criteria on the cost-effectiveness of targeted drugs in lung cancer, using ALK and crizotinib to build the initial model. METHODS: Health economic modeling of cost per Quality Adjusted Life Year was based on literature review and expert opinion. The modeled population represented advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), eligible for predictive biomarker screening with prescribing restricted to biomarker-positive patients. RESULTS: For assays costing $1400 per person, cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained for ALK screening all advanced NSCLC, excluding treatment cost, is $106,707. This falls to $4756 when only a highly enriched population is screened (increasing biomarker frequency from 1.6 to 35.9%). However, the same enrichment involves missing 56% patients who segregate within the unscreened group. Cheaper screening tests that miss some true positives can be more cost-effective if proportional reductions in cost exceed proportion of subjects missed. Generic modeling of idealised screening assays, including treatment cost, reveals a dominant effect of screening cost per person at low biomarker frequencies. Cost-effectiveness of <$100,000 per QALY gained is not achievable at biomarker frequencies <5% (with drug costs $1-5000 per month and screening costs $600-1400 per person). INTERPRETATION: Cost-effectiveness of oncology drugs whose prescribing is restricted to biomarker-positive subgroups should address the cost of detecting marker-positive patients. The cost of screening dominates at low frequencies and strategies to improve cost-effectiveness based on the assay cost, drug cost and the group screened should be considered in these scenarios.

A phase I, open-label dose-escalation study of continuous treatment with BIBF 1120 in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin as first-line treatment in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: BIBF 1120 is an oral potent inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, fibroblast growth factor receptor and platelet-derived growth factor receptor, the three key receptor families involved in angiogenesis. This phase I, open-label dose-escalation study investigated BIBF 1120 combined with paclitaxel (Taxol) and carboplatin in first-line patients with advanced (IIIB/IV) non-small-cell lung cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received BIBF 1120 (starting dose 50 mg b.i.d.) on days 2-21 and paclitaxel (200 mg/m2) and carboplatin [area under curve (AUC)=6 mg/ml/min] on day 1 of each 21-day cycle. Primary end points were safety and BIBF 1120 maximum tolerated dose (MTD) in this combination. Pharmacokinetics (PK) profiles were evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were treated (BIBF 1120 50-250 mg b.i.d.). BIBF 1120 MTD was 200 mg b.i.d. in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin. Six dose-limiting toxicity events occurred during treatment cycle 1 (liver enzyme elevations, thrombocytopenia, abdominal pain, and rash). Best responses included 7 confirmed partial responses (26.9%); 10 patients had stable disease. BIBF 1120 200 mg b.i.d. had no clinically relevant influence on the PK of paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 and carboplatin AUC 6 mg/ml/min and vice versa. CONCLUSIONS: BIBF 1120 MTD was 200 mg b.i.d when given with paclitaxel and carboplatin; this combination demonstrated an acceptable safety profile. No relevant changes in PK parameters of the backbone chemotherapeutic agents or BIBF 1120 were observed.

Genetic landscape of patients with ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and response to ceritinib in ASCEND-1 study.

OBJECTIVES: To better understand genetic determinants of response to ceritinib, an exploratory analysis was conducted using tumor biopsies from anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-rearranged (ALK+) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with ceritinib at doses of ≥ 300 mg in the ASCEND-1 study. METHODS: ASCEND-1 was an open-label, multicentre, phase 1, dose-escalation and expansion study of ceritinib (fasted) in ALK inhibitor (ALKi)-naïve or ALKi-pretreated patients with locally advanced or metastatic ALK + NSCLC. Biopsies were assayed by next-generation sequencing (NGS) using a Foundation Medicine panel targeting 295 genes. Somatic alterations were correlated with clinical outcome (cut-off 14-Apr-2014). A total of 285 ALK + NSCLC patients were treated with ceritinib at doses ≥ 300 mg. RESULTS: NGS data were generated for 85 pts (ALKi-pretreated [n = 54]; ALKi-naïve [n = 31]), 57 were collected from patients before exposure to any ALKi. NGS did not detect ALK rearrangement in 14 of 85 patients; several of these ALK NGS negative cases harbored alternative drivers, e.g. EGFR mutation. Of the 71 biopsies with NGS confirmed ALK rearrangement, the most frequently detected rearrangements were EML4-ALK variant 1 (V1) and EML4-ALK V3 (36.6% [26/71] and 32.4% [23/71] respectively). Eight (six crizotinib-pretreated and two pretreated with crizotinib followed by alectinib) of the 21 ALKi-pretreated patients carried a point mutation of the ALK TKD, and had the biopsy collected between 1 and 14 days before ceritinib; with the exception of one patient with a G1202R point mutation, all patients derived clinical benefit from ceritinib treatment. Of the 14 ALKi-naïve patients, ceritinib was effective in almost all patients, including a patient carrying a concomitant ERBB4 and HGF amplification. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory analysis highlights the potential role of NGS in improving our understanding of response and resistance to ceritinib. It also illustrates that ceritinib is active against almost all ALK resistance mutations found in ALKi-pretreated patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01283516. Registered January 26, 2011, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01283516.

Evolution of MET and NRAS gene amplification as acquired resistance mechanisms in EGFR mutant NSCLC.

EGFR mutant non-small cell lung cancer patients' disease demonstrates remarkable responses to EGFR-targeted therapy, but inevitably they succumb to acquired resistance, which can be complex and difficult to treat. Analyzing acquired resistance through broad molecular testing is crucial to understanding the resistance mechanisms and developing new treatment options. We performed diverse clinical testing on a patient with successive stages of acquired resistance, first to an EGFR inhibitor with MET gene amplification and then subsequently to a combination EGFR and MET targeted therapies. A patient-derived cell line obtained at the time of disease progression was used to identify NRAS gene amplification as an additional driver of drug resistance to combination EGFR/MET therapies. Analysis of downstream signaling revealed extracellular signal-related kinase activation that could only be eliminated by trametinib treatment, while Akt activation could be modulated by various combinations of MET, EGFR, and PI3K inhibitors. The combination of an EGFR inhibitor with a MEK inhibitor was identified as a possible treatment option to overcome drug resistance related to NRAS gene amplification.

Economic evaluation of fulvestrant as an extra step in the treatment sequence for ER-positive advanced breast cancer.

Drug therapies for advanced breast cancer in hormone-receptor-positive disease include both hormonal and chemotherapies. Current UK practice is to minimise toxicity by using sequential hormonal agents for as long as clinically appropriate. A Markov model was developed to investigate the cost effectiveness of different sequences of therapies, particularly exploring the effects of adding an additional hormonal agent, fulvestrant, to the treatment pathway. A systematic review was undertaken and a panel of seven UK oncologists validated assumptions used for treatment efficacy, treatment pathways and resources used. Fulvestrant was found to be a cost-effective treatment option when added to the treatment sequence as a second- or third-line hormonal therapy for advanced disease. For a cohort of 1000 patients, fulvestrant as a second-line hormone therapy provided an additional 47 life years and 41 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), at an additional cost of pound 301 359. This equated to pound 6500 per life years gained and pound 7500 per QALY. When used as a third-line option, the fulvestrant arm was dominant providing an increase in health benefit of 27 QALYs for the whole cohort, at a mean overall cost reduction of pound 430 per patient. Sensitivity analyses showed these results to be robust, demonstrating that fulvestrant is an economically viable additional endocrine option in the United Kingdom for the treatment of hormone responsive advanced breast cancer.