Final overall survival analysis from the phase III J-ALEX study of alectinib versus crizotinib in ALK inhibitor-naïve Japanese patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Mature progression-free survival (PFS) data from the phase III J-ALEX study showed superiority for alectinib versus crizotinib [hazard ratio (HR) 0.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26-0.52; median PFS 34.1 versus 10.2 months, respectively] in advanced ALK (anaplastic lymphoma kinase)-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Overall survival (OS) data were immature (HR 0.80, 99.8799% CI 0.35-1.82) at the time of data cut-off (30 June 2018). We report final OS data after ≥5 years of follow-up. PATIENTS AND METHODS: ALK inhibitor naive Japanese patients who were chemotherapy naive or had received one prior chemotherapy regimen were enrolled. Patients were randomized to receive alectinib 300 mg (n = 103) or crizotinib 250 mg (n = 104) twice daily until progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, death, or withdrawal. The primary endpoint was independent review facility-assessed PFS, with OS (not fully powered) as a secondary endpoint. RESULTS: Median duration of OS follow-up was 68.6 months with alectinib and 68.0 months with crizotinib. Treatment with alectinib did not prolong OS relative to crizotinib (HR 1.03, 95.0405% CI 0.67-1.58; P = 0.9105). Five-year OS rates were 60.9% (95% CI 51.4-70.3) with alectinib and 64.1% (95% CI 54.9-73.4) with crizotinib. In total, 91.3% (n = 95/104) of crizotinib-treated patients and 46.6% (n = 48/103) of alectinib-treated patients received at least one subsequent anticancer therapy. After study drug discontinuation, 78.8% of patients in the crizotinib arm switched to alectinib, while 10.7% of patients in the alectinib arm switched to crizotinib as a first subsequent anticancer therapy. Patients randomized to crizotinib tended to switch treatment earlier than those randomized to alectinib. CONCLUSION: Final OS analysis from J-ALEX did not show superiority of alectinib to crizotinib; this result was most likely confounded by treatment crossover. Alectinib remains a standard of care for the treatment of patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC.

An overview of alectinib hydrochloride as a treatment option for ALK positive non-small cell lung cancer.

Introduction: Alectinib is a second-generation inhibitor of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) and RET. Phase III clinical trials have established its superiority to crizotinib in the first-line ALK inhibitor-naïve setting. Studies also support its use over chemotherapy in the post-crizotinib setting. It is currently one of several FDA- and EMA-approved ALK inhibitors, and it is listed as a preferred initial therapy for treatment-naïve ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Areas covered: Herein, the authors provide the reader with details of the chemical structure, pharmacologic properties, resistance mutations, phase I, II, and III clinical trials, and safety profile of alectinib. Furthermore, the authors provide the reader with the expert opinion and future perspectives on the drug.Expert opinion: Alectinib compares favorably to other second-generation ALK inhibitors with regards to safety, tolerability, and efficacy. Based on currently available data, it is an appropriate first-line option. Ongoing studies will better resolve the ideal sequencing of ALK inhibitors in the treatment of ALK-positive NSCLC.

Final progression-free survival results from the J-ALEX study of alectinib versus crizotinib in ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The J-ALEX study compared the efficacy and safety of alectinib with crizotinib in Japanese patients with advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Superiority in independent review facility (IRF)-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) was demonstrated for alectinib at the second pre-planned interim PFS analysis (data cutoff: December 3, 2015; hazard ratio [HR] 0.34, 99.7 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.17-0.71, P < 0.0001). We report final PFS data and the second pre-planned interim analysis of overall survival (OS) and safety (data cutoff: June 30, 2018). METHODS: Patients aged ≥20 years who were ALK inhibitor-naïve and chemotherapy-naïve, or had received one prior chemotherapy regimen, were randomized to receive alectinib 300 mg (n = 103) or crizotinib 250 mg (n = 104) twice daily. The primary end point was IRF-assessed PFS. Secondary end points included OS and safety. All patients entered survival follow-up in July 2018. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 42.4 months for alectinib and 42.2 months for crizotinib. Sustained improvement in IRF-assessed PFS with alectinib was shown (HR 0.37, 95 % CI: 0.26-0.52; median PFS 34.1 months vs 10.2 months crizotinib). At the second interim OS analysis, superiority of alectinib to crizotinib could not be concluded (stratified HR 0.80, 99.8799 % CI: 0.35-1.82, stratified log-rank P = 0.3860; median OS not reached alectinib vs 43.7 months crizotinib). Fewer alectinib-treated patients experienced grade ≥3 adverse events (36.9 % vs 60.6 % crizotinib). CONCLUSIONS: At the final PFS analysis, alectinib continued to demonstrate superiority in IRF-assessed PFS versus crizotinib in ALK-inhibitor-naïve ALK-positive NSCLC, with a favorable safety profile. OS follow-up continues.