Impact of EML4-ALK Variants and Co-Occurring TP53 Mutations on Duration of First-Line ALK Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Treatment and Overall Survival in ALK Fusion-Positive NSCLC: Real-World Outcomes From the GuardantINFORM database.

INTRODUCTION: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are first-line treatment options for ALK-positive (ALK+) NSCLC. Factors such as variant allele frequencies (VAFs), EML4-ALK fusion variant, and concurrent TP53 mutations (TP53mt) in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) may affect treatment outcomes. We evaluated their effects on time to discontinuation (TTD) of first-line treatment with next-generation ALK TKIs in a real-world setting. METHODS: Adults with advanced or metastatic NSCLC and ctDNA-detected ALK fusion who received first-line next-generation ALK TKI monotherapy were identified in GuardantINFORM. Effects of ALK fusion VAF, EML4-ALK variants, and TP53mt detection on TTD were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 307 patients with ALK fusion in baseline ctDNA received first-line alectinib (n = 280), brigatinib (n = 15), lorlatinib (n = 9), or ceritinib (n = 3); 150 patients (49%) had ALK-fusion VAF greater than or equal to 1%. Among 232 patients with EML4-ALK fusions (v1, 50%; v3, 36%), TP53mt co-occurred with v1 in 42 (18%) and v3 in 32 (14%). Patients with VAF less than 1% versus greater than or equal to 1% had a median TTD of 32.2 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 20.7-not estimable [NE]) versus 14.7 months (10.4-19.9; hazard ratio [HR] = 1.57 [95% CI: 1.09-2.26]; p = 0.0146). Median TTD was 13.1 (9.5-19.9) versus 27.6 months (17.3-NE) in patients with versus without TP53mt detected (HR = 1.53 [1.07-2.19]; p = 0.0202) and 20.3 (14.4-NE) versus 11.5 months (7.4-31.1) in patients with v1 versus v3 (HR = 1.29 [0.83-2.01]; p = 0.2641). Patients with TP53mt and v3 had a median TTD of 7.4 months (95% CI: 4.2-31.1). CONCLUSION: High ctDNA VAF, EML4-ALK v3, and TP53mt were associated with early discontinuation of first-line ALK TKIs.

Real-World Treatment Patterns and Outcomes Across Three Lines of Therapy in Patients with ALK+ NSCLC.

INTRODUCTION: Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are standard first- and second-line treatment for advanced ALK+ non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We evaluated outcomes in patients with ALK+ NSCLC receiving third-line ALK TKI versus non-ALK-directed therapy. METHODS: Flatiron Health OncoEMR data were extracted for patients with ALK+ NSCLC initiating first-line ALK TKI between January 2015 and March 2022 followed by second-line ALK TKI and third-line ALK TKI (group A) or non-TKI therapy (group B). Time-to-treatment discontinuation (TTD) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using multivariate modelling. RESULTS: Among patients receiving third-line ALK TKI (A, n = 85) or non-TKI therapy (B, n = 43), most received first-line crizotinib (A/B: 64%/60%) and second-line alectinib (36%/30%), ceritinib (24%/19%), or lorlatinib (15%/30%). Common third-line treatments were lorlatinib/alectinib (41%/33%) in A and immunotherapy, chemotherapy, or chemotherapy + immunotherapy (30%/28%/21%) in B. Group A versus B had longer TTD of first-line treatment (hazard ratio [HR] 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.41-0.93; p = 0.020) and second-line treatment (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.33-0.75; p < 0.001) and longer OS from start of first-line treatment (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.19-0.54; p < 0.001) and second-line treatment (HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.24-0.66; p < 0.001). For third-line treatment, median TTD (A/B) was 6.2/2.4 months (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.37-1.00; p = 0.049) and OS was 17.6/6.5 months (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.33-0.98; p = 0.042). CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving third-line non-ALK-directed therapy had suboptimal outcomes on prior TKIs. Patients with longer duration of prior ALK TKI treatment appeared to benefit from third-line ALK TKIs.

Establishing Meaningful Change Thresholds in Patient-Reported Outcomes Among Patients With Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in ALTA-1L Trial.

OBJECTIVES: An earlier study from the ALTA-1L trial of patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small cell lung cancer demonstrated that brigatinib produces superior health-related quality of life (QoL) outcomes over crizotinib. This study aimed to derive meaningful change thresholds (MCTs) for European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 to refine the earlier results. METHODS: Patients from the ALTA-1L trial were administered the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 questionnaires. Responses were analyzed using anchor-based analysis, graphical analysis, distribution-based analysis, longitudinal responder analysis, and time to deterioration. RESULTS: The patient-reported outcome population comprised 262 patients who completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 at baseline and at least 1 follow-up timepoint. Both anchors (QLQ-C30 items for overall health and QoL) had correlations >0.40 or < -0.40 with all functioning domains, fatigue, pain, appetite loss, and all dyspnea scores. Within-group analysis for most scales found the derived MCT was consistent with a cutoff of 10 points for classifying individual-patient change, except for 3-item dyspnea. The probability of improvement/remaining stable was significantly greater in the brigatinib group over crizotinib for the EORTC QLQ-C30 emotional functioning, appetite loss, and constipation domains. CONCLUSIONS: This study derived MCTs for EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC13 domains that may be applied in future studies and again demonstrated the superiority of brigatinib over crizotinib in health-related QoL outcomes in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

Efficacy of Mobocertinib and Amivantamab in Patients With Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer With EGFR Exon 20 Insertions Previously Treated With Platinum-Based Chemotherapy: An Indirect Treatment Comparison.

INTRODUCTION: Exon 20 insertions (ex20ins) mutations of the EGFR gene account for 1% to 2% of all non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). Targeted therapies have been developed to treat this cancer type but have not been studied in head-to-head trials. Our objective was to use a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) to assess the efficacy of mobocertinib and amivantamab in patients with NSCLC EGFR ex20ins mutations who were previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An unanchored MAIC was conducted to estimate the treatment effects of mobocertinib and amivantamab using individual-level data from the mobocertinib phase I/II single-arm trial (NCT02716116) and published data from the amivantamab single-arm CHRYSALIS trial (NCT02609776). Confirmed overall response rate (cORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and duration of response (DoR) were assessed. RESULTS: Both trials were comparable in terms of study population, study design, and outcome definitions and included 114 patients who received mobocertinib and 114 patients who received amivantamab. After MAIC weighting, all reported baseline characteristics were balanced between mobocertinib and amivantamab. The weighted odds ratio (OR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] comparing mobocertinib to amivantamab was 0.56 (0.30-1.04) for independent review committee (IRC)-assessed cORR and 0.98 (0.53-1.82) for investigator (INV)-assessed cORR. The weighted hazard ratio (HR) comparing mobocertinib to amivantamab was 0.74 (0.51-1.07) for IRC-assessed PFS, 0.92 (0.57-1.48) for OS, and 0.59 (0.30-1.18) for INV-assessed DoR. CONCLUSION: MAIC analysis showed that mobocertinib and amivantamab had similar efficacy in patients with NSCLC harboring EGFR ex20ins mutations whose disease progressed during or after platinum-based chemotherapy. These findings may benefit patients by supporting future treatment options.

Real-World Response and Outcomes in Patients With NSCLC With EGFR Exon 20 Insertion Mutations.

Introduction: This study describes treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with NSCLC with EGFR exon 20 insertions (EGFRex20ins) in the United States. Methods: The Flatiron Health electronic health record database was used to select three cohorts among patients diagnosed with NSCLC with EGFRex20ins (January 1, 2011-February 29, 2020): (1) first-line (1L) or patients receiving 1L therapy after documented EGFRex20ins; (2) second or later-line (≥2L) or patients receiving ≥2L therapy after documented EGFRex20ins; and (3) ≥2L postplatinum trial-aligned, or ≥2L patients previously treated with platinum chemotherapy whose baseline characteristics aligned with key eligibility criteria (initiating new treatment after documented EGFRex20ins and ≥1 previous treatment excluding mobocertinib or amivantamab) of the mobocertinib trial NCT02716116. Real-world end points were confirmed overall response rate, overall survival, and progression-free survival. Results: Of 237 patients with EGFRex20ins-mutated NSCLC, 129 and 114 patients were included in the 1L and ≥2L cohorts, respectively. In 1L patients, platinum chemotherapy plus nonplatinum chemotherapy (31.0%) and EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (28.7%) were the most common regimens. In ≥2L patients, immuno-oncology monotherapy (28.1%) and EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (17.5%) were the most common index treatments. For any 1L, ≥2L, and ≥2L postplatinum trial-aligned patients, the confirmed overall response rate was 18.6%, 9.6%, and 14.0%, respectively; the median overall survival was 17.0, 13.6, and 11.5 months; the median progression-free survival was 5.2, 3.7, and 3.3 months, respectively. Conclusions: The outcomes for patients with NSCLC with EGFRex20ins were poor. This real-world study provides a benchmark on treatment outcomes in this patient population and highlights the unmet need for improved therapeutic options.

Brigatinib Versus Alectinib in ALK-Positive NSCLC After Disease Progression on Crizotinib: Results of Phase 3 ALTA-3 Trial.

INTRODUCTION: This open-label, phase 3 trial (ALTA-3; NCT03596866) compared efficacy and safety of brigatinib versus alectinib for ALK+ NSCLC after disease progression on crizotinib. METHODS: Patients with advanced ALK+ NSCLC that progressed on crizotinib were randomized 1:1 to brigatinib 180 mg once daily (7-d lead-in, 90 mg) or alectinib 600 mg twice daily, aiming to test superiority. The primary end point was blinded independent review committee-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Interim analysis for efficacy and futility was planned at approximately 70% of 164 expected PFS events. RESULTS: The population (N = 248; brigatinib, n = 125; alectinib, n = 123) was notable for long median duration of prior crizotinib (16.0-16.8 mo) and low rate of ALK fusion in baseline circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA; 78 of 232 [34%]). Median blinded independent review committee-assessed PFS was 19.3 months with brigatinib and 19.2 months with alectinib (hazard ratio = 0.97 [95% confidence interval: 0.66-1.42], p = 0.8672]). The study met futility criterion. Overall survival was immature (41 events [17%]). Exploratory analyses pooled across the treatment groups revealed median PFS of 11.1 versus 22.5 months in patients with versus without ctDNA-detectable ALK fusion at baseline (hazard ratio: 0.48 [95% confidence interval: 0.32-0.71]). Treatment-related adverse events in more than 30% of patients (brigatinib, alectinib) were elevated levels of blood creatine phosphokinase (70%, 29%), aspartate aminotransferase (53%, 38%), and alanine aminotransferase (40%, 36%). CONCLUSIONS: Brigatinib was not superior to alectinib for PFS in crizotinib-pretreated ALK+ NSCLC. Safety was consistent with the well-established and unique profiles of each drug. The low proportion of patients with ctDNA-detectable ALK fusion may account for prolonged PFS with both drugs in ALTA-3.

Real-world evidence in lung and hematologic oncology health technology appraisals: a review of six assessment agencies.

Aim: To assess the use and acceptability of real-world evidence (RWE) in lung and hematologic cancer appraisals. Materials & methods: A review of appraisals published by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the UK was conducted. A total of 20 case studies employing RWE were identified and compared across five additional health technology assessment agencies: Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC) (Scotland), CADTH (Canada), INESSS (Quebec), HAS (France) and IQWiG (Germany). Results: Of 80 RWE references from 20 case studies from NICE, 67 were identified in the respective CADTH submissions, 46 in IQWiG, 37 in INESSS, 37 in HAS, and 33 in SMC. NICE had the highest RWE acceptance rate (90%), followed by HAS (88%), SMC (82%), INESSS (73%), IQWiG (68%) and CADTH (67%). Conclusion: RWE was generally accepted by respective committees, allowing improved access to innovative treatments.

Use of real-world evidence for assessing the value of cancer treatments Health technology assessment (HTA) is a process used to decide whether a drug works well enough to be worth paying for. Most drugs have data showing how well they work from special studies called clinical trials. Sometimes a manufacturer also has evidence of a drug or disease that is not from a clinical trial but from the real world. This review discusses how real-world evidence (RWE) is being used for HTAs of new lung and blood cancer therapies. We reviewed twenty HTA submissions for new therapies. All twenty were submitted to these agencies: National Institute for HealthCare and Excellence (NICE; UK), Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC; Scotland), Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH; Canada), National Institute of Excellence in Health and Social Services (INESSS; Quebec), French National Authority for Health (HAS; France) and Institute for Quality and Efficiency in HealthCare (IQWiG; Germany). RWE was often used to describe the type of patient that needs the new therapy. RWE was also used to show the cost of the treatment and how well the treatment worked in relation to its cost. It was also used to show how well the new therapy works compared with other treatments. Most of the RWE was accepted by the agencies. High-quality RWE in relevant patients helped support access to new treatments.

Comparative effectiveness of mobocertinib and standard of care in patients with NSCLC with EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations: An indirect comparison.

INTRODUCTION: Mobocertinib is a novel, first-in-class, irreversible, oral epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) designed to selectively target in-frame EGFR exon 20 insertions (ex20ins). Comparative effectiveness data for mobocertinib versus real-world treatments are lacking in this rare population. This study compared data for mobocertinib reported in a Phase I/II single-arm clinical trial with an external control group consisting of patients who received available treatment in the real-world setting in the United States (US). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The mobocertinib group included platinum-pretreated patients with advanced EGFR ex20ins non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving mobocertinib 160 mg QD in an ongoing, single-arm, phase 1/2 clinical trial (NCT02716116; n = 114). The real-world data (RWD) group included platinum-pretreated patients with advanced EGFR ex20ins-mutant NSCLC from the Flatiron Health database (n = 50). Inverse probability treatment weighting based on the propensity score method controlled for potential confounding between groups. Confirmed overall response rate (cORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared between groups. RESULTS: After weighting, baseline characteristics were balanced. Patients in the RWD group received EGFR TKI (20 %), immuno-oncology therapy (40 %), or any regimens containing chemotherapy (40 %) in the second- or later-line setting. In the mobocertinib and RWD groups, respectively, cORR was 35.1 % and 11.9 % (odds ratio: 3.75 [95 % confidence interval (CI): 2.05, 6.89]); median PFS was 7.3 and 3.3 months (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.57 [95 % CI: 0.36, 0.90]); and median OS was 24.0 and 12.4 months (HR: 0.53 [95 % CI: 0.33, 0.83]) after weighting. DISCUSSION: Mobocertinib showed substantially improved outcomes versus an external control group using available therapies in platinum-pretreated patients with EGFR ex20ins-mutant NSCLC. In the absence of comparative evidence from randomized trials, these findings help elucidate potential benefits of mobocertinib in this rare population.

Indirect comparison of mobocertinib and real-world therapies for pre-treated non-small cell lung cancer with EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations.

OBJECTIVES: Mobocertinib, a novel oral epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor, is available for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with EGFR exon 20 insertion (ex20ins) mutations after platinum chemotherapy. We performed an indirect comparison of clinical trial data and real-world data (RWD) to determine the relative efficacy of mobocertinib vs. other treatments for these patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data on the efficacy of mobocertinib from a phase I/II trial (NCT02716116) were compared to RWD from a retrospective study in 12 German centers using inverse probability of treatment weighting to adjust for age, sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score, smoking status, presence of brain metastasis, time from advanced diagnosis, and histology. Tumor response assessment was based on RECIST v1.1. RESULTS: The analysis included 114 patients in the mobocertinib group and 43 in the RWD group. The confirmed overall response rate (cORR) according to investigator assessment was 0% for standard treatments and 35.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 26.4-44.6) for mobocertinib (p < 0.0001). Compared to standard regimens in the weighted population, mobocertinib prolonged overall survival (OS, median [95% CI] = 9.8 [4.3-13.7] vs. 20.2 [14.9-25.3] months; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.42 [0.25-0.69], p = 0.0035), progression-free survival (PFS, median [95% CI] = 2.6 [1.5-5.7] vs. 7.3 [5.6-8.8] months; HR = 0.28 [0.18-0.44], p < 0.0001), and time to treatment discontinuation (median [95% CI] = 2.1 [1.2-3.1] vs. 7.4 [6.4-8.5] months; HR = 0.34 [0.18-0.65], p = 0.0004). CONCLUSION: Mobocertinib was associated with an improved cORR and prolonged PFS and OS compared to standard treatments for patients with EGFR ex20ins-positive NSCLC previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy.

Distribution and Detectability of EGFR Exon 20 Insertion Variants in NSCLC.

INTRODUCTION: EGFR exon 20 insertion (ex20ins) mutations represent 5% to 10% of EGFR mutations in NSCLC. Identifying patients with EGFR ex20ins is challenging owing to the limited coverage of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays and the relatively recent use of next-generation sequencing (NGS). This study analyzes the spectrum of EGFR ex20ins variants in a large patient population from a global clinical trial and several real-world cohorts and the ability of PCR kits to identify these alterations. METHODS: We conducted this retrospective analysis in patients with NSCLC who underwent NGS or other sequencing testing and had a known EGFR ex20ins mutation. Patients were gathered from a clinical trial (NCT02716116), a chart review study in Germany, and the LC-SCRUM-Japan, GENIE, and U.S. COTA databases. Proportions of patients with ex20ins variants that could have been detected by six commercially available and widely used PCR kits were calculated in each data set. RESULTS: Overall, 636 patients with NSCLC harboring EGFR ex20ins mutations were included in this analysis and 104 unique EGFR ex20ins variants were identified across the data sources. The proportion of patients whose ex20ins could have been detected by any PCR test alone ranged from 11.8% to 58.9% across the data sources. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the PCR tests evaluated would have missed more than 40% of patients with NSCLC harboring EGFR ex20ins mutations. NGS-based genetic testing is preferable than standard PCR assays and can substantially improve the identification of the diverse profile of EGFR ex20ins variants in NSCLC.

Identifying symptomatic adverse events using the patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events in patients with non-small cell lung cancer with epidermal growth factor receptor exon 20 insertion mutations.

OBJECTIVE: Tolerability and safety of treatments are important in oncology trials and should be informed by patient assessments. We identified the most relevant patient-reported symptomatic adverse events (AEs) to measure in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) exon 20 insertion mutations. METHODS: This study selected relevant symptomatic AEs from 78 AEs available in the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) measurement system. Initially, symptomatic AEs were selected based on literature and product labeling reviews, and then core sets of symptomatic AEs were identified by patient and clinician interviews. Qualitative and descriptive analyses were performed using the data collected from three iterative rounds of patient interviews. RESULTS: During concept elicitation interviews involving 29 patients, 12 symptomatic AEs were identified and were then adapted into a 25-item PRO-CTCAE form for use in future clinical trials along with commonly used PRO measures. Cognitive interviews showed that the PRO-CTCAE items were easy to answer and appropriate for assessing the patients' experience with symptomatic AEs. This study also assessed disease symptoms, impacts, and overall patient experience. CONCLUSIONS: The 25-item PRO-CTCAE form captures the most relevant symptomatic AEs in this patient population, and it is available for future studies. Baseline characterization of AEs associated with this distinct patient group contributes to our broader knowledge about NSCLC and through platforms like Project Patient Voice will expand our understanding of treatment tolerability and safety for NSCLC. Ultimately, this data collection will help inform decision-making for patients, caregivers, healthcare providers, and regulators.

Real-world ALK Testing Trends in Patients With Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) whose tumors harbor anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangements can be treated with ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors. We assessed real-world ALK biomarker testing and treatment patterns of patients with NSCLC in the United States. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were extracted from the Flatiron Health electronic health record-derived deidentified database for patients aged ≥18 years with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and ≥2 clinic visits between January 2011 and December 2019. RESULTS: Among 60,025 eligible patients, tumors from 36,691 (61.1%) patients were tested for ALK rearrangements, and 1042 (2.8%) tested positive (ALK+). From 2011 to 2019, ALK testing rates increased from 33.1% to 73.0%; testing via fluorescence in situ hybridization declined from 68.3% to 32.1% while next-generation sequencing increased from <1% to 52.2%. Although tissue samples were more commonly used than blood (85.1% vs. 13.5% of tests), blood sample testing increased from 0.1% in 2011 to 28.2% in 2019. Median (interquartile range) time from diagnosis of advanced NSCLC to first ALK+ test result was 23 (13-43) days, including laboratory processing time of 9 (6-14) days. For the 24.7% of patients with an ALK+ test result who began treatment before receiving the positive result, chemotherapy was initiated most often overall until 2018 when immuno-oncology agents became most common. CONCLUSION: Although ALK testing in NSCLC increased over time, testing rates among eligible patients did not reach 100% during the study period. Treatment decisions for some patients with NSCLC may have been made without important, guideline-recommended biomarker data.

Economic burden in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with or without brain metastases, receiving first-line ALK inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: This observational study describes the real-world economic burden in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving a first-line ALK inhibitor, and the economic impact of brain metastases (BM). METHODS: Administrative claims data (Truven Health MarketScan® Commercial Claims and Encounters database and Medicare Supplemental and Coordination of Benefits database; January 1, 2015-March 31, 2020) for adult patients with ALK+ NSCLC who received a first-line ALK inhibitor were retrospectively reviewed. Healthcare costs and resource utilization were calculated on a per-patient-per-month (PPPM) basis and stratified by the presence or absence of BM prior to first-line ALK inhibitor. Factors associated with costs were identified. RESULTS: A total of 496 patients were eligible for analysis. Mean PPPM total healthcare costs were $21,961 for all patients receiving up to 1 year of a first-line ALK inhibitor. Patients were significantly more likely to have higher mean PPPM total costs if they had BM prior to first-line ALK inhibitor (vs. no BM; odds ratio: 1.11; 95% confidence interval: 1.02, 1.21; p = 0.013). Mean PPPM days of hospital stay (p = 0.0056), and inpatient hospital visits (p = 0.0030) were significantly higher for patients with BM compared to no BM. The main cost drivers for non-inpatient procedures for all patients were medications, radiation therapy, and other diagnostic procedures. CONCLUSIONS: The economic burden in patients with ALK+ NSCLC receiving a first-line ALK inhibitor was high. Patients with ALK+ NSCLC and BM had higher healthcare costs and resource utilization than patients without BM.

Efficacy of Brigatinib in Patients With Advanced ALK-Positive NSCLC Who Progressed on Alectinib or Ceritinib: ALK in Lung Cancer Trial of brigAtinib-2 (ALTA-2).

INTRODUCTION: Brigatinib is a potent next-generation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for treatment-naive and crizotinib-refractory advanced ALK-positive (ALK+) NSCLC. We evaluated brigatinib after other next-generation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors. METHODS: In this single-arm, phase 2, ALK in Lung Cancer Trial of brigAtinib-2 (NCT03535740), patients with advanced ALK+ NSCLC whose disease progressed on alectinib or ceritinib received brigatinib 180 mg once daily (after 7-d 90-mg lead-in). Primary end point was independent review committee (IRC)-assessed overall response rate (ORR). Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) was analyzed. RESULTS: Among 103 patients (data cutoff: September 30, 2020; median follow-up [range]: 10.8 [0.5-17.7] mo), confirmed IRC-ORR was 26.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 18.0-35.8), median duration of response, 6.3 months (95% CI: 5.6-not reached), and median progression-free survival (mPFS), 3.8 months (95% CI: 3.5-5.8). mPFS was 1.9 months (95% CI: 1.8-3.7) in patients with ctDNA-detectable baseline ALK fusion (n = 64). Among 86 patients who progressed on alectinib, IRC-ORR was 29.1% (95% CI: 19.8-39.9); mPFS was 3.8 months (95% CI: 1.9-5.4). Resistance mutations were present in 33.3% (26 of 78) of baseline ctDNA; 54% (14 of 26) of mutations were G1202R; 52% (33 of 64) of patients with detectable ALK fusion had EML4-ALK variant 3. Most common all-grade treatment-related adverse events were increased creatine phosphokinase (32%) and diarrhea (27%). The mean dose intensity of brigatinib (180 mg once daily) was 85.9%. CONCLUSIONS: In ALK in Lung Cancer Trial of brigAtinib-2, brigatinib was found to have a limited activity in patients with ALK+ NSCLC post-ceritinib or post-alectinib therapy. mPFS was longer with brigatinib in patients without baseline detectable plasma ALK fusion.

Real-World Efficacy and Tolerability of Brigatinib in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer with Prior ALK-TKIs in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Real-world evidence for brigatinib, a next-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (ALK-TKI) used in ALK-rearranged non-small cell lung cancer, is scarce. This retrospective study evaluated real-world brigatinib utilization in the US post other ALK-TKIs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adults with ≥1 brigatinib claim (index date) between 1 April 2017 and 30 September 2020 in the IQVIA longitudinal pharmacy claims database were followed until dose reduction, discontinuation, or end of follow-up. Patients had ≥12 months pre- and ≥1-month post-index observations. RESULTS: A total of 413 patients treated with brigatinib were analyzed. Over 80% received ≥1 prior ALK-TKI; alectinib and crizotinib were the most common (58.8% and 51.3% patients, respectively). The median follow-up was 8.4 months. The median time to treatment discontinuation (TTD) for brigatinib was 10.3 months (95% CI, 8.2-15.0), with 45% remaining on therapy at 12 months. The TTD was shortest (~8 months) in patients receiving both crizotinib and alectinib and longest in patients who received alectinib only prior to brigatinib (11.8 months). Adherence was high, with 92.7% of patients having a medication possession ratio of >80%. The mean dose compliance score was 1.0. Most patients reached the brigatinib dose of 180 mg/day (77%); 13.2% of patients had a dose reduction, with 89.3% and 84.6% continuing 180 mg/day therapy at 3 and 6 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Brigatinib appears to be effective and well-tolerated in the real-world ALK+ NSCLC population in the US, showing benefit in patients after a next-generation ALK-TKI. Notably, dose reduction rates appeared markedly less than those seen in trials when most trial-related dose reductions were for asymptomatic laboratory abnormalities.

Overall survival indirect treatment comparison between brigatinib and alectinib for the treatment of front-line anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small cell lung cancer using data from ALEX and final results from ALTA-1L.

BACKGROUND: Second-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) alectinib and brigatinib have shown efficacy as front-line treatments for ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). No head-to-head data are currently available for brigatinib vs alectinib in the ALK-TKI-naive population. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the relative overall survival (OS) for brigatinib vs alectinib with indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs) using ALEX and ALTA-1L clinical trial data. METHODS: The latest aggregate data from the ALEX trial and final patient-level data from ALTA-1L were used. ITCs were conducted with/without treatment crossover adjustments to estimate relative OS. Bucher methods, anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) and unanchored MAICs were employed in ITCs without treatment crossover adjustments. An inverse probability of censoring weight Cox model, a marginal structure model and rank-preserving structural failure time models (with/without re-censoring) within an anchored MAIC were used in ITCs with treatment crossover adjustments. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported. RESULTS: HRs for brigatinib vs alectinib for relative OS generated from ITCs without treatment crossover adjustments ranged from 0.90 (95% CI: 0.59-1.38) in the unanchored MAIC to 1.20 (95% CI: 0.69-2.11) using the Bucher method. Methods employing treatment switching adjustments estimated HRs for relative OS ranging from 0.74 (95% CI: 0.38-1.45) to 1.11 (95% CI: 0.63-1.94). Results from all ITCs did not indicate statistically different survival profiles. CONCLUSION: Regardless of ITC methodology, OS is comparable for brigatinib vs alectinib in patients with ALK+ NSCLC previously untreated with an ALK inhibitor.

The impact of TP53 co-mutations and immunologic microenvironment on outcome of lung cancer with EGFR exon 20 insertions.

BACKGROUND: EGFR exon20 insertions (ex20ins) are targeted by novel compounds in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, data about outcome under conventional therapies and the influence of molecular features are scarce. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analysed 118 patients with evaluation of radiologic response based on RECIST v1.1. TP53 status was available for 88 cases. RESULTS: Platinum doublets and chemoimmunotherapy showed similar response rates (20-25%), disease control rates (80%) and median progression-free survival (mPFS, ≈7 months), which were longer compared to monochemotherapy (9%, 59%, 4.1 months), EGFR inhibitors (0%, 46%, 3.0) and PD-(L)1 inhibitors (0%, 30%, 2.1; p < 0.05). Overall survival (OS) was not dependent on the choice of first-line treatment, but related to more lines of systemic therapy (p < 0.05). TP53 mutations and brain metastases were associated with shorter PFS under platinum doublets and EGFR inhibitors (HR 3.3-6.1, p < 0.01), and shorter OS for patients receiving both treatments (p < 0.05). More tumour CD8+ and less Th1 cells were associated with longer OS independent of brain and TP53 status (p < 0.01). No difference in outcome was noted according to the ex20ins site and use of pemetrexed (vs. other cytotoxics) or bevacizumab. Long-lasting responses (>1 year) occasionally occurred under EGFR inhibitors for both 'near-' and 'far-loop' variants. CONCLUSIONS: Platinum doublets and chemoimmunotherapy have the highest activity with ORR of 20-25% and mPFS of approximately 7 months, regardless of the cytotoxic partner, while PD-(L)1 inhibitors show limited efficacy. TP53 mutations, brain metastases and a lower tumour CD8/Th1-cell ratio are independently associated with shorter survival.

Non-small cell lung cancer with EGFR exon 20 insertion mutation: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of patient outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: EGFR exon 20 insertion mutation-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is rare, has a poor prognosis, and outcomes are not fully established. We describe and evaluate outcomes from real-world and clinical evidence in these patients. METHODS: A systematic literature review (SLR) identified interventional and real-world evidence (RWE) studies reporting clinical outcomes for EGFR exon 20 insertion mutation-positive NSCLC. Meta-analyses were conducted by line of therapy to synthesize pooled survival and response outcomes across RWE. Published evidence from interventional studies was summarized individually. RESULTS: The SLR identified 23 RWE and 19 original interventional studies. In the meta-analysis of RWE, pooled response and survival outcomes were low for first-line EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immuno-oncology (IO) agents. First-line chemotherapy resulted in a pooled ORR 25.7%, pooled PFS 5.6 months, and pooled OS 18.3 months. Pooled outcomes were further reduced in second or later lines (≥2 L): pooled ORR was 5.0%, 3.3%, and 13.9%; pooled PFS was 2.1 months, 2.3 months, and 4.4 months; and pooled OS was 14.1 months, 8.8 months, and 17.1 months (not a pooled result) for EGFR-TKIs, IO agents, and chemotherapy, respectively. Interventional studies reported outcomes for TKIs (mobocertinib, poziotinib, osimertinib, afatinib, CLN-081, DZD9008), a monoclonal antibody (amivantamab), and a heat shock protein 90 inhibitor (luminespib). While there is limited RWE for the recently approved agents mobocertinib and amivantamab, which specifically target exon 20 insertion mutations, interventional evidence supports their potential as effective treatment options. CONCLUSIONS: Conventional treatments used in patients with EGFR exon 20 insertion mutation-positive NSCLC have limited efficacy, though chemotherapy appeared to be associated with better response and survival outcomes than non-exon 20 targeting EGFR-TKIs and IO agents. This supports the need to identify EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations as the availability of new targeted treatments may offer additional therapeutic options to these patients.

Indirect comparisons of brigatinib and alectinib for front-line ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer.

Aim: To conduct an indirect treatment comparison (ITC) of the relative efficacy of brigatinib and alectinib for progression-free survival in people with tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)-naive ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Final aggregate and patient-level data from the ALTA-1L trial comparing brigatinib to crizotinib and published aggregate data from ALEX (comparing alectinib to crizotinib) were contrasted using Bucher ITC and matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs). Results: No statistically significant differences were identified between brigatinib and alectinib in reducing the risk of disease progression overall and in patients with baseline central nervous system metastases. Conclusion: Brigatinib appeared similar to alectinib in reducing risk of disease progression for people with TKI-naive ALK-positive NSCLC.

Patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who have a genetic marker called rearrangement in the anaplastic lymphoma kinase, or ALK-positive disease, are treated with targeted medications taken by mouth. Two medications, alectinib and brigatinib, are both considered first-line treatment for these patients but have not been compared head-to-head. Recently, updated clinical trial results were published for these medications. The present study utilized these updated results and advanced statistical tests to indirectly compare the effectiveness of the two treatments to help guide clinical treatment choices. Results showed brigatinib and alectinib have a similar magnitude of effect in decreasing the risk of a patient with ALK-positive NSCLC developing worsening disease.