Variant ALK-fusion positive anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL): A population-based paediatric study of the NHL-BFM study group.

Frequency, distribution and prognostic meaning of ALK-partner genes other than NPM1 in ALK-positive anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (ALCL) are unknown. Forty-nine of 316 ALCL diagnosed in the NHL-BFM study group showed no nuclear ALK expression suggestive of a variant ALK-partner; 41 were analysed by genomic capture high-throughput sequencing or specific RT-PCRs. NPM1::ALK was detected in 13 cases. Among the 28 patients with a non-NPM1::ALK-fusion partner, ATIC (n = 8; 29%) and TPM3 (n = 9; 32%) were the most common. Five of eight patients with ATIC::ALK-positive ALCL relapsed, none of nine with TPM3::ALK. Variant ALK-partners are rare and potentially associated with different prognoses.

Lorlatinib as a first-line treatment of adult patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Α cost-effectiveness analysis in Greece.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of lorlatinib compared to 1st generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) TKI crizotinib, and 2nd generation TKIs alectinib and brigatinib, for previously untreated patients with ALK+ advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (aNSCLC). METHODS: A partitioned survival model was locally adapted from a Greek payer perspective over a lifetime horizon. Clinical, safety and utility data were extracted from literature. Direct medical costs reflecting the year 2023 were included in the analysis (€). Model outcomes were patients' life years (LYs), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), total costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). RESULTS: Total cost per patient with lorlatinib, alectinib, crizotinib, and brigatinib was estimated to be €188,205, €183,343, €75,028, and €145,454 respectively. Lorlatinib appeared to yield more LYs and QALYs gained versus alectinib, crizotinib, and brigatinib. Hence, lorlatinib resulted in ICERs of €4,315 per LY gained and €4,422 per QALY gained compared to alectinib, €34,032 per LY gained and €48,256 per QALY gained versus crizotinib and €16,587 per LY gained and €26,271 per QALY gained compared to brigatinib. CONCLUSION: Lorlatinib provides substantial clinical benefit and appears to be a cost - effective treatment option compared to 1st and 2nd generation TKIs for previously untreated patients with ALK+ aNCSLC in Greece.

Usefulness of an RNA extraction-free test for the multiplexed detection of ALK, ROS1, and RET Gene Fusions in Real Life FFPE Specimens of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancers.

BACKGROUND: ALK, ROS1 and RET rearrangements occur, respectively, in 5%, 2%, and 1% non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC). ALK and ROS1 fusion proteins detection by immunohistochemistry (IHC) has been validated for rapid patient screening, but ROS1 fusions need to be confirmed by another technique and no RET IHC test is available for clinical use. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We report herein the usefulness of the HTG EdgeSeq Assay, an RNA extraction-free test combining a quantitative nuclease protection assay with NGS, for the detection of ALK, ROS1 and RET fusions from 'real-life' small NSCLC samples. A total of 203 FFPE samples were collected from 11 centers. They included 143 rearranged NSCLC (87 ALK, 39 ROS1, 17 RET) and 60 ALK-ROS1-RET negative controls. RESULTS: The assay had a specificity of 98% and a sensitivity for ALK, ROS1 and RET fusions of 80%, 94% and 100% respectively. Among the 19 HTG-assay false negative samples, the preanalytical conditions were identified as the major factors impacting the assay efficiency. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the HTG EdgeSeq assay offers comparable sensitivities and specificity than other RNA sequencing techniques, with the advantage that it can be used on very small and old samples collected multicentrically.

Cost­Effectiveness of Lorlatinib in First-Line Treatment of Adult Patients with Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase (ALK)­Positive Non­Small­Cell Lung Cancer in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to investigate the cost effectiveness of lorlatinib, a third-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), used first-line in Sweden to treat patients with ALK-positive (ALK+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In January 2022, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) extended its approval of lorlatinib to include adult patients with ALK+ NSCLC not previously treated with an ALK inhibitor. Extended first-line approval was based on results from CROWN, a phase III randomized trial that enlisted 296 patients randomized 1:1 to receive lorlatinib or crizotinib. Our analysis compared lorlatinib against the first-generation ALK-TKI crizotinib, and second-generation ALK TKIs alectinib and brigatinib. METHODS: A partitioned survival model with four health states [pre-progression, non-intracranial (non-central nervous system [CNS]) progression, CNS progression, and death] was constructed. The progressed disease state (which is typically modelled in cost-effectiveness analyses of oncology treatments) was explicitly separated into non-CNS and CNS progression as brain metastases, which are common in NSCLC, and can have a large impact on patient prognosis and health-related quality of life. Treatment effectiveness estimates in the lorlatinib and crizotinib arms of the model were derived from CROWN data, while indirect relative effectiveness estimates for alectinib and brigatinib were informed using network meta-analysis (NMA). Utility data were derived from the CROWN study in the base case, and cost-effectiveness results were compared when applying UK and Swedish value sets. Costs were obtained from Swedish national data. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to test model robustness. RESULTS: Fully incremental analysis identified crizotinib as the least costly and least effective treatment. Brigatinib was extendedly dominated by alectinib and, subsequently, alectinib was extendedly dominated by lorlatinib. Lorlatinib was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of Swedish Krona (SEK) 613,032 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained compared with crizotinib. Probabilistic results were generally consistent with deterministic results, and one-way sensitivity identified NMA HRs, alectinib and brigatinib treatment duration, and the CNS-progressed utility multiplier as key model drivers. CONCLUSIONS: The ICER of SEK613,032 for lorlatinib versus crizotinib falls below the typical willingness-to-pay threshold per QALY gained for high-severity diseases in Sweden (approximately SEK1,000,000). Furthermore, as brigatinib and alectinib were extendedly dominated in the incremental analysis, the results of our study indicate that lorlatinib may be considered a cost-effective treatment option for first-line patients with ALK+ NSCLC in Sweden when compared with crizotinib, alectinib, and brigatinib. Longer-term follow-up data for endpoints informing treatment effectiveness for all first-line treatments would help to reduce uncertainty in the findings.

Cost-effectiveness of ensartinib, crizotinib, ceritinib, alectinib, brigatinib and lorlatinib in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small cell lung cancer in China.

Objective: Six anaplastic lymphoma kinase-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (ALK-TKIs), including one domestic (ensartinib) and five imported ALK-TKIs (crizotinib, ceritinib, alectinib, brigatinib, and lorlatinib), have been recommended as first-line treatments for advanced ALK-positive NSCLC in China. This study sought to examine the cost-effectiveness of these six novel therapies in Chinese patients. Material and methods: We constructed a Markov model to compare the cost-effectiveness of the six ALK-TKIs as a first-line treatment for patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system. Transition probabilities were estimated by synthesizing data from the PROFILE 1,029 trial and a network meta-analysis. Health state utilities and costs were sourced from published literature, publicly available national databases, and local general hospitals. The robustness of model was assessed via deterministic sensitivity analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Results: Compared with crizotinib, ensartinib achieved additional 0.12 quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) with marginal costs of $3,249, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $27,553/ QALY. When compared with ceritinib and brigatinib, ensartinib achieved additional 0.06 and 0.03 QALYs with substantially reduced costs. When compared with lorlatinib and alectinib, ensartinib was associated with a lower QALY and decreased total costs; the ICERs for lorlatinib and alectinib were $934,101/ QALY and $164,888/ QALY, respectively. Conclusion: For Chinese patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC, ensartinib was a cost-effective option compared with crizotinib, and was a dominant alternative to ceritinib and brigatinib. Although lorlatinib and alectinib were associated with prolonged survival compared with ensartinib, they were less cost-effective than ensartinib due to the overwhelming total costs.

The cost-effectiveness of brigatinib in adult patients with ALK inhibitor-naive ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer from a US perspective.

BACKGROUND: The discovery of specific oncogenic drivers in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has led to the development of highly targeted anaplastic lymphoma kinase tyrosine kinase inhibitors (ALKis). Brigatinib is a next-generation ALKi associated with prolonged progression-free survival in patients with ALKi-naive ALK+ NSCLC. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of brigatinib compared with crizotinib and alectinib in patients with ALKi-naive ALK+ NSCLC, from a US payer perspective. METHODS: A lifetime area under the curve-partitioned survival model with 4 health states was used to evaluate the relative cost-effectiveness of brigatinib in the ALKi-naive ALK+ NSCLC setting. Brigatinib was compared with crizotinib within a cost-effectiveness framework and compared with alectinib in a cost-comparison framework, where all efficacy outcomes were assumed equal. The efficacy of brigatinib and crizotinib was informed by the ALTA-1L trial, and an indirect treatment comparison was performed to inform the efficacy of brigatinib vs alectinib owing to a lack of head-to-head data. Costs were derived from public sources. The main outcomes of the model were total costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), life-years, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, in addition to multiple scenario analyses, were conducted to assess the robustness of the model outcomes. RESULTS: The improved outcomes observed in ALTA-1L translated into QALY gains (+0.97) in the comparison of brigatinib vs crizotinib. The superior efficacy profile was associated with increased time on treatment with brigatinib, which drove the increase in costs vs crizotinib (+$210,519). The resulting base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $217,607/QALY gained. Compared with alectinib, brigatinib was associated with a cost difference of -$8,546. Sensitivity analysis suggested that extrapolation of overall survival, the assumptions relating to time on treatment, and subsequent therapy costs were the most influential determinants of results. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested brigatinib had the highest probability of being cost-effective beyond willingness-to-pay thresholds of $236,000 per QALY vs crizotinib and alectinib. CONCLUSIONS: At list prices and under base-case assumptions in the current analysis, brigatinib was associated with cost-savings vs alectinib, and QALY gains but at higher costs vs crizotinib. Additional research into the real-world efficacy of ALKis is warranted to further understand the comparative cost-effectiveness of these therapies. DISCLOSURES: Ms Cranmer and Ms Kearns are employees of Takeda UK Ltd. Dr Young is a former employee of Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Inc. Dr Humphries is an employee of Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc. Mr Trueman is an employee of Source Health Economics, the consultancy company that provided health economic and writing services. This work was funded by ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited. Work by Source Health Economics was funded by ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Professional medical writing assistance was provided by Phillipa White, of Source Health Economics, and funded by ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Coexpression of MCT1 and MCT4 in ALK-positive Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma: Diagnostic and Therapeutic Implications.

In solid tumors, glycolytic cancer or stromal cells export lactates through monocarboxylate transporter (MCT) 4, while oxidative cancer or stromal cells take up lactates as metabolic fuels or signaling molecules through MCT1. CD147 acts as a chaperone of MCT1 or MCT4. Unlike solid tumors, malignant lymphomas have a peculiar tumor microenvironment. To investigate the metabolic phenotype of malignant lymphoma associated with lactate transport, we analyzed immunohistochemical expressions of MCT1, MCT4, and CD147 in 247 cases of various malignant lymphomas. Surprisingly, both MCT1 and MCT4 were diffusely expressed on tumor cell membranes in all cases (11/11, 100%) of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) (+) anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL). In contrast, only MCT1 was diffusely expressed in tumor cells of ALK(-) ALCL, as well as in B-cell, natural killer/T-cell, T-cell, and classic Hodgkin lymphomas. In these lymphomas, MCT4 expression was mostly localized to adjacent stromal cells. The pattern of diffuse membranous MCT1 and partial MCT4 expressions in tumor cells was observed in 1 case each of peripheral T-cell lymphoma (1/15, 6.7%) and multiple myeloma (1/34, 2.9%). CD147 was diffusely expressed in all types of lymphoma tumor and/or stromal cells. In conclusion, ALK(+) ALCL has a unique metabolism showing high coexpression of MCT1 and MCT4 in tumor cells. Because only ALK(+) ALCL overexpresses MCT4, immunostaining for MCT4 together with ALK is very useful for differential diagnosis from ALK(-) ALCL or peripheral T-cell lymphoma. Moreover, dual targeting against MCT1 and MCT4 would be an appropriate therapeutic approach for ALK(+) ALCL.

Real-world biomarker testing rate and positivity rate in NSCLC in Spain: Prospective Central Lung Cancer Biomarker Testing Registry (LungPath) from the Spanish Society of Pathology (SEAP).

AIM: The aim of this study was to describe the testing rate and frequency of molecular alterations observed in the Lung Cancer Biomarker Testing Registry (LungPath). METHODS: A descriptive study of NSCLC biomarker determinations collected from March 2018 to January 2019, from 38 Spanish hospitals, was carried out. Only adenocarcinoma and not otherwise specified histologies were included for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK), c-ros oncogene 1 (ROS1) and programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression. The testing rate and the positivity rate were calculated. Multivariate logistic regression was used to explore the joint relationship between independent explanatory factors and both testing and positivity rates. Two models were adjusted: one with sample type and histology as independent factors, and the other adding the testing rate or the positivity rate of the other biomarkers. RESULTS: 3226 patient samples were analysed, where EGFR, ALK, ROS1 and PD-L1 information was collected (a total of 12 904 determinations). Overall, 9118 (71.4%) determinations were finally assessed. EGFR (91.4%) and ALK (80.1%) were the mainly tested biomarkers. Positivity rates for EGFR, ALK, ROS1 and PD-L1 were 13.6%, 3.4%, 2.0% and 49.2%, respectively. Multivariate models showed a lower testing rate for ALK in surgical pieces, fine-needle aspiration or other types of samples versus biopsies. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the high testing rate in EGFR and ALK in NSCLC, the real-world evidence obtained from the LungPath demonstrates that ROS1 and PD-L1 were not determined in a significant portion of patients. LungPath provides crucial information to improve the coverage in molecular testing in lung cancer, to monitor the positivity rate and the introduction of new biomarker testing in clinical practice.

ALK-positive histiocytosis: a new clinicopathologic spectrum highlighting neurologic involvement and responses to ALK inhibition.

ALK-positive histiocytosis is a rare subtype of histiocytic neoplasm first described in 2008 in 3 infants with multisystemic disease involving the liver and hematopoietic system. This entity has subsequently been documented in case reports and series to occupy a wider clinicopathologic spectrum with recurrent KIF5B-ALK fusions. The full clinicopathologic and molecular spectra of ALK-positive histiocytosis remain, however, poorly characterized. Here, we describe the largest study of ALK-positive histiocytosis to date, with detailed clinicopathologic data of 39 cases, including 37 cases with confirmed ALK rearrangements. The clinical spectrum comprised distinct clinical phenotypic groups: infants with multisystemic disease with liver and hematopoietic involvement, as originally described (Group 1A: 6/39), other patients with multisystemic disease (Group 1B: 10/39), and patients with single-system disease (Group 2: 23/39). Nineteen patients of the entire cohort (49%) had neurologic involvement (7 and 12 from Groups 1B and 2, respectively). Histology included classic xanthogranuloma features in almost one-third of cases, whereas the majority displayed a more densely cellular, monomorphic appearance without lipidized histiocytes but sometimes more spindled or epithelioid morphology. Neoplastic histiocytes were positive for macrophage markers and often conferred strong expression of phosphorylated extracellular signal-regulated kinase, confirming MAPK pathway activation. KIF5B-ALK fusions were detected in 27 patients, whereas CLTC-ALK, TPM3-ALK, TFG-ALK, EML4-ALK, and DCTN1-ALK fusions were identified in single cases. Robust and durable responses were observed in 11/11 patients treated with ALK inhibition, 10 with neurologic involvement. This study presents the existing clinicopathologic and molecular landscape of ALK-positive histiocytosis and provides guidance for the clinical management of this emerging histiocytic entity.

Defining Pathological Activities of ALK in Neuroblastoma, a Neural Crest-Derived Cancer.

Neuroblastoma is a common extracranial solid tumour of childhood, responsible for 15% of cancer-related deaths in children. Prognoses vary from spontaneous remission to aggressive disease with extensive metastases, where treatment is challenging. Tumours are thought to arise from sympathoadrenal progenitor cells, which derive from an embryonic cell population called neural crest cells that give rise to diverse cell types, such as facial bone and cartilage, pigmented cells, and neurons. Tumours are found associated with mature derivatives of neural crest, such as the adrenal medulla or paraspinal ganglia. Sympathoadrenal progenitor cells express anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK), which encodes a tyrosine kinase receptor that is the most frequently mutated gene in neuroblastoma. Activating mutations in the kinase domain are common in both sporadic and familial cases. The oncogenic role of ALK has been extensively studied, but little is known about its physiological role. Recent studies have implicated ALK in neural crest migration and sympathetic neurogenesis. However, very few downstream targets of ALK have been identified. Here, we describe pathological activation of ALK in the neural crest, which promotes proliferation and migration, while preventing differentiation, thus inducing the onset of neuroblastoma. Understanding the effects of ALK activity on neural crest cells will help find new targets for neuroblastoma treatment.

Assessment of Alectinib vs Ceritinib in ALK-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in Phase 2 Trials and in Real-world Data.

Importance: Quantitative assessment of bias from unmeasured confounding and missing data can help evaluate uncertainty in findings from indirect comparisons using real-world data (RWD). Objective: To compare the effectiveness of alectinib vs ceritinib in terms of overall survival (OS) in patients with ALK-positive, crizotinib-refractory, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and to assess the sensitivity of these findings to unmeasured confounding and missing data assumptions. Design, Setting, and Participants: This comparative effectiveness research study compared patients from 2 phase 2 alectinib trials and real-world patients. Patients were monitored from June 2013 to March 2020. Comparisons of interest were between alectinib trial data vs ceritinib RWD and alectinib RWD vs ceritinib RWD. RWD treatment groups were selected from nationally representative cancer data from US cancer clinics, the majority from community centers. Participants were ALK-positive patients aged 18 years or older with advanced NSCLC, prior exposure to crizotinib, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (PS) of 0 to 2. Data analysis was performed from October 2020 to March 2021. Exposures: Initiation of alectinib or ceritinib therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was OS. Results: In total, there were 355 patients: 183 (85 men [46.4%]) in the alectinib trial, 91 (43 men [47.3%]) in the ceritinib RWD group, and 81 (38 men [46.9%]) in the alectinib RWD group. Patients in the alectinib trial were younger (mean [SD] age, 52.53 [11.18] vs 57.97 [11.71] years), more heavily pretreated (mean [SD] number of prior therapy lines, 1.95 [0.72] vs 1.47 [0.81]), and had more favorable baseline ECOG PS (ECOG PS of 0 or 1, 165 patients [90.2%] vs 37 patients [77.1%]) than those in the ceritinib RWD group. The alectinib RWD group (mean [SD] age, 58.69 [11.26] years) had more patients with favorable ECOG PS (ECOG PS of 0 or 1, 49 patients [92.4%] vs 37 patients [77.1%]) and more White patients (56 patients [72.7%] vs 53 patients [62.4%]) compared with the ceritinib group. Compared with ceritinib RWD, alectinib-exposed patients had significantly longer OS in alectinib trials (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.59; 95% CI, 0.44-0.75; P < .001) and alectinib RWD (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.29-0.63; P < .001) after adjustment for baseline confounders. For the worst-case HR estimate of 0.59, residual confounding by a hypothetical confounder associated with mortality and treatment by a risk ratio greater than 2.24 was required to reverse the findings. Conclusions were robust to plausible deviations from random missingness for missing ECOG PS and underrecorded comorbidities and central nervous system metastases in RWD. Conclusions and Relevance: Alectinib exposure was associated with longer OS compared with ceritinib in patients with ALK-positive NSCLC, and only substantial levels of bias examined reversed the findings. These findings suggest that quantitative bias analysis can be a useful tool to address uncertainty of findings for decision-makers considering RWD.

Brigatinib vs alectinib in crizotinib-resistant advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (ALTA-3).

Crizotinib is highly efficacious and more tolerable than chemotherapy for ALK+ non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but its progression-free survival benefit and intracranial efficacy have limitations. Head-to-head comparisons of next-generation ALK inhibitors in patients with ALK+ NSCLC progressing on crizotinib will contribute toward optimizing survival. This international, Phase III, randomized, open-label study (ALTA-3) will therefore assign patients with locally advanced or metastatic ALK+ NSCLC progressing on crizotinib to receive either brigatinib 180 mg qd (7-day lead-in at 90 mg qd) or alectinib 600 mg twice daily. The primary end point is progression-free survival as assessed by a blinded Independent Review Committee; the key secondary end point is overall survival. Clinical trial registration number: NCT03596866 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Lay abstract Tyrosine kinase inhibitor medications like crizotinib may work as a first treatment for people with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that has spread to other parts of the body and has the ALK⁺ mutation (ALK⁺ NSCLC) in tumor testing. However, many people stop responding to treatment with crizotinib. Brigatinib and alectinib are tyrosine kinase inhibitor medications that may be effective in people with ALK⁺ NSCLC who have stopped responding to crizotinib treatment. We describe the need for and design of a study comparing brigatinib with alectinib in people with ALK⁺ NSCLC whose disease worsened on crizotinib.