Blood-Based Biomarkers for Predicting Immunotherapy Benefit in Lung Cancer.

PD1/PD-L1-directed immunotherapy, alone or in combination with chemotherapy, dominates the initial treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. However, our ability to predict who will benefit from these approaches is limited. In this issue of Cell, Nabet et al. report a novel, blood-based methodology to more accurately predict durable disease control with immunotherapy.

Repotrectinib in ROS1 Fusion-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The early-generation ROS1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) that are approved for the treatment of ROS1 fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have antitumor activity, but resistance develops in tumors, and intracranial activity is suboptimal. Repotrectinib is a next-generation ROS1 TKI with preclinical activity against ROS1 fusion-positive cancers, including those with resistance mutations such as ROS1 G2032R. METHODS: In this registrational phase 1-2 trial, we assessed the efficacy and safety of repotrectinib in patients with advanced solid tumors, including ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC. The primary efficacy end point in the phase 2 trial was confirmed objective response; efficacy analyses included patients from phase 1 and phase 2. Duration of response, progression-free survival, and safety were secondary end points in phase 2. RESULTS: On the basis of results from the phase 1 trial, the recommended phase 2 dose of repotrectinib was 160 mg daily for 14 days, followed by 160 mg twice daily. Response occurred in 56 of the 71 patients (79%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 68 to 88) with ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC who had not previously received a ROS1 TKI; the median duration of response was 34.1 months (95% CI, 25.6 to could not be estimated), and median progression-free survival was 35.7 months (95% CI, 27.4 to could not be estimated). Response occurred in 21 of the 56 patients (38%; 95% CI, 25 to 52) with ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC who had previously received one ROS1 TKI and had never received chemotherapy; the median duration of response was 14.8 months (95% CI, 7.6 to could not be estimated), and median progression-free survival was 9.0 months (95% CI, 6.8 to 19.6). Ten of the 17 patients (59%; 95% CI, 33 to 82) with the ROS1 G2032R mutation had a response. A total of 426 patients received the phase 2 dose; the most common treatment-related adverse events were dizziness (in 58% of the patients), dysgeusia (in 50%), and paresthesia (in 30%), and 3% discontinued repotrectinib owing to treatment-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Repotrectinib had durable clinical activity in patients with ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC, regardless of whether they had previously received a ROS1 TKI. Adverse events were mainly of low grade and compatible with long-term administration. (Funded by Turning Point Therapeutics, a wholly owned subsidiary of Bristol Myers Squibb; TRIDENT-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03093116.).

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.

Effectiveness of crizotinib versus entrectinib in ROS1-positive non-small-cell lung cancer using clinical and real-world data.

Aims: To compare clinical trial results for crizotinib and entrectinib in ROS1-positive non-small-cell lung cancer and compare clinical trial data and real-world outcomes for crizotinib. Patients & methods: We analyzed four phase I-II studies using a simulated treatment comparison (STC). A STC of clinical trial versus real-world evidence compared crizotinib clinical data to real-world outcomes. Results: Adjusted STC found nonsignificant trends favoring crizotinib over entrectinib: objective response rate, risk ratio = 1.04 (95% CI: 0.85-1.28); median duration of response, mean difference = 16.11 months (95% CI: -1.57- 33.69); median progression-free survival, mean difference = 3.99 months (95% CI: -6.27-14.25); 12-month overall survival, risk ratio = 1.01 (95% CI: 0.90-1.12). Nonsignificant differences were observed between the trial end point values and the real-world evidence for crizotinib. Conclusions: Crizotinib and entrectinib have comparable efficacy in ROS1-positive non-small-cell lung cancer.

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.

First-In-Human, First-In-Class, Phase I Trial of the Fucosylation Inhibitor SGN-2FF in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors.

LESSONS LEARNED: Inhibition of glycoprotein fucosylation, as monotherapy and in combination with immune checkpoint blockade, is a promising therapeutic strategy for treating a broad range of cancers. In this first-in-human, first-in-class, phase I study in advanced solid tumors, SGN-2FF demonstrated dose-proportional pharmacokinetics, evidence of pharmacodynamic target inhibition of glycoprotein fucosylation, and preliminary antitumor activity. SGN-2FF was associated with thromboembolic events that led to study termination. BACKGROUND: We conducted a first-in-human, first-in-class, phase I study of SGN-2FF, a potent small-molecule inhibitor of glycoprotein fucosylation, in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: The study consisted of four parts: SGN-2FF monotherapy dose-escalation (part A) and expansion (part B), and SGN-2FF + pembrolizumab dose-escalation (part C) and expansion (part D). The objectives were to evaluate safety and tolerability, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and antitumor activity of SGN-2FF monotherapy and SGN-2FF + pembrolizumab. RESULTS: Forty-six patients were enrolled (part A, n = 33; part B, n = 6; part C, n = 7; part D did not enroll any patients). During part A (n = 32) exploring 1-15 g once daily (QD) and 2-5 g twice daily (b.i.d.), grade 3 dose-limiting toxicities were diarrhea (2 g and 15 g QD) and increased lipase (2 g QD). The MTD was 10 g daily. In part A, common toxicities were grades 1-2 diarrhea, fatigue, and nausea (each 47%); thromboembolic events (grades 2-5) occurred in 5 of 32 patients (16%). Safety measures included concurrent prophylactic anticoagulation with low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH). In part C, despite the safety measures implemented, a thromboembolic event occurred in one of seven patients (14%) during the SGN-2FF lead-in period. Of 28 evaluable patients in part A, 1 patient with advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma achieved Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1 complete response (CR) and 10 (36%) had RECIST v1.1 stable disease, including 1 patient with advanced triple-negative breast cancer with 51% tumor burden reduction. SGN-2FF administration led to dose-proportional increases in exposure and PD reduction in protein fucosylation. CONCLUSION: SGN-2FF demonstrated proof-of-mechanism and preliminary antitumor activity but was associated with thromboembolic events leading to study termination.

Brigatinib versus Crizotinib in ALK-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Brigatinib, a next-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitor, has robust efficacy in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that is refractory to crizotinib. The efficacy of brigatinib, as compared with crizotinib, in patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC who have not previously received an ALK inhibitor is unclear. METHODS: In an open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC who had not previously received ALK inhibitors to receive brigatinib at a dose of 180 mg once daily (with a 7-day lead-in period at 90 mg) or crizotinib at a dose of 250 mg twice daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review. Secondary end points included the objective response rate and intracranial response. The first interim analysis was planned when approximately 50% of 198 expected events of disease progression or death had occurred. RESULTS: A total of 275 patients underwent randomization; 137 were assigned to brigatinib and 138 to crizotinib. At the first interim analysis (99 events), the median follow-up was 11.0 months in the brigatinib group and 9.3 months in the crizotinib group. The rate of progression-free survival was higher with brigatinib than with crizotinib (estimated 12-month progression-free survival, 67% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 56 to 75] vs. 43% [95% CI, 32 to 53]; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.33 to 0.74]; P<0.001 by the log-rank test). The confirmed objective response rate was 71% (95% CI, 62 to 78) with brigatinib and 60% (95% CI, 51 to 68) with crizotinib; the confirmed rate of intracranial response among patients with measurable lesions was 78% (95% CI, 52 to 94) and 29% (95% CI, 11 to 52), respectively. No new safety concerns were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with ALK-positive NSCLC who had not previously received an ALK inhibitor, progression-free survival was significantly longer among patients who received brigatinib than among those who received crizotinib. (Funded by Ariad Pharmaceuticals; ALTA-1L ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02737501 .).

Race and ethnicity representation in clinical trials: findings from a literature review of Phase I oncology trials.

Aim: To provide an assessment of published literature on the demographic representation in Phase I trials of biopharmaceutical oncology agents. Materials & methods: We conducted a rapid evidence assessment to identify demographic representation reported in Phase I clinical trials for biopharmaceutical oncology agents published in 2019. Results: Globally, the population was predominantly White/Caucasian (62.2%). In the USA, the distribution was heavily skewed toward White/Caucasian (84.2%), with minimal representation of Blacks/African-Americans (7.3%), Asians (3.4%), Hispanics/Latinos (2.8%) or other race/ethnicity groups. Conclusion: Our data highlight that Phase I oncology trials do not reflect the population at large, which may perpetuate health disparities. Further research is needed to understand and address barriers to participation, particularly among under-represented groups.

Lay abstract A plain language version of this article is available and is published alongside the paper online: www.futuremedicine.com/doi/suppl/10.2217/fon-2020-1262.

Alectinib versus Crizotinib in Untreated ALK-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Alectinib, a highly selective inhibitor of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK), has shown systemic and central nervous system (CNS) efficacy in the treatment of ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We investigated alectinib as compared with crizotinib in patients with previously untreated, advanced ALK-positive NSCLC, including those with asymptomatic CNS disease. METHODS: In a randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 303 patients with previously untreated, advanced ALK-positive NSCLC to receive either alectinib (600 mg twice daily) or crizotinib (250 mg twice daily). The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Secondary end points were independent review committee-assessed progression-free survival, time to CNS progression, objective response rate, and overall survival. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 17.6 months (crizotinib) and 18.6 months (alectinib), an event of disease progression or death occurred in 62 of 152 patients (41%) in the alectinib group and 102 of 151 patients (68%) in the crizotinib group. The rate of investigator-assessed progression-free survival was significantly higher with alectinib than with crizotinib (12-month event-free survival rate, 68.4% [95% confidence interval (CI), 61.0 to 75.9] with alectinib vs. 48.7% [95% CI, 40.4 to 56.9] with crizotinib; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.34 to 0.65]; P<0.001); the median progression-free survival with alectinib was not reached. The results for independent review committee-assessed progression-free survival were consistent with those for the primary end point. A total of 18 patients (12%) in the alectinib group had an event of CNS progression, as compared with 68 patients (45%) in the crizotinib group (cause-specific hazard ratio, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.28; P<0.001). A response occurred in 126 patients in the alectinib group (response rate, 82.9%; 95% CI, 76.0 to 88.5) and in 114 patients in the crizotinib group (response rate, 75.5%; 95% CI, 67.8 to 82.1) (P=0.09). Grade 3 to 5 adverse events were less frequent with alectinib (41% vs. 50% with crizotinib). CONCLUSIONS: As compared with crizotinib, alectinib showed superior efficacy and lower toxicity in primary treatment of ALK-positive NSCLC. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche; ALEX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02075840 .).

Incidence of pneumonitis/interstitial lung disease induced by HER2-targeting therapy for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Anti-human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) therapies are associated with interstitial lung disease (ILD), also referred to as pneumonitis. In this literature review, we describe the incidence of ILD among patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) receiving anti-HER2 therapies, and we describe existing recommendations for monitoring and managing drug-induced ILD among these patients. METHODS: We searched PubMed and Embase to identify clinical trials and postmarket observational studies that investigated anti-HER2 therapies for HER2-positive MBC, reported on ILD, and were published during January 1, 2009 to July 15, 2019. Articles were screened by two researchers; data were extracted from the full-text articles. RESULTS: The 18 articles selected for this review assessed 9,886 patients who received trastuzumab (8 articles), lapatinib (4 articles), trastuzumab emtansine (3 articles), trastuzumab deruxtecan (2 articles), or trastuzumab duocarmazine (1 article). The overall incidence of all-grade ILD was 2.4% (n = 234), with 66.7% (n = 156) occurring as grade 1-2 events, 0.5% grade 3-4 (n = 54; incidence), and 0.2% grade 5 (n = 16; incidence). The highest ILD incidence (21.4%) was among patients receiving trastuzumab combined with everolimus and paclitaxel. Ten studies indicated that ILD events were managed via dose interruption, dose reduction, or treatment discontinuation; two studies included detailed guidelines on managing drug-induced ILD. CONCLUSIONS: ILD is a well-described adverse drug reaction associated with several anti-HER2 drugs. Published ILD management guidelines are available for few anti-HER2 treatment regimens; however, guidance for monitoring for anti-HER2 drug-induced ILD is lacking.

Dose-escalation trial of the ALK, MET & ROS1 inhibitor, crizotinib, in patients with advanced cancer.

Aim: This first-in-human, dose-finding study evaluated safety, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of crizotinib and established a recommended Phase II dose (RP2D) among patients with advanced solid malignancies. Patients & methods: Patients received oral crizotinib in a 3 + 3 dose escalation design. Results: Thirty-six patients received crizotinib (50 mg once daily-300 mg twice daily); maximum tolerated dose (and RP2D) was 250 mg twice daily. Most patients (89%) experienced ≥1 treatment-related adverse event. Three patients had grade 3 dose-limiting toxicities: alanine aminotransferase increased (n = 1) and fatigue (n = 2). Generally, an increase in soluble MET was found with increasing crizotinib concentrations. Conclusion: Crizotinib demonstrated a favorable safety profile. The observed pharmacodynamic effect on soluble MET provide evidence for targeted MET inhibition by crizotinib. Clinicaltrials. gov identifier: NCT00585195.

Predictive value of oncogenic driver subtype, programmed death-1 ligand (PD-L1) score, and smoking status on the efficacy of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in patients with oncogene-driven non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: This multicenter, retrospective study explored the value of oncogene driver subtype, programmed death-1 ligand (PD-L1) status, and smoking status for predicting which patients with oncogene-driven non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) would benefit from treatment with programmed death-1 (PD-1)/PD-L1 inhibitors. METHODS: The clinical features, PD-L1 tumor proportion scores, and PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor (PDi) outcomes (objective response rate and progression-free survival) of patients who had advanced NSCLC with Kirsten rat sarcoma 2 viral oncogene homolog (KRAS) mutations or common, actionable oncogenic drivers were captured. RESULTS: In total, 189 oncogene-positive patients were analyzed. Of these, 104 received a PDi, and 108 had undergone prior PD-L1 testing. The frequency of PD-L1 positivity (≥1%) was higher in patients who had KRAS mutations (P = .031), smokers (P = .006), and non-Asian patients (P = .002). Multivariable analysis indicated that smoking status (P < .001) was the only factor associated significantly with KRAS mutation. The objective response rate to PDi treatment was 16.9% (11 of 65 patients) among smokers (17.3% in the KRAS-mutant and 15.4% in the non-KRAS-mutant smoker subgroups), which was significantly higher than the 0% rate (0 of 26 patients; P = .019) among never-smokers. In subgroup analyses, progression-free survival was influenced by KRAS mutation status (median, 4.57 vs 1.63 months; P = .004), smoking status (4.07 vs 1.73 months; P = .004), PD-L1 positivity (3.8 vs 1.2 months; P = .040), and non-Asian race (3.0 vs 1.97 months; P = .046). In multivariable analysis, only smoking status (P = .008) remained a significant predictor when a PD-L1 level ≥1% was used. However, both smoking status (P = .001) and PD-L1 status (P = .028) were independent predictors when a PD-L1 level ≥50% was used. CONCLUSIONS: Among associated clinical features among patients who have NSCLC with oncogenic drivers, smoking status potentially was the most important, easily available predictor of single PDi efficacy.

Lorlatinib in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: results from a global phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Lorlatinib is a potent, brain-penetrant, third-generation inhibitor of ALK and ROS1 tyrosine kinases with broad coverage of ALK mutations. In a phase 1 study, activity was seen in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer, most of whom had CNS metastases and progression after ALK-directed therapy. We aimed to analyse the overall and intracranial antitumour activity of lorlatinib in patients with ALK-positive, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: In this phase 2 study, patients with histologically or cytologically ALK-positive or ROS1-positive, advanced, non-small-cell lung cancer, with or without CNS metastases, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, 1, or 2, and adequate end-organ function were eligible. Patients were enrolled into six different expansion cohorts (EXP1-6) on the basis of ALK and ROS1 status and previous therapy, and were given lorlatinib 100 mg orally once daily continuously in 21-day cycles. The primary endpoint was overall and intracranial tumour response by independent central review, assessed in pooled subgroups of ALK-positive patients. Analyses of activity and safety were based on the safety analysis set (ie, all patients who received at least one dose of lorlatinib) as assessed by independent central review. Patients with measurable CNS metastases at baseline by independent central review were included in the intracranial activity analyses. In this report, we present lorlatinib activity data for the ALK-positive patients (EXP1-5 only), and safety data for all treated patients (EXP1-6). This study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01970865. FINDINGS: Between Sept 15, 2015, and Oct 3, 2016, 276 patients were enrolled: 30 who were ALK positive and treatment naive (EXP1); 59 who were ALK positive and received previous crizotinib without (n=27; EXP2) or with (n=32; EXP3A) previous chemotherapy; 28 who were ALK positive and received one previous non-crizotinib ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor, with or without chemotherapy (EXP3B); 112 who were ALK positive with two (n=66; EXP4) or three (n=46; EXP5) previous ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors with or without chemotherapy; and 47 who were ROS1 positive with any previous treatment (EXP6). One patient in EXP4 died before receiving lorlatinib and was excluded from the safety analysis set. In treatment-naive patients (EXP1), an objective response was achieved in 27 (90·0%; 95% CI 73·5-97·9) of 30 patients. Three patients in EXP1 had measurable baseline CNS lesions per independent central review, and objective intracranial responses were observed in two (66·7%; 95% CI 9·4-99·2). In ALK-positive patients with at least one previous ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EXP2-5), objective responses were achieved in 93 (47·0%; 39·9-54·2) of 198 patients and objective intracranial response in those with measurable baseline CNS lesions in 51 (63·0%; 51·5-73·4) of 81 patients. Objective response was achieved in 41 (69·5%; 95% CI 56·1-80·8) of 59 patients who had only received previous crizotinib (EXP2-3A), nine (32·1%; 15·9-52·4) of 28 patients with one previous non-crizotinib ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EXP3B), and 43 (38·7%; 29·6-48·5) of 111 patients with two or more previous ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EXP4-5). Objective intracranial response was achieved in 20 (87·0%; 95% CI 66·4-97·2) of 23 patients with measurable baseline CNS lesions in EXP2-3A, five (55·6%; 21·2-86·3) of nine patients in EXP3B, and 26 (53·1%; 38·3-67·5) of 49 patients in EXP4-5. The most common treatment-related adverse events across all patients were hypercholesterolaemia (224 [81%] of 275 patients overall and 43 [16%] grade 3-4) and hypertriglyceridaemia (166 [60%] overall and 43 [16%] grade 3-4). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 19 (7%) of 275 patients and seven patients (3%) permanently discontinued treatment because of treatment-related adverse events. No treatment-related deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: Consistent with its broad ALK mutational coverage and CNS penetration, lorlatinib showed substantial overall and intracranial activity both in treatment-naive patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer, and in those who had progressed on crizotinib, second-generation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors, or after up to three previous ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Thus, lorlatinib could represent an effective treatment option for patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer in first-line or subsequent therapy. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Clinical trial design for systemic agents in patients with brain metastases from solid tumours: a guideline by the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Brain Metastases working group.

Patients with active CNS disease are often excluded from clinical trials, and data regarding the CNS efficacy of systemic agents are usually obtained late in the drug development process or not at all. In this guideline from the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Brain Metastases (RANO-BM) working group, we provide detailed recommendations on when patients with brain metastases from solid tumours should be included or excluded in clinical trials of systemic agents. We also discuss the limitations of retrospective studies in determining the CNS efficacy of systemic drugs. Inclusion of patients with brain metastases early on in the clinical development of a drug or a regimen is needed to generate appropriate CNS efficacy or non-efficacy signals. We consider how to optimally incorporate or exclude such patients in systemic therapy trials depending on the likelihood of CNS activity of the agent by considering three scenarios: drugs that are considered very unlikely to have CNS antitumour activity or efficacy; drugs that are considered very likely to have CNS activity or efficacy; and drugs with minimal baseline information on CNS activity or efficacy. We also address trial design issues unique to patients with brain metastases, including the selection of appropriate CNS endpoints in systemic therapy trials.

Rociletinib in EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with a mutation in the gene encoding epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is sensitive to approved EGFR inhibitors, but resistance develops, mediated by the T790M EGFR mutation in most cases. Rociletinib (CO-1686) is an EGFR inhibitor active in preclinical models of EGFR-mutated NSCLC with or without T790M. METHODS: In this phase 1-2 study, we administered rociletinib to patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC who had disease progression during previous treatment with an existing EGFR inhibitor. In the expansion (phase 2) part of the study, patients with T790M-positive disease received rociletinib at a dose of 500 mg twice daily, 625 mg twice daily, or 750 mg twice daily. Key objectives were assessment of safety, side-effect profile, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary antitumor activity of rociletinib. Tumor biopsies to identify T790M were performed during screening. Treatment was administered in continuous 21-day cycles. RESULTS: A total of 130 patients were enrolled. The first 57 patients to be enrolled received the free-base form of rociletinib (150 mg once daily to 900 mg twice daily). The remaining patients received the hydrogen bromide salt (HBr) form (500 mg twice daily to 1000 mg twice daily). A maximum tolerated dose (the highest dose associated with a rate of dose-limiting toxic effects of less than 33%) was not identified. The only common dose-limiting adverse event was hyperglycemia. In an efficacy analysis that included patients who received free-base rociletinib at a dose of 900 mg twice daily or the HBr form at any dose, the objective response rate among the 46 patients with T790M-positive disease who could be evaluated was 59% (95% confidence interval [CI], 45 to 73), and the rate among the 17 patients with T790M-negative disease who could be evaluated was 29% (95% CI, 8 to 51). CONCLUSIONS: Rociletinib was active in patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC associated with the T790M resistance mutation. (Funded by Clovis Oncology; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01526928.).

Ceritinib in ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring the anaplastic lymphoma kinase gene (ALK) rearrangement is sensitive to the ALK inhibitor crizotinib, but resistance invariably develops. Ceritinib (LDK378) is a new ALK inhibitor that has shown greater antitumor potency than crizotinib in preclinical studies. METHODS: In this phase 1 study, we administered oral ceritinib in doses of 50 to 750 mg once daily to patients with advanced cancers harboring genetic alterations in ALK. In an expansion phase of the study, patients received the maximum tolerated dose. Patients were assessed to determine the safety, pharmacokinetic properties, and antitumor activity of ceritinib. Tumor biopsies were performed before ceritinib treatment to identify resistance mutations in ALK in a group of patients with NSCLC who had had disease progression during treatment with crizotinib. RESULTS: A total of 59 patients were enrolled in the dose-escalation phase. The maximum tolerated dose of ceritinib was 750 mg once daily; dose-limiting toxic events included diarrhea, vomiting, dehydration, elevated aminotransferase levels, and hypophosphatemia. This phase was followed by an expansion phase, in which an additional 71 patients were treated, for a total of 130 patients overall. Among 114 patients with NSCLC who received at least 400 mg of ceritinib per day, the overall response rate was 58% (95% confidence interval [CI], 48 to 67). Among 80 patients who had received crizotinib previously, the response rate was 56% (95% CI, 45 to 67). Responses were observed in patients with various resistance mutations in ALK and in patients without detectable mutations. Among patients with NSCLC who received at least 400 mg of ceritinib per day, the median progression-free survival was 7.0 months (95% CI, 5.6 to 9.5). CONCLUSIONS: Ceritinib was highly active in patients with advanced, ALK-rearranged NSCLC, including those who had had disease progression during crizotinib treatment, regardless of the presence of resistance mutations in ALK. (Funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01283516.).

Crizotinib in ROS1-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Chromosomal rearrangements of the gene encoding ROS1 proto-oncogene receptor tyrosine kinase (ROS1) define a distinct molecular subgroup of non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) that may be susceptible to therapeutic ROS1 kinase inhibition. Crizotinib is a small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK), ROS1, and another proto-oncogene receptor tyrosine kinase, MET. METHODS: We enrolled 50 patients with advanced NSCLC who tested positive for ROS1 rearrangement in an expansion cohort of the phase 1 study of crizotinib. Patients were treated with crizotinib at the standard oral dose of 250 mg twice daily and assessed for safety, pharmacokinetics, and response to therapy. ROS1 fusion partners were identified with the use of next-generation sequencing or reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction assays. RESULTS: The objective response rate was 72% (95% confidence interval [CI], 58 to 84), with 3 complete responses and 33 partial responses. The median duration of response was 17.6 months (95% CI, 14.5 to not reached). Median progression-free survival was 19.2 months (95% CI, 14.4 to not reached), with 25 patients (50%) still in follow-up for progression. Among 30 tumors that were tested, we identified 7 ROS1 fusion partners: 5 known and 2 novel partner genes. No correlation was observed between the type of ROS1 rearrangement and the clinical response to crizotinib. The safety profile of crizotinib was similar to that seen in patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, crizotinib showed marked antitumor activity in patients with advanced ROS1-rearranged NSCLC. ROS1 rearrangement defines a second molecular subgroup of NSCLC for which crizotinib is highly active. (Funded by Pfizer and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00585195.).

Activity and safety of ceritinib in patients with ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (ASCEND-1): updated results from the multicentre, open-label, phase 1 trial.

BACKGROUND: ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is sensitive to ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors (ALK inhibitors) such as crizotinib, but resistance invariably develops, often with progression in the brain. Ceritinib is a more potent ALK inhibitor than crizotinib in vitro, crosses the blood-brain barrier in vivo, and shows clinical responses in patients with crizotinib-resistant disease. We aimed to assess whole-body activity of ceritinib in both ALK inhibitor-pretreated and ALK inhibitor-naive patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC. METHODS: ASCEND-1 was an open-label, phase 1 trial that recruited patients from 20 academic hospitals or cancer centres in 11 countries in Europe, North America, and Asia-Pacific. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with ALK-rearranged locally advanced or metastatic cancer that had progressed despite standard therapy (or for which no effective standard therapy existed), who had at least one measurable lesion at baseline. The primary objective (to determine the maximum tolerated dose) has been reported previously. This updated analysis includes all patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC given oral ceritinib at the recommended dose of 750 mg/day in the dose-escalation and expansion phases. Here we report the secondary outcomes of overall response, duration of response, and progression-free survival, analysed in all patients who received at least one 750 mg dose of ceritinib. Exploratory analyses included retrospective analysis of intracranial activity by independent neuroradiologists, in patients with untreated or locally treated neurologically stable brain metastases at baseline. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of ceritinib. This study is no longer recruiting patients; however, treatment and follow-up are ongoing. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01283516. FINDINGS: Between Jan 24, 2011, and July 31, 2013, 255 patients were enrolled and received at least one dose of ceritinib 750 mg/day, of whom 246 had ALK-rearranged NSCLC. At data cutoff (April 14, 2014), median follow-up was 11·1 months (IQR 6·7-15·2) and 147 (60%) patients had discontinued treatment, 98 (40%) as a result of disease progression. An overall response was reported in 60 (72% [95% CI 61-82]) of 83 ALK inhibitor-naive patients and 92 (56% [49-64]) of 163 ALK inhibitor-pretreated patients. Median duration of response was 17·0 months (95% CI 11·3-non-estimable [NE]) in ALK inhibitor-naive patients and 8·3 months (6·8-9·7) in ALK inhibitor-pretreated patients. Median progression-free survival was 18·4 months (95% CI 11·1-NE) in ALK inhibitor-naive patients and 6·9 months (5·6-8·7) in ALK inhibitor-pretreated patients. Of 94 patients with retrospectively confirmed brain metastases and at least one post-baseline MRI or CT tumour assessment, intracranial disease control was reported in 15 (79% [95% CI 54-94]) of 19 ALK inhibitor-naive patients and in 49 (65% [54-76]) of 75 ALK inhibitor-pretreated patients. Of these 94 patients, 11 had measurable brain lesions and no previous radiotherapy to the brain, six of whom achieved a partial intracranial response. Serious adverse events were recorded in 117 (48%) of 246 patients. The most common grade 3-4 laboratory abnormalities were increased alanine aminotransferase (73 [30%] patients) and increased aspartate aminotransferase (25 [10%]). The most common grade 3-4 non-laboratory adverse events were diarrhoea and nausea, both of which occurred in 15 (6%) patients. Two on-treatment deaths during the study were deemed to be related to study drug by the investigators, one due to interstitial lung disease and one as a result of multiorgan failure that occurred in the context of infection and ischaemic hepatitis. INTERPRETATION: The durable whole-body responses reported, together with the intracranial activity, support a clinical benefit for treatment with ceritinib in patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC who have received crizotinib, or as an alternative to crizotinib. A confirmatory phase 2 clinical trial is ongoing to assess ceritinib activity in patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC and brain or leptomeningeal metastases. FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.

Alectinib in ALK-positive, crizotinib-resistant, non-small-cell lung cancer: a single-group, multicentre, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Alectinib--a highly selective, CNS-active, ALK inhibitor-showed promising clinical activity in crizotinib-naive and crizotinib-resistant patients with ALK-rearranged (ALK-positive) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of alectinib in patients with ALK-positive NSCLC who progressed on previous crizotinib. METHODS: We did a phase 2 study at 27 centres in the USA and Canada. We enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with stage IIIB-IV, ALK-positive NSCLC who had progressed after crizotinib. Patients were treated with oral alectinib 600 mg twice daily until progression, death, or withdrawal. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an objective response by an independent review committee using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Response endpoints were assessed in the response-evaluable population (ie, patients with measurable disease at baseline who received at least one dose of study drug), and efficacy and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population (all enrolled patients). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01871805. The study is ongoing and patients are still receiving treatment. FINDINGS: Between Sept 4, 2013, and Aug 4, 2014, 87 patients were enrolled into the study (intention-to-treat population). At the time of the primary analysis (median follow-up 4·8 months [IQR 3·3-7·1]), 33 of 69 patients with measurable disease at baseline had a confirmed partial response; thus, the proportion of patients achieving an objective response by the independent review committee was 48% (95% CI 36-60). Adverse events were predominantly grade 1 or 2, most commonly constipation (31 [36%]), fatigue (29 [33%]), myalgia 21 [24%]), and peripheral oedema 20 [23%]). The most common grade 3 and 4 adverse events were changes in laboratory values, including increased blood creatine phosphokinase (seven [8%]), increased alanine aminotransferase (five [6%]), and increased aspartate aminotransferase (four [5%]). Two patients died: one had a haemorrhage (judged related to study treatment), and one had disease progression and a history of stroke (judged unrelated to treatment). INTERPRETATION: Alectinib showed clinical activity and was well tolerated in patients with ALK-positive NSCLC who had progressed on crizotinib. Therefore, alectinib could be a suitable treatment for patients with ALK-positive disease who have progressed on crizotinib. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Local consolidative therapy versus maintenance therapy or observation for patients with oligometastatic non-small-cell lung cancer without progression after first-line systemic therapy: a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence from retrospective studies suggests that disease progression after first-line chemotherapy for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) occurs most often at sites of disease known to exist at baseline. However, the potential effect of aggressive local consolidative therapy for patients with oligometastatic NSCLC is unknown. We aimed to assess the effect of local consolidative therapy on progression-free survival. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 2 study, eligible patients from three hospitals had histological confirmation of stage IV NSCLC, three or fewer metastatic disease lesions after first-line systemic therapy, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 2 or less, had received standard first-line systemic therapy, and had no disease progression before randomisation. First-line therapy was four or more cycles of platinum doublet therapy or 3 or more months of EGFR or ALK inhibitors for patients with EGFR mutations or ALK rearrangements, respectively. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either local consolidative therapy ([chemo]radiotherapy or resection of all lesions) with or without subsequent maintenance treatment or to maintenance treatment alone, which could be observation only. Maintenance treatment was recommended based on a list of approved regimens, and observation was defined as close surveillance without cytotoxic treatment. Randomisation was not masked and was balanced dynamically on five factors: number of metastases, response to initial therapy, CNS metastases, intrathoracic nodal status, and EGFR and ALK status. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival analysed in all patients who were treated and had at least one post-baseline imaging assessment. The study is ongoing but not recruiting participants. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01725165. FINDINGS: Between Nov 28, 2012, and Jan 19, 2016, 74 patients were enrolled either during or at the completion of first-line systemic therapy. The study was terminated early after randomisation of 49 patients (25 in the local consolidative therapy group and 24 in the maintenance treatment group) as part of the annual analyses done by the Data Safety Monitoring Committee of all randomised trials at MD Anderson Cancer Center, and before a planned interim analysis of 44 events. At a median follow-up time for all randomised patients of 12·39 months (IQR 5·52-20·30), the median progression-free survival in the local consolidative therapy group was 11·9 months (90% CI 5·7-20·9) versus 3·9 months (2·3-6·6) in the maintenance treatment group (hazard ratio 0·35 [90% CI 0·18-0·66], log-rank p=0·0054). Adverse events were similar between groups, with no grade 4 adverse events or deaths due to treatment. Grade 3 adverse events in the maintenance therapy group were fatigue (n=1) and anaemia (n=1) and in the local consolidative therapy group were oesophagitis (n=2), anaemia (n=1), pneumothorax (n=1), and abdominal pain (n=1, unlikely related). INTERPRETATION: Local consolidative therapy with or without maintenance therapy for patients with three or fewer metastases from NSCLC that did not progress after initial systemic therapy improved progression-free survival compared with maintenance therapy alone. These findings suggest that aggressive local therapy should be further explored in phase 3 trials as a standard treatment option in this clinical scenario. FUNDING: MD Anderson Lung Cancer Priority Fund, MD Anderson Cancer Center Moon Shot Initiative, and Cancer Center Support (Core), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health.