Real-world therapeutic effectiveness of lorlatinib after alectinib in Japanese patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer.

Alectinib, an anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), is the recommended first-line treatment for ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in Japan. Lorlatinib was approved as a subsequent therapeutic option after progression while receiving ALK TKI treatment. However, data on the use of lorlatinib in the second- or third-line setting after alectinib failure are limited in Japanese patients. This retrospective real-world observational study investigated the clinical effectiveness of lorlatinib in second- or later-line settings after alectinib failure in Japanese patients. Clinical and demographic data collected in the Japan Medical Data Vision (MDV) database between December 2015 and March 2021 were used. Patients diagnosed with lung cancer who received lorlatinib following alectinib failure after the November 2018 marketing approval of lorlatinib in Japan were included. Of 1954 patients treated with alectinib, 221 were identified from the MDV database as receiving lorlatinib after November 2018. The median age of these patients was 62 years. Second-line lorlatinib treatment was reported for 154 patients (70%); third- or later-line lorlatinib treatment was reported for 67 patients (30%). The median duration of treatment (DOT) for all lorlatinib-treated patients was 161 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 126-248), and 83 patients (37.6%) continued treatment after data cut-off (March 31, 2021). Median DOTs of 147 days (95% CI, 113-242) and 244 days (95% CI, 109 to not reached) were reported with second-line and third- or later-line treatment, respectively. Consistent with clinical trial data, this real-world observational study supports data suggesting the effectiveness of lorlatinib after alectinib failure in Japanese patients.

Effectiveness of crizotinib in patients with ROS1-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: real-world evidence in Japan.

Aim: Crizotinib, approved in Japan (2017) for ROS1-positive NSCLC, has limited real-world data. Materials & methods: Crizotinib monotherapy real-world effectiveness and treatment status were analyzed from claims data (June 2017-March 2021; Japanese Medical Data Vision; 58 patients tested for ROS1-NSCLC). Results: Median duration of treatment ([DoT]; primary end point), any line: 12.9 months; 22 patients on crizotinib, 23 discontinued, 13 receiving post-crizotinib treatment. 1L (n = 27) median DoT: 13.0 months (95% CI, 4.4-32.0 months); 13 patients on crizotinib; seven discontinued; seven receiving post-crizotinib treatment. 2L (n = 13) median DoT: 14.0 months (95% CI, 4.6-22.2 months); 2L+ (n = 31): nine patients on crizotinib; 16 discontinued; six receiving post-crizotinib treatment. Post-crizotinib treatments (chemotherapy, cancer immunotherapy, anti-VEGF/R) did not affect crizotinib DoT. Conclusion: Data supplement crizotinib's effectiveness in ROS1-positive NSCLC previously seen in clinical trials/real-world.

Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a common type of cancer in the lung that is often caused by mutations in specific genes in the DNA. One type of NSCLC occurs when you have mutations in a gene called ROS1, whose normal function is not well understood. Crizotinib, an oral medicine, was approved in Japan for the treatment of NSCLC with mutations in ROS1 in 2017; however, this was based upon data from controlled clinical trials. This study was looking at crizotinib use in Japan based upon claims data from the Japanese Medical Data Vision database, which captures all use of medications provided in Japan. Data was collected from June 2017 to March 2021 for 58 Japanese patients who had NSCLC, tested positive for ROS1 mutations, and received crizotinib. Patients took crizotinib for a median of 13.0 months as a first treatment option and 14.0 months as a second treatment option for their NSCLC. The type of and duration of anticancer treatments given before crizotinib did not have an effect on the length of time crizotinib was used. Other treatments outside of crizotinib were given before or after crizotinib and include chemotherapy, therapy that modifies the immune system to treat cancer, or treatments that inhibit the growth of blood vessels that help the cancer grow/spread. Together, these real-world data provide evidence supporting the use of crizotinib in the treatment of patients with NSCLC and ROS1 mutations.

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.

Sunitinib-associated hypertension and neutropenia as efficacy biomarkers in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) prognostic models may be improved by incorporating treatment-induced toxicities. METHODS: In sunitinib-treated mRCC patients (N=770), baseline prognostic factors and treatment-induced toxicities (hypertension (systolic blood pressure ⩾140 mm Hg), neutropenia (grade ⩾2), thrombocytopenia (grade ⩾2), hand-foot syndrome (grade >0), and asthenia/fatigue (grade >0)) were analysed in multivariate analyses of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) end points. RESULTS: On-treatment neutropenia and hypertension were associated with longer PFS (P=0.0276 and P<0.0001, respectively) and OS (P=0.0014 and P<0.0001, respectively), independent of baseline prognostic factors, including International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria. By 12-week landmark analysis, neutropenia was significantly associated with longer PFS and OS (P=0.013 and P=0.0122, respectively) and hypertension or hand-foot syndrome with longer OS (P=0.0036 and P=0.0218, respectively). The concordance index was 0.65 (95% CI: 0.63-0.67) for IMDC classification alone and 0.72 (95% CI: 0.70-0.74) when combined with hypertension and neutropenia. Considering hypertension and neutropenia (developing both vs neither) changed IMDC-predicted median OS in each IMDC risk group (favourable: 45.3 vs 19.5 months; intermediate: 32.5 vs 8.0 months; poor: 21.1 vs 4.8 months). CONCLUSIONS: On-treatment neutropenia and hypertension are independent biomarkers of sunitinib efficacy and may add prognostic accuracy to the IMDC model.

Effect of gastrointestinal resection on sunitinib exposure in patients with GIST.

BACKGROUND: GIST patients often undergo GI-surgery. Previous studies have shown that imatinib and nilotinib exposures were decreased in GIST patients with prior major gastrectomy. We investigated whether major gastrectomy influences the exposure to sunitinib and its active metabolite SU12662. METHODS: Pharmacokinetic data from 305 GIST patients included in 4 phase I-III trials were analyzed. Patients were subdivided into 6 groups according to their prior GI-surgery. Apparent clearance (CL/F) and dose-corrected steady-state plasma exposures (AUC24,ss) of sunitinib and SU12662 were estimated using a population PK approach. ANCOVA was performed to test for differences in AUC24,ss and CL/F between each surgery subgroup and controls. RESULTS: Major gastrectomy did not influence sunitinib or SU12662 exposure. The geometric mean of sunitinib and SU12662 AUC24,ss was decreased by 21% and 28% in patients with both gastrectomy and small bowel resection (n = 8) compared to controls (n = 63) for sunitinib (931 ng hr/mL (95%-CI; 676-1283) versus 1177 ng hr/mL (95%-CI; 1097-1263); p < 0.05) and SU12662 (354 ng hr/mL (95%-CI; 174-720) versus 492 ng hr/mL (95%-CI; 435-555); p < 0.05). No significant differences in exposure were observed in each of the other subgroups versus controls. CONCLUSION: In contrast to previous results for imatinib and nilotinib, gastrectomy alone does not influence sunitinib or SU12662 exposure. This should be taken into account for the treatment of gastrectomized GIST patients with TKIs. In patients who had undergone both gastrectomy and small bowel resection, sunitinib and SU12662 exposures are significantly, although clinically not relevantly, decreased.

Continuation of Lorlatinib in ALK-Positive NSCLC Beyond Progressive Disease.

INTRODUCTION: Lorlatinib, a potent, selective third-generation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), exhibited overall and intracranial antitumor activity in patients with ALK-positive NSCLC. METHODS: Retrospective analyses in the ongoing phase 2 trial (NCT01970865) investigated the clinical benefit of continuing lorlatinib beyond progressive disease (LBPD). Patients with previous crizotinib treatment as the only ALK TKI were group A (n = 28); those with at least one previous second-generation ALK TKIs were group B (n = 74). LBPD was defined as greater than 3 weeks of lorlatinib treatment after investigator-assessed progressive disease. Only patients with the best overall response of complete or partial response or stable disease were included. RESULTS: There were no major differences in baseline characteristics between groups. The median duration of treatment for patients who continued LBPD was 32.4 months (group A) and 16.4 months (group B) versus 12.5 months (group A) and 7.7 months (group B) for patients who did not continue LBPD. The median overall survival in group A was not reached (NR) in patients who continued LBPD versus 24.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 12.1-NR); group B's median was 26.5 months (95% CI: 18.7-35.5) in patients who continued LBPD versus 14.7 months (95% CI: 9.3-38.5) in patients who did not continue LBPD. The median overall survival postprogression for groups A and B was NR (95% CI: 21.4-NR) and 14.6 months (95% CI: 11.2-19.2) in patients who continued LBPD and 8.0 months (95% CI: 1.5-NR) versus 5.3 months (95% CI: 2.8-14.3) in patients who did not continue LBPD. CONCLUSIONS: Continuing LBPD is a viable treatment strategy for select patients with ALK-positive NSCLC who progressed on lorlatinib.

Treatment Sequencing in Patients with Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in Japan: A Real-World Observational Study.

INTRODUCTION: The anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) alectinib was approved in Japan in 2014 for the treatment of ALK fusion gene-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). With the approvals of crizotinib in 2012 and ceritinib in 2017, Japan became the first country with multiple ALK TKIs available for first-line or later use in patients with ALK-positive advanced NSCLC. Here, we collected and evaluated real-world data on ALK TKI clinical usage patterns and sequencing in patients with ALK-positive NSCLC in Japan. METHODS: This retrospective observational study used the Japanese Medical Data Vision database to analyze data from patients with a confirmed diagnosis of lung cancer who visited a healthcare facility in the database between April 2010 and March 2017, underwent an ALK test, received a prescription for an ALK TKI, and were at least 18 years old as of the date of the first ALK TKI prescription. There were no exclusion criteria. Descriptive analyses of demographics, baseline characteristics, ALK TKI treatment patterns and sequences, non-ALK TKI treatments received before, during, and after ALK TKI treatment, and treatment durations were reported. RESULTS: A total of 378 patients met the inclusion criteria and were evaluated in mutually exclusive groups of patients receiving one, two, or three ALK TKIs. The initial ALK TKI prescribed was crizotinib for 52.1% of patients and alectinib for 47.9% of patients; however, the proportion of patients receiving alectinib as the initial ALK TKI increased over time following the Japanese approval of alectinib in 2014. Of the 117 patients who received two or three ALK TKIs, 106 received crizotinib as the first ALK TKI and 11 received alectinib. Before the date of the patient's first ALK TKI prescription, 153 of 378 patients (40.5%) had received chemotherapy. Of 104 patients who discontinued ALK therapy, 46.2% received chemotherapy and 5.8% received immunotherapy as their next treatment. CONCLUSION: At the time of this analysis, most patients who received more than one ALK TKI received crizotinib as the initial ALK TKI. Additional ALK TKIs have since been approved in Japan as first-line or later therapeutic options for patients with ALK-positive NSCLC, but the optimal sequence of ALK TKI usage remains undetermined. As new data continue to emerge, additional research will be warranted to evaluate ALK TKI sequences that do not include crizotinib as the first therapy in this patient population.

Systematic review of sequencing of ALK inhibitors in ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer.

The objective of this study was to understand outcomes of patients treated with ALK inhibitors, especially when ALK inhibitors are followed by other ALK inhibitors. A systematic literature review was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane through July 17, 2017. Conference abstracts (three meetings in past 2 years) also were searched. Of 504 unique publications, 80 met inclusion criteria (47 clinical trials, 33 observational studies). Observational studies have the potential to provide information for ALK inhibitors used sequentially. Ten observational studies reported median overall survival of crizotinib-led sequences ranging from 30.3 to 63.75 months from initiation of crizotinib; 49.4-89.6 months from metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer diagnosis; and 15.5-22.0 months from initiation of the second-generation ALK inhibitor after initial crizotinib. Sequencing of ALK inhibitors may benefit patients progressing on initial ALK inhibitors.

Clinical Experience With Crizotinib in Patients With Advanced ALK-Rearranged Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer and Brain Metastases.

PURPOSE: Crizotinib is an oral kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The clinical benefits of crizotinib in patients with brain metastases have not been previously studied. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced ALK-rearranged NSCLC enrolled onto clinical trial PROFILE 1005 or 1007 (randomly assigned to crizotinib) were included in this retrospective analysis. Patients with asymptomatic brain metastases (nontarget or target lesions) were allowed to enroll. Tumor assessments were evaluated every 6 weeks using RECIST (version 1.1). RESULTS: At baseline, 31% of patients (275 of 888) had asymptomatic brain metastases; 109 had received no prior and 166 had received prior brain radiotherapy as treatment. Among patients with previously untreated asymptomatic brain metastases, the systemic disease control rate (DCR) at 12 weeks was 63% (95% CI, 54% to 72%), the intracranial DCR was 56% (95% CI, 46% to 66%), and the median intracranial time to progression (TTP) was 7 months (95% CI, 6.7 to 16.4). Among patients with previously treated brain metastases, the systemic DCR was 65% (95% CI, 57% to 72%), the intracranial DCR was 62% (95% CI, 54% to 70%), and the median intracranial TTP was 13.2 months (95% CI, 9.9 to not reached). Patients with systemic disease control were also likely to experience intracranial disease control at 12 weeks (correlation coefficient, 0.7652; P < .001). Among patients without baseline brain metastases who developed progressive disease (n = 253) after initiation of crizotinib, 20% were diagnosed with brain metastases. CONCLUSION: Crizotinib was associated with systemic and intracranial disease control in patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC who were ALK inhibitor naive and had brain metastases. However, progression of preexisting or development of new intracranial lesions while receiving therapy was a common manifestation of acquired resistance to crizotinib.