Amivantamab plus Lazertinib in Previously Untreated EGFR-Mutated Advanced NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: Amivantamab plus lazertinib (amivantamab-lazertinib) has shown clinically meaningful and durable antitumor activity in patients with previously untreated or osimertinib-pretreated EGFR (epidermal growth factor receptor)-mutated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: In a phase 3, international, randomized trial, we assigned, in a 2:2:1 ratio, patients with previously untreated EGFR-mutated (exon 19 deletion or L858R), locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC to receive amivantamab-lazertinib (in an open-label fashion), osimertinib (in a blinded fashion), or lazertinib (in a blinded fashion, to assess the contribution of treatment components). The primary end point was progression-free survival in the amivantamab-lazertinib group as compared with the osimertinib group, as assessed by blinded independent central review. RESULTS: Overall, 1074 patients underwent randomization (429 to amivantamab-lazertinib, 429 to osimertinib, and 216 to lazertinib). The median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the amivantamab-lazertinib group than in the osimertinib group (23.7 vs. 16.6 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58 to 0.85; P<0.001). An objective response was observed in 86% of the patients (95% CI, 83 to 89) in the amivantamab-lazertinib group and in 85% of those (95% CI, 81 to 88) in the osimertinib group; among patients with a confirmed response (336 in the amivantamab-lazertinib group and 314 in the osimertinib group), the median response duration was 25.8 months (95% CI, 20.1 to could not be estimated) and 16.8 months (95% CI, 14.8 to 18.5), respectively. In a planned interim overall survival analysis of amivantamab-lazertinib as compared with osimertinib, the hazard ratio for death was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.61 to 1.05). Predominant adverse events were EGFR-related toxic effects. The incidence of discontinuation of all agents due to treatment-related adverse events was 10% with amivantamab-lazertinib and 3% with osimertinib. CONCLUSIONS: Amivantamab-lazertinib showed superior efficacy to osimertinib as first-line treatment in EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; MARIPOSA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04487080.).

Osimertinib with or without Chemotherapy in EGFR-Mutated Advanced NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: Osimertinib is a third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) that is selective for EGFR-TKI-sensitizing and EGFR T790M resistance mutations. Evidence suggests that the addition of chemotherapy may extend the benefits of EGFR-TKI therapy. METHODS: In this phase 3, international, open-label trial, we randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio patients with EGFR-mutated (exon 19 deletion or L858R mutation) advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who had not previously received treatment for advanced disease to receive osimertinib (80 mg once daily) with chemotherapy (pemetrexed [500 mg per square meter of body-surface area] plus either cisplatin [75 mg per square meter] or carboplatin [pharmacologically guided dose]) or to receive osimertinib monotherapy (80 mg once daily). The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Response and safety were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 557 patients underwent randomization. Investigator-assessed progression-free survival was significantly longer in the osimertinib-chemotherapy group than in the osimertinib group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49 to 0.79; P<0.001). At 24 months, 57% (95% CI, 50 to 63) of the patients in the osimertinib-chemotherapy group and 41% (95% CI, 35 to 47) of those in the osimertinib group were alive and progression-free. Progression-free survival as assessed according to blinded independent central review was consistent with the primary analysis (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.80). An objective (complete or partial) response was observed in 83% of the patients in the osimertinib-chemotherapy group and in 76% of those in the osimertinib group; the median response duration was 24.0 months (95% CI, 20.9 to 27.8) and 15.3 months (95% CI, 12.7 to 19.4), respectively. The incidence of grade 3 or higher adverse events from any cause was higher with the combination than with monotherapy - a finding driven by known chemotherapy-related adverse events. The safety profile of osimertinib plus pemetrexed and a platinum-based agent was consistent with the established profiles of the individual agents. CONCLUSIONS: First-line treatment with osimertinib-chemotherapy led to significantly longer progression-free survival than osimertinib monotherapy among patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC. (Funded by AstraZeneca; FLAURA2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04035486.).

Tepotinib in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer with MET Exon 14 Skipping Mutations.

BACKGROUND: A splice-site mutation that results in a loss of transcription of exon 14 in the oncogenic driver MET occurs in 3 to 4% of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We evaluated the efficacy and safety of tepotinib, a highly selective MET inhibitor, in this patient population. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 2 study, we administered tepotinib (at a dose of 500 mg) once daily in patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC with a confirmed MET exon 14 skipping mutation. The primary end point was the objective response by independent review among patients who had undergone at least 9 months of follow-up. The response was also analyzed according to whether the presence of a MET exon 14 skipping mutation was detected on liquid biopsy or tissue biopsy. RESULTS: As of January 1, 2020, a total of 152 patients had received tepotinib, and 99 patients had been followed for at least 9 months. The response rate by independent review was 46% (95% confidence interval [CI], 36 to 57), with a median duration of response of 11.1 months (95% CI, 7.2 to could not be estimated) in the combined-biopsy group. The response rate was 48% (95% CI, 36 to 61) among 66 patients in the liquid-biopsy group and 50% (95% CI, 37 to 63) among 60 patients in the tissue-biopsy group; 27 patients had positive results according to both methods. The investigator-assessed response rate was 56% (95% CI, 45 to 66) and was similar regardless of the previous therapy received for advanced or metastatic disease. Adverse events of grade 3 or higher that were considered by investigators to be related to tepotinib therapy were reported in 28% of the patients, including peripheral edema in 7%. Adverse events led to permanent discontinuation of tepotinib in 11% of the patients. A molecular response, as measured in circulating free DNA, was observed in 67% of the patients with matched liquid-biopsy samples at baseline and during treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with advanced NSCLC with a confirmed MET exon 14 skipping mutation, the use of tepotinib was associated with a partial response in approximately half the patients. Peripheral edema was the main toxic effect of grade 3 or higher. (Funded by Merck [Darmstadt, Germany]; VISION ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02864992.).

Rationale and design of ON-TRK: a novel prospective non-interventional study in patients with TRK fusion cancer treated with larotrectinib.

BACKGROUND: Tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) fusion proteins resulting from neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) gene fusions are rare primary oncogenic drivers in a wide array of tumors. Larotrectinib is a first-in-class, highly selective, central nervous system-active TRK inhibitor approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), European Medicines Agency (EMA), and over 40 countries for the treatment of TRK fusion solid tumors in adult and pediatric patients. Due to the rarity of TRK fusion cancer, larotrectinib was granted accelerated approval based on a relatively small number of patients enrolled in three early phase trials. ON-TRK aims to evaluate the safety profile of larotrectinib in a broader population and over extended time periods. METHODS: ON-TRK is a prospective, non-interventional, open-label, multicenter, multi-cohort, post-approval study in adult and pediatric patients with locally advanced or metastatic TRK fusion cancer treated with larotrectinib that will describe the safety and effectiveness of larotrectinib in real-world practice conditions. Adult patients will be grouped by tumor type and followed for at least 2 years. Patients < 18 years old will be enrolled under a 'pediatric' cohort regardless of tumor type and will be followed for 5 years to evaluate the risk of potential long-term adverse effects of larotrectinib on their growth and development. The effectiveness of larotrectinib in the overall study population as well as in patient subgroups will also be evaluated. Procedures avoided in patients with infantile fibrosarcoma (e.g., amputation) and the number of patients who were able to undergo surgery with a curative intent (excluding amputation) because of the use of larotrectinib will be described. Larotrectinib treatment patterns in real-world practice, including dosing and duration of treatment, will be described. DISCUSSION: The FDA Accelerated Approval Program allows for earlier approval of and patient access to drugs that treat serious conditions and fill an unmet medical need. This study is designed to fulfill post-approval requirements set by the FDA as well as post-marketing requirements set forth by local regulatory bodies and is part of the risk management plan for the EMA. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT04142437 ). PROTOCOL VERSION: v2.5, 25 March 2021.

Benefits and limitations of real-world evidence: lessons from EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer.

While randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for evidence-based medicine, they do not always reflect real-world patient populations, limiting their generalizability and external validity. Real-world evidence (RWE), generated during routine clinical practice, is increasingly important in determining effectiveness outside of the tightly controlled conditions of RCTs, and is now recognized by regulatory bodies as a valuable complement to RCTs. Consequently, it is increasingly important for physicians to understand how RWE data can be used alongside clinical trial data. Here, we discuss the different types of real-world observational studies, outline the benefits and limitations of RWE, and, using examples from EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer, outline how RWE can be used to help inform treatment decisions.

EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors for EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: outcomes in Asian populations.

Few data are available that have compared outcomes with different EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) specifically in Asian patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer. In this narrative review, we have collated available data from prospective studies that have assessed first-, second- and third-generation EGFR TKIs in Asian populations, including subanalyses in individual countries (China and Japan). These data indicate that outcomes with first- and second-generation TKIs are broadly similar in Asian and non-Asian populations. However, while the third-generation EGFR TKI, osimertinib, confers significant overall survival benefit over erlotinib/gefitinib in non-Asians, this is not apparent in Asians, particularly in countries like Japan with well-resourced healthcare. Head-to-head comparisons of second- and third-generation EGFR TKIs, with OS as a primary end point, should be considered in Asia.

Sequential afatinib and osimertinib in patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: final analysis of the GioTag study.

Aim: Final overall survival (OS) and time on treatment analysis of patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who received sequential afatinib and osimertinib. Patients & methods: Patients (n = 203) had T790M-positive disease following first-line afatinib and started osimertinib treatment ≥10 months before data entry. Primary outcome was time on treatment; OS analysis was exploratory. Results: Median time on treatment with afatinib and osimertinib was 27.7 months (90% CI: 26.7-29.9). Median OS was 37.6 months (90% CI: 35.5-41.3); median OS was 41.6 and 44.8 months in Del19-positive patients and Asian patients, respectively. Conclusion: In real-world clinical practice, sequential afatinib and osimertinib was associated with encouraging outcomes in patients with EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC, especially in Del19-positive patients and Asian patients. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03370770 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Osimertinib in patients with T790M mutation-positive, advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Long-term follow-up from a pooled analysis of 2 phase 2 studies.

BACKGROUND: Osimertinib is a third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) that is selective for both EGFR-TKI-sensitizing and T790M (threonine-to-methionine substitution at codon 790)-resistance mutations. The authors present long-term follow-up data from a preplanned, pooled analysis of phase 2 studies, the AZD9291 First Time in Patients Ascending Dose Study (AURA) extension trial (clincialtrials.gov identifier NCT01802632) and the AURA2 trial (NCT02094261). METHODS: Patients with centrally confirmed, T790M mutation-positive, advanced non-small cell lung cancer received osimertinib 80 mg once daily until disease progression or study discontinuation. Response was assessed by a blinded, independent, central review using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate. RESULTS: In total, 411 patients received osimertinib (second line, 129 patients; third line or later, 282 patients). At the data cutoff date of November 1, 2016, the median treatment exposure was 16.4 months (range, 0-29.7 months), the objective response rate was 66% (95% confidence interval [CI], 61%-70%), the median response duration was 12.3 months (95% CI, 11.1-13.8 months), and the median progression-free survival was 9.9 months (95% CI, 9.5-12.3 months). At the data cutoff date of May 1, 2018, 271 patients (66%) had died, and 140 patients (34%) had discontinued before death. The median overall survival was 26.8 months (95% CI, 24.0-29.1 months); and the 12-month, 24-month, and 36-month survival rates were 80%, 55%, and 37%, respectively. Grade ≥3 possibly causally related (investigator assessed) adverse events were reported in 65 patients (16%), and the most common were rash (grouped terms; 42%; grade ≥3, 1%) and diarrhea (39%; <1%). CONCLUSIONS: This pooled analysis represents the most mature clinical trial data for osimertinib in patients with pretreated, T790M-positive, advanced non-small cell lung cancer, further establishing osimertinib as a standard of care for this patient population.

Predictive value of PD-L1 and other clinical factors for chemoimmunotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

We investigate if PD-L1 expression and other clinical characteristics predict chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) benefits versus chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of CIT versus chemotherapy identified through electronic searches. In seven randomized controlled trials (n = 4170), CIT prolonged progression-free survival over chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.58-0.67; p < 0.00001). The treatment benefits differed between PD-L1-high (HR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.34-0.49) and PD-L1 low (HR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.55-0.72; interaction-p = 0.00002) and PD-L1-high and PD-L1-negative (HR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.65-0.80; interaction-p < 0.00001). Similar benefits were observed regardless of gender, EGFR/ALK status and histological subtype. PD-L1 status is predictive of CIT benefit and may assist patient selection and design of future trials.

Sequential afatinib and osimertinib in patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: updated analysis of the observational GioTag study.

Aims: Overall survival (OS) and updated time to treatment failure (TTF) analysis of patients with EGFR mutation-positive (Del19, L858R) non-small-cell lung cancer who received sequential afatinib/osimertinib in the real-world GioTag study. Patients & methods: Patients had T790M-positive disease following first-line afatinib and received osimertinib treatment (n = 203). Primary outcome was TTF. The OS analysis was exploratory. Results: Median OS was 41.3 months (90% CI: 36.8-46.3) overall and 45.7 months (90% CI: 45.3-51.5) in patients with Del19-positive tumors (n = 149); 2-year survival was 80 and 82%, respectively. Updated median TTF with afatinib and osimertinib was 28.1 months (90% CI: 26.8-30.3). Conclusion: Sequential afatinib/osimertinib was associated with encouraging OS/TTF in patients with EGFR T790M-positive non-small-cell lung cancer, especially in patients with Del19-positive tumors. Trial registration number: NCT03370770.

Sequential treatment with afatinib and osimertinib in patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: an observational study.

AIM: To assess outcomes in patients with EGFR mutation-positive (Del19, L858R) non-small-cell lung cancer receiving sequential afatinib and osimertinib in a real-world clinical setting. Materials & methods: In this retrospective, observational, multicenter study, patients (n = 204) had T790M-positive disease following first-line afatinib and started osimertinib treatment ≥10 months prior to data entry. Primary outcome was time on treatment. RESULTS: Overall median time on treatment was 27.6 months (90% CI: 25.9-31.3), 30.3 months (90% CI: 27.6-44.5) in Del19-positive patients and 46.7 months (90% CI: 26.8-not reached) in Asians. The 2-year overall survival was 78.9%. CONCLUSION: In real-world clinical practice, sequential afatinib and osimertinib facilitates prolonged, chemotherapy-free treatment in patients with T790M acquired resistance, and is a potentially attractive strategy, especially for Del19-positive tumors. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03370770.

Clinical activity of afatinib in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer harbouring uncommon EGFR mutations: a combined post-hoc analysis of LUX-Lung 2, LUX-Lung 3, and LUX-Lung 6.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with non-small-cell lung cancer tumours that have EGFR mutations have deletion mutations in exon 19 or the Leu858Arg point mutation in exon 21, or both (ie, common mutations). However, a subset of patients (10%) with mutations in EGFR have tumours that harbour uncommon mutations. There is a paucity of data regarding the sensitivity of these tumours to EGFR inhibitors. Here we present data for the activity of afatinib in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer that have tumours harbouring uncommon EGFR mutations. METHODS: In this post-hoc analysis, we used prospectively collected data from tyrosine kinase inhibitor-naive patients with EGFR mutation-positive advanced (stage IIIb-IV) lung adenocarcinomas who were given afatinib in a single group phase 2 trial (LUX-Lung 2), and randomised phase 3 trials (LUX-Lung 3 and LUX-Lung 6). Analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population, including all randomly assigned patients with uncommon EGFR mutations. The type of EGFR mutation (exon 19 deletion [del19], Leu858Arg point mutation in exon 21, or other) and ethnic origin (LUX-Lung 3 only; Asian vs non-Asian) were pre-specified stratification factors in the randomised trials. We categorised all uncommon mutations as: point mutations or duplications in exons 18-21 (group 1); de-novo Thr790Met mutations in exon 20 alone or in combination with other mutations (group 2); or exon 20 insertions (group 3). We also assessed outcomes in patients with the most frequent uncommon mutations, Gly719Xaa, Leu861Gln, and Ser768Ile, alone or in combination with other mutations. Response was established by independent radiological review. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT00525148, NCT00949650, and NCT01121393. FINDINGS: Of 600 patients given afatinib across the three trials, 75 (12%) patients had uncommon EGFR mutations (38 in group 1, 14 in group 2, 23 in group 3). 27 (71·1%, 95% CI 54·1-84·6) patients in group 1 had objective responses, as did two (14·3%, 1·8-42·8) in group 2 and two (8·7%, 1·1-28·0) in group 3. Median progression-free survival was 10·7 months (95% CI 5·6-14·7) in group 1, 2·9 months (1·2-8·3) in group 2; and 2·7 months (1·8-4·2) in group 3. Median overall survival was 19·4 months (95% CI 16·4-26·9) in group 1, 14·9 months (8·1-24·9) in group 2, and 9·2 months (4·1-14·2) in group 3. For the most frequent uncommon mutations, 14 (77·8%, 95% CI 52·4-93·6) patients with Gly719Xaa had an objective response, as did nine (56·3%, 29·9-80·2) with Leu861Gln, and eight (100·0%, 63·1-100·0) with Ser768Ile. INTERPRETATION: Afatinib was active in non-small-cell lung cancer tumours that harboured certain types of uncommon EGFR mutations, especially Gly719Xaa, Leu861Gln, and Ser768Ile, but less active in other mutations types. Clinical benefit was lower in patients with de-novo Thr790Met and exon 20 insertion mutations. These data could help inform clinical decisions for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer harbouring uncommon EGFR mutations. FUNDING: Boehringer Ingelheim.

Recommended first-line management of asymptomatic brain metastases from EGFR mutant and ALK positive non-small cell lung cancer varies significantly according to specialty: an international survey of clinical practice.

Background: The role for radiotherapy or surgery in the upfront management of brain metastases (BrM) in epidermal growth factor receptor mutant (EGFRm) or anaplastic lymphoma kinase translocation positive (ALK+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is uncertain because of a lack of prospective evidence supporting tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) monotherapy. Further understanding of practice heterogeneity is necessary to guide collaborative efforts in establishing guideline recommendations. Methods: We conducted an international survey among medical (MO), clinical (CO), and radiation oncologists (RO), as well as neurosurgeons (NS), of treatment recommendations for asymptomatic BrM (in non-eloquent regions) EGFRm or ALK+ NSCLC patients according to specific clinical scenarios. We grouped and compared treatment recommendations according to specialty. Responses were summarized using counts and percentages and analyzed using the Fisher exact test. Results: A total of 449 surveys were included in the final analysis: 48 CO, 85 MO, 60 NS, and 256 RO. MO and CO were significantly more likely than RO and NS to recommend first-line TKI monotherapy, regardless of the number and/or size of asymptomatic BrM (in non-eloquent regions). Radiotherapy in addition to TKI as first-line management was preferred by all specialties for patients with ≥4 BrM. NS recommended surgical resection more often than other specialties for BrM measuring >2 cm. Conclusions: Recommendations for the management of BrM from EGFRm or ALK+ NSCLC vary significantly according to oncology sub-specialties. Development of multidisciplinary guidelines and further research on establishing optimal treatment strategies is warranted.

Tepotinib Treatment in Patients With MET Exon 14-Skipping Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Long-term Follow-up of the VISION Phase 2 Nonrandomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: MET inhibitors have recently demonstrated clinical activity in patients with MET exon 14 (METex14)-skipping non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, data with longer follow-up and in larger populations are needed to further optimize therapeutic approaches. Objective: To assess the long-term efficacy and safety of tepotinib, a potent and highly selective MET inhibitor, in patients with METex14-skipping NSCLC in the VISION study. Design, Setting, and Participants: The VISION phase 2 nonrandomized clinical trial was a multicohort, open-label, multicenter study that enrolled patients with METex14-skipping advanced/metastatic NSCLC (cohorts A and C) from September 2016 to May 2021. Cohort C (>18 months' follow-up) was an independent cohort, designed to confirm findings from cohort A (>35 months' follow-up). Data cutoff was November 20, 2022. Intervention: Patients received tepotinib, 500 mg (450 mg active moiety), once daily. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was objective response by independent review committee (RECIST v1.1). Secondary end points included duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: Cohorts A and C included 313 patients (50.8% female, 33.9% Asian; median [range] age, 72 [41-94] years). The objective response rate (ORR) was 51.4% (95% CI, 45.8%-57.1%) with a median (m)DOR of 18.0 (95% CI, 12.4-46.4) months. In cohort C (n = 161), an ORR of 55.9% (95% CI, 47.9%-63.7%) with an mDOR of 20.8 (95% CI, 12.6-not estimable [NE]) months was reported across treatment lines, comparable to cohort A (n = 152). In treatment-naive patients (cohorts A and C; n = 164), ORR was 57.3% (95% CI, 49.4%-65.0%) and mDOR was 46.4 (95% CI, 13.8-NE) months. In previously treated patients (n = 149), ORR was 45.0% (95% CI, 36.8%-53.3%) and mDOR was 12.6 (95% CI, 9.5-18.5) months. Peripheral edema, the most common treatment-related adverse event, occurred in 210 patients (67.1%) (35 [11.2%] experienced grade ≥3 events). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings from cohort C in this nonrandomized clinical trial supported the results from original cohort A. Overall, the long-term outcomes of VISION demonstrated robust and durable clinical activity following treatment with tepotinib, particularly in the treatment-naive setting, in the largest known clinical trial of patients with METex14-skipping NSCLC, supporting the global approvals of tepotinib and enabling clinicians to implement this therapeutic approach for such patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02864992.

Recommended first-line management of brain metastases from melanoma: A multicenter survey of clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy (RT) and surgery (Sx) are effective in treating brain metastases. However, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have shown activity against asymptomatic melanoma brain metastases (MBM). BRAF/MEK inhibitors can be used to treat BRAF V600 mutation positive (BRAF+) MBM. METHOD: We conducted an international survey among experts from medical oncology (MO), clinical oncology (CO), radiation oncology (RO), and neurosurgery (NS) about treatment recommendations for patients with asymptomatic BRAF+ or BRAF mutation negative (BRAF-) MBM. Eighteen specific clinical scenarios were presented and a total of 267 responses were collected. Answers were grouped and compared using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: In most MBM scenarios, survey respondents, regardless of specialty, favored RT in addition to systemic therapy. However, for patients with BRAF+ MBM, MO and CO were significantly more likely than RO and NS to recommend BRAF/MEK inhibitors alone, without the addition of RT, including the majority of MO (51%) for patients with 1-3 MBM, all <2 cm. Likewise, for BRAF- MBM, MO and CO more commonly recommended single or dual agent ICI only and dual agent ICI therapy alone was the most common recommendation from MO or CO for MBM <2 cm. When at least 1 of 3 MBM (BRAF+ or BRAF-) was >2 cm, upfront Sx was recommended by all groups with the exception that MO and RO recommended RT for BRAF- MBM. CONCLUSIONS: In most clinical settings involving asymptomatic MBM, experts recommended RT in addition to systemic therapy. However, recommendations varied significantly according to specialty, with MO and CO more commonly recommending dual systemic therapy alone for up to 9 BRAF- MBM <2 cm.

Efficacy and Safety of Brigatinib Compared With Crizotinib in Asian vs. Non-Asian Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic ALK-Inhibitor-Naive ALK+ Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Final Results From the Phase III ALTA-1L Study.

BACKGROUND: Brigatinib is a next-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitor with demonstrated efficacy in locally advanced and metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in crizotinib-refractory and ALK inhibitor-naive settings. This analysis assessed brigatinib in Asian vs. non-Asian patients from the first-line ALTA-1L trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a subgroup analysis from the phase III ALTA-1L trial of brigatinib vs. crizotinib in ALK inhibitor-naive ALK+ NSCLC. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) as assessed by blinded independent review committee (BIRC). Secondary endpoints included confirmed objective response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS) in the overall population and BIRC-assessed intracranial ORR and PFS in patients with brain metastases. RESULTS: Of the 275 randomized patients, 108 were Asian. Brigatinib showed consistent superiority in BIRC-assessed PFS vs. crizotinib in Asian (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.35 [95% CI: 0.20-0.59]; log-rank P = .0001; median 24.0 vs. 11.1 months) and non-Asian (HR: 0.56 [95% CI: 0.38-0.84]; log-rank P = .0041; median 24.7 vs. 9.4 months) patients. Results were consistent with investigator-assessed PFS and BIRC-assessed intracranial PFS. Brigatinib was well tolerated. Toxicity profiles and dose modification rates were similar between Asian and non-Asian patients. CONCLUSION: Efficacy with brigatinib was consistently better than with crizotinib in Asian and non-Asian patients with locally advanced or metastatic ALK inhibitor-naive ALK-+ NSCLC. There were no clinically notable differences in overall safety in Asian vs. non-Asian patients.

Nazartinib for treatment-naive EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer: Results of a phase 2, single-arm, open-label study.

INTRODUCTION: Nazartinib, a novel third-generation EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor, previously demonstrated antitumor activity and manageable safety in patients with EGFR-mutant advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who received ≤ 3 prior lines of systemic therapy. Herein, we report phase 2 efficacy and safety of first-line nazartinib. METHODS: This single-arm, open-label, global study enrolled treatment-naive adult patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC harboring EGFR-activating mutations (eg, L858R and/or ex19del). Patients with neurologically stable and controlled brain metastases were also eligible. Patients received oral nazartinib 150 mg once daily. The primary endpoint was Blinded Independent Review Committee (BIRC)-assessed overall response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1. RESULTS: Forty-five patients received ≥ 1 dose of nazartinib. The median follow-up time from enrollment to data cutoff (November 1, 2019) was 30 months (range: 25-34). The BIRC-assessed ORR was 69% (95% CI, 53-82). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 18 months (95% CI, 15-not estimable [NE]). The median overall survival was NE. In patients with baseline brain metastases (n = 18), the ORR and median PFS (95% CIs) were 67% (41-87) and 17 months (11-21). Seventeen of 18 patients had brain metastases as non-target lesions; the CNS lesions were absent/normalized in 9 of 17 (53%). Only 2 of 27 patients without baseline brain metastases developed new brain metastases postbaseline. Most frequent adverse events (≥ 25%, any grade, all-causality) were diarrhea (47%), maculopapular rash (38%), pyrexia (29%), cough, and stomatitis (27% each). CONCLUSIONS: First-line nazartinib demonstrated promising efficacy, including clinically meaningful antitumor activity in the brain, and manageable safety in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02108964.

Impact of subsequent immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment on overall survival with avelumab vs docetaxel in platinum-treated advanced NSCLC: Post hoc analyses from the phase 3 JAVELIN Lung 200 trial.

OBJECTIVES: The JAVELIN Lung 200 phase 3 trial did not meet its primary endpoint of improving overall survival (OS) with avelumab vs docetaxel in patients with platinum-treated PD-L1+ NSCLC. We report post hoc analyses assessing the effects of subsequent immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment on OS. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC progressed following platinum-doublet therapy were randomized to receive avelumab or docetaxel. OS was analyzed in the PD-L1+ population (≥1% of tumor cells) and full analysis set (PD-L1+ or PD-L1-). Effects of subsequent ICI (after permanent discontinuation of study treatment) on OS were analyzed using a preplanned naive sensitivity analysis and post hoc inverse probability of censoring weighting (IPCW) analysis. Subgroups with or without subsequent ICI treatment were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: In the avelumab and docetaxel arms, a subsequent ICI was received by 16/396 (4.0 %) and 104/396 (26.3 %) after a median of 10.5 months (range, 3.9-20.4) and 5.7 months (range, 0.1-24.4), respectively. Some subgroups showed trends for higher subsequent ICI treatment, including patients with non-squamous NSCLC (avelumab arm, 4.3 % vs docetaxel arm, 32.1 %) or with a baseline ECOG performance status of 0 (6.3 % vs 31.3 %); those enrolled in the early recruitment wave (11.6 % vs 54.3 %), or enrolled in the US/Western Europe (2.8 % vs 45.5 %) or Asia (11.0 % vs 35.4 %); and non-white patients (10.1 % vs 35.0 %). The hazard ratio for OS with avelumab vs docetaxel was lower in the IPCW analysis than in the naive sensitivity analysis (PD-L1+ population: 0.80 [95 % CI, 0.62-1.04] vs 0.86 [95 % CI, 0.68-1.09], respectively). CONCLUSION: In the JAVELIN Lung 200 trial, avelumab showed clinical activity as second-line treatment for patients with advanced NSCLC. Post hoc analyses suggest that the primary OS analysis may have been confounded by subsequent ICI use in the docetaxel arm. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02395172.

Avelumab Versus Docetaxel in Patients With Platinum-Treated Advanced NSCLC: 2-Year Follow-Up From the JAVELIN Lung 200 Phase 3 Trial.

INTRODUCTION: In the JAVELIN Lung 200 trial, avelumab (anti-programmed death-ligand 1 [PD-L1] antibody) did not significantly prolong overall survival (OS) versus docetaxel in patients with platinum-treated PD-L1+ NSCLC. We report greater than 2-year follow-up data. METHODS: Patients with stage IIIB or IV or recurrent NSCLC with disease progression after platinum-doublet chemotherapy were randomized 1:1 to avelumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. The primary end point was OS in patients with PD-L1+ tumors (greater than or equal to 1% tumor cell expression; IHC 73-10 pharmDx assay). RESULTS: Of 792 patients, 529 had PD-L1+ tumors (264 versus 265 in the avelumab versus docetaxel arms, respectively). As of March 4, 2019, median duration of follow-up for OS in the PD-L1+ population was 35.4 months in the avelumab arm and 34.7 months in the docetaxel arm; study treatment was ongoing in 25 (9.5%) versus 0 patients, respectively. In the PD-L1+ population, 2-year OS rates (95% confidence interval [CI]) with avelumab versus docetaxel were 29.9% (24.5%-35.5%) versus 20.5% (15.6%-25.8%); in greater than or equal to 50% PD-L1+ subgroups, 2-year OS rates were 36.4% (29.1%-43.7%) versus 17.7% (11.8%-24.7%) and in the greater than or equal to 80% subgroup were 40.2% (31.3%-49.0%) versus 20.3% (12.9%-28.8%), respectively. Median duration of response (investigator assessed) was 19.1 months (95% CI: 10.8-34.8) versus 5.7 months (95% CI: 4.1-8.3). Safety profiles for both arms were consistent with the primary analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Although the JAVELIN Lung 200 primary analysis (reported previously) revealed that avelumab did not significantly prolong OS versus docetaxel in patients with platinum-treated PD-L1+ NSCLC, posthoc analyses at 2 years of follow-up revealed that 2-year OS rates were doubled with avelumab in subgroups with higher PD-L1 expression (greater than or equal to 50% and greater than or equal to 80%).

Brigatinib Versus Crizotinib in ALK Inhibitor-Naive Advanced ALK-Positive NSCLC: Final Results of Phase 3 ALTA-1L Trial.

INTRODUCTION: In the phase 3 study entitled ALK in Lung cancer Trial of brigAtinib in 1st Line (ALTA-1L), which is a study of brigatinib in ALK inhibitor-naive advanced ALK-positive NSCLC, brigatinib exhibited superior progression-free survival (PFS) versus crizotinib in the two planned interim analyses. Here, we report the final efficacy, safety, and exploratory results. METHODS: Patients were randomized to brigatinib 180 mg once daily (7-d lead-in at 90 mg once daily) or crizotinib 250 mg twice daily. The primary end point was a blinded independent review committee-assessed PFS. Genetic alterations in plasma cell-free DNA were assessed in relation to clinical efficacy. RESULTS: A total of 275 patients were enrolled (brigatinib, n = 137; crizotinib, n = 138). At study end, (brigatinib median follow-up = 40.4 mo), the 3-year PFS by blinded independent review committee was 43% (brigatinib) versus 19% (crizotinib; median = 24.0 versus 11.1 mo, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.35-0.66). The median overall survival was not reached in either group (HR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.53-1.22). Posthoc analyses suggested an overall survival benefit for brigatinib in patients with baseline brain metastases (HR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.21-0.89). Detectable baseline EML4-ALK fusion variant 3 and TP53 mutation in plasma were associated with poor PFS. Brigatinib exhibited superior efficacy compared with crizotinib regardless of EML4-ALK variant and TP53 mutation. Emerging secondary ALK mutations were rare in patients progressing on brigatinib. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In the ALTA-1L final analysis, with longer follow-up, brigatinib continued to exhibit superior efficacy and tolerability versus crizotinib in patients with or without poor prognostic biomarkers. The suggested survival benefit with brigatinib in patients with brain metastases warrants future study.