Efficacy of alectinib in lung adenocarcinoma patients with different anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangements and co-existing alterations-a retrospective cohort study.

ABSTRACT

Background: Alectinib significantly improves survival of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-rearrangement. In this study, we analyzed the effects of different ALK rearrangements and co-mutations on the efficacy of alectinib. Methods: Using the electronic medical record system, we reviewed in terms of clinical and pathological features patients with advanced (IIIB/IV stage) ALK-rearranged NSCLC at Shanghai Chest Hospital between January 2018 and December 2021 who were treated with alectinib in first or second line and were assessed for objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: A total of 66 patients were enrolled in the study, and 17 types of ALK rearrangements were detected, of which five types of ALK rearrangements responded well to alectinib. We classified ALK-rearrangements into four main types, namely echinoderm microtubule-associated protein-like 4 (EML4)-ALK (E6A20), EML4-ALK (E13A20), EML4-ALK (E20A20), and others. There was no significant difference in ORR and DCR of these types (ORR 31.3% vs. 13.0% vs. 18.2% vs. 17.6%, P=0.575; DCR 93.8% vs. 95.6% vs. 100.0% vs. 88.2%, P=0.627). The 3-year PFS rates were 25.0% (4/16) vs. 13.0% (3/23) vs. 27.3% (3/11) vs. 18.8% (3/16) for EML4-ALK (E6A20), EML4-ALK (E13A20), EML4-ALK (E20A20), and others, respectively (P=0.725). The results of co-mutation analysis showed that the median PFS (mPFS) for patients with tumors harboring TP53 mutations was 30.4 months, significantly shorter than that of patients with tumors without co-mutations and whose mPFS was not mature (P=0.026). TSC1 co-mutation was also identified as a detrimental factor in outcome, with a DCR of 60% vs. 100% (P=0.031), mPFS of 30.4 months vs. not applicable (P=0.160) in patients with vs. those without this co-mutation, respectively. The efficacy of alectinib in patients with brain metastases is comparable to that in patients without distant organ metastases. There were two cases with specific fusion types that also responded to alectinib; namely, double ALK-rearrangements EML4-ALK (E13A20) and MSH2-ALK (M7A20), and with a rare fusion partner, SPECC1L-ALK (S8A20). Their PFS were 8.7 and 38.0 months, respectively. Conclusions: In this study, the efficacy of alectinib in different types of ALK-rearrangements varied slightly. TP53 and TSC1 co-mutations were identified as detrimental factors affecting efficacy. This study provides references for the response to alectinib in patients with different types of ALK rearrangements and co-mutation.