Alectinib in untreated anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small cell lung cancer.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Ruppert AM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5733330 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:The central nervous system (CNS) is an important and increasingly recognized site of treatment failure in anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients receiving ALK inhibitors. In this report, we describe two ALK-positive patients who experienced initial improvements in CNS metastases on standard dose alectinib (600 mg twice daily), but who subsequently experienced recurrences with symptomatic leptomeningeal metastases. Both patients were dose-escalated to alectinib 900 mg twice daily, resulting in repeat clinical and radiographic responses. Our results suggest that dose intensification of alectinib may be necessary to overcome incomplete ALK inhibition in the CNS and prolong the durability of responses in patients with CNS metastases, particularly those with leptomeningeal carcinomatosis.
| S-EPMC4743545 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We reported a case of locally advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patient who received neoadjuvant alectinib therapy. Enhanced computed tomography (CT) scan was performed after the first cycle of alectinib therapy to evaluate the efficacy of neoadjuvant alectinib. Surprisingly, the tumor shrunk 42.2% after one cycle treatment. Partial remission (PR) was achieved without any side effects, although the tumor stage didn’t degrade. Then right upper lobectomy and mediastinal lymph node dissection by video assistant thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) were successfully performed after multi-disciplinary team meeting with the department of respiratory, thoracic surgery, radiotherapy (RT), pathology and radiology. Pathologic evaluation about tumor was assessed by hematoxylin and eosin staining. However, the residual viable tumor cells were 15%, which indicated that major pathologic response (MPR) was not achieved. Next, continually adjuvant alectinib and RT were given because mediastinal station 4R lymphadenectomy excluded with serious tissue adhesion and MPR status was not met. In this case, we presented neoadjuvant alectinib therapy was feasible and well tolerated in locally advanced ALK positive NSCLC, inspiring clinical studies to further assess its clinical implication in treating patients with locally advanced ALK-positive NSCLC. And we also discussed the necessary time of neoadjuvant and adjuvant alectinib in advanced ALK-positive NSCLC.
| S-EPMC8799071 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene rearrangements occur in a small portion of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). These gene rearrangements lead to constitutive activation of the ALK kinase and subsequent ALK-driven tumor formation. Patients with tumors harboring such rearrangements are highly sensitive to ALK inhibitors, such as crizotinib, ceritinib, and alectinib. Resistance to these kinase inhibitors occurs through several mechanisms, resulting in ongoing clinical challenges. This review summarizes the biology of ALK-positive lung cancer, methods for diagnosing ALK-positive NSCLC, current FDA-approved ALK inhibitors, mechanisms of resistance to ALK inhibition, and potential strategies to combat resistance.
| S-EPMC5154547 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Crizotinib and alectinib are anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-inhibitors indicated for the treatment of ALK-positive metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). At the currently used fixed doses, interindividual variability in exposure is high. The aim of this study was to investigate whether minimum plasma concentrations (Cmin ) of crizotinib and alectinib are related to efficacy and toxicity. An observational study was performed, in which ALK-positive NSCLC patients who were treated with crizotinib and alectinib and from whom pharmacokinetic samples were collected in routine care, were included in the study. Exposure-response analyses were explored using previously proposed Cmin thresholds of 235 ng/mL for crizotinib and 435 ng/mL for alectinib. Forty-eight crizotinib and 52 alectinib patients were included. For crizotinib, median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 5.7 vs. 17.4 months for patients with Cmin < 235 ng/mL (48%) and ≥ 235 ng/mL, respectively (P = 0.08). In multivariable analysis, Cmin < 235 ng/mL resulted in a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.79 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.90-3.59, P = 0.100). In a pooled analysis of all crizotinib patients (not only ALK-positive, n = 79), the HR was 2.15 (95% CI, 1.21-3.84, P = 0.009). For alectinib, mPFS was 12.6 months vs. not estimable (95% CI, 19.8-not estimable) for patients with Cmin < 435 ng/mL (37%) and ≥ 435 ng/mL, respectively (P = 0.04). Multivariable analysis resulted in an HR of 4.29 (95% CI, 1.33-13.90, P = 0.015). In conclusion, PFS of crizotinib and alectinib treated NSCLC patients is prolonged in patients with Cmin ≥ 235 ng/mL and 435 ng/mL, respectively. Therefore, therapeutic drug monitoring should be part of routine clinical management for these agents.
| S-EPMC7891593 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionRecently, a phase III CROWN trial compared the efficacy of two anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitors and demonstrated that lorlatinib displayed clinical improvement over crizotinib for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Therefore, the aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of lorlatinib as a first-line therapy for patients with advanced ALK-positive (+) NSCLC.Materials and methodsA cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using a microsimulation model from the US payer perspective and a lifetime horizon (30 years) in patients with previous untreated advanced ALK+ NSCLC. Based on the CROWN trial, patient characteristics were obtained, and the transition probabilities were estimated. All direct costs were derived from official sources and published literature. The main outcomes of the model were total costs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and life years (LYs). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses and multiple scenario analyses were conducted to test the robustness of the model outcomes.ResultsIn the base case analysis, in which 1 million patients were simulated, treatment with lorlatinib or crizotinib as the first-line treatment was related to a mean cost of $909,758 and $616,230 (incremental cost: $293,528) and a mean survival of 4.81 QALYs and 4.09 QALYs (incremental QALY: 0.72) per patient, respectively. The main drivers of cost effectiveness were drug price and subsequent cost. PAS indicated that lorlatinib has 90% cost-effectiveness when compared to crizotinib when the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold in increased to $448,000/QALY. Scenario analysis demonstrated that lorlatinib has 100% cost-effectiveness at a WTP threshold of 200,000/QALY compared to crizotinib treatment when the price of lorlatinib is decreased to 75% ($424.5) of its original price.ConclusionsIn this study, lorlatinib was unlikely to be cost effective compared with crizotinib for patients with previously untreated advanced ALK+ NSCLC at a WTP threshold of 200,000/QALY.
| S-EPMC8203315 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:This is the first trial to directly compare efficacy and safety of alectinib versus standard chemotherapy in advanced/metastatic anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients who have progressed on, or were intolerant to, crizotinib. Patients and methods:ALUR (MO29750; NCT02604342) was a randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase III trial of alectinib versus chemotherapy in advanced/metastatic ALK-positive NSCLC patients previously treated with platinum-based doublet chemotherapy and crizotinib. Patients were randomized 2 : 1 to receive alectinib 600?mg twice daily or chemotherapy (pemetrexed 500?mg/m2 or docetaxel 75?mg/m2, both every 3?weeks) until disease progression, death, or withdrawal. Primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Results:Altogether, 107 patients were randomized (alectinib, n?=?72; chemotherapy, n?=?35) in 13 countries across Europe and Asia. Median investigator-assessed PFS was 9.6?months [95% confidence interval (CI): 6.9-12.2] with alectinib and 1.4?months (95% CI: 1.3-1.6) with chemotherapy [hazard ratio (HR) 0.15 (95% CI: 0.08-0.29); P?<?0.001]. Independent Review Committee-assessed PFS was also significantly longer with alectinib [HR 0.32 (95% CI: 0.17-0.59); median PFS was 7.1?months (95% CI: 6.3-10.8) with alectinib and 1.6?months (95% CI: 1.3-4.1) with chemotherapy]. In patients with measurable baseline central nervous system (CNS) disease (alectinib, n?=?24; chemotherapy, n?=?16), CNS objective response rate was significantly higher with alectinib (54.2%) versus chemotherapy (0%; P?<?0.001). Grade ?3 adverse events were more common with chemotherapy (41.2%) than alectinib (27.1%). Incidence of AEs leading to study-drug discontinuation was lower with alectinib (5.7%) than chemotherapy (8.8%), despite alectinib treatment duration being longer (20.1?weeks versus 6.0?weeks). Conclusion:Alectinib significantly improved systemic and CNS efficacy versus chemotherapy for crizotinib-pretreated ALK-positive NSCLC patients, with a favorable safety profile. Trial registration:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02604342; Roche study MO29750.
| S-EPMC6005013 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe phase III ALEX study in patients with treatment-naive advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase mutation-positive (ALK+) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) met its primary end point of improved progression-free survival (PFS) with alectinib versus crizotinib. Here, we present detailed central nervous system (CNS) efficacy data from ALEX.Patients and methodsOverall, 303 patients aged ≥18 years underwent 1:1 randomization to receive twice-daily doses of alectinib 600 mg or crizotinib 250 mg. Brain imaging was conducted in all patients at baseline and every subsequent 8 weeks. End points (analyzed by subgroup: patients with/without baseline CNS metastases; patients with/without prior radiotherapy) included PFS, CNS objective response rate (ORR), and time to CNS progression.ResultsIn total, 122 patients had Independent Review Committee-assessed baseline CNS metastases (alectinib, n = 64; crizotinib, n = 58), 43 had measurable lesions (alectinib, n = 21; crizotinib, n = 22), and 46 had received prior radiotherapy (alectinib, n = 25; crizotinib, n = 21). Investigator-assessed PFS with alectinib was consistent between patients with baseline CNS metastases [hazard ratio (HR) 0.40, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.25-0.64] and those without (HR 0.51, 95% CI: 0.33-0.80, P interaction = 0.36). Similar results were seen in patients regardless of prior radiotherapy. Time to CNS progression was significantly longer with alectinib versus crizotinib and comparable between patients with and without baseline CNS metastases (P < 0.0001). CNS ORR was 85.7% with alectinib versus 71.4% with crizotinib in patients who received prior radiotherapy and 78.6% versus 40.0%, respectively, in those who had not.ConclusionAlectinib demonstrated superior CNS activity and significantly delayed CNS progression versus crizotinib in patients with previously untreated, advanced ALK+ NSCLC, irrespective of prior CNS disease or radiotherapy.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02075840.
| S-EPMC6290889 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveSix anaplastic lymphoma kinase-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (ALK-TKIs), including one domestic (ensartinib) and five imported ALK-TKIs (crizotinib, ceritinib, alectinib, brigatinib, and lorlatinib), have been recommended as first-line treatments for advanced ALK-positive NSCLC in China. This study sought to examine the cost-effectiveness of these six novel therapies in Chinese patients.Material and methodsWe constructed a Markov model to compare the cost-effectiveness of the six ALK-TKIs as a first-line treatment for patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system. Transition probabilities were estimated by synthesizing data from the PROFILE 1,029 trial and a network meta-analysis. Health state utilities and costs were sourced from published literature, publicly available national databases, and local general hospitals. The robustness of model was assessed via deterministic sensitivity analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.ResultsCompared with crizotinib, ensartinib achieved additional 0.12 quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) with marginal costs of $3,249, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $27,553/ QALY. When compared with ceritinib and brigatinib, ensartinib achieved additional 0.06 and 0.03 QALYs with substantially reduced costs. When compared with lorlatinib and alectinib, ensartinib was associated with a lower QALY and decreased total costs; the ICERs for lorlatinib and alectinib were $934,101/ QALY and $164,888/ QALY, respectively.ConclusionFor Chinese patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC, ensartinib was a cost-effective option compared with crizotinib, and was a dominant alternative to ceritinib and brigatinib. Although lorlatinib and alectinib were associated with prolonged survival compared with ensartinib, they were less cost-effective than ensartinib due to the overwhelming total costs.
| S-EPMC9533130 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Oncogenic fusion genes consisting of EML4 and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) are present in a subgroup of non-small-cell lung cancers, representing 2 to 7% of such tumors. We explored the therapeutic efficacy of inhibiting ALK in such tumors in an early-phase clinical trial of crizotinib (PF-02341066), an orally available small-molecule inhibitor of the ALK tyrosine kinase.After screening tumor samples from approximately 1500 patients with non-small-cell lung cancer for the presence of ALK rearrangements, we identified 82 patients with advanced ALK-positive disease who were eligible for the clinical trial. Most of the patients had received previous treatment. These patients were enrolled in an expanded cohort study instituted after phase 1 dose escalation had established a recommended crizotinib dose of 250 mg twice daily in 28-day cycles. Patients were assessed for adverse events and response to therapy.Patients with ALK rearrangements tended to be younger than those without the rearrangements, and most of the patients had little or no exposure to tobacco and had adenocarcinomas. At a mean treatment duration of 6.4 months, the overall response rate was 57% (47 of 82 patients, with 46 confirmed partial responses and 1 confirmed complete response); 27 patients (33%) had stable disease. A total of 63 of 82 patients (77%) were continuing to receive crizotinib at the time of data cutoff, and the estimated probability of 6-month progression-free survival was 72%, with no median for the study reached. The drug resulted in grade 1 or 2 (mild) gastrointestinal side effects.The inhibition of ALK in lung tumors with the ALK rearrangement resulted in tumor shrinkage or stable disease in most patients. (Funded by Pfizer and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00585195.).
| S-EPMC3014291 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6987338 | biostudies-literature