Search

Background: This study examined patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer who received long-term avelumab (anti-PD-L1) in a large phase Ib trial (JAVELIN Solid Tumor). Methods: Patients receiving >2 years of avelumab were reviewed and exploratory descriptive analyses were conducted. Results: Individuals with varying baseline characteristics who had received up to 6 years of avelumab were reviewed. Overall, 37/340 (10.9%) had received ≥2 years of treatment; in this subgroup, best response was complete response in 5.4%, partial response in 59.5% and stable disease in 29.7%; 51.4% had continued treatment beyond disease progression. Conclusions: In this study, 11% of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer received ≥2 years of avelumab treatment and experienced prolonged response or continued clinical benefit. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02395172 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Background Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and chemokine (C-X-C motif) receptor 4 (CXCR4) expression in CTCs and tumor tissue were evaluated as prognostic or predictive markers of CXCR4 peptide antagonist LY2510924 plus carboplatin-etoposide (CE) versus CE in extensive-stage disease small cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC). Methods This exploratory analysis of a phase II study evaluated CXCR4 expression in baseline tumor tissue and peripheral blood CTCs and in post-treatment CTCs. Optimum cutoff values were determined for CTC counts and CXCR4 expression in tumors and CTCs as predictors of survival outcome. Kaplan-Meier estimates and hazard ratios were used to determine biomarker prognostic and predictive values. Results There was weak positive correlation at baseline between CXCR4 expression in tumor tissue and CTCs. Optimum cutoff values were H-score ≥ 210 for CXCR4+ tumor, ≥7% CTCs with CXCR4 expression (CXCR4+ CTCs), and ≥6 CTCs/7.5 mL blood. Baseline H-score for CXCR4+ tumor was not prognostic of progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS). Baseline CXCR4+ CTCs ≥7% was prognostic of shorter PFS. CTCs ≥6 at baseline and cycle 2, day 1 were prognostic of shorter PFS and OS. None of the biomarkers at their respective optimum cutoffs was predictive of treatment response of LY2510924 plus CE versus CE. Conclusions In patients with ED-SCLC, baseline CXCR4 expression in tumor tissue was not prognostic of survival or predictive of LY2510924 treatment response. Baseline CXCR4+ CTCs ≥7% was prognostic of shorter PFS. CTC count ≥6 at baseline and after 1 cycle of treatment were prognostic of shorter PFS and OS.

BackgroundAvelumab, a human Ig-G1 monoclonal antibody targeting PD-L1 and approved in the USA for the treatment of metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma, has shown antitumour activity and an acceptable safety profile in patients with advanced solid tumours in a dose-escalation phase 1a trial. In this dose-expansion cohort of that trial, we assess avelumab treatment in a cohort of patients with advanced, platinum-treated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).MethodsIn this dose-expansion cohort of a multicentre, open-label, phase 1 study, patients with progressive or platinum-resistant metastatic or recurrent NSCLC were enrolled at 58 cancer treatment centres and academic hospitals in the USA. Eligible patients had confirmed stage IIIB or IV NSCLC with squamous or non-squamous histology, measurable disease by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1), tumour biopsy or archival sample for biomarker assessment, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1, among other criteria. Patient selection was not based on PD-L1 expression or expression of other biomarkers, including EGFR or KRAS mutation or ALK translocation status. Patients received infusional avelumab monotherapy 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks until disease progression or toxicity. The primary objective was to assess safety and tolerability. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01772004; enrolment in this cohort is closed and the trial is ongoing.FindingsBetween Sept 10, 2013, and June 24, 2014, 184 patients were enrolled and initiated treatment with avelumab. Median follow-up duration was 8·8 months (IQR 7·2-11·9). The most common treatment-related adverse events of any grade were fatigue (46 [25%] of 184 patients), infusion-related reaction (38 [21%]), and nausea (23 [13%]). Grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events occurred in 23 (13%) of 184 patients; the most common (occurring in more than two patients) were infusion-related reaction (four [2%] patients) and increased lipase level (three [2%]). 16 (9%) of 184 patients had a serious adverse event related to treatment with avelumab, with infusion-related reaction (in four [2%] patients) and dyspnoea (in two [1%]) occurring in more than one patient. Serious adverse events irrespective of cause occurred in 80 (44%) of 184 patients. Those occurring in more than five patients (≥3%) were dyspnoea (ten patients [5%]), pneumonia (nine [5%]), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (six [3%]). Immune-related treatment-related events occurred in 22 patients (12%). Of 184 patients, 22 (12% [95% CI 8-18]) achieved a confirmed objective response, including one complete response and 21 partial responses. 70 (38%) had stable disease. Overall, 92 (50%) of 184 patients achieved disease control (they had a confirmed response or stable disease as their best overall response). One patient was initially thought to have died from grade 5 radiation pneumonitis during the study; however, this adverse event was subsequently regraded to grade 3 and the death was attributed to disease progression.InterpretationAvelumab showed an acceptable safety profile and antitumour activity in patients with progressive or treatment-resistant NSCLC, providing a rationale for further studies of avelumab in this disease setting.FundingMerck KGaA and Pfizer.

PurposeEpidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) -tyrosine kinase inhibitors have proven efficacy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We hypothesized that erlotinib would be efficacious in the adjuvant setting.Patients and methodsAn international randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted in patients with completely resected IB to IIIA NSCLC whose tumors expressed EGFR protein by immunohistochemistry or EGFR amplification by fluorescence in situ hybridization. Patients were assigned 2:1 to erlotinib 150 mg once per day or placebo for 2 years. Stratification factors were stage, histology, previous adjuvant chemotherapy, smoking status, EGFR amplification status, and country. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS); key secondary end points were overall survival (OS) and DFS and OS in patients whose tumors had EGFR-activating mutations (EGFRm-positive).ResultsA total of 973 patients were randomly assigned (November 26, 2007, to July 7, 2010). There was no statistically significant difference in DFS (median, 50.5 months for erlotinib and 48.2 months for placebo; hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.10; P = .324). Among the 161 patients (16.5%) in the EGFRm-positive subgroup, DFS favored erlotinib (median, 46.4 v 28.5 months; hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.98; P = .039), but this was not statistically significant because of the hierarchical testing procedure. OS data are immature. Rash and diarrhea were common adverse events occurring in 528 (86.4%) and 319 (52.2%) patients treated with erlotinib, respectively, versus 110 (32.1%) and 54 (15.7%) patients receiving placebo. The most common grade 3 adverse events in patients treated with erlotinib were rash (22.3%) and diarrhea (6.2%).ConclusionAdjuvant erlotinib did not prolong DFS in patients with EGFR-expressing NSCLC or in the EGFRm-positive subgroup. Further evaluation of erlotinib is warranted in the EGFRm-positive subgroup.

Background: This study examined patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer who received long-term avelumab (anti-PD-L1) in a large phase Ib trial (JAVELIN Solid Tumor). Methods: Patients receiving >2 years of avelumab were reviewed and exploratory descriptive analyses were conducted. Results: Individuals with varying baseline characteristics who had received up to 6 years of avelumab were reviewed. Overall, 37/340 (10.9%) had received ≥2 years of treatment; in this subgroup, best response was complete response in 5.4%, partial response in 59.5% and stable disease in 29.7%; 51.4% had continued treatment beyond disease progression. Conclusions: In this study, 11% of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer received ≥2 years of avelumab treatment and experienced prolonged response or continued clinical benefit. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02395172 (ClinicalTrials.gov). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PURPOSE: Insufficient characterization of the optimal multidisciplinary team and lack of understanding of barriers to quality care are unmet needs in the management of stage III or IV non--small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A national survey was conducted to inform the design and execution of process improvement plans and address identified barriers. METHODS: A steering committee of multidisciplinary specialists and representation from patient advocacy collaborated for a comprehensive, double-blind, web-based survey (January-April 2019) to obtain insights on care delivery for patients with advanced NSCLC in a diverse set of US community cancer programs. RESULTS: Overall, 639 responses (160 unique cancer programs across 44 US states) were included; 41% (n = 261) of respondents indicated an absence of a thoracic multidisciplinary clinic in their cancer program. Engagement in shared decision making was significantly associated with the presence of navigation and radiation oncology disciplines (P ≤ .04); 19.2% and 33.3% of respondents belonged to cancer programs with no lung cancer screening and no protocol for biomarker testing, respectively. The frequency of tumor board meetings negatively correlated with time to complete disease staging (P = .03); the average time to first therapeutic intervention in newly diagnosed patients was 4 weeks. The most challenging barriers to quality care included insufficient quantity of biopsy material for biomarker testing, lack of primary care provider referrals, and diagnostic costs. CONCLUSION: Improving the quality of advanced NSCLC care, including optimization of a multidisciplinary team framework, may surmount barriers to care coordination, diagnosis and staging, and treatment planning, consequently improving adherence to evolving standards of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Oncologist is the property of Oxford University Press / USA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Oncologist is the property of Oxford University Press / USA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Oncologist is the property of Oxford University Press / USA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Purpose: Nivolumab has been administered using a 60-min infusion time. Reducing this time to 30 min would benefit both patients and infusion facilities. This analysis compared the safety of 30- and 60-min infusions of nivolumab in patients with previously treated advanced non-small cell lung cancer.Methods: CheckMate 153 is an open-label, phase 3b/4, predominantly community-based study ongoing in the United States and Canada. Patients with stage IIIB/IV disease with progression/recurrence after at least one prior systemic therapy received nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks over 30 or 60 min for 1 year or until disease progression. The primary outcome overall was to estimate the incidence of grade 3-5 treatment-related select adverse events; a retrospective objective was to estimate the incidence of hypersensitivity/infusion-related reactions (IRRs) with the 30-min infusion. Exploratory pharmacokinetic analyses were performed using a population pharmacokinetics model.Results: Of 1420 patients enrolled, 369 received only 30-min infusions and 368 received only 60-min infusions. Similar frequencies of hypersensitivity/IRRs were noted in patients receiving 30-min [2% (n = 8)] and 60-min [2% (n = 7)] infusions. Grade 3-4 treatment-related hypersensitivity/IRRs led to treatment discontinuation in < 1% of patients in each group; < 1% of patients in each group received systemic corticosteroids. Hypersensitivity/IRRs were managed by dosing interruptions, with minimal impact on total dose received. Nivolumab pharmacokinetics were predicted to be similar in the two groups.Conclusions: Nivolumab infused over 30 min had a comparable safety profile to the 60-min infusion, including a low incidence of IRRs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We added panitumumab to standard combination chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with advanced KRAS WT non-squamous NSCLC.Methods: Patients received panitumumab 9 mg/kg IV, pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 IV, and carboplatin AUC = 6 IV every 21 days. After 6 cycles, maintenance therapy with panitumumab and pemetrexed was administered every 21 days until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity.Results: 29 of 66 patients (44%) had objective responses. The median TTP was 6 months; median overall survival (OS) was 17 months. Panitumumab increased treatment-related toxicity, notably skin rash.Conclusions: The addition of panitumumab increased toxicity, and had no discernible impact on efficacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the study which examines the efficacy and safety of erlotinib monotherapy in patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). One objective of the study is to characterize the overall response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS) associated with erlotinib therapy. According to the findings, there are no safety signals noted, and the observed ORR and survival data are uniform with the results from the pivotal trial.

The article compares the efficacy of weekly docetaxel with the combination of docetaxel and gemcitabine in elderly or poor performance status patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) based on a randomized clinical trial in the U.S. The study involved 350 patients who were randomized and 345 of them received treatment. It found that treatment with docetaxel/gemcitabine produced a modest improvement but had no impact on survival when compared with single-agent weekly docetaxel.

Background: Antibodies targeting the immune checkpoint molecules PD-1 or PD-L1 have demonstrated clinical efficacy in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this trial we investigated the efficacy and safety of avelumab, an anti-PD-L1 antibody, in patients with NSCLC who had already received platinum-based therapy.Methods: JAVELIN Lung 200 was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial at 173 hospitals and cancer treatment centres in 31 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had stage IIIB or IV or recurrent NSCLC and disease progression after treatment with a platinum-containing doublet, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1, an estimated life expectancy of more than 12 weeks, and adequate haematological, renal, and hepatic function. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1), via an interactive voice-response system with a stratified permuted block method with variable block length, to receive either avelumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by PD-L1 expression (≥1% vs <1% of tumour cells), which was measured with the 73-10 assay, and histology (squamous vs non-squamous). The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed when roughly 337 events (deaths) had occurred in the PD-L1-positive population. Efficacy was analysed in all PD-L1-positive patients (ie, PD-L1 expression in ≥1% of tumour cells) randomly assigned to study treatment (the primary analysis population) and then in all randomly assigned patients through a hierarchical testing procedure. Safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02395172. Enrolment is complete, but the trial is ongoing.Findings: Between March 24, 2015, and Jan 23, 2017, 792 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive avelumab (n=396) or docetaxel (n=396). 264 participants in the avelumab group and 265 in the docetaxel group had PD-L1-positive tumours. In patients with PD-L1-positive tumours, median overall survival did not differ significantly between the avelumab and docetaxel groups (11·4 months [95% CI 9·4-13·9] vs 10·3 months [8·5-13·0]; hazard ratio 0·90 [96% CI 0·72-1·12]; one-sided p=0·16). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 251 (64%) of 393 avelumab-treated patients and 313 (86%) of 365 docetaxel-treated patients, including grade 3-5 events in 39 (10%) and 180 (49%) patients, respectively. The most common grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events were infusion-related reaction (six patients [2%]) and increased lipase (four [1%]) in the avelumab group and neutropenia (51 [14%]), febrile neutropenia (37 [10%]), and decreased neutrophil counts (36 [10%]) in the docetaxel group. Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 34 (9%) patients in the avelumab group and 75 (21%) in the docetaxel group. Treatment-related deaths occurred in four (1%) participants in the avelumab group, two due to interstitial lung disease, one due to acute kidney injury, and one due to a combination of autoimmune myocarditis, acute cardiac failure, and respiratory failure. Treatment-related deaths occurred in 14 (4%) patients in the docetaxel group, three due to pneumonia, and one each due to febrile neutropenia, septic shock, febrile neutropenia with septic shock, acute respiratory failure, cardiovascular insufficiency, renal impairment, leucopenia with mucosal inflammation and pyrexia, infection, neutropenic infection, dehydration, and unknown causes.Interpretation: Compared with docetaxel, avelumab did not improve overall survival in patients with platinum-treated PD-L1-positive NSCLC, but had a favourable safety profile.Funding: Merck and Pfizer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Nivolumab, a programmed death-1 inhibitor, prolonged overall survival and had a favourable safety profile versus docetaxel in previously treated patients with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the phase III CheckMate 057 trial. Aim To evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQoL) using patient-reported outcomes. Methods Disease-related symptoms and general health status were assessed using two validated patient-reported instruments, the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) and the European Quality of Life Five Dimensions (EQ-5D), respectively. The proportion of patients with disease-related symptom improvement at 12 weeks on the LCSS average symptom burden index (ASBI) was a secondary end-point. LCSS 3-item global index (3-IGI), EQ-5D utility index and EQ-5D visual analogue scale (VAS) scores were also determined. Mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) and time to first deterioration analyses assessed longitudinal changes. Results Mean baseline LCSS ASBI scores were similar in both arms. By week 12, rates of disease-related improvement (95% confidence interval) were similar between nivolumab (17.8% [13.6–22.7]) and docetaxel (19.7% [15.2–24.7]); however, numerical differences in LCSS ASBI mean change from baseline favoured nivolumab. Subsequently, LCSS ASBI scores improved with nivolumab and worsened with docetaxel, with statistically significant between-arm differences at weeks 12, 24, 30 and 42. HRQoL improvements with nivolumab versus docetaxel were also supported by the LCSS 3-IGI, EQ-5D VAS and MMRM analysis. Time to first HRQoL deterioration was longer with nivolumab than with docetaxel. Conclusion Nivolumab improved disease-related symptoms and overall health status versus docetaxel for second-line treatment of advanced non-squamous NSCLC. Clinical trial registration NCT01673867. Highlights • Nivolumab provided improvements in health-related quality of life in CheckMate 057. • Docetaxel was associated with stable or worsening of quality of life. • Disease-related deterioration was delayed with nivolumab versus docetaxel. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Atezolizumab, an anti-programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibody, inhibits PD-L1:PD-1 and PD-L1:B7.1 interactions, restoring anticancer immunity. Here, we report final analyses from the non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cohort of the first atezolizumab phase I study. Methods Patients with NSCLC received atezolizumab 1–20 mg/kg or 1200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks. Baseline PD-L1 expression on tumour cells (TCs) and tumour-infiltrating immune cells (ICs) was assessed (VENTANA SP142 immunohistochemistry assay). Exploratory subgroup analyses investigated responses by baseline PD-L1 expression and oncogenic mutational status. Results Eighty-nine patients, 98% of whom had received previous systemic therapy, were evaluable for safety and antitumour activity. Atezolizumab was well tolerated, with grade III/IV treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) observed in 10 patients (11%). All-grade TRAEs occurring in >10% of patients were fatigue, nausea and decreased appetite; grade III/IV TRAEs occurring in >2% of patients were fatigue, dyspnoea, hyponatremia and hypoxia. One patient died from treatment-unrelated pneumonia. Objective response rate (ORR) was 50% (95% confidence interval [CI], 28%–72%), 33% (20%–48%), 29% (18%–41%) and 11% (1%–35%) for the TC3 or IC3, TC2/3 or IC2/3, TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3 and TC0 and IC0 subgroups, respectively. All-patient ORR was 23% (95% CI, 14%–33%). Median duration of response was 16.4 months (range, 7.2–53.4+). One-, 2-, and 3-year survival rates were 63% (95% CI, 53%–73%), 37% (26%–47%) and 28% (18%–38%), respectively. Conclusions Single-agent atezolizumab was well tolerated with long-term clinical benefits, including durable responses and survival, in pretreated NSCLC. Improved responses and survival rates were seen with increasing baseline PD-L1 expression. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01375842 . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives The combination of pemetrexed and carboplatin is a standard first-line treatment for patients with advanced NSCLC. In this pilot phase II trial, we evaluated the feasibility of using pemetrexed and carboplatin as neoadjuvant therapy, prior to definitive surgical resection, for patients with localized NSCLC. Patients and methods Patients with potentially resectable, previously untreated, clinical stage IB-III, nonsquamous NSCLC were eligible for this trial. All patients received 4 cycles of pemetrexed (500 mg/m 2 ) and carboplatin (AUC 6.0) administered at 21 day intervals. Three to 6 weeks after completion of chemotherapy, definitive surgical resection was attempted. The primary endpoint of this trial was the 3-year survival rate. Results Forty-six patients began protocol treatment, and 40 completed 4 courses of pemetrexed/carboplatin. Surgical resection was performed in 27 patients (59%); all had pathologic partial responses. The estimated 3-year survival rate for the entire group was 46%. Toxicity of neoadjuvant therapy was consistent with toxicity previously reported with pemetrexed/carboplatin. Conclusions Administration of 4 courses of pemetrexed/carboplatin was feasible. The efficacy was similar to neoadjuvant regimens previously investigated. A significant number of patients 19 of 46 (41%) in this trial did not have surgical resection after neoadjuvant therapy. Further investigation of the role of neoadjuvant pemetrexed/carboplatin requires a larger, randomized clinical trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Ceritinib is a next-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitor, which has shown robust anti-tumour efficacy, along with intracranial activity, in patients with ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer. In phase 1 and 2 studies, ceritinib has been shown to be highly active in both ALK inhibitor-naive and ALK inhibitor-pretreated patients who had progressed after chemotherapy (mostly multiple lines). In this study, we compared the efficacy and safety of ceritinib versus single-agent chemotherapy in patients with advanced ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer who had previously progressed following crizotinib and platinum-based doublet chemotherapy.Methods: In this randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients aged at least 18 years with ALK-rearranged stage IIIB or IV non-small-cell lung cancer (with at least one measurable lesion) who had received previous chemotherapy (one or two lines, including a platinum doublet) and crizotinib and had subsequent disease progression, from 99 centres across 20 countries. Other inclusion criteria were a WHO performance status of 0-2, adequate organ function and laboratory test results, a life expectancy of at least 12 weeks, and having recovered from previous anticancer treatment-related toxicities. We randomly allocated patients (1:1; with blocking [block size of four]; stratified by WHO performance status [0 vs 1-2] and presence or absence of brain metastases) to oral ceritinib 750 mg per day fasted (in 21 day treatment cycles) or chemotherapy (intravenous pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 [investigator choice], every 21 days). Patients who discontinued chemotherapy because of progressive disease could cross over to the ceritinib group. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, assessed by a masked independent review committee using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1 in the intention-to-treat population, assessed every 6 weeks until month 18 and every 9 weeks thereafter. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01828112, and is ongoing but no longer recruiting patients.Findings: Between June 28, 2013, and Nov 2, 2015, we randomly allocated 231 patients; 115 (50%) to ceritinib and 116 (50%) to chemotherapy (40 [34%] to pemetrexed, 73 [63%] to docetaxel, and three [3%] discontinued before receiving treatment). Median follow-up was 16·5 months (IQR 11·5-21·4). Ceritinib showed a significant improvement in median progression-free survival compared with chemotherapy (5·4 months [95% CI 4·1-6·9] for ceritinib vs 1·6 months [1·4-2·8] for chemotherapy; hazard ratio 0·49 [0·36-0·67]; p<0·0001). Serious adverse events were reported in 49 (43%) of 115 patients in the ceritinib group and 36 (32%) of 113 in the chemotherapy group. Treatment-related serious adverse events were similar between groups (13 [11%] in the ceritinib group vs 12 [11%] in the chemotherapy group). The most frequent grade 3-4 adverse events in the ceritinib group were increased alanine aminotransferase concentration (24 [21%] of 115 vs two [2%] of 113 in the chemotherapy group), increased γ glutamyltransferase concentration (24 [21%] vs one [1%]), and increased aspartate aminotransferase concentration (16 [14%] vs one [1%] in the chemotherapy group). Six (5%) of 115 patients in the ceritinib group discontinued because of adverse events compared with eight (7%) of 116 in the chemotherapy group. 15 (13%) of 115 patients in the ceritinib group and five (4%) of 113 in the chemotherapy group died during the treatment period (from the day of the first dose of study treatment to 30 days after the final dose). 13 (87%) of the 15 patients who died in the ceritinib group died because of disease progression and two (13%) died because of an adverse event (one [7%] cerebrovascular accident and one [7%] respiratory failure); neither of these deaths were considered by the investigator to be treatment related. The five (4%) deaths in the chemotherapy group were all due to disease progression.Interpretation: These findings show that patients derive significant clinical benefit from a more potent ALK inhibitor after failure of crizotinib, and establish ceritinib as a more efficacious treatment option compared with chemotherapy in this patient population.Funding: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]