Search

Tolerability and safety of treatments are important in oncology trials and should be informed by patient assessments. We identified the most relevant patient-reported symptomatic adverse events (AEs) to measure in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) exon 20 insertion mutations.This study selected relevant symptomatic AEs from 78 AEs available in the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) measurement system. Initially, symptomatic AEs were selected based on literature and product labeling reviews, and then core sets of symptomatic AEs were identified by patient and clinician interviews. Qualitative and descriptive analyses were performed using the data collected from three iterative rounds of patient interviews.During concept elicitation interviews involving 29 patients, 12 symptomatic AEs were identified and were then adapted into a 25-item PRO-CTCAE form for use in future clinical trials along with commonly used PRO measures. Cognitive interviews showed that the PRO-CTCAE items were easy to answer and appropriate for assessing the patients' experience with symptomatic AEs. This study also assessed disease symptoms, impacts, and overall patient experience.The 25-item PRO-CTCAE form captures the most relevant symptomatic AEs in this patient population, and it is available for future studies. Baseline characterization of AEs associated with this distinct patient group contributes to our broader knowledge about NSCLC and through platforms like Project Patient Voice will expand our understanding of treatment tolerability and safety for NSCLC. Ultimately, this data collection will help inform decision-making for patients, caregivers, healthcare providers, and regulators.

Circulating tumor DNA; Non–small cell lung cancer; Tumor biomarker ADN tumoral circulante; Cáncer de pulmón de células no pequeñas; Biomarcador tumoral ADN tumoral circulant; Càncer de pulmó de cèl·lules no petites; Biomarcador tumoral Introduction Brigatinib is a potent next-generation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for treatment-naive and crizotinib-refractory advanced ALK-positive (ALK+) NSCLC. We evaluated brigatinib after other next-generation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Methods In this single-arm, phase 2, ALK in Lung Cancer Trial of brigAtinib-2 (NCT03535740), patients with advanced ALK+ NSCLC whose disease progressed on alectinib or ceritinib received brigatinib 180 mg once daily (after 7-d 90-mg lead-in). Primary end point was independent review committee (IRC)-assessed overall response rate (ORR). Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) was analyzed. Results Among 103 patients (data cutoff: September 30, 2020; median follow-up [range]: 10.8 [0.5–17.7] mo), confirmed IRC-ORR was 26.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 18.0–35.8), median duration of response, 6.3 months (95% CI: 5.6–not reached), and median progression-free survival (mPFS), 3.8 months (95% CI: 3.5–5.8). mPFS was 1.9 months (95% CI: 1.8–3.7) in patients with ctDNA-detectable baseline ALK fusion (n = 64). Among 86 patients who progressed on alectinib, IRC-ORR was 29.1% (95% CI: 19.8–39.9); mPFS was 3.8 months (95% CI: 1.9–5.4). Resistance mutations were present in 33.3% (26 of 78) of baseline ctDNA; 54% (14 of 26) of mutations were G1202R; 52% (33 of 64) of patients with detectable ALK fusion had EML4-ALK variant 3. Most common all-grade treatment-related adverse events were increased creatine phosphokinase (32%) and diarrhea (27%). The mean dose intensity of brigatinib (180 mg once daily) was 85.9%. Conclusions In ALK in Lung Cancer Trial of brigAtinib-2, brigatinib was found to have a limited activity in patients with ALK+ NSCLC post-ceritinib or post-alectinib therapy. mPFS was longer with brigatinib in patients without baseline detectable plasma ALK fusion.

Background Real-world evidence for brigatinib, a next-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (ALK-TKI) used in ALK-rearranged non-small cell lung cancer, is scarce. This retrospective study evaluated real-world brigatinib utilization in the US post other ALK-TKIs. Materials and Methods Adults with ≥1 brigatinib claim (index date) between 1 April 2017 and 30 September 2020 in the IQVIA longitudinal pharmacy claims database were followed until dose reduction, discontinuation, or end of follow-up. Patients had ≥12 months pre– and ≥1-month post–index observations. Results A total of 413 patients treated with brigatinib were analyzed. Over 80% received ≥1 prior ALK-TKI; alectinib and crizotinib were the most common (58.8% and 51.3% patients, respectively). The median follow-up was 8.4 months. The median time to treatment discontinuation (TTD) for brigatinib was 10.3 months (95% CI, 8.2-15.0), with 45% remaining on therapy at 12 months. The TTD was shortest (~8 months) in patients receiving both crizotinib and alectinib and longest in patients who received alectinib only prior to brigatinib (11.8 months). Adherence was high, with 92.7% of patients having a medication possession ratio of >80%. The mean dose compliance score was 1.0. Most patients reached the brigatinib dose of 180 mg/day (77%); 13.2% of patients had a dose reduction, with 89.3% and 84.6% continuing 180 mg/day therapy at 3 and 6 months, respectively. Conclusions Brigatinib appears to be effective and well-tolerated in the real-world ALK+ NSCLC population in the US, showing benefit in patients after a next-generation ALK-TKI. Notably, dose reduction rates appeared markedly less than those seen in trials when most trial-related dose reductions were for asymptomatic laboratory abnormalities.

Aim: To conduct an indirect treatment comparison (ITC) of the relative efficacy of brigatinib and alectinib for progression-free survival in people with tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)-naive ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Final aggregate and patient-level data from the ALTA-1L trial comparing brigatinib to crizotinib and published aggregate data from ALEX (comparing alectinib to crizotinib) were contrasted using Bucher ITC and matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs). Results: No statistically significant differences were identified between brigatinib and alectinib in reducing the risk of disease progression overall and in patients with baseline central nervous system metastases. Conclusion: Brigatinib appeared similar to alectinib in reducing risk of disease progression for people with TKI-naive ALK-positive NSCLC.

ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor; Brigatinib; Non–small cell lung cancer Inhibidor de la tirosina quinasa ALK; Brigatinib; Cáncer de pulmón de células no pequeñas Inhibidor de la tirosina cinasa ALK; Brigatinib; Càncer de pulmó de cèl·lules no petites 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.

Mobocertinib, an oral, first-in-class epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor selective for

This observational study describes the real-world economic burden in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (Administrative claims data (Truven Health MarketScan® Commercial Claims and Encounters database and Medicare Supplemental and Coordination of Benefits database; January 1, 2015-March 31, 2020) for adult patients withA total of 496 patients were eligible for analysis. Mean PPPM total healthcare costs were $21,961 for all patients receiving up to 1 year of a first-line ALK inhibitor. Patients were significantly more likely to have higher mean PPPM total costs if they had BM prior to first-line ALK inhibitor (vs. no BM; odds ratio: 1.11; 95% confidence interval: 1.02, 1.21;The economic burden in patients with

In ALTA-1 L, first-line brigatinib versus crizotinib significantly prolonged progression-free survival in advanced ALK-positive (ALK+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We report health-related quality of life (HRQOL) outcomes from ALTA-1 L.HRQOL was assessed using European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and lung cancer-specific module (QLQ-LC13). HRQOL time to worsening, change from baseline, and duration of improvement were analyzed.EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC13 compliance was90 % for both groups (n = 131 each). Brigatinib versus crizotinib significantly delayed time to worsening in the EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status (GHS)/QOL (median: 26.74 vs 8.31 months; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.70; 95 % CI: 0.49, 1.00; log-rank P = 0.0485); emotional functioning, social functioning, fatigue, nausea and vomiting, appetite loss, and constipation scales (log-rank P0.05); delays in time to worsening for the physical, role, and cognitive functioning scales were not statistically significant. Mean change from baseline showed greater improvement in GHS/QOL and most EORTC QLQ-C30 functional and symptom scales with brigatinib versus crizotinib. Among patients with GHS/QOL improvement, brigatinib had longer duration of improvement versus crizotinib (median: not reached vs 11.99 months); similar results were seen in the physical, role, emotional, and social functioning; fatigue; nausea and vomiting; and appetite loss scales. Median time to worsening in dyspnea (QLQ-LC13) was 23.98 versus 8.25 months (brigatinib vs crizotinib; HR: 0.64; 95 % CI: 0.39, 1.05).Brigatinib significantly delayed time to worsening and prolonged duration of improvement in GHS/QOL versus crizotinib, supported by improvement in functional and symptom scores. These preliminary analyses suggest brigatinib is the first ALK inhibitor with better HRQOL versus another ALK inhibitor in ALK inhibitor-naive advanced ALK + NSCLC.

A systematic literature review (SLR) identified interventional and real-world evidence (RWE) studies reporting clinical outcomes forThe SLR identified 23 RWE and 19 original interventional studies. In the meta-analysis of RWE, pooled response and survival outcomes were low for first-line EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immuno-oncology (IO) agents. First-line chemotherapy resulted in a pooled ORR 25.7%, pooled PFS 5.6 months, and pooled OS 18.3 months. Pooled outcomes were further reduced in second or later lines (≥2 L): pooled ORR was 5.0%, 3.3%, and 13.9%; pooled PFS was 2.1 months, 2.3 months, and 4.4 months; and pooled OS was 14.1 months, 8.8 months, and 17.1 months (not a pooled result) for EGFR-TKIs, IO agents, and chemotherapy, respectively. Interventional studies reported outcomes for TKIs (mobocertinib, poziotinib, osimertinib, afatinib, CLN-081, DZD9008), a monoclonal antibody (amivantamab), and a heat shock protein 90 inhibitor (luminespib). While there is limited RWE for the recently approved agents mobocertinib and amivantamab, which specifically target exon 20 insertion mutations, interventional evidence supports their potential as effective treatment options.Conventional treatments used in patients with

Patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) whose tumors harbor anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangements can be treated with ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors. We assessed real-world ALK biomarker testing and treatment patterns of patients with NSCLC in the United States.Data were extracted from the Flatiron Health electronic health record-derived deidentified database for patients aged ≥18 years with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and ≥2 clinic visits between January 2011 and December 2019.Among 60,025 eligible patients, tumors from 36,691 (61.1%) patients were tested for ALK rearrangements, and 1042 (2.8%) tested positive (ALK+). From 2011 to 2019, ALK testing rates increased from 33.1% to 73.0%; testing via fluorescence in situ hybridization declined from 68.3% to 32.1% while next-generation sequencing increased from1% to 52.2%. Although tissue samples were more commonly used than blood (85.1% vs. 13.5% of tests), blood sample testing increased from 0.1% in 2011 to 28.2% in 2019. Median (interquartile range) time from diagnosis of advanced NSCLC to first ALK+ test result was 23 (13-43) days, including laboratory processing time of 9 (6-14) days. For the 24.7% of patients with an ALK+ test result who began treatment before receiving the positive result, chemotherapy was initiated most often overall until 2018 when immuno-oncology agents became most common.Although ALK testing in NSCLC increased over time, testing rates among eligible patients did not reach 100% during the study period. Treatment decisions for some patients with NSCLC may have been made without important, guideline-recommended biomarker data.

Càncer de pulmó; Brigatinib; Estudi ALTA-1L Cáncer de pulmón; Brigatinib; Estudio ALTA-1L Lung cancer; Brigatinib; ALTA-1L study PURPOSE Brigatinib, a next-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitor, demonstrated superior progression-free survival (PFS) and improved health-related quality of life (QoL) versus crizotinib in advanced ALK inhibitor–naive ALK-positive non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) at first interim analysis (99 events; median brigatinib follow-up, 11.0 months) in the open-label, phase III ALTA-1L trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02737501). We report results of the second prespecified interim analysis (150 events). METHODS Patients with ALK inhibitor–naive advanced ALK-positive NSCLC were randomly assigned 1:1 to brigatinib 180 mg once daily (7-day lead-in at 90 mg once daily) or crizotinib 250 mg twice daily. The primary end point was PFS as assessed by blinded independent review committee (BIRC). Investigator-assessed efficacy, blood samples for pharmacokinetic assessments, and patient-reported outcomes were also collected. RESULTS Two hundred seventy-five patients were randomly assigned (brigatinib, n = 137; crizotinib, n = 138). With median follow-up of 24.9 months for brigatinib (150 PFS events), brigatinib showed consistent superiority in BIRC-assessed PFS versus crizotinib (hazard ratio [HR], 0.49 [95% CI, 0.35 to 0.68]; log-rank P < .0001; median, 24.0 v 11.0 months). Investigator-assessed PFS HR was 0.43 (95% CI, 0.31 to 0.61; median, 29.4 v 9.2 months). No new safety concerns emerged. Brigatinib delayed median time to worsening of global health status/QoL scores compared with crizotinib (HR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.49 to 1.00]; log-rank P = .049). Brigatinib daily area under the plasma concentration–time curve was not a predictor of PFS (HR, 1.005 [95% CI, 0.98 to 1.031]; P = .69). CONCLUSION Brigatinib represents a once-daily ALK inhibitor with superior efficacy, tolerability, and QoL over crizotinib, making it a promising first-line treatment of ALK-positive NSCLC. Supported by ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Cambridge, MA, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited. Professional medical writing assistance was provided by Lauren Gallagher, RPh, PhD, and Lela Creutz, PhD, of Peloton Advantage, Parsippany, NJ, an OPEN Health company, and funded by Millennium Pharmaceuticals. Supported by National Health Service funding to the Royal Marsden Hospital/Institute of Cancer Research NIHR Biomedical Research Centre (S.P.).

Aims: To describe the real-world economic burden of patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive (ALK+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with post-crizotinib, second-line ALK inhibit...

BackgroundSecond-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) alectinib and brigatinib have shown efficacy as front-line treatments for ALK-positive non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). No head-to-head data are currently available for brigatinib vs alectinib in the ALK-TKI–naive population. Objective: To estimate the relative overall survival (OS) for brigatinib vs alectinib with indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs) using ALEX and ALTA-1L clinical trial data. Methods: The latest aggregate data from the ALEX trial and final patient-level data from ALTA-1L were used. ITCs were conducted with/without treatment crossover adjustments to estimate relative OS. Bucher methods, anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs), and unanchored MAICs were employed in ITCs without treatment crossover adjustments. An inverse probability of censoring weight Cox model, a marginal structure model, and rank-preserving structural failure time models (with/without re-censoring) within an anchored MAIC were used in ITCs with treatment crossover adjustments. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported. Results: HRs for brigatinib vs alectinib for relative OS generated from ITCs without treatment crossover adjustments ranged from 0.90 (95% CI: 0.59–1.38) in the unanchored MAIC to 1.20 (95% CI: 0.69–2.11) using the Bucher method. Methods employing treatment switching adjustments estimated HRs for relative OS ranging from 0.74 (95% CI: 0.38–1.45) to 1.11 (95% CI: 0.63–1.94). Results from all ITCs did not indicate statistically different survival profiles. Conclusion: Regardless of ITC methodology, OS is comparable for brigatinib vs alectinib in patients with ALK+ NSCLC previously untreated with an ALK inhibitor.

EGFR exon 20 insertion mutation-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is rare, has a poor prognosis, and outcomes are not fully established. We describe and evaluate outcomes from real-world and clinical evidence in these patients. A systematic literature review (SLR) identified interventional and real-world evidence (RWE) studies reporting clinical outcomes for EGFR exon 20 insertion mutation-positive NSCLC. Meta-analyses were conducted by line of therapy to synthesize pooled survival and response outcomes across RWE. Published evidence from interventional studies was summarized individually. The SLR identified 23 RWE and 19 original interventional studies. In the meta-analysis of RWE, pooled response and survival outcomes were low for first-line EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immuno-oncology (IO) agents. First-line chemotherapy resulted in a pooled ORR 25.7%, pooled PFS 5.6 months, and pooled OS 18.3 months. Pooled outcomes were further reduced in second or later lines (≥2 L): pooled ORR was 5.0%, 3.3%, and 13.9%; pooled PFS was 2.1 months, 2.3 months, and 4.4 months; and pooled OS was 14.1 months, 8.8 months, and 17.1 months (not a pooled result) for EGFR-TKIs, IO agents, and chemotherapy, respectively. Interventional studies reported outcomes for TKIs (mobocertinib, poziotinib, osimertinib, afatinib, CLN-081, DZD9008), a monoclonal antibody (amivantamab), and a heat shock protein 90 inhibitor (luminespib). While there is limited RWE for the recently approved agents mobocertinib and amivantamab, which specifically target exon 20 insertion mutations, interventional evidence supports their potential as effective treatment options. Conventional treatments used in patients with EGFR exon 20 insertion mutation-positive NSCLC have limited efficacy, though chemotherapy appeared to be associated with better response and survival outcomes than non-exon 20 targeting EGFR-TKIs and IO agents. This supports the need to identify EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations as the availability of new targeted treatments may offer additional therapeutic options to these patients.

EGFR exon20 insertions (ex20ins) are targeted by novel compounds in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, data about outcome under conventional therapies and the influence of molecular features are scarce.We retrospectively analysed 118 patients with evaluation of radiologic response based on RECIST v1.1. TP53 status was available for 88 cases.Platinum doublets and chemoimmunotherapy showed similar response rates (20-25%), disease control rates (80%) and median progression-free survival (mPFS, ≈7 months), which were longer compared to monochemotherapy (9%, 59%, 4.1 months), EGFR inhibitors (0%, 46%, 3.0) and PD-(L)1 inhibitors (0%, 30%, 2.1; p 0.05). Overall survival (OS) was not dependent on the choice of first-line treatment, but related to more lines of systemic therapy (p 0.05). TP53 mutations and brain metastases were associated with shorter PFS under platinum doublets and EGFR inhibitors (HR 3.3-6.1, p 0.01), and shorter OS for patients receiving both treatments (p 0.05). More tumour CD8Platinum doublets and chemoimmunotherapy have the highest activity with ORR of 20-25% and mPFS of approximately 7 months, regardless of the cytotoxic partner, while PD-(L)1 inhibitors show limited efficacy. TP53 mutations, brain metastases and a lower tumour CD8/Th1-cell ratio are independently associated with shorter survival.

Aims: Health utilities summarize a patient’s overall health status. This study estimated utilities based on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Qu...

Background: Mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene have been identified in 10%–50% of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Exon 20 insertion mutations represent about 2%–10% of this group. Reports of real world experience of NSCLC patients with EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations are limited. This study describes patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and survival outcomes of NSCLC patients with EGFR exon 20 insertions based on real world data. Methods: Flatiron Health electronic health record data, largely from community oncology practices, from January 2011–April 2018 were used for this retrospective observational study. Treatment-naïve (TN) and relapsed/refractory (RR) second-line patients diagnosed with NSCLC with EGFR exon 20 insertion mutation aged ≥18 years at treatment initiation were included. Patient characteristics were described, and Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to assess real world overall survival (rwOS) separately for TN (starting at first-line therapy) and RR (starting at second-line therapy) patients. Results: There were 128 TN and 71 RR patients identified. Median age was 66.5 and 65.0 years for TN and RR patients, respectively, and over half were female (TN: 59.4%, RR: 53.5%). Among 83 TN and 47 RR patients with known ECOG score at advanced diagnosis, most had score 0–1 (TN: 56.3%; RR: 62.0%). Central nervous system metastases were observed in 35.2% of TN and 33.8% of RR patients. While 45.3% of TN patients received any chemotherapy, approximately 20% of both TN and RR patient groups had exposure to various EGFR TKIs. Overall, median rwOS was low at 14.6 months for TN patients, and 10.1 months for RR patients. Conclusion: Real world survival of patients with EGFR exon 20 NSCLC remains poor. Treatment with any chemotherapy regimen was most commonly used followed by EGFR TKIs in TN patients, while the proportion treated with chemotherapy and EGFR TKIs was similar in RR patients. Despite limited evidence in this population, over a fifth of TN and RR patients received EGFR TKI monotherapy. This study demonstrated unmet need for improved therapeutic options in TN and RR patients with NSCLC with EGFR exon 20 insertion mutation.

Background: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations are frequently found in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Various EGFR mutations respond differently to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), and several TKIs have been approved for use on common mutations but none have been approved for EGFR exon 20 insertions, indicating a need for targeted therapy for this subpopulation. A systematic literature review (SLR) and meta-analysis were conducted to synthesize epidemiological and outcome data for the uncommon EGFR exon 20 insertion mutation. Methods: An SLR was performed on August 7, 2018 following the Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, using the Population, Intervention Comparators, Outcomes and Study Design (PICOS) criteria. Studies were identified based on a systematic search using key biomedical literature databases: EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane. Relevant congress abstracts published between 2015–2018 were also identified. Two independent reviewers screened all citations and full-text articles using PICOS-based criteria; any discrepancies were resolved by a third independent reviewer. Data were extracted into a predefined template for meta-analysis and summarized using the PRISMA flow diagram. Results: A total of 61 studies reporting the number of EGFR mutation−positive patients and/or NSCLC patients were identified. A meta-analysis found that 3.7% of EGFR mutation−positive patients and 0.8% of NSCLC patients harbored the EGFR exon 20 insertion, with geographic variations in epidemiology. There were 12, 10, and 12 studies, respectively, that reported overall survival, progression-free survival, and overall response rates in 2 cohorts, patients with EGFR exon 20 insertions and patients without EGFR exon 20 mutations. A Most patient populations in these studies included a mixture of treatment at various lines. A meta-analysis of outcomes across these studies showed that patients with EGFR exon 20 insertions experienced worse outcomes compared with those without the mutation (Table 1). Meta-analyses were weighted based on each study’s relevant population. No economic or quality of life studies were identified. Conclusions: Exon 20 insertion mutations represent an important subgroup of EGFR mutations in patients with NSCLC, and current therapies have limited efficacy. These relatively poor outcomes indicate a need for novel treatment strategies.

Aim: Evaluate real-world patient preferences, experiences and outcomes (health-related quality of life [HRQoL]) from patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive (ALK+) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) utilizing the ALKConnect Patient Insight Network. Patients & methods: Demographics, disease history/status/treatment, patient preferences and HRQoL (MD Anderson Symptom Inventory lung cancer module, reported as symptom severity and interference) were evaluated for US adults with ALK+ NSCLC. Results: Among 104 patients (median age: 53.0 years, 67.3% female, 40.0% employed), HRQoL and 3-month delay in disease progression were important treatment attributes. Burdensome symptoms included fatigue and disturbed sleep. Symptoms interfered most with work and day-to-day activity. Higher HRQoL was associated with ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment and employment. Conclusion: ALKConnect demonstrated that disease progression, HRQoL, fatigue/sleep, ALK TKIs and employment matter in ALK+ NSCLC.

Background Little is known about real-world treatment and outcomes of patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive (ALK+) advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and Methods This retrospective study of the Flatiron Health EHR-derived deidentified database included patients with a lung cancer diagnosis and confirmed advanced NSCLC who received ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy (January 1, 2011, through June 30, 2018). Patient characteristics and treatment patterns were characterized. Real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) and time to discontinuation were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results First-line ALK TKI therapy was administered to 581 patients (27.5% had brain metastasis on or prior to initiation) and second-line ALK TKI therapy to 254 patients post crizotinib (45.7% had brain metastasis on or prior to second-line ALK TKI initiation). Crizotinib (84.6%; n = 492) was the most commonly administered first-line ALK TKI therapy. For second-line ALK TKI post crizotinib (n = 254), 49.6% received ceritinib, 41.7% received alectinib, 5.9% received crizotinib retreatment, and 2.8% received brigatinib. Median (95% confidence interval [CI]) rwPFS was 7.47 (6.48–8.32) months for first-line and 7.30 (5.72–8.42) months for second-line ALK TKI. Median (95% CI) rwPFS was significantly longer among first-line ALK TKI patients without than with brain metastasis (8.52 [7.57–10.59] vs. 4.97 [3.75–5.99] months; p Conclusion Median rwPFS in patients with advanced ALK+ NSCLC was

Aim: To assess time-to-treatment discontinuation (TTD) of brigatinib following treatment with ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor(s) (TKIs) in patients with ALK-positive (ALK+) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving brigatinib through the international early access program. Patients & analysis: Analysis was performed for patients with ALK+ NSCLC treated with prior ALK TKIs, including next-generation ALK TKIs. Results: Data for 604 patients (21 countries), including patients with prior next-generation ALK TKIs, were reported. The median TTD of brigatinib in patients with prior crizotinib, alectinib, ceritinib or lorlatinib was 10.0, 8.7, 10.3 and 7.5 months, respectively. Conclusion: Brigatinib appears to be effective and tolerable in real-world clinical practice regardless of prior treatment with first or NG ALK TKIs.

Introduction The treatment landscape for anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) primarily involves ALK-directed tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Although therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is a treatment option in NSCLC, the efficacy of ICI is inconclusive in ALK-positive NSCLC as a result of limited data. This retrospective real-world study sought to describe the characteristics of ALK-positive NSCLC patients treated with ICI and to assesses treatment outcomes in US oncology practices. Patients and Methods This analysis used the Flatiron Health electronic health record–derived deidentified database and included adult (18 years and older) ALK-positive advanced NSCLC patients with receipt of one or more ICIs after January 1, 2015. Median time to ICI discontinuation and real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) were estimated by Kaplan-Meier methods. Results Of 83 patients with ALK-positive NSCLC treated with ICIs, 50.6% (n = 42) received ICI without a prior ALK TKI. Median time to ICI discontinuation was 2.17 months (95% confidence interval, 1.41, 3.32). The median rwPFS was 2.34 months (95% confidence interval, 1.55, 3.09); in patients who received an ICI without prior ALK TKI, it was 3.9 months, and in patients who received ICI therapy after an ALK TKI, it was 1.5 months. Conclusions Real-world effectiveness (rwPFS) of ICIs in ALK-positive NSCLC patients, whether provided before or after TKIs, was limited, underscoring the relative lack of efficacy of ICI in this patient population, particularly compared to approved ALK TKIs.

Importance Metastatic non–small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) withEGFRexon 20 insertion (EGFRex20ins) mutations is associated with a poor prognosis. Mobocertinib is an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor designed to selectively targetEGFRex20ins mutations. Objective To evaluate treatment outcomes and safety of mobocertinib in patients with previously treatedEGFRex20ins-positive mNSCLC. Design, Setting, and Participants This 3-part, open-label, phase 1/2 nonrandomized clinical trial with dose-escalation/dose-expansion cohorts (28 sites in the US) and a single-arm extension cohort (EXCLAIM; 40 sites in Asia, Europe, and North America) was conducted between June 2016 and November 2020 (data cutoff date). The primary analysis populations were the platinum-pretreated patients (PPP) cohort and the EXCLAIM cohort. The PPP cohort included 114 patients with platinum-pretreatedEGFRex20ins-positive mNSCLC who received mobocertinib 160 mg once daily from the dose-escalation (n = 6), dose-expansion (n = 22), and EXCLAIM (n = 86) cohorts. The EXCLAIM cohort included 96 patients with previously treatedEGFRex20ins-positive mNSCLC (10 were not platinum pretreated and thus were excluded from the PPP cohort). Interventions Mobocertinib 160 mg once daily. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point of the PPP and EXCLAIM cohorts was confirmed objective response rate (ORR) assessed by independent review committee (IRC). Secondary end points included confirmed ORR by investigator, duration of response, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. Results Among the PPP (n = 114) and EXCLAIM (n = 96) cohorts, the median (range) age was 60 (27-84) and 59 (27-80) years, respectively; most patients were women (75 [66%] and 62 [65%], respectively) and of Asian race (68 [60%] and 66 [69%], respectively). At data cutoff, median follow-up was 14.2 months in the PPP cohort (median 2 prior anticancer regimens; 40 [35%] had baseline brain metastases), with confirmed ORR of 28% (95% CI, 20%-37%) by IRC assessment and 35% (95% CI, 26%-45%) by investigator assessment; median duration of response by IRC assessment was 17.5 months (95% CI, 7.4-20.3). Median progression-free survival by IRC assessment was 7.3 months (95% CI, 5.5-9.2). Median overall survival was 24.0 months (95% CI, 14.6-28.8). In the EXCLAIM cohort, median follow-up was 13.0 months, with confirmed ORR by IRC assessment of 25% (95% CI, 17%-35%) and by investigator assessment of 32% (95% CI, 23%-43%). The most common treatment-related adverse events were diarrhea and rash. Conclusions and Relevance In this open-label, phase 1/2 nonrandomized clinical trial, mobocertinib was associated with clinically meaningful benefit in patients with previously treatedEGFRex20ins-positive mNSCLC, with a manageable safety profile. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT02716116

Objective: Brigatinib, ceritinib, and alectinib are approved to treat crizotinib-refractory anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive (ALK+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but no trial has compared them head-to-head. A matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) was conducted to estimate the relative efficacy of these agents in the crizotinib-refractory setting. Methods: MAIC is a propensity score-type method that adjusts for differences in baseline characteristics between trials to estimate relative efficacy. Analyses were based on patient-level data from the ALTA trial for brigatinib and published summary-level trial data from ASCEND-1 and ASCEND-2 for ceritinib and NP28761 and NP28673 for alectinib. Objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared. Results: After matching, all key baseline characteristics were balanced between trials. Compared with ceritinib, brigatinib was associated with longer PFS (ASCEND-1: median 15.7 vs 6.9 months, hazard ratio (HR) [95% confidence interval] = 0.38 [0.26–0.57]; ASCEND-2: median = 18.3 vs 7.2 months, HR = 0.33 [0.20–0.56]) and OS (ASCEND-1: not available; ASCEND-2: median 27.6 vs 14.9 months, HR = 0.33 [0.17–0.63]). Versus alectinib, brigatinib was associated with longer PFS (NP28761: median = 17.6 vs 8.2 months, HR = 0.56 [0.36–0.86]; NP28673: median = 17.6 vs 8.9 months, HR = 0.61 [0.40–0.93]); results for OS were inconclusive (NP28761: median = 27.6 vs 22.7 months, HR = 0.70 [0.42–1.16]; NP28673: median = 27.6 vs 26.0 months, HR = 0.66 [0.39–1.09]). ORR was similar. Conclusion: In crizotinib-refractory ALK + NSCLC patients, relative efficacy estimates suggest brigatinib may have prolonged PFS and OS vs ceritinib and prolonged PFS vs alectinib. Trial registration:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02094573. Trial registration:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01283516. Trial registration:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01685060. Trial registration:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01871805. Trial registration:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01801111.