Crizotinib 250mg capsules

IMPORTANCE: Ensartinib, an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK), has shown systemic and central nervous system efficacy for patients with ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). OBJECTIVE: To compare ensartinib with crizotinib among patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC who had not received prior treatment with an ALK inhibitor. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This open-label, multicenter, randomized, phase 3 trial conducted in 120 centers in 21 countries enrolled 290 patients between July 25, 2016, and November 12, 2018. Eligible patients were 18 years of age or older and had advanced, recurrent, or metastatic ALK-positive NSCLC. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized (1:1) to ensartinib, 225 mg once daily, or crizotinib, 250 mg twice daily. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was blinded independent review committee-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included systemic and intracranial response, time to central nervous system progression, and overall survival. Efficacy was evaluated in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population as well as a prespecified modified ITT (mITT) population consisting of patients with central laboratory-confirmed ALK-positive NSCLC. RESULTS: A total of 290 patients (149 men [51.4%]; median age, 54 years [range, 25-90 years]) were randomized. In the ITT population, the median PFS was significantly longer with ensartinib than with crizotinib (25.8 [range, 0.03-44.0 months] vs 12.7 months [range, 0.03-38.6 months]; hazard ratio, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.35-0.72]; log-rank P < .001), with a median follow-up of 23.8 months (range, 0-44 months) for the ensartinib group and 20.2 months (range, 0-38 months) for the crizotinib group. In the mITT population, the median PFS in the ensartinib group was not reached, and the median PFS in the crizotinib group was 12.7 months (95% CI, 8.9-16.6 months; hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.30-0.66; log-rank P < .001). The intracranial response rate confirmed by a blinded independent review committee was 63.6% (7 of 11) with ensartinib vs 21.1% (4 of 19) with crizotinib for patients with target brain metastases at baseline. Progression-free survival for patients without brain metastases was not reached with ensartinib vs 16.6 months with crizotinib as a result of a lower central nervous system progression rate (at 12 months: 4.2% with ensartinib vs 23.9% with crizotinib; cause-specific hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.16-0.63; P = .001). Frequencies of treatment-related serious adverse events (ensartinib: 11 [7.7%] vs crizotinib: 9 [6.1%]), dose reductions (ensartinib: 34 of 143 [23.8%] vs crizotinib: 29 of 146 [19.9%]), or drug discontinuations (ensartinib: 13 of 143 [9.1%] vs crizotinib: 10 of 146 [6.8%]) were similar, without any new safety signals. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this randomized clinical trial, ensartinib showed superior efficacy to crizotinib in both systemic and intracranial disease. Ensartinib represents a new first-line option for patients with ALK-positive NSCLC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02767804.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC-ND

PURPOSE Lorlatinib improved progression-free survival (PFS) and intracranial activity versus crizotinib in patients with previously untreated, advanced, ALK -positive non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the phase III CROWN study. Here, we report long-term outcomes from CROWN after 5 years of follow-up. METHODS Two hundred ninety-six patients with ALK -positive NSCLC were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive lorlatinib 100 mg once daily (n = 149) or crizotinib 250 mg twice daily (n = 147). This post hoc analysis presents updated investigator-assessed efficacy outcomes, safety, and biomarker analyses. RESULTS With a median follow-up for PFS of 60.2 and 55.1 months, respectively, median PFS was not reached (NR [95% CI, 64.3 to NR]) with lorlatinib and 9.1 months (95% CI, 7.4 to 10.9) with crizotinib (hazard ratio [HR], 0.19 [95% CI, 0.13 to 0.27]); 5-year PFS was 60% (95% CI, 51 to 68) and 8% (95% CI, 3 to 14), respectively. Median time to intracranial progression was NR (95% CI, NR to NR) with lorlatinib and 16.4 months (95% CI, 12.7 to 21.9) with crizotinib (HR, 0.06 [95% CI, 0.03 to 0.12]). Safety profile was consistent with that in prior analyses. Emerging new ALK resistance mutations were not detected in circulating tumor DNA collected at the end of lorlatinib treatment. CONCLUSION After 5 years of follow-up, median PFS has yet to be reached in the lorlatinib group, corresponding to the longest PFS ever reported with any single-agent molecular targeted treatment in advanced NSCLC and across all metastatic solid tumors. These results coupled with prolonged intracranial efficacy and absence of new safety signals represent an unprecedented outcome for patients with advanced ALK -positive NSCLC and set a new benchmark for targeted therapies in cancer.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC-ND

Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangements are present in about 5-6% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cases and associated with increased risks of central nervous system (CNS) involvement. Envonalkib, a novel ALK inhibitor, demonstrated promising anti-tumor activity and safety in advanced ALK-positive NSCLC in the first-in-human phase I study. This phase III trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04009317) investigated the efficacy and safety of first-line envonalkib in advanced ALK-positive NSCLC cases. Totally 264 participants were randomized 1:1 to receive envonalkib (n = 131) or crizotinib (n = 133). Median independent review committee (IRC)-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) times were 24.87 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 15.64-30.36) and 11.60 (95% CI: 8.28-13.73) months in the envonalkib and crizotinib groups, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.34-0.64, p < 0.0001). IRC-assessed confirmed objective response rate (ORR) was higher (81.68% vs. 70.68%, p = 0.056) and duration of response was longer (median, 25.79 [95% CI, 16.53-29.47] vs. 11.14 [95% CI, 9.23-16.59] months, p = 0.0003) in the envonalkib group compared with the crizotinib group. In participants with baseline brain target lesions, IRC-assessed CNS-ORR was improved with envonalkib compared with crizotinib (78.95% vs. 23.81%). Overall survival (OS) data were immature, and median OS was not reached in either group (HR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.48-1.47, p = 0.5741). The 12-month OS rates were 90.6% (95% CI, 84.0%-94.5%) and 89.4% (95% CI, 82.8%-93.6%) in the envonalkib and crizotinib groups, respectively. Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events were observed in 55.73% and 42.86% of participants in the envonalkib and crizotinib groups, respectively. Envonalkib significantly improved PFS and delayed brain metastasis progression in advanced ALK-positive NSCLC.

Abstract licence: CC BY