Matching-adjusted indirect comparison: entrectinib versus crizotinib in ROS1 fusion-positive non-small cell lung cancer

Population-Adjusted Indirect Treatment Comparisons of Repotrectinib Among Patients with ROS1+ NSCLC

BACKGROUND

Head-to-head evidence comparing repotrectinib against other approved ROS1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) is not currently available. The objective of this study was to indirectly compare progression-free survival (PFS), the objective response rate (ORR), and the duration of response (DoR) for repotrectinib vs. crizotinib and vs. entrectinib in patients with TKI-naïve ROS1+ locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC).

METHODS

Using evidence from a systematic literature review, unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) were used to estimate population-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for PFS and DoR and odds ratios (ORs) for ORR for repotrectinib vs. crizotinib and vs. entrectinib among patients with TKI-naïve aNSCLC. The MAICs were adjusted for imbalances in baseline patient characteristics that were pre-specified as being prognostic or predictive of treatment effects. Weighted Cox (for PFS and DoR) and logistic (for ORR) regression models were fit. Supplementary analyses (SAs) explored the impact of missing data and modeling assumptions on effect estimates.

RESULTS

The evidence base was formed by TRIDENT-1 EXP-1 (repotrectinib; N = 71), a pooled set of five trials involving crizotinib (N = 273), and the pooled ALKA-372-001/STARTRK-1 and -2 trials (entrectinib; N = 168). After population adjustment, repotrectinib was associated with statistically significant improvements in PFS relative to crizotinib (HR = 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.29, 0.67) and entrectinib (HR = 0.57; 95% CI: 0.36, 0.91). Differences in ORR and DoR were not statistically significant but numerically favored repotrectinib. SAs were consistent with the main analyses across all comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

The analysis demonstrated the strong benefits of repotrectinib in PFS, which was robust across different SAs and supported by numerically favorable results for DoR (where available) and ORR. These results, alongside the published TRIDENT-1 clinical data, further support repotrectinib as a potential new standard of care for TKI-naïve patients with ROS1+ aNSCLC.

Advancing the role of real-world evidence in comparative effectiveness research

Aim: Comparative effectiveness research (CER) is essential for making informed decisions about drug access. It provides insights into the effectiveness and safety of new drugs compared with existing treatments, thereby guiding better healthcare decisions and ensuring that new therapies meet the real-world needs of patients and healthcare systems. Objective: To provide a tool that assists analysts and decision-makers in identifying the most suitable analytical approach for answering a CER question, given specific data availability contexts. Methods: A systematic literature review of the scientific literature was performed and existing regulatory and health technology assessment (HTA) guidance were evaluated to identify and compare recommendations and best practices. Based on this review a methods flowchart that synthesizes current practices and requirements was proposed. Results: The review did not find any papers that clearly identified the most appropriate analytical approach for answering CER questions under various conditions. Therefore, a methods flowchart was designed to inform analyst and decision makers choices starting from a well-defined scientific question. Conclusion: The proposed methods flowchart offers clear guidance on CER methodologies across a range of settings and research needs. It begins with a well-defined research question and considers multiple feasibility aspects related to CER. This tool aims to standardize methods, ensure rigorous and consistent research quality and promote a culture of evidence-based decision-making in healthcare.

Entrectinib versus crizotinib in Asian patients with ROS1-positive non-small cell lung cancer: A matching-adjusted indirect comparison

OBJECTIVES

Entrectinib and crizotinib are the only ROS proto-oncogene 1 receptor (ROS1) tyrosine kinase inhibitors available for most Asian patients. Their efficacy has neither been compared directly in clinical trials in patients with ROS1-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), nor indirectly in Asian populations. Thus, we aimed to provide comparative evidence of the efficacy and safety of entrectinib and crizotinib for Asian patients with advanced or metastatic ROS1-positive NSCLC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Efficacy, including overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), and safety were evaluated using an unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC). Individual patient data (IPD) from entrectinib trials (ALKA-372-001/EudraCT 2012-000148-88, STARTRK-1/NCT02097810, and STARTRK-2/NCT02568267; dosage, ≥600 mg once daily; enrollment cutoff, 02 July 2020; data cutoff, 02 August 2021) and aggregate data with simulated pseudo-IPD from a crizotinib trial (OxOnc/NCT01945021; dosage, 250 mg twice daily) were analyzed. Key eligibility criteria from the crizotinib trial were applied to IPD from the entrectinib trials. Baseline characteristics were match-adjusted between arms using propensity score weighting.

RESULTS

Fifty-two and 127 patients from the entrectinib and crizotinib trials, respectively, were available for evaluation. Median OS was not reached (NR; weighted; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 28.3-NR) in the entrectinib arm and 44.2 months (95 % CI 32.0-NR) in the crizotinib arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.662; 95 % CI 0.32-1.37). The respective median PFS was 39.4 months (weighted; 95 % CI 10.4-46.8) and 15.9 months (95 % CI 12.9-24.0) (HR, 0.688; 95 % CI 0.37-1.27). Most AEs were Grade 1-2; both drugs were generally well tolerated. Neutropenia was the most common Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse event for both entrectinib and crizotinib.

CONCLUSIONS

The outcomes in this MAIC study including Asian patients with ROS1-positive NSCLC showed a trend for greater clinical benefit with entrectinib versus crizotinib. These findings may contribute to better-informed treatment decisions.

Cost-effectiveness of large-panel next-generation sequencing in guiding first-line treatment decisions for patients with nonsquamous advanced non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines recommend broad-panel genomic profiling to identify actionable genomic alterations for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC).

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of large-panel next-generation sequencing (LP-NGS) compared with current empirical single-gene test (SGT) patterns to inform first-line treatment decisions for patients with aNSCLC from a US commercial payer perspective, accounting for the effect of testing turnaround time and time to treatment initiation.

METHODS

We developed a discrete-event simulation model to estimate the impact of LP-NGS vs SGT for patients with nonsquamous aNSCLC. Discrete events and timing included testing patterns, receipt of the initial test result, treatment initiation (targeted vs nontargeted therapies), switching, retesting, rebiopsies, clinical trial participation, progression on therapy, and death. LP-NGS and SGT cohorts each comprised 100,000 adults with aNSCLC simulated over a 5-year postdiagnosis period, assumed to have the same distribution of genomic alterations. The model predicted the proportion of patients receiving appropriate first-line therapy according to clinical practice guidelines. Economic outcomes included expected life-years gained, quality-adjusted life-years, and the total costs of care over 5 years. Sensitivity and scenario analyses explored the robustness of the base-case model results.

RESULTS

In the base-case model, LP-NGS was likely to identify more alterations than SGT. Total 5-year costs per patient were $539,658 for LP-NGS and $544,550 for SGT (net difference, $4,892 lower costs per patient for LP-NGS), which is likely to be cost-effective 95.1% of the time. The most influential model parameters on the 5-year total costs of care were preprogression nondrug medical costs on nontargeted therapy, NGS turnaround time, and clinical trial participation.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that LP-NGS to guide first-line treatment decisions is clinically more appropriate (more likely to identify alterations and subsequently allocate patients to clinically appropriate therapy) and provides a dominant cost-effectiveness treatment strategy over 5 years for patients with newly diagnosed aNSCLC in the United States.

Therapeutical Options in ROS1-Rearranged Advanced Non Small Cell Lung Cancer

ROS proto-oncogene 1 (ROS1) rearrangements occur in 0.9-2.6% of patients with non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), conferring sensitivity to treatment with specific tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKI). Crizotinib, a first-generation TKI, was the first target-therapy approved for the first-line treatment of ROS1-positive NSCLC. Recently, entrectinib, a multitarget inhibitor with an anti-ROS1 activity 40 times more potent than crizotinib and better activity on the central nervous system (CNS), received approval for treatment-naive patients. After a median time-to-progression of 5.5-20 months, resistance mechanisms can occur, leading to tumor progression. Therefore, newer generation TKI with greater potency and brain penetration have been developed and are currently under investigation. This review summarizes the current knowledge on clinicopathological characteristics of ROS1-positive NSCLC and its therapeutic options.

Effectiveness of crizotinib versus entrectinib in ROS1-positive non-small-cell lung cancer using clinical and real-world data

Aims: To compare clinical trial results for crizotinib and entrectinib in ROS1-positive non-small-cell lung cancer and compare clinical trial data and real-world outcomes for crizotinib. Patients & methods: We analyzed four phase I-II studies using a simulated treatment comparison (STC). A STC of clinical trial versus real-world evidence compared crizotinib clinical data to real-world outcomes. Results: Adjusted STC found nonsignificant trends favoring crizotinib over entrectinib: objective response rate, risk ratio = 1.04 (95% CI: 0.85-1.28); median duration of response, mean difference = 16.11 months (95% CI: -1.57- 33.69); median progression-free survival, mean difference = 3.99 months (95% CI: -6.27-14.25); 12-month overall survival, risk ratio = 1.01 (95% CI: 0.90-1.12). Nonsignificant differences were observed between the trial end point values and the real-world evidence for crizotinib. Conclusions: Crizotinib and entrectinib have comparable efficacy in ROS1-positive non-small-cell lung cancer.

Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison (MAIC) of Tepotinib with Other MET Inhibitors for the Treatment of Advanced NSCLC with MET Exon 14 Skipping Mutations

INTRODUCTION

MET exon 14 skipping in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC), can be targeted with MET inhibitors including tepotinib, capmatinib, savolitinib, and crizotinib. Matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) methodology was used to compare outcomes data between agents and to address bias from differences in baseline characteristics.

METHODS

Patient-level data from the VISION study (tepotinib) were weighted for comparison with aggregate data from the GEOMETRY mono-1 (capmatinib), NCT02897479 (savolitinib) and PROFILE 1001 (crizotinib) studies in patients with aNSCLC, using baseline characteristics prognostic for overall survival (OS) in VISION. Overall response rate (ORR), OS, progression-free survival (PFS), and duration of response (DOR) were compared. Patients were stratified by line of therapy: overall (all lines), previously treated, and treatment-naïve.

RESULTS

Improvements in ORR and all time-to-event endpoints were predicted for tepotinib compared with crizotinib and savolitinib in the different populations, although comparisons with savolitinib were hindered by considerable differences in baseline patient populations. Tepotinib appeared to be associated with prolonged PFS and OS compared with capmatinib in previously treated patients (PFS HR 0.54; 95% CI 0.36-0.83; OS HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.42-1.06) and the overall populations (PFS HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.43-0.86; OS HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.49-1.05), with smaller improvements in DOR. The ORR comparisons between tepotinib and capmatinib identified a swing of up to ± 6 percentage points in the weighted tepotinib ORR depending on the population studied (treatment-naïve vs. previously treated patients).

CONCLUSIONS

The MAIC identified potential differences in efficacy endpoints with the different MET inhibitors, and predicted prolonged PFS and OS with tepotinib compared with capmatinib and crizotinib. Although MAIC cannot balance for unobserved factors, it remains an informative method to contextualize single-arm studies, where head-to-head trials are unlikely to be feasible.

Entrectinib: A new Selective Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Approved for the Treatment of Pediatric and Adult Patients with NTRK Fusion-positive, Recurrent or Advanced Solid Tumors

BACKGROUND

Entrectinib is a highly potent ATP-competitive and selective inhibitor of tyrosine kinases - Trk A B C, ALK, and ROS1. It was developed by Roche and initially approved in Japan in 2019 for the treatment of pediatric and adult patients with NTRK fusion-positive, recurrent, or advanced solid tumors. In August 2019, entrectinib received accelerated approval by the U.S FDA for this indication. It is also the first FDA-approved drug designed to target both NTRK and ROS1.

OBJECTIVE

We aim to summarize recent studies related to the synthesis, mechanism of action, and clinical trials of the newly approved selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor entrectinib.

METHOD

We conduct a literature review of the research studies on the new highly-potent small-molecule entrectinib.

CONCLUSION

Entrectinib, based on three clinical studies (ALKA, STARTRK-1, and STARTRK-2), was well tolerated, with a manageable safety profile. It induced clinically meaningful responses in recurrent or advanced solid tumors associated with NTRK fusion-positive or ROS1+ NSCLC. It demonstrated substantial efficacy in patients with CNS metastases.

Entrectinib: A Review in NTRK+ Solid Tumours and ROS1+ NSCLC

Entrectinib (Rozlytrek®) is an orally active, CNS-penetrant, small-molecule, selective inhibitor of the tropomyosin receptor tyrosine kinases TRKA/B/C [encoded by the neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) genes NTRK1/2/3, respectively], the proto-oncogene tyrosine-protein kinase ROS1 (ROS1) and the anaplastic lymphoma kinase gene (ALK). It is approved for the treatment of adults and paediatric patients aged ≥ 12 years with NTRK fusion-positive (NTRK+) solid tumours and adults with ROS1 fusion-positive (ROS1+) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In trials in adults, entrectinib induced clinically meaningful and durable systemic responses in tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)-naïve patients with locally-advanced or metastatic NTRK+ solid tumours or ROS1+ NSCLC, irrespective of the presence or absence of CNS metastases at baseline. Moreover, entrectinib demonstrated substantial intracranial efficacy in patients with baseline CNS metastases. Entrectinb efficacy in paediatric patients was established on the basis of extrapolation of clinical trial data from adults with NTRK+ solid tumours and children and adolescents aged < 21 years with recurrent or refractory NTRK+ CNS/solid tumours. Entrectinib was generally well tolerated, with a manageable safety profile. Thus, entrectinib expands the range of treatment options for advanced NTRK+ solid tumours and ROS1+ NSCLC, and may be of particular value in patients with existing CNS metastases and those who are at risk of developing CNS metastases.

Molecular Pathology of Primary Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

Lung carcinoma is one of the most common human cancers and is estimated to have an incidence of approximately 2 million new cases per year worldwide with a 20% mortality rate. Lung cancer represents one of the leading causes of cancer related death in the world. Of all cancer types to affect the pulmonary system, non-small cell lung carcinoma comprises approximately 80-85% of all tumors. In the past few decades cytogenetic and advanced molecular techniques have helped define the genomic landscape of lung cancer, and in the process, revolutionized the clinical management and treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. The discovery of specific, recurrent genetic abnormalities has led to the development of targeted therapies that have extended the life expectancy of patients who develop carcinoma of the lungs. Patients are now routinely treated with targeted therapies based on identifiable molecular alterations or other predictive biomarkers which has led to a revolution in the field of pulmonary pathology and oncology. Numerous different testing modalities, with various strengths and limitations now exist which complicate diagnostic algorithms, however recently emerging consensus guidelines and recommendations have begun to standardize the way to approach diagnostic testing of lung carcinoma. Herein we provide an overview of the molecular genetic landscape of non-small cell lung carcinoma, with attention to those clinically relevant alterations which drive management, as well as review current recommendations for molecular testing.