Targeted therapy for advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase (<I>ALK</I>)-rearranged non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Targeted therapies directed at specific driver oncogenes have improved outcomes for individuals with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Approximately 5% of lung adenocarcinomas, the most common histologic subtype of NSCLC, harbour rearrangements in the anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene leading to constitutive activity of the ALK kinase. Crizotinib was the first tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) demonstrated to be effective in advanced NSCLC. Next-generation ALK TKIs have since been developed including ceritinib, alectinib, brigatinib, ensartinib, and lorlatinib, and have been compared with crizotinib or chemotherapy in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). These ALK-targeted therapies are currently used in clinical practice and are endorsed in multiple clinical oncology guidelines.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of ALK inhibitors given as monotherapy to treat advanced ALK-rearranged NSCLC.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted electronic searches in the Cochrane Lung Cancer Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and Embase. We also searched conference proceedings from the American Society for Clinical Oncology (ASCO), European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO), and International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) World Conference on Lung Cancer, as well as the reference lists of retrieved articles. All searches were conducted from 2007 until 7 January 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs comparing ALK inhibitors with cytotoxic chemotherapy or another ALK inhibitor in individuals with incurable locally advanced or metastatic pathologically confirmed ALK-rearranged NSCLC.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility, extracted study characteristics and outcome data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for each included study. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. Primary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events (AE); secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS), OS at one year, overall response rate (ORR) by RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours) criteria, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We performed a meta-analysis for all outcomes, where appropriate, using the fixed-effect model. We reported hazard ratios (HR) for PFS, OS, and a composite HRQoL of life outcome (time to deterioration), and risk ratios (RR) for AE, ORR, and one-year OS. We presented 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) and used the I² statistic to investigate heterogeneity. We planned comparisons of 'ALK inhibitor versus chemotherapy' and 'next-generation ALK inhibitor versus crizotinib' with subgroup analysis by type of ALK inhibitor, line of treatment, and baseline central nervous system involvement.

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven studies (2874 participants) met our inclusion criteria: six studies compared an ALK inhibitor (crizotinib, ceritinib, and alectinib) to chemotherapy, and five studies compared a next-generation ALK inhibitor (alectinib, brigatinib, and lorlatinib) to crizotinib. We assessed the evidence for most outcomes as of moderate to high certainty. Most studies were at low risk for selection, attrition, and reporting bias; however, no RCTs were blinded, resulting in a high risk of performance and detection bias for outcomes reliant on subjective measurement. ALK inhibitor versus chemotherapy Treatment with ALK inhibitors resulted in a large increase in PFS compared to chemotherapy (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.52, 6 RCTs, 1611 participants, high-certainty evidence). This was found regardless of line of treatment. ALK inhibitors may result in no difference in overall AE rate when compared to chemotherapy (RR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.03, 5 RCTs, 1404 participants, low-certainty evidence). ALK inhibitors slightly improved OS (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.97, 6 RCTs, 1611 participants, high-certainty evidence), despite most included studies having a significant number of participants crossing over from chemotherapy to receive an ALK inhibitor after the study period. ALK inhibitors likely increase ORR (RR 2.43, 95% CI 2.16 to 2.75, 6 RCTs, 1611 participants, moderate-certainty evidence) including in measurable baseline brain metastases (RR 4.88, 95% CI 2.18 to 10.95, 3 RCTs, 108 participants) when compared to chemotherapy. ALK inhibitors result in a large increase in the HRQoL measure, time to deterioration (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.60, 5 RCTs, 1504 participants, high-certainty evidence) when compared to chemotherapy. Next-generation ALK inhibitor versus crizotinib Next-generation ALK inhibitors resulted in a large increase in PFS (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.46, 5 RCTs, 1263 participants, high-certainty evidence), particularly in participants with baseline brain metastases. Next-generation ALK inhibitors likely result in no difference in overall AE (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.01, 5 RCTs, 1263 participants, moderate-certainty evidence) when compared to crizotinib. Next-generation ALK inhibitors likely increase OS (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.90, 5 RCTs, 1263 participants, moderate-certainty evidence) and slightly increase ORR (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.25, 5 RCTs, 1229 participants, moderate-certainty evidence) including a response in measurable brain metastases (RR 2.45, 95% CI 1.7 to 3.54, 4 RCTs, 138 participants) when compared to crizotinib. Studies comparing ALK inhibitors were conducted exclusively or partly in the first-line setting.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Next-generation ALK inhibitors including alectinib, brigatinib, and lorlatinib are the preferred first systemic treatment for individuals with advanced ALK-rearranged NSCLC. Further trials are ongoing including investigation of first-line ensartinib. Next-generation inhibitors have not been compared to each other, and it is unknown which should be used first and what subsequent treatment sequence is optimal.

Immunotherapy in the First-Line Treatment of NSCLC: Current Status and Future Directions in China

Lung cancer causes significant morbidity and mortality in China and worldwide. In China, lung cancer accounts for nearly one-fourth of all cancer deaths. Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the predominant type of lung cancer, accounting for approximately 80%–85% of all lung cancer cases. Immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is revolutionizing the treatment of NSCLC. Immune checkpoint molecules, including PD-1/PD-L1 and CTLA-4, can suppress immune responses by delivering negative signals to T cells. By interfering with these immunosuppressive axes, ICIs unleash antitumor immune responses, ultimately eliminating cancer cells. ICIs have demonstrated promising antitumor efficacy in NSCLC, and mounting evidence supports the use of ICIs in treatment-naïve patients with advanced NSCLC. A comprehensive overview of current and emerging ICIs for the first-line treatment of NSCLC in China will facilitate a better understanding of NSCLC immunotherapy using ICIs and optimize the clinical use of ICIs in previously untreated Chinese patients with NSCLC. Herein, we review the efficacy and safety of currently approved and investigational ICIs as the first-line treatment of NSCLC in China. We also discuss the challenges limiting more widespread use of ICIs and future directions in the first-line treatment of NSCLC using ICIs.

Ensartinib vs Crizotinib for Patients With Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Question

Is ensartinib superior to crizotinib for patients with advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)–positive non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who have not been treated previously with an ALK inhibitor?

Findings

This randomized clinical phase 3 trial including 290 patients met the primary end point; the median progression-free survival was statistically significantly longer with ensartinib than with crizotinib (25.8 vs 12.7 months), and the confirmed intracranial response rate was 64% with ensartinib vs 21% with crizotinib for patients with brain metastases at baseline. Ensartinib had a favorable safety profile.

Meaning

Ensartinib represents a new first-line treatment option for patients with ALK-positive NSCLC.

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

Update on molecular pathology and role of liquid biopsy in nonsmall cell lung cancer

Personalised medicine, an essential component of modern thoracic oncology, has been evolving continuously ever since the discovery of the epidermal growth factor receptor and its tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Today, screening for driver alterations in patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma as well as those with squamous cell carcinoma and no/little history of smoking is mandatory. Multiplex molecular platforms are preferred to sequential molecular testing since they are less time- and tissue-consuming. In this review, we present the latest updates on the nine most common actionable driver alterations in nonsmall cell lung cancer. Liquid biopsy, a simple noninvasive technique that uses different analytes, mostly circulating tumour DNA, is an appealing tool that is used in thoracic oncology to identify driver alterations including resistance mutations. Additional roles are being evaluated in clinical trials and include monitoring the response to treatment, screening for lung cancer in high-risk patients and early detection of relapse in the adjuvant setting. In addition, liquid biopsy is being tested in immune-oncology as a prognostic, predictive and pharmacodynamic tool. The major limitation of plasma-based assays remains their low sensitivity when compared to tissue-based assays. Ensuring the clinical validity and utility of liquid biopsy will definitely optimise cancer care.

Screening for driver alterations in patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma and those with squamous cell carcinoma and no/little smoking history is mandatory. Liquid biopsy is evolving constantly and will definitely improve outcomes in thoracic oncology.https://bit.ly/2XjuQrD

The mechanisms of resistance to second- and third-generation ALK inhibitors and strategies to overcome such resistance

INTRODUCTION

Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitors are widely known to contribute to the long-term survival of ALK-rearranged non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Based on clinical trial data, treatment with second- or third-generation ALK inhibitors can be initiated after crizotinib therapy without analyzing resistance mechanisms, and some randomized trials have recently shown the superiority of second- or third-generation ALK inhibitors over crizotinib as the initial treatment; however, the optimal treatment for patients who relapse while on second- or third-generation ALK inhibitors is not well-defined.

AREAS COVERED

This review provides an overview of the mechanisms of resistance to second- or third-generation ALK inhibitors that have been identified in both clinical and pre-clinical settings, and introduces strategies for overcoming resistance and discusses ongoing clinical trials.

EXPERT OPINION

The comprehensive elucidation of both ALK-dependent and ALK-independent resistance mechanisms is necessary to improve the prognosis of patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC. Liquid biopsy to clarify these mechanisms of resistance might play an important role in the near future.

Lung Cancer Stem Cells-Origin, Diagnostic Techniques and Perspective for Therapies

Lung cancer remains one of the most aggressive solid tumors with an overall poor prognosis. Molecular studies carried out on lung tumors during treatment have shown the phenomenon of clonal evolution, thereby promoting the occurrence of a temporal heterogeneity of the tumor. Therefore, the biology of lung cancer is interesting. Cancer stem cells (CSCs) are involved in tumor initiation and metastasis. Aging is still the most important risk factor for lung cancer development. Spontaneously occurring mutations accumulate in normal stem cells or/and progenitor cells by human life resulting in the formation of CSCs. Deepening knowledge of these complex processes and improving early recognition and markers of predictive value are of utmost importance. In this paper, we discuss the CSC hypothesis with an emphasis on age-related changes that initiate carcinogenesis. We analyze the current literature in the field, describe our own experience in CSC investigation and discuss the technical challenges with special emphasis on liquid biopsy.

Current treatment and future challenges in ROS1- and ALK-rearranged advanced non-small cell lung cancer

Non─small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) presents different druggable genetic abnormalities, including ROS1 and ALK rearrangements, which share relevant clinical features and therapeutic strategies. The homology between the tyrosine kinase domains of ROS1 and ALK defines unique subsets of patients highly sensitive to targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Genomic profiling in advanced NSCLC is standard, immunohistochemistry and fluorescence in situ hybridization being the main techniques used to detect genomic rearrangements. Personalized treatment with TKIs in ROS1- and ALK-positive NSCLC patients has dramatically improved patients' outcomes. Crizotinib has been the first-line standard of care treatment in ALK-rearranged NSCLC patients for a long time, while crizotinib still represents the best upfront therapeutic option in ROS1-positive NSCLC patients, followed by next-generation TKIs at the time of disease progression. However, the improved intracranial efficacy of next-generation TKIs has led to these drugs becoming first-line options, widening treatment opportunities for these patients. Since all patients will develop disease progression under TKI therapy, understanding the mechanisms of acquired resistance is crucial to define the optimal sequential therapeutic strategy. Despite the positive correlation between personalized treatment and patients' outcome, access to next-generation TKIs and genomic profiling at the time of disease progression are major challenges to achieving this goal. In this review, we present updated evidence on ROS1- and ALK-rearranged NSCLC regarding epidemiology and diagnostics, current therapies and the most suitable sequential treatment approaches, as well as mechanisms of acquired resistance and strategies to overcome them.

Head to head evaluation of second generation ALK inhibitors brigatinib and alectinib as first-line treatment for ALK+ NSCLC using an in silico systems biology-based approach

Around 3-7% of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), which represent 85% of diagnosed lung cancers, have a rearrangement in the ALK gene that produces an abnormal activity of the ALK protein cell signaling pathway. The developed ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), such as crizotinib, ceritinib, alectinib, brigatinib and lorlatinb present good performance treating ALK+ NSCLC, although all patients invariably develop resistance due to ALK secondary mutations or bypass mechanisms. In the present study, we compare the potential differences between brigatinib and alectinib's mechanisms of action as first-line treatment for ALK+ NSCLC in a systems biology-based in silico setting. Therapeutic performance mapping system (TPMS) technology was used to characterize the mechanisms of action of brigatinib and alectinib and the impact of potential resistances and drug interferences with concomitant treatments. The analyses indicate that brigatinib and alectinib affect cell growth, apoptosis and immune evasion through ALK inhibition. However, brigatinib seems to achieve a more diverse downstream effect due to a broader cancer-related kinase target spectrum. Brigatinib also shows a robust effect over invasiveness and central nervous system metastasis-related mechanisms, whereas alectinib seems to have a greater impact on the immune evasion mechanism. Based on this in silico head to head study, we conclude that brigatinib shows a predicted efficacy similar to alectinib and could be a good candidate in a first-line setting against ALK+ NSCLC. Future investigation involving clinical studies will be needed to confirm these findings. These in silico systems biology-based models could be applied for exploring other unanswered questions.

Recent Advances in Systemic Therapies for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Purpose of Review

This paper aims to summarize the data of recently completed and key ongoing clinical trials of systemic agents for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC). In particular, the review focuses on ongoing checkpoint inhibitor combination trials and promising studies combining tyrosine kinase inhibitors with checkpoint inhibitors.

Recent Findings

The recently approved combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab based on the IMbrave150 trial has shown the most potential with the highest overall survival of any systemic agent in HCC to date, surpassing sorafenib. Despite COVID-19 delays, other promising trials that involve combining VEGF-directed therapy and checkpoint inhibition, cancer vaccines, phosphatidylserine, YIV-906, and oncolytic and immunotherapeutic vaccinia virus are actively recruiting patients.

Summary

After almost a 10-year dormancy, the list of potential systemic treatment options for aHCC is growing rapidly. Given the promising data from the IMbrave150 trial, the combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab is now the new first-line therapy. We discuss the change in landscape, the new second- and third-line systemic treatments in aHCC, and the ongoing clinical trials for newer agents including combination therapies.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in the Treatment of HCC

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the typical inflammation-induced neoplasia. It often prospers where a chronic liver disease persists, thus leading a strong rationale for immune therapy. Several immune-based treatments, including immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), cytokines, adoptive cell transfer, and vaccines, have been tested in the treatment of HCC. In this review, we summarize the role of the ICI in HCC patients in various sets of treatment. As for advanced HCC, the anti-Programmed cell Death protein 1 (PD1) antibodies and the anti-Cytotoxic T-Lymphocyte Antigen 4 (CTLA-4) antibodies have been examined in patients with enthusiastic results in phase I-II-III studies. Overall, this led the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to approve pembrolizumab, nivolumab, and nivolumab + ipilimumab in the second-line setting. The anti- Programmed Death-Ligand 1 (PDL-1) antibodies have also been evaluated. Thanks to the results obtained from phase III IMbrave study, atezolizumab + bevacizumab is now the standard of care in the first-line advanced setting of HCC. As for localized HCC, the putative immunological effect of locoregional therapies led to evaluate the combination strategy with ICI. This way, chemoembolization, ablation with radiofrequency, and radioembolization combined with ICI are currently under study. Likewise, the study of adjuvant immunotherapy following surgical resection is underway. In addition, the different ICI has been studied in combination with other ICI as well as with multikinase inhibitors and anti-angiogenesis monoclonal antibody. The evidence available suggests that combining systemic therapies and locoregional treatments with ICI may represent an effective strategy in this context.

Upfront Management of ALK-Rearranged Metastatic Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: One Inhibitor Fits All?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangements represent a seldom event in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Given the oncogene alteration, ALK targeting represents the main therapeutic strategy. Here, we review evidence regarding ALK inhibitors (ALKi): clinical activity, safety profiles, financial costs, and biomarkers of efficacy.

RECENT FINDINGS

During the past 10 years, multiple ALKi have been developed, and four different compounds are currently available as upfront options for ALK+ NSCLC patients: crizotinib, ceritinib, alectinib, and brigatinib. Second-generation (2G) ALKi demonstrated superior clinical activity in terms of median progression-free survival (mPFS), objective response rate (ORR), intracranial disease control, and duration of response (DOR) when compared with crizotinib. 2G ALKi represent the current gold-standard first-line treatment for ALK-rearranged metastatic NSCLC. Among all available options, in our opinion, alectinib has likely the best profile of clinical activity and safety, thus emerging as the best upfront therapy. More insights will come from ongoing trials and analysis of biomarkers.

Update 2020: Management of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

The past decade has seen a revolution of new advances in the management of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with remarkable progresses in screening, diagnosis, and treatment. The advances in systemic treatment have been driven primarily by the development of molecularly targeted therapeutics, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and anti-angiogenic agents, all of which have transformed this field with significantly improved patient outcomes. This review will address updates in lung cancer screening, liquid biopsy, and immunotherapy in the front-line setting. We discuss recent advances and highlight the plethora of new approvals of molecular-targeted therapy for subgroups of NSCLC patients with sensitizing EGFR, ALK, ROS1, RET, BRAF V600E, MET, and NTRK alterations.

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors for solid tumors in the past 20 years (2001-2020)

Tyrosine kinases are implicated in tumorigenesis and progression, and have emerged as major targets for drug discovery. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) inhibit corresponding kinases from phosphorylating tyrosine residues of their substrates and then block the activation of downstream signaling pathways. Over the past 20 years, multiple robust and well-tolerated TKIs with single or multiple targets including EGFR, ALK, ROS1, HER2, NTRK, VEGFR, RET, MET, MEK, FGFR, PDGFR, and KIT have been developed, contributing to the realization of precision cancer medicine based on individual patient's genetic alteration features. TKIs have dramatically improved patients' survival and quality of life, and shifted treatment paradigm of various solid tumors. In this article, we summarized the developing history of TKIs for treatment of solid tumors, aiming to provide up-to-date evidence for clinical decision-making and insight for future studies.

Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer from Genomics to Therapeutics: A Framework for Community Practice Integration to Arrive at Personalized Therapy Strategies

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a heterogeneous disease, and therapeutic management has advanced with the identification of various key oncogenic mutations that promote lung cancer tumorigenesis. Subsequent studies have developed targeted therapies against these oncogenes in the hope of personalizing therapy based on the molecular genomics of the tumor. This review presents approved treatments against actionable mutations in NSCLC as well as promising targets and therapies. We also discuss the current status of molecular testing practices in community oncology sites that would help to direct oncologists in lung cancer decision-making. We propose a collaborative framework between community practice and academic sites that can help improve the utilization of personalized strategies in the community, through incorporation of increased testing rates, virtual molecular tumor boards, vendor-based oncology clinical pathways, and an academic-type singular electronic health record system.

New insights on sorafenib resistance in liver cancer with correlation of individualized therapy

Liver cancer is highly malignant and insensitive to cytotoxic chemotherapy and is associated with very poor patient prognosis. In 2007, the small-molecule targeted drug sorafenib was approved for the treatment of advanced liver cancer. In the subsequent ten years, sorafenib has been the only first-line therapeutic targeted drug for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, a number of clinical studies show that a considerable percentage of patients with liver cancer are insensitive to sorafenib. The number of patients who actually benefit significantly from sorafenib treatment is very limited, and the overall efficacy of sorafenib is far from satisfactory, which has attracted the attention of researchers. Based on previous studies and reports, this article reviews the potential mechanisms of sorafenib resistance (SR) and summarizes the biomarkers and clinicopathological indicators that might be used for predicting sorafenib response and developing personalized therapy.

Sequential blinded treatment decisions in ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancers in the era of precision medicine

Next-generation ALK TKIs have become the new standard of care in first-line setting in advanced ALK-positive NSCLC patients. However, sequential strategies at progression are relevant, as may have an impact on patients' outcome. In this commentary we discuss whether genomic-tailored strategies at progression would be more suitable for improving outcome of ALK-positive NSCLC patients.