Neoadjuvant Targeted Therapy in Resectable NSCLC: Current and Future Perspectives

The standard of care (SoC) for medically operable patients with early-stage (stages I-IIIB) NSCLC is surgery combined with (neo)adjuvant systemic therapy for patients with stages II to IIIB disease and some stage IB or, rarely, chemoradiation (stage III disease with mediastinal lymph node metastases). Despite these treatments, metastatic recurrence is common and associated with poor survival, highlighting the need for systemic therapies that are more effective than the current SoC. After the success of targeted therapy (TT) in patients with advanced NSCLC harboring oncogenic drivers, these agents are being investigated for the perioperative (neoadjuvant and adjuvant) treatment of patients with early-stage NSCLC. Adjuvant osimertinib is the only TT approved for use in the early-stage setting, and there are no approved neoadjuvant TTs. We discuss the importance of comprehensive biomarker testing at diagnosis to identify individuals who may benefit from neoadjuvant targeted treatments and review emerging data from neoadjuvant TT trials. We also address the potential challenges for establishing neoadjuvant TTs as SoC in the early-stage setting, including the identification and validation of early response markers to guide care and accelerate drug development, and discuss safety considerations in the perioperative setting. Initial data indicate that neoadjuvant TTs are effective and well tolerated in patients with EGFR- or ALK-positive early-stage NSCLC. Data from ongoing trials will determine whether neoadjuvant targeted agents will become a new SoC for individuals with oncogene-addicted resectable NSCLC.

Real-world Comparative Effectiveness of First-Line Alectinib Versus Crizotinib in Patients with Advanced ALK-Positive NSCLC with or without Baseline Central Nervous System Metastases

Introduction

Alectinib was found to have superior efficacy to crizotinib in the phase 3 ALEX study and is a preferred initial treatment for patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC. To understand the efficacy of alectinib in U.S. clinical practice, we conducted a retrospective real-world comparative effectiveness analysis of first-line alectinib versus crizotinib.

Methods

Adults with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC who received first-line alectinib (from December 11, 2015) or crizotinib (from January 1, 2014) were included from a real-world database. Propensity scores were applied to balance baseline characteristics. Real-world data (RWD), including real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS), real-world overall survival, real-world time to new central nervous system (CNS) metastases, and outcomes in patients with or without baseline CNS metastases were analyzed. The ALEX-like RWD cohort (filtered by ALEX laboratory eligibility criteria) was used to compare real-world comparative effectiveness with ALEX.

Results

The RWD cohort comprised 364 patients (141 alectinib; 223 crizotinib); rwPFS (weighted hazard ratio [wHR] = 0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.33-0.65) and real-world overall survival (wHR = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.31-0.69) were significantly improved with alectinib versus crizotinib. In patients with baseline brain scans, a substantial rwPFS benefit was found regardless of baseline CNS metastases. Real-world time to new CNS metastases was delayed with alectinib versus crizotinib in patients with (wHR = 0.28, 95% CI: 0.16-0.52) and without (wHR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.24-0.76) baseline CNS metastases. The ALEX-like RWD cohort comprised 325 patients (120 alectinib; 205 crizotinib); alectinib was found to have similar rwPFS benefits with ALEX.

Conclusions

Outcomes were significantly improved with first-line alectinib versus crizotinib in patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC in the U.S. real-world setting.

Clinical experience and management of adverse events in patients with advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer receiving alectinib

Alectinib is a preferred first-line therapy for patients with advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in several national clinical practice guidelines. The randomized, global, phase III ALEX study has demonstrated significant improvement in progression-free survival for alectinib over crizotinib in treatment-naive ALK-positive NSCLC. It was also the first study to show clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival for a next-generation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor relative to crizotinib. The J-ALEX and ALESIA phase III studies confirmed the clinical benefit of alectinib relative to crizotinib in the first-line ALK-positive NSCLC treatment setting in Japanese and Asian patients, respectively. Across these pivotal phase III trials, alectinib had a manageable, well-characterized safety profile. Here, we review the safety and tolerability of long-term alectinib treatment in patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC and provide guidance for physicians, based on clinical experience, on the management of the most frequently reported adverse events (AEs). Most AEs associated with alectinib can be managed by dose reduction. Some alectinib-related AEs are not yet fully characterized, including myalgia and peripheral oedema and deciphering their underlying mechanism of action could enhance their management. With longer-term follow-up, the safety profile of alectinib continues to remain consistent in the ALEX study, with no new safety signals observed. Safety and tolerability data from the first-line phase III alectinib trials are also consistent with those observed in clinical trials of alectinib in later-line settings. These results add to the weight of evidence recommending alectinib as a preferred therapy for treatment-naive advanced ALK-positive NSCLC.

A randomized phase 3 study of entrectinib versus crizotinib in patients (pts) with locally advanced/metastatic ROS1 fusion-positive (fp) NSCLC with or without baseline CNS metastases (mets)

TPS9141

Background: ROS proto-oncogene 1 ( ROS1) fusions are found in 1–2% of NSCLC cases. As CNS mets are common in pts with ROS1-fp NSCLC and associated with poor prognosis, CNS-active treatments are needed for these pts. Entrectinib and crizotinib are tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) of ROS1, recommended as first-line treatments for ROS1-fp NSCLC. Both drugs have shown robust systemic efficacy and good tolerability in pts with ROS1-fp NSCLC. While crizotinib may have suboptimal CNS activity, entrectinib has shown intracranial efficacy in pts with baseline CNS mets by blinded independent central review (BICR, PMIDs 30215676; 33646820). We hypothesized that entrectinib may have greater CNS activity than crizotinib, potentially addressing the unmet need for pts with ROS1-fp NSCLC with CNS mets. Methods: This randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase 3 trial (NCT04603807) aims to compare the efficacy and safety of entrectinib vs crizotinib in adult pts with TKI-naïve advanced/metastatic ROS1-fp NSCLC, with or without CNS mets. Key eligibility criteria: advanced/recurrent/metastatic NSCLC with ROS1 fusion determined locally by certified clinical laboratory testing; measurable systemic disease (RECIST 1.1); age ≥18 years; ECOG PS ≤2; no prior ROS1 TKI or systemic treatment for advanced/metastatic disease; adequate hematologic, renal and hepatic functions; prior radiotherapy ≥14 days before randomization and neurologically stable CNS mets per RECIST 1.1 are permitted. Pts will be randomized 1:1 to receive 600 mg entrectinib once a day or 250 mg crizotinib twice a day. Stratification factors are baseline CNS mets (none/measurable/non-measurable) and prior brain radiotherapy ≤2 months (yes/no); to allow sufficient power, ≥30% of randomized pts will have baseline CNS mets. Study treatment will continue until progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, death or withdrawal from the study. Pts with radiographic disease progression or isolated asymptomatic CNS progression may continue treatment at the investigator’s discretion. Tumor assessments (brain MRI and chest, abdomen and pelvis CT/MRI) will occur at screening, Wk 4, Wk 8 and every 8 wks thereafter. Blood samples will be collected at every visit. Primary endpoint: progression-free survival (PFS) by BICR in pts with baseline CNS mets (CNS population, target HR = 0.57). Secondary endpoints: CNS-PFS by BICR and ORR, duration of response (DoR) and PFS (by BICR and investigator) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population; overall survival in the CNS and ITT populations; CNS-ORR and CNS-DoR by BICR in the CNS population. Impact on quality of life, functioning and lung cancer-specific symptoms will be evaluated via questionnaires in the ITT population. Safety endpoints and biomarkers will also be evaluated. As of 12 Jan 2022, 8 pts are enrolled (first pt enrolled in Oct 2021). Clinical trial information: NCT04603807.