Patient-reported outcomes and quality of life in advanced ALK+ non-small-cell lung cancer trial of brigatinib (ALTA)

A Review of Meaningful Change Thresholds for EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G Within Oncology

OBJECTIVES

This literature review provides an overview of meaningful change thresholds for the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General (FACT-G) used across hematological cancers and solid tumors (melanoma, lung, bladder, and prostate).

METHODS

Embase, MEDLINE, and PubMed were searched to identify relevant oncology publications from 2016 to 2021. Label claims from the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency for 7 recently approved drugs (pembrolizumab, atezolizumab, glasdegib, gilteritinib, tisagenlecleucel, axicabtagene ciloleucel, and daratumumab plus hyaluronidase-fihj) were reviewed.

RESULTS

Publications providing guidance on meaningful change thresholds for the QLQ-C30 displayed a growing trend away from broad "legacy" thresholds of 10 points for all QLQ-C30 scales), toward deriving "contemporary" thresholds (eg, subscale specific, population specific). Contemporary publications generally provide guidance on selecting thresholds for specific scales that account for improved or worsening thresholds (eg, QLQ-C30 subscales). This trend was not clear for FACT-G, with less new guidance available. Most clinical trials used in regulatory label submissions have used thresholds of 10 points for the QLQ-C30 subscales and 3 to 7 points for the FACT-G total score. Despite the availability of more recent guidelines, contemporary meaningful change thresholds seem slow to emerge in the published literature and regulatory labels.

CONCLUSIONS

Trialists should consider using contemporary thresholds, rather than legacy thresholds, for QLQ-C30 endpoints. Thresholds derived for a similar patient-population should be used where available. Further work is required to provide these across a broader range of cancer sites.

Patient-reported outcomes from the randomized phase 3 CROWN study of first-line lorlatinib versus crizotinib in advanced ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVES

Quality of life (QoL) for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is negatively impacted by their disease and treatment side effects. We present detailed patient-reported outcome (PRO) data from the phase 3 CROWN study, which compared lorlatinib with crizotinib in patients with previously untreated ALK-positive advanced NSCLC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PROs were assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL Questionnaire with Lung Cancer module. A longitudinal, random-intercept, random-slope, mixed-effect model assessed score changes from baseline up to (not including) end of treatment. Mean changes of absolute scores from baseline at each cycle were calculated and presented up to cycle 18 (≥ 10-point change considered clinically meaningful).

RESULTS

In both lorlatinib (n = 148) and crizotinib (n = 140) arms, there were longitudinal improvements across multiple functioning and symptom scores during treatment compared with pre-treatment. Numerical improvements for most longitudinal functioning scores (physical, role, emotional, social) favored lorlatinib; cognitive functioning favored crizotinib. Numerical improvements favored lorlatinib for several symptoms (fatigue, nausea and vomiting, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea [clinically meaningful improvement], and cough); peripheral neuropathy favored crizotinib. Subgroup analyses showed PROs did not differ by presence/absence of baseline brain metastases.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients receiving first-line lorlatinib or crizotinib showed improvements and delayed deterioration in QoL, functioning, and several symptoms. Alongside the previously reported significantly longer progression-free survival and higher intracranial response rates for lorlatinib versus crizotinib, these data further support the use of lorlatinib over crizotinib in patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC with/without baseline brain metastases and provide evidence of several QoL improvements with lorlatinib when used in the first-line setting.

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.

Current Insights on the Treatment of Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase-Positive Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Focus on Brigatinib

Rearrangement of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene is detected in approximately 5% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors targeting ALK have significantly improved the prognosis of these patients. However, most patients experienced disease progression within a few years due to acquired resistance. Brigatinib is a second-generation ALK inhibitor effective in presence of several ALK mutations with demonstrated activity against central nervous system metastases. Currently, brigatinib is approved to treat ALK-positive metastatic NSCLC patients not previously treated with ALK inhibitors and patients who have progressed on or are intolerant to crizotinib. In this review, we provide a summary of results from clinical trials involving brigatinib, and we discuss its possible role in the management of ALK-positive NSCLC in the following years.

Health-related quality of life in the randomized phase III trial of brigatinib vs crizotinib in advanced ALK inhibitor-naive ALK + non-small cell lung cancer (ALTA-1L)

OBJECTIVE

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.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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.

RESULTS

EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC13 compliance was >90 % 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 P < 0.05); 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).

CONCLUSION

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.

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.

Humanistic burden of living with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: findings from the ALKConnect patient insight network and research platform

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.

Lung Adenocarcinoma during Pregnancy: 11-Year Follow-Up

The incidence of lung cancer during pregnancy is rising due to the high rate of smokers in young women and the late mean age of pregnancy; in addition, considering that the patients are young women with a higher incidence of molecular alterations, molecular testing in lung adenocarcinoma should always be performed, even in pregnancy. Here, we report the case of a lung adenocarcinoma diagnosed during pregnancy with a long survival who benefitted from brain radiotherapy, conventional chemotherapy, and ALK TKI-targeted treatment. It reveals the safety of whole brain radiotherapy during pregnancy and consideration of other brain radiation techniques even in palliative cases, which should be personalized and managed by a multidisciplinary team. However, upfront management of brain metastasis in ALK-positive patients remains unresolved.