Brain metastases in patients with ALK+ non-small cell lung cancer: clinical symptoms, treatment patterns and economic burden

Potential of radiomics analysis and machine learning for predicting brain metastasis in newly diagnosed lung cancer patients

AIM

To explore the potential of utilising radiomics analysis and machine-learning models that incorporate intratumoural and peritumoural regions of interest (ROIs) for predicting brain metastasis (BM) in newly diagnosed lung cancer patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study comprised 183 lung cancer patients (training cohort: n=146; validation cohort: n=37) whose radiomics features were extracted from plain computed tomography (CT) images of the primary lesion. Four machine-learning algorithms (logistic regression [LR], support vector machine [SVM], k-nearest neighbour algorithm [KNN], and random forest [RF]) were employed to develop predictive models. Model diagnostic performance was assessed through receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, and clinical utility was evaluated using decision curve analysis (DCA). Finally, the radiomics model's generalisation ability was further validated in the prediction of metachronous brain metastasis (MBM).

RESULTS

After feature screening, 22 radiomics features were identified as highly predictive, of which nine were derived from the peritumour region. All four machine-learning models demonstrated predictive capability, with SVM showing superior efficiency and robustness. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) of SVM was 0.918 in the training cohort and 0.901 in the validation cohort. DCA indicated the highest net benefit. Furthermore, the time-dependent ROC curve exhibited predictive efficacy for MBM occurrence across 1-, 2-, and 3-year follow-up periods, with all AUC values exceeding 0.7.

CONCLUSION

The optimal SVM model integrating intratumoural and peritumoural radiomics features was confirmed and defined as an imaging biomarker for predicting BM in newly diagnosed lung cancer patients, underscoring its potential to significantly impact clinical diagnosis and treatment.

Lorlatinib Versus Crizotinib in Patients With Advanced ALK-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: 5-Year Outcomes From the Phase III CROWN Study

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.

Treatment sequencing after failure to alectinib in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small-cell lung cancer

Alectinib is the first-line therapy for anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small-cell lung cancer. Although some guidelines have recommended using other anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibitors after alectinib failure, evidence for such regimens in patients who fail to respond to alectinib is limited. This study involved using administrative claims data from acute care hospitals in Japan. We extracted the data of 634 patients diagnosed with lung cancer between September 1, 2014, and January 31, 2023, who received alectinib treatment before treatment with another anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibitor. We assessed distributions of patients according to their treatment sequencing and prognosis among three periods defined based on the initial marketing dates of lorlatinib and brigatinib. The type of anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibitors after alectinib failure changed over time. In the most recent period, lorlatinib (58%) and brigatinib (40%) became predominant. Two-year overall survival improved over time (47%-84%), accompanied by an increased 2-year proportion of patients who continuously used anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibitors after alectinib failure (13%-44%). The times to treatment discontinuation of the regimen between patients treated with lorlatinib and brigatinib were similar, with a hazard ratio of 1.02 (95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.64) in the period after marketing brigatinib. This study provides insights into the evolving treatment landscape for patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small-cell lung cancer who experience failed alectinib treatment and highlights the need for further studies and data accumulation to determine the optimal treatment strategy.

High efficacy of brigatinib for brain metastases in ALK fusion gene-positive non-small cell lung cancer: A case series

Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) fusion gene-positive lung cancer often shows brain metastasis at initial diagnosis or during the course of treatment. However, molecular-targeted drugs are known to pass through the blood-brain barrier and present positive effects for central nervous system lesions. There are few reports suggesting how effective molecular-targeted drug therapy alone is for brain metastasis lesions of ALK fusion-positive lung cancer, especially after the first use of ALK-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) or for bulky brain metastases. A patient in his mid-fifties with stage IV pleural dissemination developed brain metastases after 10 years of crizotinib use, but showed a complete response after switching to brigatinib. Moreover, a patient in her early sixties with stage III recurrent large brain metastases 5 years after chemoradiation therapy experienced dramatic tumor shrinkage with brigatinib. In each case of ALK fusion gene-positive lung cancer with brain metastases, brigatinib showed a high efficacy and was well-tolerated after previous ALK-TKI and for bulky lesions.

Podcast on Lorlatinib as a First-Line Treatment Option for Patients with ALK-Positive Metastatic NSCLC with Brain Metastasis

Brain metastases are especially common in anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with a cumulative incidence of over 50% and associated with a poor prognosis, high symptom burden, and decreased quality of life. Lorlatinib is a brain-penetrant, third-generation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), which has a high potency against resistance mutations seen with earlier generation ALK TKIs. In 2018, lorlatinib was granted accelerated approval in second- and third-line treatment for use in patients with ALK-positive metastatic NSCLC on the basis of phase 1/2 study results. This initial approval was expanded for first-line treatment of patients with ALK-positive metastatic NSCLC on the basis of the interim analysis of the phase 3 CROWN study showing longer progression-free survival, time to intracranial progression, duration of response, and objective response rate compared with crizotinib. This manuscript is a transcript of our podcast, in which we discuss the clinical significance of controlling the onset of brain metastases, considerations in selecting a first-line therapy option, efficacy and safety observed in patients with and without brain metastases, and rationales for using lorlatinib upfront versus reserving for a later line in therapy.

Economic burden in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with or without brain metastases, receiving first-line ALK inhibitors

INTRODUCTION

This observational study describes the real-world economic burden in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving a first-line ALK inhibitor, and the economic impact of brain metastases (BM).

METHODS

Administrative claims data (Truven Health MarketScan® Commercial Claims and Encounters database and Medicare Supplemental and Coordination of Benefits database; January 1, 2015-March 31, 2020) for adult patients with ALK+ NSCLC who received a first-line ALK inhibitor were retrospectively reviewed. Healthcare costs and resource utilization were calculated on a per-patient-per-month (PPPM) basis and stratified by the presence or absence of BM prior to first-line ALK inhibitor. Factors associated with costs were identified.

RESULTS

A total of 496 patients were eligible for analysis. Mean PPPM total healthcare costs were $21,961 for all patients receiving up to 1 year of a first-line ALK inhibitor. Patients were significantly more likely to have higher mean PPPM total costs if they had BM prior to first-line ALK inhibitor (vs. no BM; odds ratio: 1.11; 95% confidence interval: 1.02, 1.21; p = 0.013). Mean PPPM days of hospital stay (p = 0.0056), and inpatient hospital visits (p = 0.0030) were significantly higher for patients with BM compared to no BM. The main cost drivers for non-inpatient procedures for all patients were medications, radiation therapy, and other diagnostic procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

The economic burden in patients with ALK+ NSCLC receiving a first-line ALK inhibitor was high. Patients with ALK+ NSCLC and BM had higher healthcare costs and resource utilization than patients without BM.

Safety of lorlatinib in ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer and management of central nervous system adverse events

The use of tyrosine kinase inhibitors has made a breakthrough in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Recently, lorlatinib, a third-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has demonstrated significant systemic and intracranial activity in both first-line and subsequent-line therapy in ALK-positive NSCLC patients. In this review, general characteristics of lorlatinib, its efficacy in the treatment of ALK-positive NSCLC patients and the safety of lorlatinib, particularly addressing central nervous system adverse events, are discussed. Management of central nervous system adverse events, which seem to be specific to lorlatinib therapy, is outlined.

Lorlatinib Effectiveness and Quality-of-Life in Patients with ALK-Positive NSCLC Who Had Failed Second-Generation ALK Inhibitors: Canadian Real-World Experience

Lorlatinib is the only targeted therapy approved in Canada to treat patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) whose tumor has progressed despite treatment with second-generation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), a patient population with high unmet need and lack of publicly reimbursed targeted treatments in Canada. We prospectively examined the real-world effectiveness and impact of lorlatinib on quality-of-life in 59 lorlatinib-treated patients, characterized as: median age of 62.0 years; 47.5% were female; 32.2% had central nervous system metastases; 50.8% had 2+ prior ALK TKI lines; and alectinib was the most common ALK TKI (72.9%) administered before lorlatinib, including 44.1% who received first-line alectinib. With a median follow-up of 15.3 months (IQR: 6.2-19.2), median time-to-treatment discontinuation of lorlatinib was 15.3 months (95% CI: 7.9-not reached), with 54.2% (95% CI: 40.8-65.9%) of patients without treatment discontinuation at 12 months. At baseline, the mean health utility score (HUS) was 0.744 (SD: 0.200). At 3 months, patients receiving lorlatinib demonstrated a 0.069 (95% CI: 0.020-0.118; p = 0.007) average HUS increase over baseline; HUS was maintained at 6 and 12 months. Thus, patients with ALK-positive NSCLC post second-generation ALK TKI remained on lorlatinib for a meaningful duration of time while their quality-of-life was preserved.

Upfront Advanced Radiotherapy and New Drugs for NSCLC Patients with Synchronous Brain Metastases: Is the Juice Worth the Squeeze? A Real-World Analysis from Lombardy, Italy

AIM

Healthcare administrative databases represent a valuable source for real-life data analysis. The primary aim of this study is to compare effectiveness and cost profile in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients harboring synchronous brain metastases (BMs) who received non-chemo first-line systemic therapy with or without advanced radiotherapy (aRT).

METHODS

Diagnostic ICD-9-CM codes were used for identifying all patients with a new diagnosis of lung cancer between 2012 and 2019. Among these, patients who had started a first-line systemic treatment with either TKIs or pembrolizumab, alone or in combination with intensity-modulated or stereotactic RT, were selected. Clinical outcomes investigated included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and time-to-treatment failure (TTF). The cost outcome was defined as the average per capita cumulative healthcare direct costs of the treatment, including all inpatient and outpatient costs.

RESULTS

The final cohort included 177 patients, of whom 58 were treated with systemic treatment plus aRT (STRT) and 119 with systemic treatment alone. The addition of aRT to systemic treatment was associated with a significantly better OS (p = 0.020) and PFS (p = 0.041) than systemic therapy alone. The ICER (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio) value indicated an average cost of €3792 for each month of survival after STRT treatment and confirmed clinical effectiveness but higher healthcare costs.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world study suggests that upfront aRT for NCLSC patients with synchronous BMs represents a valid treatment strategy, boosting the efficacy of novel and emerging drug classes with sustainable costs for the health service.

TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE

The present real-world study reports that the use of upfront advanced radiotherapyaRT and new-generation systemic agents, such as TKIs and pembrolizumab, may have higher oncological control and an improved cost-effectiveness profile than the use of new-generation systemic agents alone in NCLSC patients with synchronous brain metastases. Acquired evidence can also be used to inform policymakers that adding advanced radiotherapy results is a sustainable cost for the health service. Since approximately 50% of patients do not meet RCT inclusion criteria, a significant proportion of them is receiving treatment that is not evidence-informed; therefore, these results warrant further studies to identify the best radiotherapy timing and possible dose escalation approaches to improving treatment efficacy in patient subgroups not typically represented in randomized controlled trials.

Update on Prevalence of Pain in Patients with Cancer 2022: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis

Experiencing pain and insufficient relief can be devastating and negatively affect a patient's quality of life. Developments in oncology such as new treatments and adjusted pain management guidelines may have influenced the prevalence of cancer pain and severity in patients. This review aims to provide an overview of the prevalence and severity of pain in cancer patients in the 2014-2021 literature period. A systematic literature search was performed using the databases PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane. Titles and abstracts were screened, and full texts were evaluated and assessed on methodological quality. A meta-analysis was performed on the pooled prevalence and severity rates. A meta-regression analysis was used to explore differences between treatment groups. We identified 10,637 studies, of which 444 studies were included. The overall prevalence of pain was 44.5%. Moderate to severe pain was experienced by 30.6% of the patients, a lower proportion compared to previous research. Pain experienced by cancer survivors was significantly lower compared to most treatment groups. Our results imply that both the prevalence of pain and pain severity declined in the past decade. Increased attention to the assessment and management of pain might have fostered the decline in the prevalence and severity of pain.

Brain metastasis screening in the molecular age

The incidence of brain metastases (BM) amongst cancer patients has been increasing due to improvements in therapeutic options and an increase in overall survival. Molecular characterization of tumors has provided insights into the biology and oncogenic drivers of BM and molecular subtype-based screening. Though there are currently some screening and surveillance guidelines for BM, they remain limited. In this comprehensive review, we review and present epidemiological data on BM, their molecular characterization, and current screening guidelines. The molecular subtypes with the highest BM incidence are epithelial growth factor receptor-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), BRCA1, triple-negative (TN), and HER2+ breast cancers, and BRAF-mutated melanoma. Furthermore, BMs are more likely to present asymptomatically at diagnosis in oncogene-addicted NSCLC and BRAF-mutated melanoma. European screening standards recommend more frequent screening for oncogene-addicted NSCLC patients, and clinical trials are investigating screening for BM in hormone receptor+, HER2+, and TN breast cancers. However, more work is needed to determine optimal screening guidelines for other primary cancer molecular subtypes. With the advent of personalized medicine, molecular characterization of tumors has revolutionized the landscape of cancer treatment and prognostication. Incorporating molecular characterization into BM screening guidelines may allow physicians to better identify patients at high risk for BM development and improve patient outcomes.

Efficacy and safety of first-line lorlatinib versus crizotinib in patients with advanced, ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: updated analysis of data from the phase 3, randomised, open-label CROWN study

BACKGROUND

After a median follow-up of 18·3 months, the third-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) tyrosine-kinase inhibitor, lorlatinib, improved progression-free survival in patients with treatment-naive, ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer in the phase 3 CROWN study. Here we report updated efficacy data, including intracranial activity, from an unplanned analysis after 3 years of follow-up.

METHODS

CROWN is an ongoing, international, randomised, open-label phase 3 trial done in 104 centres in 23 countries worldwide. Eligible participants were aged 18 years and older or aged 20 years and older (depending on local regulations) with advanced, ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer, had received no previous systemic treatment for metastatic disease, had at least one extracranial measurable target lesion (according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours [RECIST], version 1.1), and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0-2. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to oral lorlatinib 100 mg daily or oral crizotinib 250 mg twice daily in 28-day cycles. Randomisation was stratified by the presence or absence of brain metastasis, and by ethnicity. Since the primary endpoint of the study had been met at the planned interim analysis, no further formal analysis of progression-free survival was planned, per protocol. The current unplanned analysis was done to further characterise tumour-related endpoints with a longer follow-up and is presented descriptively. For the planned study, the primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by blinded independent central review. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (investigator), objective response rate, intracranial objective response rate, time to intracranial progression, duration of response, intracranial duration of response, and safety. Efficacy endpoints were also assessed by the presence or absence of baseline brain metastases. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03052608.

FINDINGS

Between May 11, 2017, and Feb 28, 2019, 425 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 296 were enrolled and randomly assigned to the lorlatinib (n=149) or crizotinib (n=147) group. At data cutoff for this unplanned analysis (Sept 20, 2021), median duration of follow-up for progression-free survival was 36·7 months (IQR 31·3-41·9) for lorlatinib and 29·3 months (10·8-35·0) for crizotinib. Median progression-free survival by blinded independent central review was not reached (95% CI not reached-not reached) for lorlatinib and was 9·3 months (7·6-11·1) for crizotinib (hazard ratio [HR] 0·27 [95% CI 0·18-0·39]). 3-year progression-free survival was 64% (95% CI 55-71) in the lorlatinib group and 19% (12-27) in the crizotinib group. Progression-free survival (investigator), objective response rate, intracranial objective response rate, time to intracranial progression, and duration of response were improved with lorlatinib versus crizotinib. In patients with baseline brain metastases (n=37 lorlatinib; n=39 crizotinib), the HR for time to intracranial progression for lorlatinib versus crizotinib was 0·10 (95% CI 0·04-0·27); in patients without baseline brain metastases (n=112 lorlatinib; n=108 crizotinib), the HR was 0·02 (95% CI 0·002-0·14). In patients without brain metastases, one (1%) in the lorlatinib group and 25 (23%) in the crizotinib group had intracranial progression. Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 113 (76%) of 149 patients (most commonly due to altered lipid levels) with lorlatinib and in 81 (57%) of 142 patients with crizotinib. Adverse events led to treatment discontinuation in 11 (7%) patients in the lorlatinib group and 14 (10%) patients in the crizotinib group. There were no new safety signals.

INTERPRETATION

These updated, long-term data from CROWN show the durable benefit of lorlatinib over crizotinib in patients with treatment-naive, ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer and support the use of first-line lorlatinib in patients with and without baseline brain metastases.

FUNDING

Pfizer.

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.

Post Hoc Analysis of Lorlatinib Intracranial Efficacy and Safety in Patients With ALK-Positive Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer From the Phase III CROWN Study

PURPOSE

Lorlatinib significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus crizotinib and showed robust intracranial activity in patients with previously untreated advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the phase III CROWN trial. Here, we report post hoc efficacy outcomes in patients with and without brain metastases at baseline, and present data on the incidence and management of CNS adverse events (AEs) in CROWN.

METHODS

Eligible patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to first-line lorlatinib (100 mg once daily) or crizotinib (250 mg twice a day); no crossover between treatment arms was permitted. Tumor assessments, including CNS magnetic resonance imaging, were performed at screening and then at 8-week intervals. Regular assessments of patient-reported outcomes were conducted.

RESULTS

PFS by blinded independent central review was improved with lorlatinib versus crizotinib in patients with and without brain metastases at baseline (12-month PFS rates: 78% v 22% and 78% v 45%, respectively). Lorlatinib was associated with lower 12-month cumulative incidence of CNS progression versus crizotinib in patients with (7% v 72%) and without (1% v 18%) brain metastases at baseline. In total, 35% of patients had CNS AEs with lorlatinib, most of grade 1 severity. Occurrence of CNS AEs did not result in a clinically meaningful difference in patient-reported quality of life. At analysis, 56% of CNS AEs had resolved (33% without intervention; 17% with lorlatinib dose modification), and 38% were unresolved; most required no intervention. Lorlatinib dose modification did not notably influence PFS.

CONCLUSION

First-line lorlatinib improved PFS outcomes and reduced CNS progression versus crizotinib in patients with advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer with or without brain metastases at baseline. Half of all CNS AEs resolved without intervention or with lorlatinib dose modification.

Economic burden of brain metastases in non-small cell lung cancer patients in South Korea: A retrospective cohort study using nationwide claims data

Brain metastases (BM) are common in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the pure economic burden of BM is unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of BM on healthcare costs and resource utilization in patients with NSCLC by comparing patients with and without BM. This was a retrospective cohort analysis of South Korean health insurance review and assessment claims data. Patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC were identified (March 1, 2013 to February 28, 2018). We compared their two-year and per-patient-per-month (PPPM) healthcare costs and resource utilization with 1:3 propensity score-matched patients without the condition. A generalized linear model was used to estimate the impact of BM and other covariates on healthcare costs. After propensity score matching with the 33 402 newly diagnosed cases of stage IIIB or IV NSCLC, 3435 and 10 305 patients were classified as having or not having BM, respectively. Mean healthcare costs were significantly greater in patients with BM for both the two years (US$ 44 692 vs. US$ 32 230, p < .0001) and PPPM (US$ 3510 vs. US$ 2573, p < .0001). The length of hospital stay was longer in patients with BM (79.15 vs. 69.41 days for two years, p < .0001; 7.69 vs. 6.86 days PPPM, p < .0001), and patients with BM had more outpatient visits (50.61 vs. 46.43 times for two years, p < .0001; 3.64 vs. 3.40 times PPPM costs, p < .0001). The costs of drugs, radiology/radiotherapy, and admission comprised the majority of PPPM costs and were higher in patients with BM. The generalized linear model analysis suggested that patients with BM had significantly increased healthcare costs (by 1.29-fold, 95% confidence interval 1.26–1.32). BM is a significant economic burden for patients with NSCLC. Therefore, it is important to prevent BM in patients with NSCLC to reduce their economic burden.

The cost-effectiveness of brigatinib in adult patients with ALK inhibitor–naive ALK-positive non–small cell lung cancer from a US perspective

BACKGROUND: The discovery of specific oncogenic drivers in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has led to the development of highly targeted anaplastic lymphoma kinase tyrosine kinase inhibitors (ALKis). Brigatinib is a next-generation ALKi associated with prolonged progression-free survival in patients with ALKi-naive ALK+ NSCLC. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of brigatinib compared with crizotinib and alectinib in patients with ALKi-naive ALK+ NSCLC, from a US payer perspective. METHODS: A lifetime area under the curve-partitioned survival model with 4 health states was used to evaluate the relative cost-effectiveness of brigatinib in the ALKi-naive ALK+ NSCLC setting. Brigatinib was compared with crizotinib within a cost-effectiveness framework and compared with alectinib in a cost-comparison framework, where all efficacy outcomes were assumed equal. The efficacy of brigatinib and crizotinib was informed by the ALTA-1L trial, and an indirect treatment comparison was performed to inform the efficacy of brigatinib vs alectinib owing to a lack of head-to-head data. Costs were derived from public sources. The main outcomes of the model were total costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), life-years, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, in addition to multiple scenario analyses, were conducted to assess the robustness of the model outcomes. RESULTS: The improved outcomes observed in ALTA-1L translated into QALY gains (+0.97) in the comparison of brigatinib vs crizotinib. The superior efficacy profile was associated with increased time on treatment with brigatinib, which drove the increase in costs vs crizotinib (+$210,519). The resulting base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $217,607/QALY gained. Compared with alectinib, brigatinib was associated with a cost difference of -$8,546. Sensitivity analysis suggested that extrapolation of overall survival, the assumptions relating to time on treatment, and subsequent therapy costs were the most influential determinants of results. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested brigatinib had the highest probability of being cost-effective beyond willingness-to-pay thresholds of $236,000 per QALY vs crizotinib and alectinib. CONCLUSIONS: At list prices and under base-case assumptions in the current analysis, brigatinib was associated with cost-savings vs alectinib, and QALY gains but at higher costs vs crizotinib. Additional research into the real-world efficacy of ALKis is warranted to further understand the comparative cost-effectiveness of these therapies. DISCLOSURES: Ms Cranmer and Ms Kearns are employees of Takeda UK Ltd. Dr Young is a former employee of Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Inc. Dr Humphries is an employee of Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc. Mr Trueman is an employee of Source Health Economics, the consultancy company that provided health economic and writing services. This work was funded by ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited. Work by Source Health Economics was funded by ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Professional medical writing assistance was provided by Phillipa White, of Source Health Economics, and funded by ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

A CT-based radiomics model to predict subsequent brain metastasis in patients with ALK-rearranged non-small cell lung cancer undergoing crizotinib treatment

Background

Brain metastasis (BM) comprises the most common reason for crizotinib failure in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)‐rearranged non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We hypothesize that its occurrence could be predicted by a computed tomography (CT)‐based radiomics model, therefore, allowing for selection of enriched patient populations for prevention therapies.

Methods

A total of 75 eligible patients were enrolled from Sun Yat‐sen University Cancer Center between June 2014 and September 2019. The primary endpoint was brain metastasis‐free survival (BMFS), estimated from the initiation of crizotinib to the date of the occurrence of BM. Patients were randomly divided into two cohorts for model training (n = 51) and validation (n = 24), respectively. A radiomics signature was constructed based on features extracted from chest CT before crizotinib treatment. Clinical model was developed using the Cox proportional hazards model. Log‐rank test was performed to describe the difference of BMFS risk.

Results

Patients with low radiomics score had significantly longer BMFS than those with higher, both in the training cohort (p = 0.019) and validation cohort (p = 0.048). The nomogram combining smoking history and the radiomics signature showed good performance for the estimation of BMFS, both in the training (concordance index [C‐index], 0.762; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.663–0.861) and validation cohort (C‐index, 0.724; 95% CI, 0.601–0.847).

Conclusion

We have developed a CT‐based radiomics model to predict subsequent BM in patients with non‐brain metastatic NSCLC undergoing crizotinib treatment. Selection of an enriched patient population at high BM risk will facilitate the design of clinical trials or strategies to prevent BM.

Intracranial Metastatic Disease: Present Challenges, Future Opportunities

Intracranial metastatic disease (IMD) is a prevalent complication of cancer that significantly limits patient survival and quality of life. Over the past half-century, our understanding of the epidemiology and pathogenesis of IMD has improved and enabled the development of surveillance and treatment algorithms based on prognostic factors and tumor biomolecular characteristics. In addition to advances in surgical resection and radiation therapy, the treatment of IMD has evolved to include monoclonal antibodies and small molecule antagonists of tumor-promoting proteins or endogenous immune checkpoint inhibitors. Moreover, improvements in the sensitivity and specificity of imaging as well as the development of new serological assays to detect brain metastases promise to revolutionize IMD diagnosis. In this review, we will explore current treatment principles in patients with IMD, including the emerging role of targeted and immunotherapy in select primary cancers, and discuss potential areas for further investigation.

Alectinib Together with Intracranial Therapies Improved Survival Outcomes in Untreated ALK-Positive Patients with Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer and Symptomatic and Synchronic Brain Metastases: A Retrospective Study

Purpose

The performance of alectinib and crizotinib in untreated anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and symptomatic and synchronic brain metastases is largely unknown. This retrospective study assessed the effectiveness of alectinib and crizotinib, together with intracranial therapies in a cohort of these patients.

Patients and Methods

This study included 34 previously untreated ALK-positive NSCLC patients with three or fewer intracranial metastases. Of these patients, 13 received oral alectinib 600 mg twice daily, and 21 received oral crizotinib 250 mg twice daily, until progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, or death. All intracranial metastases were treated with craniotomy, CyberKnife, or both.

Results

Median overall progression-free survival (PFS) was 32.8 months (95% CI 24.4–41.2 months) in patients treated with alectinib and 8.0 months (95% CI 7.3–8.7 months) in patients treated with crizotinib. Median PFS of brain lesions was not yet reached with alectinib (95% CI 30.1 months–not estimated) and was 8.5 months (95% CI 7.2–12.3 months) with crizotinib. Median PFS of lung lesions was 38.5 months (95% CI 27.5–49.5 months) with alectinib and 9.2 months (95% CI 7.4–11.0 months) with crizotinib. Median overall survival was not yet reached with alectinib (95% CI 31.0 months–not estimated) and 30.3 months (95% CI 27.3–37.1 months) with crizotinib.

Conclusion

Compared with crizotinib, alectinib showed superior efficacy and lower toxicity in the treatment of ALK-positive patients with NSCLC and symptomatic and synchronic brain metastases. The inclusion of intracranial therapies such as craniotomy or CyberKnife further improved the brain PFS and overall survival of these patients.

Cancer driver gene and non-coding RNA alterations as biomarkers of brain metastasis in lung cancer: A review of the literature

Brain metastasis (BM) is the most common event in patients with lung cancer. Despite multimodal treatments and advances in systemic therapies, development of BM remains one of the main factors associated with poor prognosis and mortality in patients with lung cancer. Therefore, better understanding of mechanisms involved in lung cancer brain metastasis (LCBM) is of great importance to suppress cancer cells and to improve the overall survival of patients. Several cancer-related genes such as EGFR and KRAS have been proposed as potential predictors of LCBM. In addition, there is ample evidence supporting crucial roles of non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs) in mediating LCBM. In this review, we provide comprehensive information on risk assessment, predictive, and prognostic panels for early detection of BM in patients with lung cancer. Moreover, we present an overview of LCBM molecular mechanisms, cancer driver genes, and ncRNAs which may predict the risk of BM in lung cancer patients. Recent clinical studies have focused on determining mechanisms involved in LCBM and their association with diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment outcomes. These studies have shown that alterations in EGFR, KRAS, BRAF, and ALK, as the most frequent coding gene alterations, and dysregulation of ncRNAs such as miR-423, miR-330-3p, miR-145, piR-651, and MALAT1 can be considered as potential biomarkers of LCBM.

A Comprehensive Analysis of Metabolomics and Transcriptomics Reveals Novel Biomarkers and Mechanistic Insights on Lorlatinib Crosses the Blood-Brain Barrier

Of late, lorlatinib has played an increasingly pivotal role in the treatment of brain metastasis from non-small cell lung cancer. However, its pharmacokinetics in the brain and the mechanism of entry are still controversial. The purpose of this study was to explore the mechanisms of brain penetration by lorlatinib and identify potential biomarkers for the prediction of lorlatinib concentration in the brain. Detection of lorlatinib in lorlatinib-administered mice and control mice was performed using liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry. Metabolomics and transcriptomics were combined to investigate the pathway and relationships between metabolites and genes. Multilayer perceptron was applied to construct an artificial neural network model for prediction of the distribution of lorlatinib in the brain. Nine biomarkers related to lorlatinib concentration in the brain were identified. A metabolite-reaction-enzyme-gene interaction network was built to reveal the mechanism of lorlatinib. A multilayer perceptron model based on the identified biomarkers provides a prediction accuracy rate of greater than 85%. The identified biomarkers and the neural network constructed with these metabolites will be valuable for predicting the concentration of drugs in the brain. The model provides a lorlatinib to treat tumor brain metastases in the clinic.

Radiotherapy of brain metastasis from lung cancer in limited resource settings

Radiotherapy is one of the most commonly used treatment modality for brain metastases from lung cancer. Its use has evolved from conventional whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) to more sophisticated stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and hippocampal sparing radiotherapy. Indications of cranial radiotherapy are also evolving with the advent of targeted therapies directed against molecular markers like epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK). Prognostic criteria such as recursive partitioning analyses and graded prognostic score helps in prognostication of brain metastases patients. Majority of the prospective and randomized studies of brain metastases from lung cancer have come from the developed countries with adequate resources. Efforts have been made to replicate or validate the data in developing countries. In this overview, we intend to discuss the role of radiotherapy for brain metastases in limited resource settings of developing countries. The aim should be to generate a good quality data which is applicable for routine clinical practice in a resource friendly manner. SRS is indicated in guidelines for limited brain metastases, however, it requires a more sophisticated treatment delivery and quality assurance machines which are not available at many centres in majority of the developing countries. Similarly, clinical research should be undertaken considering the demographic, clinical and genetic differences among different populations. Currently, tyrosine kinase inhibitors have dramatically changed the outcomes of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer including brain metastases. The role of WBRT is being questioned in driver mutated patients in developed countries. However, the applicability of this approach should be examined in resource constrained settings as availability of these drugs is limited, its higher cost and frequent use of surveillance brain imaging are the practical challenges.

High expression of cell adhesion molecule 2 unfavorably impacts survival in non-small cell lung cancer patients with brain metastases

Background

Lung cancer is one kind of malignant tumor with a high risk for morbidity and mortality compared to other solid organ malignancies. Brain metastases occur in 30-55% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Prognosis of NSCLC patients with brain metastases is very poor. Our previous study showed that cell adhesion molecule 2 (CADM2) could regulate the development of brain metastasis in NSCLC cells. Therefore, the objective of the study is to evaluate the effect of CADM2 on the prognosis of NSCLC patients with brain metastases.

Methods

The expression of CADM2 was detected by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) in the tissue of the primary tumor. Patients were followed up and overall survival (OS) was calculated. The relationships between CADM2 and clinicopathological features were analyzed using the chi-square test. Kaplan-Meier analysis was carried out to demonstrate the influence of CADM2 on the OS of patients. Univariate and multivariate Cox analyses were used to determine the prognosis of NSCLC patients with brain metastases.

Results

A total of 139 NSCLC patients with brain metastases from the Affiliated Cancer Hospital & Institute of Guangzhou Medical University, treated between January 2015 and December 2017 were evaluated retrospectively. The expression level of CADM2 in patients ranged from 1 to 17.2677, with a median of 6.0772. Chi-square analysis showed that CADM2 gene expression level was not significantly associated with gender, age, tumor location, histological subtype, tumor T stage, extracranial metastasis, or smoking status. However, CADM2 expression was notably associated with risk for lymph node metastasis. The results of the Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that high expression [CADM2 messenger RNA (mRNA) ≥6.0772] of CADM2 was markedly associated with poor prognosis. Univariate and multivariate Cox analyses demonstrated that CADM2 was an independent risk factor for survival in NSCLC patients with brain metastases (P<0.05).

Conclusions

CADM2 expression is up-regulated and closely associated with disease progression and poor prognosis in NSCLC patients with brain metastases. CADM2 expression warrants special consideration given its potential prognostic significance that might help inform clinical decision making.

Brain Penetration of Lorlatinib: Cumulative Incidences of CNS and Non-CNS Progression with Lorlatinib in Patients with Previously Treated ALK-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Background

Lorlatinib is a potent, third-generation ALK/ROS1 tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) designed to penetrate the blood–brain barrier.

Objective

We report the cumulative incidence of central nervous system (CNS) and non-CNS progression with lorlatinib in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) previously treated with ALK TKIs.

Patients and methods

In an ongoing phase II study (NCT01970865), 198 patients with ALK-positive NSCLC with ≥ 1 prior ALK TKI were enrolled into expansion cohorts (EXP) based on treatment history. Patients received lorlatinib 100 mg once daily. Patients were analyzed for progressive disease, categorized as CNS or non-CNS progression, by independent central review. Cumulative incidence probabilities were calculated adopting a competing risks approach.

Results

Fifty-nine patients received crizotinib as their only prior ALK TKI (EXP2–3A); cumulative incidence rates (CIRs) of CNS and non-CNS progression were both 22% at 12 months in patients with baseline CNS metastases (n = 37), and CIR of non-CNS progression at 12 months was higher versus that for CNS progression in patients without baseline CNS metastases [43% vs. 9% (n = 22)]. In patients who received ≥ 1 prior second-generation ALK TKI [EXP3B–5 (n = 139)], CIR of non-CNS progression at 12 months was higher versus that for CNS progression in patients both with and without baseline CNS metastases (35% vs. 23% (n = 94) and 55% vs. 12% (n = 45), respectively).

Conclusions

Lorlatinib showed substantial intracranial activity in patients with pretreated ALK-positive NSCLC, with or without baseline CNS metastases, whose disease progressed on crizotinib or second-generation ALK TKIs.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier

NCT01970865.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s11523-020-00702-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Analysis of metastases in non-small cell lung cancer patients with epidermal growth factor receptor mutation

Background

Most lung cancer patients are diagnosed at an advanced stage with metastases. There was no population-based data on metastases in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation. This study focused on the metastases in NSCLC patients with EGFR mutation.

Methods

In our research, we retrospectively studied 365 NSCLC patients with EGFR mutation (EGFR positive-mutant group) were not resistant to first-generation EGFR TKIs and 316 NSCLC patients with T790M mutation (T790M-mutant group) who were resistant to first-generation EGFR TKIs. In the study, we also investigated sex, smoking status, age at diagnosis, histology, T, N, and M stage, and mutation status. In addition, we analyzed metastatic sites in stage IV patients.

Results

Among the EGFR positive-mutant group, 248 (67.95%) patients were stage IV disease. Among them, 41 patients had brain metastases, 86 patients had bone metastases, 16 patients had liver metastases, 168 patients had intrapulmonary metastases, and 39 patients had metastases in other sites. Among the T790M-mutant group, 277 (87.66%) patients were stage IV disease. Among them, 158 patients had brain metastases, 82 patients had bone metastases, 241 patients had liver metastases, 53 patients had intrapulmonary metastases, and 229 patients had metastases in other sites. We also found that lung cancer patients in the T790M-mutant group had higher incidences of the brain (P<0.001), bone (P<0.001), liver (P=0.001), and intrapulmonary metastases (P<0.001). Moreover, wherever the metastatic site was, the metastasis time all centrally distributed in the first two months after diagnosis.

Conclusions

For patients with metastatic lung cancer, most metastases happened before diagnosis, which indicated that metastases related to driving mutations, such as EGFR positive mutation or T790M mutation, but not to the survival time. Lung cancer patients with T790M mutation were more likely to metastasize before the diagnosis.

Real-world impact of brain metastases on healthcare utilization and costs in patients with non-small cell lung cancer treated with EGFR-TKIs in the US

BACKGROUND

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with brain metastases (BM) is difficult to treat and associated with poor survival. This study assessed the impact of BM on healthcare-related utilization and costs (HRUC) among patients receiving epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Adults newly-diagnosed with metastatic NSCLC, initiating first-/second-generation EGFR-TKI treatment, with BM or no BM (NBM), were identified retrospectively from IBM MarketScan healthcare claims databases (2013-2017). HRUC were measured during the variable-length follow-up period. Generalized linear models assessed the impact of BM on total healthcare costs, standardized to 2017 US$.

RESULTS

Overall, 222 BM and 280 NBM patients were included, with a mean duration of follow-up of 14 months. Adjusted NSCLC-related and all-cause costs over average follow-up were 1.2 times higher among BM patients (Δ$5,640 and Δ$6,366, respectively; p <0.05); differences were driven primarily by radiation treatment and radiology. More than two times more BM than NBM patients received NSCLC-related radiation treatment, in both inpatient (15.3% vs 6.8%; p <0.05) and outpatient settings (87.8% vs 37.5%; p <0.05). Per-patient per-month (PPPM) radiation costs were also higher among BM patients, both inpatient ($796 vs $464, p =0.172) and outpatient ($2,443 vs $747, p <0.05). All-cause PPPM radiology visits (2.0 vs 1.3) and associated costs ($3,824 vs $1,621) were higher among BM patients (both p <0.05).

CONCLUSION

NSCLC-related HRUC, especially those attributable to radiation treatment, were higher among patients with BM. Future research should compare the potential for CNS-active EGFR-TKIs vs first-/second-generation EGFR-TKIs combined with radiotherapy to reduce HRUC.

Discordance between Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization and Immunohistochemistry Analysis of Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase Rearrangement in Indian Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Aims  This study aims to evaluate the incidence of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) mutation in nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) incorporating fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and immunohistochemistry (IHC) methods and to look for any discordance. Methods  We evaluated 101 samples obtained from an enriched cohort of NSCLCs patients from the Army Hospital Research and Referral, New Delhi, India, between November 2016 and November 2018. IHC was performed using the highly-sensitive D5F3 rabbit monoclonal primary antibody. FISH was performed with dual-color, break-apart probe (ZytoLight SPEC) on formalin-fixed, and paraffin-embedded tissue. Discordance between IHC and FISH for ALK rearrangements was evaluated. Pearson correlation coefficient ( r ) was performed to identify any association of ALK presence (by IHC and FISH) with smoking brain metastasis, programmed death-ligand (PD-L1) expression, pleural effusion, and histopathological subtype. Results  A total of 7.92% (8/101) cases tested by IHC and 9.9% (10/101) cases tested by FISH were positive for ALK rearrangement. Of 93 ALK IHC-negative cases, 4 were ALK FISH-positive, whereas of 91 ALK FISH-negative cases, 4 were ALK IHC-positive cases. The correlation analysis demonstrated no or very weak correlation in ALK mutations by IHC or FISH with smoking, brain metastasis, PD-L1 expression, pleural effusion, and histopathological examination, except a weak positive correlation ( r = 0.33) observed between brain metastasis and ALK rearrangement identified by FISH. Conclusions  Our study demonstrated a somewhat similar incidence of ALK FISH-positive cases and ALK IHC-positive cases, though the incidence was numerically higher for ALK-FISH method.

Health care resource utilization and treatment of leptomeningeal carcinomatosis in the United States

Background

The economic burden of cancer in the United States is substantial, and better understanding it is essential in informing health care policy and innovation. Leptomeningeal carcinomatosis (LC) represents a late complication of primary cancer spreading to the leptomeninges.

Methods

The IBM MarketScan Research databases were queried for adults diagnosed with LC from 2001 to 2015, secondary to 4 primary cancers (breast, lung, gastrointestinal, and melanoma). Health care resource utilization (HCRU) and treatment utilization were quantified at baseline (1-year pre-LC diagnosis) and 30, 90, and 365 days post-LC diagnosis.

Results

We identified 4961 cases of LC (46.3% breast cancer, 34.8% lung cancer, 13.5% gastrointestinal cancer, and 5.4% melanoma). The median age was 57.0 years, with 69.7% female and 31.1% residing in the South. Insurance status included commercial (71.1%), Medicare (19.8%), and Medicaid (9.1%). Median follow-up was 66.0 days (25th percentile: 24.0, 75th percentile: 186.0) and total cumulative costs were highest for the gastrointestinal subgroup ($167 768) and lowest for the lung cancer subgroup ($145 244). There was considerable variation in the 89.6% of patients who used adjunctive treatments at 1 year, including chemotherapy (64.3%), radiotherapy (57.6%), therapeutic lumbar puncture (31.5%), and Ommaya reservoir (14.5%). The main cost drivers at 1 year were chemotherapy ($62 026), radiation therapy ($37 076), and specialty drugs ($29 330). The prevalence of neurologic impairments was 46.9%, including radiculopathy (15.0%), paresthesia (12.3%), seizure episode/convulsive disorder not otherwise specified (11.0%), and ataxia (8.0%).

Conclusions

LC is a devastating condition with an overall poor prognosis. We present the largest study of LC in this real-world study, including current treatments, with an emphasis on HCRU. There is considerable variation in the treatment of LC and significant health care costs.

Application of clinical trial inclusion criteria to clinical practice patients to quantify the burden of CNS metastases on health-related quality of life and healthcare resource use in patients with NSCLC

OBJECTIVES

Quantify the burden of central nervous system (CNS) metastases on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and healthcare resource use (HRU) in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from a prospective European study in clinical practice, utilising clinical trial inclusion criteria.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients ≥18 years, with metastatic NSCLC, Eastern Oncology C0operative Group (ECOG) performance status 0-2 and life expectancy ≥12 weeks were enrolled in two cohorts by baseline CNS metastases status. Demographics, clinical characteristics, NSCLC management data, HRQoL and HRU were collected at baseline and two follow-up visits (Visits 2 and 3, 6 weeks apart). HRQoL was assessed using validated questionnaires.

RESULTS

162 patients were enrolled (n = 80 CNS cohort, n = 82 non-CNS cohort). Baseline characteristics were balanced, but CNS patients were younger (mean ± standard deviation age: 62.1 ± 9.6 vs 65.6 ± 9.7 years, p =  0.021) with a lower body mass index (13.8 % underweight [<18.5kg/m²] vs 3.7 %, p =  0.049). Mean HRQoL scores were similar between cohorts at all visits. Cancer pharmacotherapy, procedures and concomitant treatment were comparable across cohorts, with some exceptions. More CNS patients were hospitalised at baseline (10.3 % vs 2.2 %) for longer (mean 7.2 vs 4.6 days; p <  0.001). By Visit 2, more CNS patients were hospitalised (50.0 % vs 29.3 %; p = 0.009) with emergency room visits (11.8 % vs 2.7 %; p =  0.032). At baseline, more CNS versus non-CNS patients had Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scans (80.0 % vs 31.7 %; p <  0.001), but fewer had fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-positron emission tomography (PET)-computed tomography (CT) scans (10.0 % vs 28.0 %; p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

These data from clinical practice show minor differences in HRQoL/HRU between patients with advanced NSCLC with/without CNS metastases when applying selected clinical trial criteria. Although follow-up was short, HRQoL scores were similar between cohorts at all visits, supporting the wider inclusion of selected patients with CNS disease into clinical trials.

Economic burden in patients with ALK + non-small cell lung cancer, with or without brain metastases, receiving second-line anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitors

Aims: To describe the real-world economic burden of patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive (ALK+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with post-crizotinib, second-line ALK inhibitor therapy.Materials and methods: Retrospective analysis using data from US Optum: Clinformatics Data Mart administrative claims database. Adult patients with ALK + NSCLC treated with ceritinib or alectinib as second-line ALK inhibitors between 1 January 2011 and 30 September 2017 were included. Healthcare costs and resource utilization for up to 1 year of therapy were calculated on a per-patient-per-month (PPPM) basis and stratified by presence or absence of brain metastases (BM). Multivariate regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with costs. Top ten cost drivers of non-inpatient procedure costs were recorded.Results: One hundred and twelve patients received second-line ALK inhibitors. Total mean PPPM healthcare costs were $23,984 for all patients receiving up to 1 year of post-crizotinib, second-line ALK inhibitor therapy. Total mean PPPM costs for patients with BM on or prior to post-crizotinib, second-line ALK inhibitor therapy were 1.37-times as high as those for patients without BM (p = 0.0406). Mean PPPM outpatient visits and inpatient hospitalization stays were higher for patients with BM versus no BM. The main cost drivers for non-inpatient procedures were radiation therapy, medications, and diagnostic radiology.Limitations: Analyses did not include newer ALK-directed therapies. BM development after the index date (defined as the date of the first claim for a second-line ALK inhibitor) may have been misclassified as non-BM. Findings may not be generalizable to patients with no health insurance coverage.Conclusions: Treatment of patients with ALK + NSCLC with ceritinib or alectinib as post-crizotinib, second-line ALK inhibitor therapy represents a high economic burden. Healthcare costs and resource utilization were significantly higher for patients with ALK + NSCLC with BM versus no BM.

Durable Complete Response to Alectinib in a Lung Adenocarcinoma Patient With Brain Metastases and Low-Abundance EML4-ALK Variant in Liquid Biopsy: A Case Report

EML4-ALK fusions are targetable oncogenic drivers in a subset of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients that can benefit from selected ALK inhibitors. Precise detection of ALK fusions may yield critical information for selection of appropriate therapy and hence improve patient survival. Analysis of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in liquid biopsies using next generation sequencing (NGS) prior to or during treatment hold great promise for disease monitoring and treatment guidance of various cancers including NSCLC. Herein, we report a case of a 21-year-old advanced lung adenocarcinoma patient with a low abundance (0.03%) of EML4-ALK rearrangement identified in plasma ctDNA upon progression on two lines of chemotherapy that demonstrated long-term complete response to alectinib (>13 months) including metastatic brain tumors. Patient's clinical and pathologic characteristics, computerized tomography (CT) scans and brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were reviewed retrospectively. Taken together, our report not only reinforces the translational utility of NGS-based genomic sequencing of liquid biopsy in guiding clinical practice, but also highlights the superior efficacy of alectinib than chemotherapy in ALK+ NSCLC with brain metastases, albeit at a low variant allele abundance.

Real-World Treatment Patterns and Progression-Free Survival Associated with Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase (ALK) Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Therapies for ALK+ Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

Little is known about real-world treatment and outcomes of patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive (ALK+) advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This retrospective study of the Flatiron Health EHR-derived deidentified database included patients with a lung cancer diagnosis and confirmed advanced NSCLC who received ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy (January 1, 2011, through June 30, 2018). Patient characteristics and treatment patterns were characterized. Real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) and time to discontinuation were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

First-line ALK TKI therapy was administered to 581 patients (27.5% had brain metastasis on or prior to initiation) and second-line ALK TKI therapy to 254 patients post crizotinib (45.7% had brain metastasis on or prior to second-line ALK TKI initiation). Crizotinib (84.6%; n = 492) was the most commonly administered first-line ALK TKI therapy. For second-line ALK TKI post crizotinib (n = 254), 49.6% received ceritinib, 41.7% received alectinib, 5.9% received crizotinib retreatment, and 2.8% received brigatinib. Median (95% confidence interval [CI]) rwPFS was 7.47 (6.48-8.32) months for first-line and 7.30 (5.72-8.42) months for second-line ALK TKI. Median (95% CI) rwPFS was significantly longer among first-line ALK TKI patients without than with brain metastasis (8.52 [7.57-10.59] vs. 4.97 [3.75-5.99] months; p < .0001) and patients with brain metastasis on or prior to first-line ALK TKI therapy had a significantly increased risk of progression (hazard ratio ± SE, 1.976 ± 0.112; p < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Median rwPFS in patients with advanced ALK+ NSCLC was < 8 months for first- and second-line ALK TKI therapy and was even shorter in patients with brain metastasis, highlighting the need for more effective treatments in this patient population.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Results presented herein describe real-world treatment of advanced ALK+ NSCLC with ALK TKI therapies from January 2011 through June 2018. Crizotinib was the most commonly prescribed first-line ALK TKI therapy in this patient population, but the majority of data analyzed were obtained prior to Food and Drug Administration approval of alectinib and ceritinib in the first-line ALK TKI setting. Physicians should monitor patients closely to help identify when a change in treatment should occur.

ALK-Brain Prognostic Index-Preliminary Study of a Prognostic Tool for Patients with ALK-Rearranged, Non-small Cell Lung Cancer and Brain Metastases

Background: Disease-specific Graded Prognostic Assessment (DS-GPA) is the most validated prognostic tool for patients with brain metastasized lung cancer. The Lung-molGPA scoring system was recently introduced for oncogenic-driven brain metastasized lung cancer, but has not yet been validated in cohorts including only ALK-translocated tumors. Methods: We designed a retrospective cohort study consisting of 44 patients with brain metastasized ALK-positive, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who were treated between January 2009 and November 2019 at Karolinska University Hospital in Stockholm, Sweden. Information about demographics and clinicopathological parameters were collected. Predictors of overall survival (OS) were identified by Cox regression analyses. A bootstrap validation with 1000 samples was performed in order to compare the different prognostic scores. Results: The variables found to independently influence OS in the multivariate analysis, i.e., PS, sex and brain metastases at diagnosis, were used as prognostic variables in our new prognostic index (ALK-BPI). Patients were divided into two prognostic groups. The median OS was 65.7 months for the good prognostic group and 22.7 months for the poor prognostic group (p = 0.0068). In the univariate analysis of the different prognostic scores, ALK-BPI performed better than the others (HR = 3.6; 95% CI: 1.3–9.9). The mean C-statistics of the different prognostic scores were compared to each other, and no significant difference was observed. Conclusion: We propose the ALK-BPI score as a new prognostic tool that can easily be applied for ALK-positive lung cancer patients with brain metastases in daily clinical practice, as it has at least the same prognostic value as Lung-molGPA.

Treatment Sequencing in Patients with Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in Japan: A Real-World Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

The anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) alectinib was approved in Japan in 2014 for the treatment of ALK fusion gene-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). With the approvals of crizotinib in 2012 and ceritinib in 2017, Japan became the first country with multiple ALK TKIs available for first-line or later use in patients with ALK-positive advanced NSCLC. Here, we collected and evaluated real-world data on ALK TKI clinical usage patterns and sequencing in patients with ALK-positive NSCLC in Japan.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study used the Japanese Medical Data Vision database to analyze data from patients with a confirmed diagnosis of lung cancer who visited a healthcare facility in the database between April 2010 and March 2017, underwent an ALK test, received a prescription for an ALK TKI, and were at least 18 years old as of the date of the first ALK TKI prescription. There were no exclusion criteria. Descriptive analyses of demographics, baseline characteristics, ALK TKI treatment patterns and sequences, non-ALK TKI treatments received before, during, and after ALK TKI treatment, and treatment durations were reported.

RESULTS

A total of 378 patients met the inclusion criteria and were evaluated in mutually exclusive groups of patients receiving one, two, or three ALK TKIs. The initial ALK TKI prescribed was crizotinib for 52.1% of patients and alectinib for 47.9% of patients; however, the proportion of patients receiving alectinib as the initial ALK TKI increased over time following the Japanese approval of alectinib in 2014. Of the 117 patients who received two or three ALK TKIs, 106 received crizotinib as the first ALK TKI and 11 received alectinib. Before the date of the patient's first ALK TKI prescription, 153 of 378 patients (40.5%) had received chemotherapy. Of 104 patients who discontinued ALK therapy, 46.2% received chemotherapy and 5.8% received immunotherapy as their next treatment.

CONCLUSION

At the time of this analysis, most patients who received more than one ALK TKI received crizotinib as the initial ALK TKI. Additional ALK TKIs have since been approved in Japan as first-line or later therapeutic options for patients with ALK-positive NSCLC, but the optimal sequence of ALK TKI usage remains undetermined. As new data continue to emerge, additional research will be warranted to evaluate ALK TKI sequences that do not include crizotinib as the first therapy in this patient population.

Cost analysis of the management of brain metastases in patients with advanced ALK+ NSCLC: alectinib versus crizotinib

Aim

To estimate management cost of NSCLC ALK+ patients with and without brain metastasis (BM), and to compare annual costs in patients treated with alectinib or crizotinib.

Methods

Management cost/year (€ 2018) in patients with and without BM was estimated with disaggregated resource consumption provided by local oncologists, including medical visits, hospitalizations, diagnostic/laboratory tests, imaging techniques and surgical procedures. The comparison of costs/year with alectinib and crizotinib, considered the cumulative 12-month incidence of BM in ALEX trial (9.4 and 41.4%, respectively).

Results

Management cost was €6173.42/patient-year without BM and €21,637.50/patient-year with BM. With alectinib, average cost/patient was lower than crizotinib (€4948.51/patient-year).

Conclusion

Prevention of BM with alectinib may result in reductions of cost/year in the management of advanced ALK+ NSCLC.

Cost-effectiveness of alectinib compared to crizotinib for the treatment of first-line ALK+ advanced non-small-cell lung cancer in France

The aim of the study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of alectinib for first-line treatment of ALK+ advanced non-small-cell lung cancer compared to crizotinib in the French setting. This study used a partitioned survival model, with three discrete health states (progression-free survival, post-progression survival and death). Survival probabilities were derived from a randomised Phase III clinical trial comparing alectinib to crizotinib (ALEX). Beyond the length of the trial (18 months), the efficacy of both treatments was considered equivalent. Occurrence of adverse events or brain metastases were considered as inter-current events. Utilities (and disutilities for intercurrent adverse events) derived from the EQ-5D were applied. Costs were attributed using standard French national public health tariffs. Projected mean overall survival was 4.62 years for alectinib and 4.18 years for crizotinib. Projected mean progression-free survival was 30.30 months for alectinib and 16.13 months for crizotinib. The total number of quality-adjusted life years projected was 3.40 for alectinib and 2.84 for crizotinib. The projected total cost of treatment over the lifetime of the model was € 246,022 for alectinib and € 195,486 for crizotinib. This extra cost was principally attributable to treatment acquisition costs and management before progression. Alectinib was associated with lower costs related to brain metastases and to management post-progression. The incremental cost per life year gained was 115,334 €/year and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 90,232 €/QALY. First-line treatment of ALK+ NSCLC with alectinib provides superior clinical outcomes to crizotinib and is cost-effective in the French context.

Treatment Optimization for Brain Metastasis from Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase Rearrangement Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

Brain metastasis is common in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with driver gene mutations. Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene rearrangement is one of the common driver mutations in NSCLC. Tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) has been the research hotspot at present. However, there are relatively few studies specified on the treatment of brain metastasis from ALK gene rearrangement NSCLC. The prognosis of these patients, the role of ALK-TKI, and the proper combination model of ALK-TKI with radiotherapy are worth further exploring. This review focuses on new data on the prognosis of ALK-TKI and the proper combination model of ALK-TKI with radiotherapy.

SUMMARY

According to some retrospective trials, for ALKi-naïve ALK rearrangement NSCLC patients with brain metastasis, crizotinib together with radiotherapy seem to improve intracranial control rate, progression-free survival, and very likely improve overall survival; next-generation ALK-TKIs are now replacing crizotinib as first-line treatment. For patients with central nervous system progression during crizotinib application, combining radiotherapy could improve the local control rate while continuing crizotinib to control systemic disease. Second-/third-generation ALK inhibitors had higher intracranial ORR and DCR even after crizotinib-refractory situations, and they alone had a strong efficacy against intracranial tumors, in which situation radiotherapy might be omitted. Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) were both local treatment options for brain metastasis, and the preferred choice was hard to make. ALK resistance is complicated with a wide range of molecular changes, and future studies are needed to solve these problems. Anyway, further and larger prospective studied are worth exploring to offer a confirmed preferred choice of drugs and radiation. Key Messages: Next-generation ALK-TKIs are now replacing crizotinib as first-line treatment in ALKi-naïve ALK rearrangement NSCLC patients with brain metastasis, and they alone might have a strong efficacy against intracranial tumors in crizotinib-refractory situations in which occasion radiotherapy might be omitted. SRS and WBRT are both local treatment options for brain metastasis.

Management of CNS disease in ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer: Is whole brain radiotherapy still needed?

Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small cell lung cancer (3 to 5% of all non-small cell lung cancers) carries a particularly high risk of central nervous system dissemination (60% to 90%). As the use of ALK inhibitors improves treatment outcomes over chemotherapy, the determent of central nervous system metastases has become an increasingly relevant therapeutic dilemma considering young age and possible extended overall survival. The goal of brain metastases management is to optimize both overall survival and quality of life, with the high priority of neurocognitive function preservation. Unfortunately in the first year on crizotinib, the pioneering ALK inhibitors, approximately one third of these patients fail in the central nervous system, which is explained by an inadequate central nervous system drug penetration through the blood-brain barrier. Central nervous system-directed radiotherapy represents the most important strategy to control intracranial disease burden and extend the survival benefit with crizotinib. The role of whole brain irradiation in the treatment of brain metastases diminishes, as this technique is associated with the risk of neurocognitive decline. Stereotactic radiotherapy represents an alternative technique that delivers ablative doses of ionizing radiation to the limited volume of oligometastatic brain disease, offering sparing of the adjacent brain parenchyma and reduced neurotoxicity. The next generation ALK inhibitors were designed to cross the blood-brain barrier more efficiently than crizotinib and achieve higher concentration in the cerebrospinal fluid, offering prominent ability to control central nervous system spread. In the phase III ALEX trial the intracranial control was significantly better with alectinib as compared to crizotinib and it translated into survival benefit. Other next generation ALK inhibitors (i.e. ceritinib, brigatinib, lorlatinib) also demonstrated promising activity in the central nervous system.

Treatment of ALK-positive nonsmall cell lung cancer: recent advances

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The review will highlight recent advances in development of ALK-TKIs and management of patients with ALK-positive nonsmall cell lung cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

There has been rapid progress in the use of targeted therapies for ALK-positive NSCLC. Since the discovery, development and approval of crizotinib in 2011, three second-generation ALK-TKIs, ceritinib, alectinib and brigatinib have been approved by the FDA. A range of newer generation ALK inhibitors with improved potency against ALK and against mutations that confer resistance to crizotinib are in clinical development.

SUMMARY

Our review will discuss the recent phase III data with ceritinib and alectinib as well as clinical trials with other ALK inhibitors. We will also address two important issues in the management of ALK-positive NSCLC, prevention and treatment of brain metastases and management of emergent ALK-TKI resistance mechanisms.

Comparative efficacy of brigatinib versus ceritinib and alectinib in patients with crizotinib-refractory anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVE

Brigatinib, ceritinib, and alectinib are approved to treat crizotinib-refractory anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive (ALK+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but no trial has compared them head-to-head. A matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) was conducted to estimate the relative efficacy of these agents in the crizotinib-refractory setting.

METHODS

MAIC is a propensity score-type method that adjusts for differences in baseline characteristics between trials to estimate relative efficacy. Analyses were based on patient-level data from the ALTA trial for brigatinib and published summary-level trial data from ASCEND-1 and ASCEND-2 for ceritinib and NP28761 and NP28673 for alectinib. Objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared.

RESULTS

After matching, all key baseline characteristics were balanced between trials. Compared with ceritinib, brigatinib was associated with longer PFS (ASCEND-1: median 15.7 vs 6.9 months, hazard ratio (HR) [95% confidence interval] = 0.38 [0.26-0.57]; ASCEND-2: median = 18.3 vs 7.2 months, HR = 0.33 [0.20-0.56]) and OS (ASCEND-1: not available; ASCEND-2: median 27.6 vs 14.9 months, HR = 0.33 [0.17-0.63]). Versus alectinib, brigatinib was associated with longer PFS (NP28761: median = 17.6 vs 8.2 months, HR = 0.56 [0.36-0.86]; NP28673: median = 17.6 vs 8.9 months, HR = 0.61 [0.40-0.93]); results for OS were inconclusive (NP28761: median = 27.6 vs 22.7 months, HR = 0.70 [0.42-1.16]; NP28673: median = 27.6 vs 26.0 months, HR = 0.66 [0.39-1.09]). ORR was similar.

CONCLUSION

In crizotinib-refractory ALK + NSCLC patients, relative efficacy estimates suggest brigatinib may have prolonged PFS and OS vs ceritinib and prolonged PFS vs alectinib.

Optimal timing and clinical value of radiotherapy in advanced ALK-rearranged non-small cell lung cancer with or without baseline brain metastases: implications from pattern of failure analyses

Background

Despite development of several next-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), crizotinib remains one of the first-line treatment options for advanced ALK-positive NSCLC and is widely used in situations where next-generation TKIs aren’t yet approved or economically inaccessible. However, the pattern of failure and clinical value of radiotherapy in metastatic crizotinib-treated ALK-mutant lung cancer, with or without baseline brain metastases (BBM), are largely unknown.

Methods

Consecutive crizotinib-treated NSCLC patients with adequate imaging and measurable disease were retrospectively enrolled. Disease progression in original sites (primary/metastatic), new sites, or both, are classified as original failure (OF), distant failure (DF) and ODF, respectively. Progression free survival, from crizotinib initiation to the first disease progression, and from that to the second disease progression, were calculated as PFS1 and PFS2.

Results

Ninety-three patients were identified. With a median follow up of 22.0 (range, 2.0–72.0) months, 52 patients had crizotinib-treatment failure. The frequencies of OF, ODF, and DF, were 50.0, 26.9, and 23.1%, respectively. Histology, primary tumor size and presence of BBM, were independently associated with OF, using competing risks analyses. The brain was the most common site of initial disease progression. Patients with BBM had a significant higher possibility developing multiple-progressive lesions in the brain (p = 0.002). Importantly, four of the ten patients who had baseline oligo-metastatic cranial disease but didn’t receive upfront brain radiation, developed multiple-progressive disease in the brain. Brain radiation before crizotinib could alter the disease failure patterns and improve PFS1 among patients with BBM (p = 0.006). Extracranial radiation was efficient in controlling symptoms but it was not associated with PFS1 (p = 0.223), and the majority of patients were eligible for salvage radiotherapy upon disease progression to crizotinib. By the time of data cut-off, 28 patients had second disease progression, with a median PFS2 of 7.0 (95% CI 5.4–8.6) months and salvage radiotherapy significantly prolonged PFS2 (p = 0.003). Additionally, patients receiving any radiotherapy during their treatment course had a significant longer overall survival (p = 0.048).

Conclusions

Among patients with baseline oligo-metastatic brain lesions which are suitable for stereotactic radiosurgery, upfront brain radiotherapy provides considerable clinical benefits. While, extracranial radiation may be deferred in asymptomatic patients with multiple-metastatic lesions.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13014-019-1240-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

ALK Inhibitors in the Treatment of ALK Positive NSCLC

Background: ALK inhibitors have shown positive advance in the treatment of ALK+ NSCLC. They have achieved better results in prolonging the progression free survival and improving quality of life in comparison to chemotherapy. We have assembled the evidence related to the efficacy and safety of these agents in the treatment of ALK positive NSCLC. Materials and Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted using electronic databases of PubMed, Medline and Cochrane Library to identify the studies involving comparison of ALK inhibitors to chemotherapy and Next generation ALK inhibitors to crizotinib. PFS was the primary outcome while other outcomes like ORR, adverse events, quality of life and OS were also analyzed and compared. Hazard ratios and odds ratios obtained were analyzed using fixed effect or random effects model in Review Manager Software. Results: A total of 12 studies (n = 3,297) met the criteria for inclusion in this review and meta-analysis. ALK inhibitors including crizotinib, ceritinib and alectinib revealed significantly better PFS (HR 0.42 [0.35, 0.50; p < 0.00001]), ORR (Overall OR 6.59 [4.86, 8.94; p < 0.00001] as compared to chemotherapy in the first line as well as second line treatment settings. Intracranial response rate was better with ALK inhibitors (ceritinib and alectinib) as compared to chemotherapy OR 6.51 [2.86, 14.83; p < 0.00001]. No significant increase in grade 3 or 4 adverse events was observed with crizotinib (OR 1.21 [0.82, 1.77; p = 0.34]) or ceritinib (OR 1.49 [0.86, 2.57; p = 0.17]) when compared to chemotherapy individually. Quality of life indicators assessed were significantly improved with ALK inhibitors. Next generation agents (ceritinib, alectinib and brigatinib) revealed significant improvement in PFS (HR 0.50 [0.43, 0.57; p < 0.00001]), ORR (OR 1.57 [1.21, 2.04; p = 0.0006]) in comparison to crizotinib. Next generation agents (Alectinib and brigatinib) yielded better response intra-cranially than crizotinib in terms of objective response rate (OR 5.87 [3.49, 9.87; p < 0.00001]) and time to CNS progression (HR 0.25 [0.13, 0.46; p < 0.0001]). Alectinib by far resulted in fewer adverse events than chemotherapy or crizotinib. Conclusions: Overall ALK inhibitors are safe and effective treatment option in ALK+ non-small cell lung cancer. Of the ALK inhibitors, Next generation agents in particular alectinib and brigatinib are safer and more effective intra-cranially and can be preferred as first option.

Brain metastases in ALK-positive NSCLC - time to adjust current treatment algorithms

The progress in molecular biology has revolutionized systemic treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from conventional chemotherapy to a treatment stratified by histology and genetic aberrations. Tumors harboring a translocation of the anaplastic-lymphoma-kinase (ALK) gene constitute a distinct genetic and clinico-pathologic NSCLC subtype with patients with ALK-positive disease being at a higher risk for developing brain metastases. Due to the introduction of effective targeted therapy with ALK-inhibitors, today, patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC achieve high overall response rates and remain progression-free for long time intervals. Moreover, ALK-inhibitors seem to exhibit efficacy in the treatment of brain metastases. In the light of this, it needs to be discussed how treatment algorithms for managing patients with brain metastases should be modified. By integrating systemic ALK-inhibitor therapy, radiotherapy, in particular whole brain radiotherapy might be postponed deferring potential long-term impairment by neurocognitive deficits to a later time point in the course of the disease. An early treatment of asymptomatic brain metastases might offer patients a longer time without impairment of cerebral symptoms or radiotherapeutic interventions. Based on an updated extensive review of the literature this article provides an overview on the epidemiology and the treatment of patients’ brain metastases. It describes the specifics of ALK-positive disease and proposes an algorithm for the treatment of patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC and brain metastases.

CNS Metastases in Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Mutation-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Impact on Health Resource Utilization

PURPOSE

Patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation-positive (EGFRm) non-small-cell lung cancer commonly experience disease progression in the CNS. Here, we assess the impact of CNS disease on resource utilization and outcomes in patients who are EGFRm.

METHODS

We completed a retrospective review of all advanced patients who were EGFRm, referred to BC Cancer, and treated with a first- and/or second-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor from 2010 to 2015. Baseline characteristics, systemic treatment, and CNS management were collected. We compared health resource utilization (HRU) between patients with CNS-negative disease and those with CNS metastases from the median time of CNS metastases diagnosis to death or last follow-up (9.1 months) and at 9 months preceding death or last follow-up for the CNS-negative group.

RESULTS

Four hundred ninety-nine patients were referred, of which 68% were female; 51% were of Asian ethnicity; and 57%, 37%, and 6% were exon 19, 21, or other, respectively; with a median age of 66 years. Two hundred twenty-nine (46%) of 499 patients developed CNS metastases-39% at diagnosis and 61% over the course of disease. CNS metastases were managed with surgery with or without whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT; 13%) WBRT alone (73%), stereotactic radiosurgery with or without WBRT (5%), or no CNS-directed therapy (9%). The median time from the development of CNS metastases diagnosis to death was 9.1 months. CNS-negative patients used less HRU versus patients that were CNS-positive in the 9 months preceding death or last follow-up-in the average number of clinic visits (8.53 v 12.71, respectively; P < .001), hospitalizations (0.43 v 0.76, respectively; P < .001), CNS imaging investigations (0.52 v 2.65, respectively; P < .001), emergency room visits (0.03 v 0.14, respectively; P = .001), palliative care unit admission (8% v 10%, respectively; P = .64), and hospice admission (3% v 19%, respectively; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

The incidence of CNS metastases in patients with EGFRm is high and associated with increased HRU. Prevention or delay of CNS metastases with newer systemic therapy options may translate into lower resource utilization.