The New England journal of medicine 2018-11-22
Brigatinib versus Crizotinib in ALK-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.
Abstract
Background
Brigatinib, a next-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitor, has robust efficacy in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that is refractory to crizotinib. The efficacy of brigatinib, as compared with crizotinib, in patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC who have not previously received an ALK inhibitor is unclear.
Methods
In an open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC who had not previously received ALK inhibitors to receive brigatinib at a dose of 180 mg once daily (with a 7-day lead-in period at 90 mg) or crizotinib at a dose of 250 mg twice daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review. Secondary end points included the objective response rate and intracranial response. The first interim analysis was planned when approximately 50% of 198 expected events of disease progression or death had occurred.
Results
A total of 275 patients underwent randomization; 137 were assigned to brigatinib and 138 to crizotinib. At the first interim analysis (99 events), the median follow-up was 11.0 months in the brigatinib group and 9.3 months in the crizotinib group. The rate of progression-free survival was higher with brigatinib than with crizotinib (estimated 12-month progression-free survival, 67% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 56 to 75] vs. 43% [95% CI, 32 to 53]; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.33 to 0.74]; P<0.001 by the log-rank test). The confirmed objective response rate was 71% (95% CI, 62 to 78) with brigatinib and 60% (95% CI, 51 to 68) with crizotinib; the confirmed rate of intracranial response among patients with measurable lesions was 78% (95% CI, 52 to 94) and 29% (95% CI, 11 to 52), respectively. No new safety concerns were noted.
Conclusions
Among patients with ALK-positive NSCLC who had not previously received an ALK inhibitor, progression-free survival was significantly longer among patients who received brigatinib than among those who received crizotinib. (Funded by Ariad Pharmaceuticals; ALTA-1L ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02737501 .).
Related Questions
Would you offer a different ALK inhibitor to a patient receiving alectinib who had decompensation of liver function in the setting of preexisting cirrhosis?
Short answer is yes. In the pivotal phase III studies that compared alectinib, brigatinib, and lorlatinib to crizotinib in the first line setting (Peters et al., PMID 28586279, Camidge et al., PMID 30280657, Shaw et al., PMID 33207094 respectively), the risk of hepatic dysfunction (defined by increa...
Is there a preferred ALK targeting agent for patients with ALK+ mNSCLC presenting with CNS metastases?
We do not have head-to-head comparisons and thus bearing the caveats of cross-trial comparisons given the heterogeneity in patients enrolled (e.g. baseline brain mets and type of treatment received), we do this exercise given the limitations of available data. There are considerable differences in b...
What is your preferred first line therapy in metastatic ALK+ NSCLC?
For patients with known CNS metastases at baseline, lorlatinib may potentially offer better CNS disease control, albeit with more toxicity relative to brigatinib/alectinib. Brigatinib is more convenient in terms of dosing from the patient perspective (one tablet once daily versus up to four twice da...