Walter Bordogna

Alectinib in Crizotinib-Refractory ALK-Rearranged Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase II Global Study

PURPOSE Crizotinib confers improved progression-free survival compared with chemotherapy in anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but progression invariably occurs. We investigated the efficacy and safety of alectinib, a potent and selective ALK inhibitor with excellent CNS penetration, in patients with crizotinib-refractory ALK-positive NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Alectinib 600 mg was administered orally twice daily. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) by central independent review committee (IRC). RESULTS Of the 138 patients treated, 84 patients (61%) had CNS metastases at baseline, and 122 were response evaluable (RE) by IRC. ORR by IRC was 50% (95% CI, 41% to 59%), and the median duration of response (DOR) was 11.2 months (95% CI, 9.6 months to not reached). In 96 patients (79%) previously treated with chemotherapy, the ORR was 45% (95% CI, 35% to 55%). Median IRC-assessed progression-free survival for all 138 patients was 8.9 months (95% CI, 5.6 to 11.3 months). CNS disease control rate was 83% (95% CI, 74% to 91%), and the median CNS DOR was 10.3 months (95% CI, 7.6 to 11.2 months). CNS ORR in 35 patients with baseline measurable CNS lesions was 57% (95% CI, 39% to 74%). Of the 23 patients with baseline CNS metastases (measurable or nonmeasurable) and no prior radiation, 10 (43%) had a complete CNS response. At 12 months, the cumulative CNS progression rate (24.8%) was lower than the cumulative non-CNS progression rate (33.2%) for all patients. Common adverse events were constipation (33%), fatigue (26%), and peripheral edema (25%); most were grade 1 to 2. CONCLUSION Alectinib is highly active and well tolerated in patients with advanced, crizotinib-refractory ALK-positive NSCLC, including those with CNS metastases.

Pooled analysis of CNS response to alectinib in two studies of pretreated patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer

Purpose Alectinib has shown activity in the CNS in phase I and II studies. To further evaluate this activity, we pooled efficacy and safety data from two single-arm phase II studies (NP28761 and NP28673; ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01871805 and NCT01801111, respectively) in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and Methods Both studies included patients with ALK-positive NSCLC who had previously received crizotinib; all patients received alectinib 600 mg twice per day. The primary end point in both studies was independent review committee (IRC)-assessed objective response rate (ORR; by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors [RECIST] version 1.1). Additional end points (all by IRC) included CNS ORR (CORR), CNS disease control rate (CDCR), and CNS duration of response (CDOR). Results One hundred thirty-six patients had baseline CNS metastases (60% of the overall study populations); 50 patients (37%) had measurable CNS disease at baseline. Ninety-five patients (70%) had prior CNS radiotherapy; 55 patients completed the CNS radiotherapy more than 6 months before starting alectinib. Median follow-up time was 12.4 months (range, 0.9 to 19.7 months). For patients with baseline measurable CNS disease, IRC CORR was 64.0% (95% CI, 49.2% to 77.1%), CDCR was 90.0% (95% CI, 78.2% to 96.7%), and median CDOR was 10.8 months (95% CI, 7.6 to 14.1 months). For patients with measurable and/or nonmeasurable baseline CNS disease, IRC CORR was 42.6% (95% CI, 34.2% to 51.4%), CDCR was 85.3% (95% CI, 78.2% to 90.8%), and median CDOR was 11.1 months (95% CI, 10.3 months to not evaluable). CORR was 35.8% (95% CI, 26.2% to 46.3%) for patients with prior radiotherapy (n = 95) and 58.5% (95% CI, 42.1% to 73.7%) for patients without prior radiotherapy (n = 41). As previously reported, alectinib was well tolerated, regardless of baseline CNS disease. Conclusion Alectinib showed good efficacy against CNS metastases, in addition to systemic activity, in crizotinib-refractory ALK-positive NSCLC.

Clinical validation of a PCR assay for the detection of EGFR mutations in non-small-cell lung cancer: retrospective testing of specimens from the EURTAC trial.

The EURTAC trial demonstrated that the tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) erlotinib was superior to chemotherapy as first-line therapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) that harbor EGFR activating mutations in a predominantly Caucasian population. Based on EURTAC and several Asian trials, anti-EGFR TKIs are standard of care for EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC. We sought to validate a rapid multiplex EGFR mutation assay as a companion diagnostic assay to select patients for this therapy. Samples from the EURTAC trial were prospectively screened for EGFR mutations using a combination of laboratory-developed tests (LDTs), and tested retrospectively with the cobas EGFR mutation test (EGFR PCR test). The EGFR PCR test results were compared to the original LDT results and to Sanger sequencing, using a subset of specimens from patients screened for the trial. Residual tissue was available from 487 (47%) of the 1044 patients screened for the trial. The EGFR PCR test showed high concordance with LDT results with a 96.3% overall agreement. The clinical outcome of patients who were EGFR-mutation detected by the EGFR PCR test was very similar to the entire EURTAC cohort. The concordance between the EGFR PCR test and Sanger sequencing was 90.6%. In 78.9% of the discordant samples, the EGFR PCR test result was confirmed by a sensitive deep sequencing assay. This retrospective study demonstrates the clinical utility of the EGFR PCR test in the accurate selection of patients for anti-EGFR TKI therapy. The EGFR PCR test demonstrated improved performance relative to Sanger sequencing.

Clinical Drug–Drug Interactions Through Cytochrome P450 3A (CYP3A) for the Selective ALK Inhibitor Alectinib

The efficacy and safety of alectinib, a central nervous system–active and selective anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitor, has been demonstrated in patients with ALK‐positive (ALK+) non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) progressing on crizotinib. Alectinib is mainly metabolized by cytochrome P450 3A (CYP3A) to a major similarly active metabolite, M4. Alectinib and M4 show evidence of weak time‐dependent inhibition and small induction of CYP3A in vitro. We present results from 3 fixed‐sequence studies evaluating drug–drug interactions for alectinib through CYP3A. Studies NP28990 and NP29042 enrolled 17 and 24 healthy subjects, respectively, and investigated potent CYP3A inhibition with posaconazole and potent CYP3A induction through rifampin, respectively, on the single oral dose pharmacokinetics (PK) of alectinib. A substudy of the global phase 2 NP28673 study enrolled 15 patients with ALK+ NSCLC to determine the effect of multiple doses of alectinib on the single oral dose PK of midazolam, a sensitive substrate of CYP3A. Potent CYP3A inhibition or induction resulted in only minor effects on the combined exposure of alectinib and M4. Multiple doses of alectinib did not influence midazolam exposure. These results suggest that dose adjustments may not be needed when alectinib is coadministered with CYP3A inhibitors or inducers or for coadministered CYP3A substrates.

Pooled Systemic Efficacy and Safety Data from the Pivotal Phase II Studies (NP28673 and NP28761) of Alectinib in ALK-positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Introduction: Alectinib demonstrated clinical efficacy and an acceptable safety profile in two phase II studies (NP28761 and NP28673). Here we report the pooled efficacy and safety data after 15 and 18 months more follow‐up than in the respective primary analyses. Methods: Enrolled patients had ALK receptor tyrosine kinase gene (ALK)‐positive NSCLC and had progressed while taking, or could not tolerate, crizotinib. Patients received oral alectinib, 600 mg twice daily. The primary end point in both studies was objective response rate assessed by an independent review committee (IRC) using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Secondary end points included disease control rate, duration of response, progression‐free survival, overall survival, and safety. Results: The pooled data set included 225 patients (n = 138 in NP28673 and n = 87 in NP28761). The response‐evaluable population included 189 patients (84% [n = 122 in NP28673 and n = 67 in NP28761]). In the response‐evaluable population, objective response rate as assessed by the IRC was 51.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 44.0–58.6 [all PRs]), the disease control rate was 78.8% (95% CI: 72.3–84.4), and the median duration of response was 14.9 months (95% CI: 11.1–20.4) after 58% of events. Median progression‐free survival as assessed by the IRC was 8.3 months (95% CI: 7.0–11.3) and median overall survival was 26.0 months (95% CI: 21.4–not estimable). Grade 3 or higher adverse events (AEs) occurred in 40% of patients, 6% of patients had treatment withdrawn on account of AEs, and 33% had AEs leading to dose interruptions/modification. Conclusions: This pooled data analysis confirmed the robust systemic efficacy of alectinib in ALK‐positive NSCLC with a durable response rate. Alectinib also had an acceptable safety profile with a longer duration of follow‐up.

PTPRF Expression as a Potential Prognostic/Predictive Marker for Treatment with Erlotinib in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Introduction: EGFR mutations and anaplastic lymphoma kinase rearrangements are, to date, the only approved biomarkers to select treatment for non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, there is considerable interest in identifying other predictive markers. The PTPRF gene has been suggested as a marker of interest in NSCLC and other tumor types. Methods: This hypothesis-generating retrospective analysis examined data from two studies of erlotinib in NSCLC, Marker Identification Trial (MERIT; n = 102) and Sequential Tarceva in Unresectable NSCLC (SATURN; n = 262), to determine whether PTPRF expression was prognostic and/or predictive of patient outcomes. Exploratory analyses were conducted using quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction on existing formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded samples, to assess gene expression levels, including PTPRF. High versus low levels of expression were dichotomized using the median with B2M as a control comparator. Progression-free survival and overall survival were then compared for patients with high versus low levels of PTPRF in the two studies. Results: PTPRF expression was found to be prognostic for shorter overall survival but was also significantly predictive of improved survival with erlotinib versus placebo in SATURN (hazard ratio, 0.45 [95% confidence interval, CI, 0.30–0.69] in PTPRF high versus 0.96 [95% CI, 0.62–1.48] in PTPRF low; interaction p = 0.02), even in the EGFR wild-type subpopulation (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.29–0.68] versus 0.96 [95% CI, 0.62–1.48]; interaction p = 0.01). Conclusions: PTPRF may have value as a predictive marker to identify which patients can obtain the greatest benefit from erlotinib in the post–first-line setting. Further research is warranted to determine the potential value of this marker in clinical decision-making.

Patient-reported outcomes in a phase II, North American study of alectinib in patients with ALK-positive, crizotinib-resistant, non-small cell lung cancer

Background In a phase II North American study (NP28761; NCT01871805), the anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitor alectinib demonstrated both systemic and central nervous system (CNS) efficacy with good tolerability in patients with ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer. We describe patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from the NP28761 study. Patients and methods PROs and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) benefits were assessed using two self-administered questionnaires (the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer 30-Item Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core (EORTC QLQ-C30), and the 13-item EORTC QLQ-lung cancer-specific module) at enrolment and every 6 weeks until week 66, disease progression or death. Results Clinically meaningful mean improvements (≥10 point change from baseline) were observed in 10 domains, including global health status (GHS), role and social functioning, fatigue, pain, dyspnoea, and appetite loss. A clinically meaningful improvement was observed in GHS from the first assessment (6 weeks) until week 60. Alectinib demonstrated a rapid effect, with a median time to symptom improvement, using the composite endpoint of cough, dyspnoea and pain in the chest, of 1.4 months (6.1 weeks) (95% CI 1.4 to 1.6) and a median time to symptom deterioration of 5.1 months (22.1 weeks) (95% CI 2.8 to 6.8). Patients with CNS metastases at baseline experienced comparable HRQoL over the duration of the study as patients without CNS metastases. Exploratory analysis showed that the occurrence of an objective response may be associated with a better HRQoL. Conclusions Patients treated with alectinib in this phase II study achieved clinically meaningful improvements in HRQoL and symptoms and had delayed time to symptom deterioration.

PTPRF expression as prognostic/predictive marker for treatment with erlotinib in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)?

22 Background: Erlotinib is an EGFR TKI established as maintenance, second- and third-line treatment in unselected NSCLC patients and as first-line treatment in patients harboring EGFR mutations. Aberrations in the receptor type protein tyrosine phosphatase (PTP) gene family were described by Jacob and Motiwala (2005) as a hallmark of carcinogenesis. Recent research established the role of PTPRS, a member of the same gene family, as necessary for the dephosphorylation of EGFR in head and neck cancer (Morris and Bivona. 2011). The role of PTPRF as an interesting prognostic marker in NSCLC and potential predictive marker for treatment with erlotinib is reported here. METHODS MERIT was a single arm phase II clinical trial (Tan et al. 2010) where all patients had biopsies performed by bronchoscopy before starting treatment with erlotinib (150 mg/day p.o.). Biopsies were snap frozen and RNA was extracted using laser capture microdissection to enrich for tumor content. Affymetrix Human U133A microarrays were used to analyse gene expression profiles. Exploratory statistical methods identified several gene candidates by comparing benefitting and nonbenefitting patients including PTPRF. These findings were confirmed by qRT-PCR in both fresh and FFPE tissue. Here we describe analysis of PTPRF in FFPE tissue from the randomized phase III SATURN trial (Cappuzzo et al. 2010) Results: PTPRF expression was found to be greater in benefitting patients than in nonbenefitting patients in MERIT HR 0.50 (0.34 - 0.73), p = 0.0004 on a continuous log2 scale. Results from SATURN further suggested predictive characteristics for PTPRF, with a larger treatment effect observed in patients with high levels as defined above median. CONCLUSIONS Data from MERIT and SATURN suggest PTPRF to be a possibly prognostic marker for OS in NSCLC and potential predictive marker for treatment with erlotinib. This gene family is very interesting and further research, especially MoA is warranted. [Table: see text].