Therapeutic Options Expanding for ALK-Rearranged NSCLC

Brielle Urciuoli
Published: Saturday, Nov 12, 2016

Leena Gandhi, MD, PhD,

Leena Gandhi, MD, PhD

The treatment landscape for patients with ALK-rearranged non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is changing rapidly, gearing up the potential for more therapeutic options to address the heterogeneity of the mechanism of resistance in this population, according to Leena Gandhi, MD, PhD.

“Things change so fast that now approval within 4 years of discovery or approval within 3 years for a novel drug is sort of our standard now for TKIs and targeted therapies,” Gandhi, a medical oncologist at the Perlmutter Cancer Center at NYU Langone School of Medicine, said in a presentation during the 11th Annual New York Lung Cancer Symposium.

Crizotinib (Xalkori) was approved by the FDA in 2011 as a treatment with ALK-rearranged patients with NSCLC. It quickly became the standard of care. In the past 5 years, however, researchers continued to investigate new agents.

“With the approval of alectinib (Alecensa), the paradigm of crizotinib as first-line treatment followed by ceritinib (Zykadia), which was a quite short-lived paradigm, I think, has changed— not necessarily based on efficacy differences, which were not clearly that different, and not even necessarily based on CNS efficacy differences. Really, it is based on toxicity differences,” said Gandhi. 

Second-line ceritinib is associated with significant levels of gastrointestinal toxicities for many patients, which led to the rise of the use of second-line alectinib after frontline crizotinib, Gandhi added.

Further research has also led to the questioning of crizotinib as the optimal first-line treatment. In a 2013 study published in Lancet Oncology, there was a 93.5% response rate in crizotinib-naïve Japanese patients, with a median progression-free survival (PFS) longer than 3 years.1 Gandhi also cited the ASCEND trials, which suggested a frontline PFS of 16 to 18 months with ceritinib. Crizotinib followed by ceritinib was associated with a median 17-month PFS, and crizotinib followed by alectinib had an 18-month median PFS.2

The J-ALEX trial tested alectinib versus crizotinib in the frontline for ALK-rearranged NSCLC and found that patients on alectinib (n = 103) had an 85.4% overall response rate (95% CI, 78.6-92.3), compared with the crizotinib arm (n = 104), which had a 70.2% ORR (95% CI, 61.4-79.0).3

“Data just from approval studies of alectinib demonstrated that there are these really quite striking complete response rates, even in previously radiated patients that—although we've seen some complete responses in many of the next-generation inhibitors—we haven’t seen that kind of activity,” Gandhi said. “Whether that's truly different—without a drug comparison we don’t know—but it's certainly suggestive that it may be in that setting.”

However, there are still many questions surrounding these drugs as next-generation inhibitors, such as brigatinib and lorlatinib, are being investigated in ALK-rearranged NSCLC. Each of these inhibitors having varying efficacy levels against different ALK mutations and have increased potency compared with crizotinib.

“Brigatinib, which was sort of in parallel of being developed at the same time as ceritinib and alectinib, got slowed down a little bit by the fact that there was a dose-dependent serious toxicity seen at relatively high rates. It was really smart to go back and re-evaluate that,” Gandhi said. “Going back and doing a much larger trial comparing either a lower dose or 90 mg for 7 days followed by 180 mg continuous dosing demonstrated that you can get very robust responses at that higher dose and minimize the rate of grade 3/4 toxicity.”

If approved, lorlatinib may be an optimal choice as a last-line therapy, because it can have activity after multiple ALK inhibitors. 

Serial biopsies and/or liquid biopsies will bring about tailored therapy that will allow oncologists to choose from the large pool of agents available to treat ALK-positive NSCLC, Gandhi said.

“To summarize, ALK is a really different field than EGFR because of the number of drugs we have, the number of potential opportunities we have for treatment, and the durability of response for every one of these,” Gandhi said.
References
  1. Seto T, Kiura K, Nishio M, et al. CH5424802 (RO5424802) for patients with ALK-rearranged advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (AF-001JP study): a single-arm, open-label, phase 1-2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2013 Jun;14(7):590-8. 
  2. Nokihara H, Hida T, Kondo M, et al. Alectinib (ALC) versus crizotinib (CRZ) in ALK inhibitor naïve ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer (ALK+ NSCLC): Primary results from the J-ALEX study. Presented at: 2016 ASCO Annual Meeting; June 3-7, 2016; Chicago. Abstract 9008.   
  3. Kim DW, Mehra R, Tan SW, et al. Activity and safety of ceritinib in patients with ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (ASCEND-1): updated results from the multicentre, open-label, phase 1 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(4):452-463.

<<< View more from the 2016 New York Lung Cancer Symposium



View Conference Coverage
Online CME Activities
TitleExpiration DateCME Credits
Community Practice Connections™: 18th Annual International Lung Cancer Congress®Oct 31, 20181.5
Clinical Interchange™: Translating Research to Inform Changing Paradigms: Assessment of Emerging Immuno-Oncology Strategies and Combinations across Lung, Head and Neck, and Bladder CancersOct 31, 20182.0
Publication Bottom Border
Border Publication
x