Brigatinib versus Crizotinib in <i>ALK</i> -Positive Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

D. Ross Camidge(University of Colorado Cancer Center), Hye Ryun Kim(Yonsei University), Myung‐Ju Ahn(Samsung Medical Center), James Chih‐Hsin Yang(National Taiwan University Hospital), Ji‐Youn Han(National Cancer Center), Jong Seok Lee(Seoul National University Bundang Hospital), Maximilian J. Hochmair(Otto Wagner Hospital), Jacky Yu-Chung Li(Queen Elizabeth Hospital), Gee‐Chen Chang(Taichung Veterans General Hospital), Ki Hyeong Lee(Chungbuk National University Hospital), Cesare Gridelli(Azienda Ospedaliera S.Giuseppe Moscati), Angelo Delmonte(Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori), Rosario García Campelo(Complexo Hospitalario Universitario A Coruña), Dong‐Wan Kim(Seoul National University Hospital), Alessandra Bearz(Centro di Riferimento Oncologico), Frank Griesinger(Pius Hospital Oldenburg), Alessandro Morabito(Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS "Fondazione G. Pascale"), Enriqueta Felip(Hebron University), Raffaele Califano(The Christie NHS Foundation Trust), Sharmistha Ghosh(Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust), Alexander I. Spira(Virginia Cancer Specialists), Scott Gettinger(Yale Cancer Center), Marcello Tiseo(University Hospitals Parma Medical Center), Neeraj Gupta(Millennium Engineering and Integration (United States)), J. Haney(Millennium Engineering and Integration (United States)), David Kerstein(Millennium Engineering and Integration (United States)), Sanjay Popat(Imperial College London)
New England Journal of Medicine
September 25, 2018
Cited by 970Open Access
Full Text

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 Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis