Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

NSCLC, metastatic 2

3051 - Alectinib vs crizotinib in treatment-naïve ALK+ NSCLC: CNS efficacy results from the ALEX study

Date

11 Sep 2017

Session

NSCLC, metastatic 2

Presenters

Shirish Gadgeel

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2017) 28 (suppl_5): v605-v649. 10.1093/annonc/mdx440

Authors

S. Gadgeel1, S. Peters2, T. Mok3, A.T. Shaw4, D. Kim5, S.I. Ou6, M. Perol7, R. Dziadziuszko8, J.S. Ahn9, R. Rosell10, A. Zeaiter11, E. Mitry11, E. Nueesch11, B. Balas11, R. Camidge12

Author affiliations

  • 1 1500e Medical Center Drive, University of Michigan, 48109 - Ann Arbor/US
  • 2 Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne/CH
  • 3 State Key Laboratory Of South China, Chinese University of Hong Kong, New Territories/HK
  • 4 Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston/US
  • 5 Oncology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul/KR
  • 6 Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine, Orange/US
  • 7 7department Of Medical Oncology, Centre Léon Bérard, 69008 - Lyon/FR
  • 8 Department Of Oncology And Radiotherapy, Medical University of Gdansk, Gdansk/PL
  • 9 Division Of Hematology-oncology, Departments Of Internal Medicine, Samsung Medical Center Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul/KR
  • 10 Oncology, Catalan Institute of Oncology, Badalona/ES
  • 11 Oncology, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., Basel/CH
  • 12 Oncology, University of Colorado Hospital, Denver/US
More

Resources

Login to access the resources on OncologyPRO.

If you do not have an ESMO account, please create one for free.

Abstract 3051

Background

ALEX phase III study (NCT02075840) of alectinib (ALC) vs crizotinib (CRZ) in treatment-naïve advanced ALK+ NSCLC, met its primary endpoint of improved progression-free survival (PFS). Pts with asymptomatic brain mets at baseline (BL), treated with radiotherapy (RT) or not, were eligible. We present comprehensive CNS efficacy data.

Methods

Pts aged ≥18 years were randomized 1:1 to ALC 600mg or CRZ 250mg (both twice daily) until disease progression (PD), toxicity, withdrawal or death. CNS MRIs were done at BL and every 8 wks in all pts. An Independent Review Committee (IRC) assessed CNS endpoints (RECIST v1.1 and RANO). Endpoints (analysed by subgroup: pts with/without BL CNS disease; pts with/without prior RT) included patterns of PD, CNS objective response rates (CORR), CNS PD and PFS.

Results

Overall, 303 pts were randomised (ALC n = 152; CRZ n = 151); 122 had BL CNS mets by IRC (ALC n = 64 [42%]; CRZ n = 58 [38%]), of whom 43 had IRC-assessed measurable lesions (ALC n = 21; CRZ n = 22); 47/122 pts had received prior RT (ALC n = 26 [62% WBRT]; CRZ n = 21 [71% WBRT]). Subgroup analyses of PFS and CNS PD are in Table 1. In the CRZ arm first PD was more common in CNS than in non-CNS sites in pts with (CNS PD 57% vs non-CNS PD 24%) and without (CNS PD 38% vs non-CNS PD 20%) CNS mets at BL. In the ALC arm first PD was more common in non-CNS sites in pts without CNS mets at BL (CNS PD 6.8% vs non-CNS PD 28%); first PD in CNS and non-CNS was similar in pts with CNS mets at BL (CNS PD 19% vs non-CNS PD 17%). CORR (RECIST) in pts with measurable CNS mets at BL was ALC 85.7% vs CRZ 71.4% for pts with prior RT and ALC 78.6% vs CRZ 40.0% for pts without RT. In pts with measurable and non-measurable CNS mets at BL, CORR was ALC 36.0% vs CRZ 28.6% for pts with prior RT, and ALC 74.4% vs CRZ 24.3% for those without. Data by RANO criteria will be presented.Table:

1298O_PR Subgroup analysis of PFS and CNS PD§

Pts without CNS disease at BL (IRC)Pts with CNS disease at BL (IRC)
All patientsPts who had received prior RTPts who had not received prior RT
ALC N = 88CRZ N = 93ALC N = 64CRZ N = 58ALC N = 25*CRZ N = 21ALC N = 39CRZ N = 37
Median PFS by INV, months (95% CI)NE (NE)14.8 (10.8–20.3)NE (9.2–NE)7.4 (6.6–9.6)NE (11.0–NE)12.7 (7.2–14.6)14.0 (5.6–NE)7.2 (3.9–8.6)
HR (95% CI) P value 0.51 (0.33–0.80)0.40 (0.25–0.64) 0.34 (0.15–0.78) 0.44 (0.25–0.78)
p = 0.0024p 

Conclusions

ALC showed significantly superior CNS activity vs CRZ in previously untreated advanced ALK+ NSCLC, irrespective of prior RT, and had a protective effect in the CNS.

Clinical trial identification

NCT02075840

Legal entity responsible for the study

F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.

Funding

F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.

Disclosure

S. Gadgeel: Consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, ARIAD, Novartis, Genentech, Pfizer and AstraZeneca during the conduct of the study. S. Peters: Grants and personal fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Clovis, Eli Lilly, Roche, Guardant health, Janssen, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Merck Serono, Merrimack, Morphotek, Pfizer, Regeneron and Takeda. T.S.K. Mok: Personal fees: AZ, MSD, Novartis, BI, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, BMS, Eli Lilly, Eisai, SFJ, Clovis, Taiho, Merck Serono, Celgene, OncoGenex Technologies, ACEA Biosciences, Vertex, Ignyta, Cirina, GeneDecode., Ariad/Tekeda. Stock ownership: Sanomics. A.T. Shaw: Personal fees from Genentech/Roche, Pfizer, Novartis, Genentech/Roche, Ariad, Ignyta, Daiichi-Sankyo, Taiho, Blueprint Medicines, Loxo, EMD Serono and Foundation Medicine. S-H.I. Ou: Personal fees from Pfizer, Roche, Astra Zeneca, ARIAD, Ignyta and Foundation Medicine. M. Perol: Personal fees from Roche, Lilly, BMS, Novartis, Astra-Zeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Clovis Oncology, Merck, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Amgen. R. Dziadziuszko: Personal fees from Roche, Novartis, Tesaro, Clovis, Pfizer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Ignyta and Astra-Zeneca. J.S. Ahn: Personal fees from BMS, Eisai, Janssen, Roche, Menarini and Boehringer Ingelheim. A. Zeaiter, E. Mitry, E. Nueesch: Full-time employee at F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. B. Balas: Full-time employee at F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd with stock ownership. R. Camidge: Personal fees from Roche Genetech, Genoptix, G1 Therapeutics, Orion, Clovis, Ariad, Novartis, Celgene, Array, Abbvie and Eli Lilly. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.