Primary Results of ALESIA: Phase III, Randomised Open-Label Study of Alectinib (ALC) Vs Crizotinib (CRZ) in Asian Patients (pts) with Treatment-Naïve ALK+ Advanced Non-Small-cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC)
C. Zhou,You Lü,S.-W. Kim,Thanyanan Reungwetwattana,Jianying Zhou,Y. Zhang,Jianxing He,Jin‐Ji Yang,Ying Cheng,S.H. Lee,Lilian Bu,Tingting Xu,Lei Yang,Chenhao Wang,Peter Meldgaard,Robert T. Jensen,Z. Li
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdy483.001
IF: 51.769
2018-01-01
Annals of Oncology
Abstract:Background: The highly selective central nervous system (CNS)-active ALK inhibitor ALC showed superior efficacy vs CRZ in treatment-naïve ALK+ NSCLC in the global phase III ALEX study. At an updated data cut off, the PFS HR was 0.43 (95% CI 0.32–0.58), median PFS 34.8 months ALC, 10.9 months CRZ. We present results from the phase III ALESIA study of first-line ALC vs CRZ in Asian pts with advanced ALK+ NSCLC (NCT02838420). Methods: Pts had ALK+ stage IIIB/IV NSCLC (by central IHC testing) and ECOG PS 0–2. Asymptomatic CNS metastases were allowed. Pts were randomised 2:1 to receive the global ALC dose 600mg BID or CRZ 250mg BID. Regular tumour/CNS imaging was done. Primary objective: consistent PFS benefit as seen in ALEX. Primary endpoint: PFS by investigator (INV). Secondary endpoints included: PFS by independent review committee (IRC), time to CNS progression, ORR, DOR, OS, CNS ORR, CNS DOR, QoL and safety. Results: Median follow-up: 16.2 months ALC, 15.0 months CRZ. At the primary data cut off (May 31, 2018), ALC significantly reduced the risk of progression/death (INV PFS) vs CRZ: HR 0.22 (95% CI 0.13–0.38), p < 0.0001; median PFS not estimable (NE) ALC, 11.1 months CRZ. Secondary endpoints (Table) supported thTableLBA2ALC (n = 125)CRZ (n = 62)P valueMedian PFS (IRC), monthsNE10.7<0.0001HR 0.37 (95% CI 0.22–0.61)CNS progression without prior systemic progression (IRC), patients with events, n (%)12 (9.6)22 (35.5)<0.0001cause-specific HR 0.14 (95% CI 0.06–0.30)ORR (INV), n (%)114 (91.2)48 (77.4)0.0095Median DOR (INV), monthsNE9.3<0.0001HR 0.22 (95% CI 0.12–0.40)CNS ORR (IRC, RECIST) in pts with measurable/non-measurable CNS metastases at baseline, n (%)32 (72.7)5 (21.7)CNS ORR (IRC, RECIST) in pts with measurable CNS metastases at baseline, n (%)16 (94.1)2 (28.6)CNS ORR (IRC, RANO) in pts with measurable CNS metastases at baseline, n (%)17 (100.0)1 (16.7)Median CNS DOR (IRC, RECIST) in pts with measurable/non-measurable CNS metastases at baseline, monthsNE3.7HR 0.04 (95% CI < 0.01–0.25)<0.001Median CNS DOR (IRC, RECIST) in pts with measurable CNS metastases at baseline, monthsNENEHR 0.16 (95% CI 0.01–1.85)0.0961RANO, Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology; RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours Open table in a new tab e primary data. RANO, Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology; RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours OS data are immature: HR 0.28 (95% CI 0.12–0.68), p = 0.0027, event rate ALC 6.4%, CRZ 21.0%; median OS NE both arms. ALC pts reported delayed time to worsening of lung cancer symptoms (HR 0.67 [95% CI 0.38–1.18]) and QoL (HR 0.48 [95% CI 0.23–1.04]), compared with CRZ pts. Despite longer treatment duration (14.7 months ALC, 12.6 months CRZ), fewer ALC pts had grade 3–5 AEs (29% vs 48% CRZ), serious AEs (15% vs 26%) or AEs leading to treatment discontinuation (7% vs 10%). Conclusions: Results confirm the clinical benefit of ALC in pts with advanced ALK+ NSCLC including greater improvement in QoL and demonstrate consistency with the ALEX study. Clinical trial identification: NCT02838420. Legal entity responsible for the study: F. Hoffmann-La Roche. Funding: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. Disclosure: C. Zhou: Honoraria: Eli Lily, Roches, BI, Hengrui. L. Bu, C. Wang, L. Yang: Roche employee. P.N. Morcos: Stock ownership in Roche. E. Mitry: Roche employee and stock ownership. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.