The likelihood of being helped or harmed as a patient-centred tool to assess ALK-Inhibitors clinical impact and safety in ALK-addicted non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and sensitivity-analysis

Abstract

Background: In untreated ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are available directly comparing next-generation ALK-inhibitors. We conducted a sensitivity analysis using the likelihood of being helped or harmed (LHH). Methods: Phase III trials comparing ALK-inhibitors to crizotinib were included. Efficacy outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), PFS in patients with brain metastases and intracranial ORR. Safety outcomes were grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs), dose reductions and discontinuations. Results: Six RCTs (1524 patients) were included. Lorlatinib and brigatinib had the lowest NNT for intracranial outcomes. Alectinib demonstrated favourable LHHs for grade 3–4 AEs, dose reductions and discontinuations. Brigatinib LHHs were low for common AEs, mainly laboratory anomalies and hypertension. Ensartinib showed mainly skin toxicity. Lorlatinib LHHs were low for specific grade 3–4 AEs, mainly metabolic alterations. Conclusions: The four ALK-inhibitors exhibited favourable risk-benefit ratios. Lorlatinib showed the lowest NNT for systemic efficacy and, alongside with Brigatinib, lower NNTs for intracranial efficacy. Alectinib exhibited higher LHHs for AEs. Registration: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42023389101.

Keywords

• ALK-inhibitors
• Alectinib
• Lorlatinib
• Brigatinib
• Ensartinib
• LHH