Exploration of Targeted Anti-tumor Therapy (Dec 2023)

Comparing efficacy and safety of upfront treatment strategies for anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small cell lung cancer: a network meta-analysis

  • Marco Filetti,
  • Pasquale Lombardi,
  • Rosa Falcone,
  • Raffaele Giusti,
  • Diana Giannarelli,
  • Antonella Carcagnì,
  • Valeria Altamura,
  • Giovanni Scambia,
  • Gennaro Daniele

DOI
https://doi.org/10.37349/etat.2023.00187
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 4, no. 6
pp. 1136 – 1144

Abstract

Read online

Aim: This article is based on our previous research, which was presented as a post at the Congress Aiom 2022 Congress and published in Tumori Journal as Conference Abstract (Tumori J. 2022;108:1–194. doi: 10.1177/03008916221114500). In this paper, a comprehensive presentation of all the achieved results is provided. Several tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have been investigated to treat patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, direct comparisons between these TKIs are lacking, with many only being compared to crizotinib. To address this gap, a network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of various first-line systemic therapies for ALK-positive NSCLC. Methods: A thorough search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between January 01, 2000 and April 01, 2022, and included trials that investigated upfront treatments for this molecular subgroup and reported overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs) of grade 3 or higher (grade ≥ 3 AEs). Results: The analysis included 9 RCTs with 2,443 patients receiving eight different treatments: alectinib (at two different dosages), brigatinib, ceritinib, crizotinib, ensartinib, lorlatinib, and chemotherapy. Second and third-generation TKIs significantly prolonged PFS compared to crizotinib, with lorlatinib having the highest probability of yielding the most favorable PFS, followed by alectinib (300 mg or 600 mg). However, only alectinib has been shown to significantly prolong OS compared to crizotinib to date. Lorlatinib appears superior in reducing the risk of central nervous system (CNS) progression, followed by alectinib 600 mg. Ceritinib had the highest rate of AEs, followed by lorlatinib and brigatinib. Conclusions: Based on the network meta-analysis, alectinib and lorlatinib emerged as the most promising upfront treatment options. These treatments provide prolonged disease control while maintaining an acceptable safety profile.

Keywords