Lorlatinib with or without chemotherapy in ALK-driven refractory/relapsed neuroblastoma: phase 1 trial results.

Neuroblastomas harbor ALK aberrations clinically resistant to crizotinib yet sensitive pre-clinically to the third-generation ALK inhibitor lorlatinib. We conducted a first-in-child study evaluating lorlatinib with and without chemotherapy in children and adults with relapsed or refractory ALK-driven neuroblastoma. The trial is ongoing, and we report here on three cohorts that have met pre-specified primary endpoints: lorlatinib as a single agent in children (12 months to <18 years); lorlatinib as a single agent in adults (≥18 years); and lorlatinib in combination with topotecan/cyclophosphamide in children (<18 years). Primary endpoints were safety, pharmacokinetics and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). Secondary endpoints were response rate and 123I-metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) response. Lorlatinib was evaluated at 45-115 mg/m2/dose in children and 100-150 mg in adults. Common adverse events (AEs) were hypertriglyceridemia (90%), hypercholesterolemia (79%) and weight gain (87%). Neurobehavioral AEs occurred mainly in adults and resolved with dose hold/reduction. The RP2D of lorlatinib with and without chemotherapy in children was 115 mg/m2. The single-agent adult RP2D was 150 mg. The single-agent response rate (complete/partial/minor) for <18 years was 30%; for ≥18 years, 67%; and for chemotherapy combination in <18 years, 63%; and 13 of 27 (48%) responders achieved MIBG complete responses, supporting lorlatinib's rapid translation into active phase 3 trials for patients with newly diagnosed high-risk, ALK-driven neuroblastoma. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT03107988 .

First-Line Lorlatinib Versus Crizotinib in ALK-Positive NSCLC: Japanese Subgroup Analysis of CROWN.

Introduction: Lorlatinib, a third-generation ALK inhibitor, was found to have improved efficacy versus crizotinib in patients with previously untreated, advanced ALK-positive NSCLC in the ongoing, global, randomized, phase 3 CROWN study. Methods: The study's primary end point was progression-free survival assessed by blinded independent central review. Secondary end points included objective and intracranial response. Here, we report efficacy and safety data of the Japanese subgroup of the CROWN study (lorlatinib 100 mg once daily, n = 25; crizotinib 250 mg twice daily, n = 23). Results: Progression-free survival was not reached (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.3 mo-not reached) for lorlatinib and 11.1 months (95% CI: 5.4-14.8) for crizotinib (hazard ratio = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.19-1.01). Objective response (lorlatinib versus crizotinib) was 68.0% (95% CI: 46.5-85.1) versus 52.2% (95% CI: 30.6-73.2) in all patients, and intracranial response was 100.0% (three of three, 95% CI: 29.2-100.0) versus 28.6% (two of seven; 95% CI: 3.7-71.0) in patients with brain metastases at baseline. The most common adverse events with lorlatinib were hypertriglyceridemia, hypercholesterolemia, and weight increase; 28.0% and 8.0% of patients had cognitive and mood effects (all grades 1 or 2), respectively. Lorlatinib was associated with more grade 3 or 4 events than crizotinib (80.0% versus 72.7%). Treatment was discontinued owing to adverse events in 16.0% and 27.3% of patients in the lorlatinib and crizotinib groups, respectively. Conclusions: The efficacy and safety of lorlatinib in the Japanese subgroup were similar to those in the CROWN global population, revealing improved outcomes versus crizotinib in Japanese patients with previously untreated, advanced ALK-positive NSCLC.

Post Hoc Analysis of Lorlatinib Intracranial Efficacy and Safety in Patients With ALK-Positive Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer From the Phase III CROWN Study.

PURPOSE: Lorlatinib significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus crizotinib and showed robust intracranial activity in patients with previously untreated advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the phase III CROWN trial. Here, we report post hoc efficacy outcomes in patients with and without brain metastases at baseline, and present data on the incidence and management of CNS adverse events (AEs) in CROWN. METHODS: Eligible patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to first-line lorlatinib (100 mg once daily) or crizotinib (250 mg twice a day); no crossover between treatment arms was permitted. Tumor assessments, including CNS magnetic resonance imaging, were performed at screening and then at 8-week intervals. Regular assessments of patient-reported outcomes were conducted. RESULTS: PFS by blinded independent central review was improved with lorlatinib versus crizotinib in patients with and without brain metastases at baseline (12-month PFS rates: 78% v 22% and 78% v 45%, respectively). Lorlatinib was associated with lower 12-month cumulative incidence of CNS progression versus crizotinib in patients with (7% v 72%) and without (1% v 18%) brain metastases at baseline. In total, 35% of patients had CNS AEs with lorlatinib, most of grade 1 severity. Occurrence of CNS AEs did not result in a clinically meaningful difference in patient-reported quality of life. At analysis, 56% of CNS AEs had resolved (33% without intervention; 17% with lorlatinib dose modification), and 38% were unresolved; most required no intervention. Lorlatinib dose modification did not notably influence PFS. CONCLUSION: First-line lorlatinib improved PFS outcomes and reduced CNS progression versus crizotinib in patients with advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer with or without brain metastases at baseline. Half of all CNS AEs resolved without intervention or with lorlatinib dose modification.

Lorlatinib for Previously Treated ALK-Positive Advanced NSCLC: Primary Efficacy and Safety From a Phase 2 Study in People's Republic of China.

INTRODUCTION: Lorlatinib was found to have activity in ALK-positive NSCLC in a global phase 1 and 2 study. We report an ongoing phase 2 study in Chinese patients with ALK-positive advanced or metastatic NSCLC. METHODS: Open-label, dual-cohort study (NCT03909971); patients had progressive disease after ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment (cohort 1: previous crizotinib; cohort 2: one ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor other than crizotinib [±prior crizotinib]), more than or equal to one unirradiated extracranial target lesion, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2. Patients received oral lorlatinib 100 mg once daily in continuous 21-day cycles. Primary end point: objective response in cohort 1 by independent central radiology (ICR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Analyses were based on patients receiving more than or equal to one dose. RESULTS: At data cutoff (August 10, 2020), 109 patients were enrolled (cohort 1: n = 67; cohort 2: n = 42). A total of 47 patients in cohort 1 (70.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 57.7-80.7, p < 0.0001; primary end point) and 20 patients in cohort 2 (47.6%, 95% CI: 32.0-63.6, secondary end point) achieved objective response by ICR. Median progression-free survival was not reached in cohort 1 and was 5.6 months in cohort 2. In patients with brain lesions at baseline, 29 of 36 patients in cohort 1 (80.6%, 95% CI: 64.0-91.8) and 10 of 21 patients in cohort 2 (47.6%, 95% CI: 25.7-70.2) achieved objective intracranial response by ICR. Hypercholesterolemia (92.7%) and hypertriglyceridemia (90.8%) (cluster terms) were common treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Nine patients (8.3%) had serious TRAEs; one permanently discontinued from treatment because of TRAEs. CONCLUSIONS: Lorlatinib was found to have a robust and durable response and high intracranial objective response in previously treated Chinese patients with ALK-positive NSCLC.

Plain language summary of the CROWN study comparing lorlatinib with crizotinib for people with untreated non-small cell lung cancer.

This is a summary of a research study (known as a clinical trial) called CROWN. The study tested two medicines called lorlatinib and crizotinib in participants with untreated non-small cell lung cancer that had spread to other parts of their body. All those who took part had changes in a gene called ALK, which is involved in cell growth. In total, 296 participants from 23 countries took part. Half the participants took lorlatinib and half took crizotinib. After participants started taking lorlatinib or crizotinib, they were checked regularly to see if their tumors had grown or spread to other parts of their body (known as tumor progression) and to monitor any side effects. After 1 year of treatment, the participants who took lorlatinib were twice as likely to be alive with no tumor growth as the participants who took crizotinib. More participants who took lorlatinib had cancer that shrank (76%) compared with the participants who took crizotinib (58%). This was also true of the participants whose cancer had spread to their brain. The most common side effects in participants who took lorlatinib were increases in the amount of cholesterol and triglycerides (a type of fat) in their blood, swelling, weight gain, nerve damage, unclear thoughts, and diarrhea. Among the participants who took crizotinib, the most common side effects were diarrhea, feeling like you want to throw up, sight problems, swelling, vomiting, changes in liver function, and feeling tired. Overall, the CROWN study showed that fewer participants with advanced ALK+ non-small cell lung cancer died or had tumor growth with lorlatinib compared with crizotinib treatment. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT number: NCT03052608.

Lorlatinib Exposure-Response Analyses for Safety and Efficacy in a Phase I/II Trial to Support Benefit-Risk Assessment in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Lorlatinib is a small molecule inhibitor of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) and c-ROS oncogene 1 (ROS1) tyrosine kinases and is approved for the treatment of patients with ALK-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In the phase I/II study (NCT01970865), potential exposure-response (E-R) relationships between lorlatinib and selected safety and efficacy end points were evaluated in patients with NSCLC. E-R relationships were assessed for safety end points with incidence > 10% in all treated patients (n = 328). In total, 4 safety end points were assessed: hypercholesterolemia grade ≥ 3, hypertriglyceridemia grade ≥ 3, weight gain grade ≥ 2, and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) grade ≥ 3. Using logistic regression, significant relationships were identified between lorlatinib plasma exposure and risk of hypercholesterolemia grade ≥ 3 (odds ratio (OR) 5.256) and risk of TEAE grade ≥ 3 (OR 3.214). The covariates baseline cholesterol and time on study prior to the event (TE) were associated with the probability of hypercholesterolemia grade ≥ 3. Baseline cholesterol and TE were found to have a statistically significant correlation with TEAE grade ≥ 3. Exposure-efficacy relationships were assessed for objective response rate (ORR; n = 197) and intracranial objective response rate (IC-ORR; n = 132). Lorlatinib plasma exposure was not identified as a statistically significant factor related to either efficacy end point. The only significant E-R relationships identified for efficacy were between baseline alkaline phosphatase and baseline amylase with IC-ORR (ORs 0.363 and 1.015, respectively). These findings support the lorlatinib indicated dose and dose modification guidelines regarding the management of lorlatinib-related AEs.

First-Line Lorlatinib or Crizotinib in Advanced ALK-Positive Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Lorlatinib, a third-generation inhibitor of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK), has antitumor activity in previously treated patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The efficacy of lorlatinib, as compared with that of crizotinib, as first-line treatment for advanced ALK-positive NSCLC is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a global, randomized, phase 3 trial comparing lorlatinib with crizotinib in 296 patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC who had received no previous systemic treatment for metastatic disease. The primary end point was progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review. Secondary end points included independently assessed objective response and intracranial response. An interim analysis of efficacy was planned after approximately 133 of 177 (75%) expected events of disease progression or death had occurred. RESULTS: The percentage of patients who were alive without disease progression at 12 months was 78% (95% confidence interval [CI], 70 to 84) in the lorlatinib group and 39% (95% CI, 30 to 48) in the crizotinib group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.41; P<0.001). An objective response occurred in 76% (95% CI, 68 to 83) of the patients in the lorlatinib group and 58% (95% CI, 49 to 66) of those in the crizotinib group; among those with measurable brain metastases, 82% (95% CI, 57 to 96) and 23% (95% CI, 5 to 54), respectively, had an intracranial response, and 71% of the patients who received lorlatinib had an intracranial complete response. The most common adverse events with lorlatinib were hyperlipidemia, edema, increased weight, peripheral neuropathy, and cognitive effects. Lorlatinib was associated with more grade 3 or 4 adverse events (mainly altered lipid levels) than crizotinib (in 72% vs. 56%). Discontinuation of treatment because of adverse events occurred in 7% and 9% of the patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In an interim analysis of results among patients with previously untreated advanced ALK-positive NSCLC, those who received lorlatinib had significantly longer progression-free survival and a higher frequency of intracranial response than those who received crizotinib. The incidence of grade 3 or 4 adverse events was higher with lorlatinib than with crizotinib because of the frequent occurrence of altered lipid levels. (Funded by Pfizer; CROWN ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03052608.).

Correction to: The Effect of Rifampin on the Pharmacokinetics and Safety of Lorlatinib: Results of a Phase One, Open-Label, Crossover Study in Healthy Participants.

In the original article, the reference 4 has been published and cited incorrectly.

Lorlatinib in previously treated anaplastic lymphoma kinase-rearranged non-small cell lung cancer: Japanese subgroup analysis of a global study.

Lorlatinib is a potent, brain-penetrant, third-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)/ROS proto-oncogene 1 (ROS1) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) that is active against most known resistance mutations. This is an ongoing phase 1/2, multinational study (NCT01970865) investigating the efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics of lorlatinib in ALK-rearranged/ROS1-rearranged advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with or without intracranial (IC) metastases. Because patterns of ALK TKI use in Japan differ from other regions, we present a subgroup analysis of Japanese patients. Patients were enrolled into six expansion (EXP) cohorts based on ALK/ROS1 mutation status and treatment history. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) and the IC-ORR based on independent central review. Secondary endpoints included pharmacokinetic evaluations. At data cutoff, 39 ALK-rearranged/ROS1-rearranged Japanese patients were enrolled across the six expansion cohorts; all received lorlatinib 100 mg once daily. Thirty-one ALK-rearranged patients previously treated with ≥1 ALK TKI (EXP2 to EXP5) were evaluable for ORR and 15 were evaluable for IC-ORR. The ORR and the IC-ORR for Japanese patients in EXP2-5 were 54.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 36.0-72.7) and 46.7% (95% CI: 21.3-73.4), respectively. Among patients who had received prior alectinib only (EXP3B), the ORR was 42.9%; 95% CI: 9.9-81.6). The most common treatment-related adverse event (TRAE) was hypercholesterolemia (79.5%). Hypertriglyceridemia was the most common grade 3/4 TRAE (25.6%). Single-dose and multiple-dose pharmacokinetic profiles among Japanese patients were similar to those in non-Japanese patients. Lorlatinib showed clinically meaningful responses and IC responses among ALK-rearranged Japanese patients with NSCLC who received ≥1 prior ALK TKI, including meaningful responses among those receiving prior alectinib only. Lorlatinib was generally well tolerated.

Impact of lorlatinib on patient-reported outcomes in patients with advanced ALK-positive or ROS1-positive non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from a phase 1/2 study (NCT01970865) in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)- or ROS1-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with lorlatinib 100 mg once daily. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PRO measures, including global quality of life (QoL), functioning domains and symptoms, were assessed by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and the 13-item Lung Cancer (QLQ-LC13) module. Mean changes of absolute scores from baseline were assessed. Percentages of patients showing improvement, stability or worsening on each scale were reported, with a change of ≥10 points considered clinically meaningful (CM). RESULTS: 255 patients completed baseline and ≥1 post-baseline PRO assessment. Most patients had CM improvement (42.4 %) or stable (38.0 %) scores for global QoL. Functioning domains with the greatest proportion of patients with improved scores were role (37.6 %) and emotional (36.9 %); only one domain had more patients showing worsening than improving function (cognitive [24.3 % vs 22.4 %]). Most patients showed improved or stable scores for disease-related symptoms. No QLQ-C30 symptom domains had more patients worsening than improving. Symptoms on the QLQ-C30 scale with the greatest proportion of patients with improved scores were fatigue (49.4 %) and insomnia (46.3 %). Four QLQ-LC13 domains had more patients worsening than improving (two most affected were peripheral neuropathy [37.3 % vs 13.7 %] and alopecia [19.2 % vs 13.3 %]). Symptoms on the QLQ-LC13 scale with the greatest proportion of patients with improved scores were cough (42.7 %) and pain in other parts (32.9 %). CONCLUSIONS: Lorlatinib treatment showed CM improvement from baseline in global QOL that was maintained over time. Additionally, there were improvements in physical, emotional, social, and role functioning. Improvements were shown in appetite loss and key symptoms such as pain, dyspnea, cough and fatigue; a worsening in peripheral neuropathy was noted.

Brain Penetration of Lorlatinib: Cumulative Incidences of CNS and Non-CNS Progression with Lorlatinib in Patients with Previously Treated ALK-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Lorlatinib is a potent, third-generation ALK/ROS1 tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) designed to penetrate the blood-brain barrier. OBJECTIVE: We report the cumulative incidence of central nervous system (CNS) and non-CNS progression with lorlatinib in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) previously treated with ALK TKIs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In an ongoing phase II study (NCT01970865), 198 patients with ALK-positive NSCLC with ≥ 1 prior ALK TKI were enrolled into expansion cohorts (EXP) based on treatment history. Patients received lorlatinib 100 mg once daily. Patients were analyzed for progressive disease, categorized as CNS or non-CNS progression, by independent central review. Cumulative incidence probabilities were calculated adopting a competing risks approach. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients received crizotinib as their only prior ALK TKI (EXP2-3A); cumulative incidence rates (CIRs) of CNS and non-CNS progression were both 22% at 12 months in patients with baseline CNS metastases (n = 37), and CIR of non-CNS progression at 12 months was higher versus that for CNS progression in patients without baseline CNS metastases [43% vs. 9% (n = 22)]. In patients who received ≥ 1 prior second-generation ALK TKI [EXP3B-5 (n = 139)], CIR of non-CNS progression at 12 months was higher versus that for CNS progression in patients both with and without baseline CNS metastases (35% vs. 23% (n = 94) and 55% vs. 12% (n = 45), respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Lorlatinib showed substantial intracranial activity in patients with pretreated ALK-positive NSCLC, with or without baseline CNS metastases, whose disease progressed on crizotinib or second-generation ALK TKIs. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01970865.

The Effect of Rifampin on the Pharmacokinetics and Safety of Lorlatinib: Results of a Phase One, Open-Label, Crossover Study in Healthy Participants.

INTRODUCTION: Lorlatinib is a third-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive metastatic non-small cell lung cancer; cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A plays an important role in the metabolism of lorlatinib. METHODS: This phase 1, open-label, two-period, crossover study estimated the effect of oral rifampin (a strong CYP3A inducer) on the pharmacokinetics and safety of oral lorlatinib (NCT02804399). Healthy participants received single-dose lorlatinib 100 mg in period 1 followed by rifampin 600 mg/day (days 1-12) and single-dose lorlatinib 100 mg (day 8) in period 2. Blood samples were collected for 120 h after each dose of lorlatinib. RESULTS: When a single dose of lorlatinib was administered during daily dosing with rifampin (period 2), the area under the plasma concentration-time profile extrapolated to infinity (AUCinf) and maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) of lorlatinib were 14.74% [90% confidence interval (CI) 12.78%, 17.01%] and 23.88% (90% CI 21.58%, 26.43%), respectively, of those in period 1 (lorlatinib alone). A single dose of lorlatinib was well tolerated in period 1, but elevations in transaminase values were observed in all participants (grade 2-4 in 11 participants) within 1-3 days after a single dose of lorlatinib was administered with ongoing rifampin in period 2. Rifampin dosing was therefore halted. Transaminase levels subsequently returned to normal (median time to recovery: 15 days). No elevations in bilirubin were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of a single dose of lorlatinib to daily dosing with rifampin significantly reduced lorlatinib plasma exposure relative to a single dose of lorlatinib administered alone and was associated with severe but self-limiting transaminase elevations in all healthy participants. These observations support the contraindication in the product label against concomitant use of lorlatinib with all strong CYP3A inducers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02804399.

Lorlatinib in advanced ROS1-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: a multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 1-2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Lorlatinib is a potent, brain-penetrant, third-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) that targets ALK and ROS1 with preclinical activity against most known resistance mutations in ALK and ROS1. We investigated the antitumour activity and safety of lorlatinib in advanced, ROS1-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: In this open-label, single-arm, phase 1-2 trial, we enrolled patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically or cytologically confirmed advanced ROS1-positive NSCLC, with or without CNS metastases, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less (≤1 for phase 1 only) from 28 hospitals in 12 countries worldwide. Lorlatinib 100 mg once daily (escalating doses of 10 mg once daily to 100 mg twice daily in phase 1 only) was given orally in continuous 21-day cycles until investigator-determined disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or death. The primary endpoint was overall and intracranial tumour response, assessed by independent central review. Activity endpoints were assessed in patients who received at least one dose of lorlatinib. This study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01970865. FINDINGS: Between Jan 22, 2014, and Oct 2, 2016, we assessed 364 patients, of whom 69 with ROS1-positive NSCLC were enrolled. 21 (30%) of 69 patients were TKI-naive, 40 (58%) had previously received crizotinib as their only TKI, and eight (12%) had previously received one non-crizotinib ROS1 TKI or two or more ROS1 TKIs. The estimated median duration of follow-up for response was 21·1 months (IQR 15·2-30·3). 13 (62%; 95% CI 38-82) of 21 TKI-naive patients and 14 (35%; 21-52) of 40 patients previously treated with crizotinib as their only TKI had an objective response. Intracranial responses were achieved in seven (64%; 95% CI 31-89) of 11 TKI-naive patients and 12 (50%; 29-71) of 24 previous crizotinib-only patients. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were hypertriglyceridaemia (13 [19%] of 69 patients) and hypercholesterolaemia (ten [14%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in five (7%) of 69 patients. No treatment-related deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: Lorlatinib showed clinical activity in patients with advanced ROS1-positive NSCLC, including those with CNS metastases and those previously treated with crizotinib. Because crizotinib-refractory patients have few treatment options, lorlatinib could represent an important next-line targeted agent. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Clinical Management of Adverse Events Associated with Lorlatinib.

Lorlatinib is a novel, highly potent, brain-penetrant, third-generation ALK/ROS1 tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), which has broad-spectrum potency against most known resistance mutations that can develop during treatment with crizotinib and second-generation ALK TKIs. The safety profile of lorlatinib was established based on 295 patients who had received the recommended dose of lorlatinib 100 mg once daily. Adverse events associated with lorlatinib are primarily mild to moderate in severity, with hypercholesterolemia (82.4%), hypertriglyceridemia (60.7%), edema (51.2%), peripheral neuropathy (43.7%), and central nervous system effects (39.7%) among the most frequently reported. These can be effectively managed with dose modification and/or standard supportive medical therapy, as indicated by a low incidence of permanent discontinuations due to adverse reactions. Most patients (81.0%) received at least one lipid-lowering agent. Prescription of supportive therapy should also consider the potential for drug-drug interactions with lorlatinib via engagement of specific CYP450 enzymes. This article summarizes the clinical experience from lorlatinib phase I investigators and was generated from discussion and review of the clinical study protocol and database to provide an expert consensus opinion on the management of the key adverse reactions reported with lorlatinib, including hyperlipidemia, central nervous system effects, weight increase, edema, peripheral neuropathy, and gastrointestinal effects. Overall, lorlatinib 100 mg once daily has a unique safety profile to be considered when prescribed, based on the recent U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval, for the treatment of patients with ALK-positive metastatic non-small cell lung cancer previously treated with a second-generation ALK TKI. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Despite the advancement of second-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), the emergence of resistance and progression of central nervous system metastases remain clinically significant problems in ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer. Lorlatinib is a potent, brain-penetrant, third-generation, macrocyclic ALK/ROS1 TKI, with broad-spectrum potency against most known resistance mutations that can develop during treatment with existing first- and second-generation ALK TKIs. This article provides recommendations for the clinical management of key adverse reactions reported with lorlatinib.

Lorlatinib in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: results from a global phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Lorlatinib is a potent, brain-penetrant, third-generation inhibitor of ALK and ROS1 tyrosine kinases with broad coverage of ALK mutations. In a phase 1 study, activity was seen in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer, most of whom had CNS metastases and progression after ALK-directed therapy. We aimed to analyse the overall and intracranial antitumour activity of lorlatinib in patients with ALK-positive, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: In this phase 2 study, patients with histologically or cytologically ALK-positive or ROS1-positive, advanced, non-small-cell lung cancer, with or without CNS metastases, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, 1, or 2, and adequate end-organ function were eligible. Patients were enrolled into six different expansion cohorts (EXP1-6) on the basis of ALK and ROS1 status and previous therapy, and were given lorlatinib 100 mg orally once daily continuously in 21-day cycles. The primary endpoint was overall and intracranial tumour response by independent central review, assessed in pooled subgroups of ALK-positive patients. Analyses of activity and safety were based on the safety analysis set (ie, all patients who received at least one dose of lorlatinib) as assessed by independent central review. Patients with measurable CNS metastases at baseline by independent central review were included in the intracranial activity analyses. In this report, we present lorlatinib activity data for the ALK-positive patients (EXP1-5 only), and safety data for all treated patients (EXP1-6). This study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01970865. FINDINGS: Between Sept 15, 2015, and Oct 3, 2016, 276 patients were enrolled: 30 who were ALK positive and treatment naive (EXP1); 59 who were ALK positive and received previous crizotinib without (n=27; EXP2) or with (n=32; EXP3A) previous chemotherapy; 28 who were ALK positive and received one previous non-crizotinib ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor, with or without chemotherapy (EXP3B); 112 who were ALK positive with two (n=66; EXP4) or three (n=46; EXP5) previous ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors with or without chemotherapy; and 47 who were ROS1 positive with any previous treatment (EXP6). One patient in EXP4 died before receiving lorlatinib and was excluded from the safety analysis set. In treatment-naive patients (EXP1), an objective response was achieved in 27 (90·0%; 95% CI 73·5-97·9) of 30 patients. Three patients in EXP1 had measurable baseline CNS lesions per independent central review, and objective intracranial responses were observed in two (66·7%; 95% CI 9·4-99·2). In ALK-positive patients with at least one previous ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EXP2-5), objective responses were achieved in 93 (47·0%; 39·9-54·2) of 198 patients and objective intracranial response in those with measurable baseline CNS lesions in 51 (63·0%; 51·5-73·4) of 81 patients. Objective response was achieved in 41 (69·5%; 95% CI 56·1-80·8) of 59 patients who had only received previous crizotinib (EXP2-3A), nine (32·1%; 15·9-52·4) of 28 patients with one previous non-crizotinib ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EXP3B), and 43 (38·7%; 29·6-48·5) of 111 patients with two or more previous ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EXP4-5). Objective intracranial response was achieved in 20 (87·0%; 95% CI 66·4-97·2) of 23 patients with measurable baseline CNS lesions in EXP2-3A, five (55·6%; 21·2-86·3) of nine patients in EXP3B, and 26 (53·1%; 38·3-67·5) of 49 patients in EXP4-5. The most common treatment-related adverse events across all patients were hypercholesterolaemia (224 [81%] of 275 patients overall and 43 [16%] grade 3-4) and hypertriglyceridaemia (166 [60%] overall and 43 [16%] grade 3-4). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 19 (7%) of 275 patients and seven patients (3%) permanently discontinued treatment because of treatment-related adverse events. No treatment-related deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: Consistent with its broad ALK mutational coverage and CNS penetration, lorlatinib showed substantial overall and intracranial activity both in treatment-naive patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer, and in those who had progressed on crizotinib, second-generation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors, or after up to three previous ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Thus, lorlatinib could represent an effective treatment option for patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer in first-line or subsequent therapy. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Analysis of the psychological impact of cancer-related symptoms on patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) experience adverse physical symptoms because of cancer, cancer treatment, and comorbidities. The relations among Cancer-Related Symptoms, Functional Impairment, and Psychological Symptoms in patients with NSCLC is not well understood. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patient-reported symptoms with the 38-item Patient Care Monitor survey, collected in routine clinical care for 1138 patients with NSCLC at eight US community oncology practices. Study sample was randomly split, and structural equation models examined the direct and mediated effects of Cancer-Related Symptoms and Functional Impairment on symptoms of acute distress (Distress) and depression (Despair) in the training sample. The training model was cross validated in testing sample. Results are presented for the full model using the entire sample. RESULTS: Patients were 48.3% female, with mean age of 66.0 years. The most common comorbidities were anemia (60.8%) and respiratory disease (24.5%). Severity of Cancer-Related Symptoms was strongly and positively related to Functional Impairment and Psychological Symptoms in both training and testing models. The modeled effect of Functional Impairment on Distress and Despair was significant in the overall model using the total sample, and significant or near-significant in the training and testing models. The mediated effect of Cancer-Related Symptoms by Functional Impairment tended to be weaker than its direct modeled effect on Distress and Despair. CONCLUSIONS: Despite prior research suggesting that Functional Impairment plays a larger role than symptom burden in depression in NSCLC, the independent modeled effects of Functional Impairment were no greater than the direct modeled effects of Cancer-Related Symptoms. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Prospective observational comparison of clinical outcomes between african-american and caucasian patients receiving second-line treatment with pemetrexed for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: This prospective observational study evaluated the effect of race on disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) in patients with NSCLC treated with second-line pemetrexed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligibility criteria included stage IIIB or IV NSCLC patients receiving single-agent pemetrexed for second-line therapy in routine clinical practice. Noninferiority was evaluated using logistic regression analysis of DCR, controlling for predefined covariates. Noninferiority was considered if the upper 95% confidence bound on the adjusted odds ratio (OR) for Caucasian vs. African-American individuals was less than 1.78, corresponding to a difference in proportion of 14% assuming Caucasian individuals to have a DCR of approximately 50%. The bound was chosen to be half of the anticipated difference between treatment and no second-line treatment. PFS and OS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Tools were used to measure functional status and symptom burden. RESULTS: The unadjusted DCR was 43.7% (117/268) for Caucasian and 45.0% (27/60) for African-American individuals (unadjusted OR, 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-1.66). The adjusted OR in the final logistic regression model was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.43-1.58). This upper 95% confidence bound was within the prespecified acceptable bound of 1.78. Median PFS times (months) were 2.7 (95% CI, 2.4-3.4) for Caucasian and 3.0 (95% CI, 2.3-4.7) for African-American individuals (P = .91). Median OS times (months) were 6.7 (95% CI, 5.7-7.9) for Caucasian and 6.9 (95% CI, 4.5-8.9) for African-American individuals (P = .92). Baseline and functional status after baseline assessment and mean symptom burden did not differ substantially among races. CONCLUSION: African-American race was not considered to be a significant predictor of disease control after second-line treatment with pemetrexed.

Perinatal factors and breast cancer risk among Hispanics.

PURPOSE: This study assessed whether perinatal factors were associated with breast cancer among Hispanics, a group with fairly low incidence rates of breast cancer. METHODS: Data were used from a case-control study of breast cancer among Hispanics aged 30-79 conducted between 2003 and 2008 on the Texas-Mexico border. In-person interviews were completed with 188 incident breast cancer cases ascertained through surgeons and oncologists, and 974 controls (with respective response rates of 97% and 78%). RESULTS: Relative to birth weight 2500-3999g, there was no elevation in breast cancer risk for birth weight of ≥ 4000g (odds ratio [OR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-1.21). CONCLUSIONS: The results tended to differ slightly from previous studies of this topic perhaps owing to the different hormonal milieu among Hispanics relative to Caucasians, African Americans and Asians in whom all previous studies of this topic have been conducted. Confirmation of these findings in larger studies may assist in determining how hormonal mechanisms responsible for breast cancer differ by ethnicity.

A review and characterization of the various perceptions of quality cancer care.

BACKGROUND: It is important to maintain high-quality cancer care while reducing spending. This requires an understanding of how stakeholders define "quality." The objective of this literature review was to understand the perceptions patients, physicians, and managed care professionals have about quality cancer care, especially chemotherapy. METHODS: A computerized literature search was conducted for articles concerning quality cancer care in patients who received chemotherapy. Among >1100 identified sources, 25 presented interviews/survey results from stakeholders. RESULTS: Patients defined quality cancer care as being treated well by providers, having multiple treatment options, and being part of the decision-making process. Waiting to see providers, having problems with referrals, going to different locations for treatment, experiencing billing inaccuracies, and navigating managed care reimbursement negatively affected patients' quality-of-care perceptions. Providers perceived quality cancer care as making decisions based on the risks-benefits of specific chemotherapy regimens and patients' health status rather than costs. Providers objected to spending substantial time interacting with payers instead of delivering care to patients. Payers must control the costs of cancer care but do not want an adversarial relationship with providers and patients. Payers' methods of managing cancer more efficiently involved working with providers to develop assessment and decision-assist tools. CONCLUSIONS: Delivering quality cancer care is increasingly difficult because of the shortage of oncologists and rising costs of chemotherapy agents, radiation therapy, and imaging tests. The definition of quality cancer care differed among stakeholders, and healthcare reform must reflect these various needs to maintain and improve quality while controlling costs.