The percentage of ALK-positive cells and the efficacy of first-line alectinib in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: is it a novel factor for stratification? (Turkish Oncology Group Study)

Creative Commons License

Hizal M., Bilgin B., Paksoy N., Atcı M. M., Kahraman S., Kılıçkap S., ...Daha Fazla

Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology, cilt.149, sa.8, ss.4141-4148, 2023 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 149 Sayı: 8
  • Basım Tarihi: 2023
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1007/s00432-022-04252-2
  • Dergi Adı: Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, BIOSIS, CAB Abstracts, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Veterinary Science Database
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.4141-4148
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: Alectinib, Break-apart, Percentage of ALK-positive cells, Predictive, Response
  • Akdeniz Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

© 2022, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.Introduction: Alectinib is an effective second-generation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) used in the first-line treatment of patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC. Recent studies demonstrated that the percentage of ALK-positive tumor cells in patient groups receiving crizotinib might affect outcomes. This study aimed to investigate whether the percentage of ALK-positive cells had a predictive effect in patients with advanced NSCLC who received first-line Alectinib as ALK-TKI. Materials and methods: This retrospective study included patients with advanced-stage NSCLC who received alectinib as a first-line ALK-TKI and whose percentage of ALK-positive cells was determined by FISH at 27 different centers. Patients who received any ALK-TKI before alectinib were not included in the study. Patients were separated into two groups according to the median (40%) value of the percentage of ALK-positive cells (high-positive group ≥ 40% and low-positive group < 40%). The primary endpoint was PFS, and the secondary endpoints were OS, ORR, and PFS of the subgroups based on different threshold values for the percentage of ALK-positive cells. Results: 211 patients were enrolled (48.3% female, 51.7% male) to study. 37% (n = 78) of the patients had received chemotherapy previously. After a median of 19.4 months of follow-up, the median PFS was not reached in the high-positive group (n = 113), but it was 10.8 months in the low-positive group (n = 98) (HR 0.39; 95% CI 0.25–0.60, p < 0.001). The median OS in the high-positive group was not reached, whereas it was 22.8 months in the low-positive group (HR 0.37; 95% CI 0.22–0.63, p < 0.001). ORR was significantly higher in the high-positive group (87.2 vs. 68.5%; p = 0.002). According to the cut-off values of < 20%, 20–39%, 40–59%, and ≥ 60%, the median PFS was 4.5, 17.1, and 26 months, respectively, and could not be reached in the ≥ 60% group. Conclusion: Our study demonstrated that the efficacy of alectinib varies significantly across patient subgroups with different percentages of ALK-positive cells. If these findings are prospectively validated, the percentage of ALK-positive cells may be used as a stratification factor in randomized trials comparing different ALK-TKIs.