Aseel Bedas1,2, Nir Peled3,4, Natalie Maimon Rabinovich5, Moshe Mishaeli5, Tzippy Shochat6, Alona Zer2, Ofer Rotem2, Aaron M Allen1,2, Jair Bar1,7, Elizabeth Dudnik8. 1. Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel. 2. Thoracic Cancer Service, Davidoff Cancer Center, Rabin Medical Center, Beilinson Campus, Petah Tikva, Israel. 3. Cancer Institute, Soroka University Medical Center, Beer-Sheva, Israel. 4. Ben Gurion University of Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel. 5. Oncology Department, Meir Medical Center, Kfar Sava, Israel. 6. Statistical Consulting Unit, Rabin Medical Center, Beilinson Campus, Petah Tikva, Israel. 7. Thoracic Oncology Unit, Institute of Oncology, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel. 8. Thoracic Cancer Service, Davidoff Cancer Center, Rabin Medical Center, Beilinson Campus, Petah Tikva, Israel, elizabeth.dudnik1603@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little is known regarding the anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) efficacy and safety in the elderly. OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: Consecutive patients (n = 53) with ALK-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with an ALK TKI were identified through internal databases of three cancer centers and divided into groups A (< 65 years old; n = 34) and B (≥65 years old; n = 19). Progression-free survival (PFS), ALK TKI safety and overall survival (OS) were assessed. Uni- and multivariate PFS and OS analyses were performed. RESULTS: Crizotinib, ceritinib, and alectinib were administered in 94 and 100%, 35 and 31%, 38 and 52% of patients in groups A and B, respectively. The median PFS (months) was 5.4 (95% CI, 3.4-12.4) and 5.6 (95% CI, 2.5-14.7) with crizotinib (log-rank 0.0009, p = 0.9), 4.7 (95% CI, 1.0-11.5) and 23.0 (95% CI, 0.8-27.7) with ceritinib (log-rank 0.44, p = 0.5), and 21.2 (95% CI, 1.2 to not reached, NR) and 5.6 (95% CI, 0.5 to NR) with alectinib (log-rank 0.53, p = 0.5) in groups A and B, respectively. The median OS (months) comprised 29.8 (95% CI, 21.0 to NR) and 25.1 (95% CI, 10.8-53.6) in groups A and B, respectively (log-rank 0.57, p = 0.4). Age affected neither PFS nor OS. 19 and 37%, 50 and 40%, and 0 and 0% of patients in groups A and B, treated with crizotinib, ceritinib, and alectinib, respectively, developed high-grade adverse events. The treatment discontinuation rate was 9 and 21%, 16 and 60%, 0 and 0% with crizotinib, ceritinib, and alectinib in groups A and B, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In the elderly, crizotinib, ceritinib, and alectinib treatments are associated with similar efficacy but different safety profiles; alectinib is associated with a lower rate of high-grade adverse events and a lower treatment discontinuation rate.
BACKGROUND: Little is known regarding the anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) efficacy and safety in the elderly. OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: Consecutive patients (n = 53) with ALK-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with an ALK TKI were identified through internal databases of three cancer centers and divided into groups A (< 65 years old; n = 34) and B (≥65 years old; n = 19). Progression-free survival (PFS), ALK TKI safety and overall survival (OS) were assessed. Uni- and multivariate PFS and OS analyses were performed. RESULTS:Crizotinib, ceritinib, and alectinib were administered in 94 and 100%, 35 and 31%, 38 and 52% of patients in groups A and B, respectively. The median PFS (months) was 5.4 (95% CI, 3.4-12.4) and 5.6 (95% CI, 2.5-14.7) with crizotinib (log-rank 0.0009, p = 0.9), 4.7 (95% CI, 1.0-11.5) and 23.0 (95% CI, 0.8-27.7) with ceritinib (log-rank 0.44, p = 0.5), and 21.2 (95% CI, 1.2 to not reached, NR) and 5.6 (95% CI, 0.5 to NR) with alectinib (log-rank 0.53, p = 0.5) in groups A and B, respectively. The median OS (months) comprised 29.8 (95% CI, 21.0 to NR) and 25.1 (95% CI, 10.8-53.6) in groups A and B, respectively (log-rank 0.57, p = 0.4). Age affected neither PFS nor OS. 19 and 37%, 50 and 40%, and 0 and 0% of patients in groups A and B, treated with crizotinib, ceritinib, and alectinib, respectively, developed high-grade adverse events. The treatment discontinuation rate was 9 and 21%, 16 and 60%, 0 and 0% with crizotinib, ceritinib, and alectinib in groups A and B, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In the elderly, crizotinib, ceritinib, and alectinib treatments are associated with similar efficacy but different safety profiles; alectinib is associated with a lower rate of high-grade adverse events and a lower treatment discontinuation rate.