These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Real world experience of treatment and outcome in ALK-rearranged metastatic nonsmall cell lung cancer: A multicenter study from India.
    Author: Patel A, Batra U, Prasad KT, Dabkara D, Ghosh J, Sharma M, Singh N, Suresh P, Jain P, Malik PS, Choudhary P, Ganguly S, Khurana S, Ms S, Bothra S, Muthu V, Biswas B.
    Journal: Curr Probl Cancer; 2020 Jun; 44(3):100571. PubMed ID: 32234264.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearranged metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) comprises 5%-7% of all lung cancer and carries a good prognosis with available ALK-inhibitors. Majority of registration trials in ALK-inhibitors did not include Indian patients. Hence, this study was planned to analyze the outcome of Indian patients treated with ALK-inhibitors and associated challenges. METHODS: This is a multi-center study in 5 major tertiary care cancer centers across India treating ALK-rearranged NSCLC patients from April 2013 to April 2019. ALK rearrangement was determined by Ventana immunohistochemistry with D5F3 clone and/or by break-apart FISH. Patients treated with ALK-inhibitors in any lines of treatment were included in this study. Patients were evaluated for clinicopathologic features, patterns of ALK-inhibitors use and outcome. Progression free-survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated and data were censored on April 30, 2019. RESULTS: A total of 274 patients were studied, out of which 250 patients received ALK inhibitor and were analyzed further for outcome. The median age was 50 years (range: 24-82) and male to female ratio of 1.17:1. ALK was evaluated by immunohistochemistry in majority of patients (97%), 3 patients by FISH and 3 more patients were evaluated by both methods. Sixty-five percent (n = 162) of the patients received ALK-inhibitor as first line therapy, 51 patients received ALK-inhibitor as switch maintenance therapy after initial chemotherapy. Crizotinib and Ceritinib were used in 88% and 12%, respectively. One patient received Alectinib. Forty-one percent of patients had CNS progression. After median follow up of 27 months (1-72 months), the median OS was 24.7 months with OS rate of 72%, 51%, and 18% at 1, 2, and 4-years respectively. Median OS was 21.2, 26, and 38 months in the first line ALK-inhibitors use (n = 162), switch maintenance group (n = 51) and second line ALK-inhibitors use (postchemotherapy progression) (n = 33), respectively. No baseline variable predicted PFS. Presence of brain metastasis (P = 0.039) and first line ALK-inhibitors use (P = 0.032) emerged as poor prognostic factor for OS on multivariate analysis. PFS rate was 70%, 47%, and 31% at 6, 12, and 18 months respectively. CONCLUSION: This is one of the largest real-world data on outcome of ALK inhibitors in ALK-rearranged NSCLC from Asia. In absence of second line ALK inhibitor, initial chemotherapy followed by ALK-inhibitors (switch maintenance) had better outcome. This fact may be studied in individual patient data meta-analysis. Poor performance status and brain metastases at presentation are poor prognostic factors for overall survival. Second-line ALK inhibitor use crucial for better outcome and access to clinical trials are much needed in Indian patients.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]