Abstract LB043: Efficacy of Lorlatinib in Treatment-Naïve Patients (pts) With ALK-Positive Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) in Relation to EML4-ALK Variant Type and ALK Mutations

BACKGROUND: Lorlatinib, a 3rd generation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has shown overall and intracranial activity in ALK+ advanced NSCLC. In the randomized, multicenter, phase 3 study in pts with previously untreated ALK+ advanced NSCLC (CROWN; NCT03052608), lorlatinib resulted in a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) vs crizotinib.1 To identify molecular correlates of response, we performed molecular profiling of circulating free DNA (cfDNA) and tumor tissue. METHODS: Plasma and tumor tissue samples were available from 130 and 118 pts in the lorlatinib arm, and from 125 and 104 pts in the crizotinib arm, respectively. Plasma DNA was analyzed for ALK fusions and mutations by next-generation sequencing (NGS; Guardant360, Guardant Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA, USA); tumor tissue DNA was analyzed with an ALK-mutation focused NGS panel (MolecularMD, Portland, OR, USA). Objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), and PFS were evaluated by blinded independent central review according to EML4-ALK variant type and ALK resistance mutation status. RESULTS: At screening, 19 ALK missense mutations and 1 deletion were detected in plasma of 11 pts (5 and 6 in the lorlatinib and crizotinib arms, respectively). Most pts harbored 1 mutation, but 3 pts harbored ≥3 mutations. ALK fusions were detected in plasma of 48% of pts. EML4-ALK variants 1, 2, and 3 were detected in 14.6%, 5.4%, and 13.8% and in 20.0%, 1.6%, and 16.8% of pts, in the lorlatinib and crizotinib arms, respectively. Variants 4, 5, 7, and 8 were detected in 11.5% and 7.2% of pts, and less frequent fusion partners in 1.5% and 3.2% of pts, respectively. ORRs were generally higher in the lorlatinib arm vs the crizotinib arm, regardless of variant subtypes and/or mutational status, with no striking differences between EML4-ALK variants 1, 2, and 3 (range, 72% to 86% for lorlatinib and 50% to 76% for crizotinib). Median DOR and PFS were not reached for variants 1 and 3 in the lorlatinib arm, and ranged from 5.7 to 6.5 months, and from 7.4 to 7.6 months in the crizotinib arm, respectively. CONCLUSION: Pts with untreated ALK+ advanced NSCLC had higher ORRs and potentially longer DOR and PFS across predefined biomarker subgroups when treated with lorlatinib compared with crizotinib in a phase 3 CROWN study. Based on pretreatment cfDNA analysis, lorlatinib led to similar clinical benefit regardless of the type of EML4-ALK variant or presence of ALK kinase mutations. REFERENCE: 1. Shaw AT, et al. N Engl J Med. 2020;383:2018-2029. Citation Format: Alessandra Bearz, Jean-Francois Martini, Jacek Jassem, Sang-We Kim, Gee-Chen Chang, Alice Shaw, Deborah Shepard, Elisa Dall9O9, Anna Polli, Holger Thurm, Gerard Zalcman, Maria Rosario Garcia Campelo, Konstantin Penkov, Hidetoshi Hayashi, Benjamin J. Solomon. Efficacy of Lorlatinib in Treatment-Naive Patients (pts) With ALK-Positive Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) in Relation to EML4-ALK Variant Type and ALK Mutations [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2021; 2021 Apr 10-15 and May 17-21. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(13_Suppl):Abstract nr LB043.