Open AccessEffectiveness of crizotinib versus entrectinib in ROS1-positive non-small-cell lung cancer using clinical and real-world data
Author(s) -
Gabriel Tremblay,
M Groff,
Laura Iadeluca,
Patrick Daniele,
Keith D. Wilner,
Robin Wiltshire,
Lauren Bartolome,
Tiziana Usari,
Joseph C. Cappelleri,
D. Ross Camidge
Publication year - 2022
Publication title -
future oncology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.857
H-Index - 72
eISSN - 1744-8301
pISSN - 1479-6694
DOI - 10.2217/fon-2021-1102
Subject(s) - crizotinib , medicine , ros1 , lung cancer , oncology , clinical trial , clinical endpoint , cancer , adenocarcinoma , malignant pleural effusion
Aims: To compare clinical trial results for crizotinib and entrectinib in ROS1-positive non-small-cell lung cancer and compare clinical trial data and real-world outcomes for crizotinib. Patients & methods: We analyzed four phase I–II studies using a simulated treatment comparison (STC). A STC of clinical trial versus real-world evidence compared crizotinib clinical data to real-world outcomes. Results: Adjusted STC found nonsignificant trends favoring crizotinib over entrectinib: objective response rate, risk ratio = 1.04 (95% CI: 0.85–1.28); median duration of response, mean difference = 16.11 months (95% CI: -1.57– 33.69); median progression-free survival, mean difference = 3.99 months (95% CI: -6.27–14.25); 12-month overall survival, risk ratio = 1.01 (95% CI: 0.90–1.12). Nonsignificant differences were observed between the trial end point values and the real-world evidence for crizotinib. Conclusions: Crizotinib and entrectinib have comparable efficacy in ROS1-positive non-small-cell lung cancer.