Evidence Hub

Lorlatinib Versus Crizotinib in Patients With Advanced ALK-Positive Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer: 5-Year Outcomes From the Phase III CROWN Study

B. Solomon, Geoffrey Liu, E. Felip, Tony S. K. Mok, R. Soo, J. Mazières, A. T. Shaw, F. de Marinis et al.

Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2024

149 participants · 323 citations

Abstract

PURPOSE Lorlatinib improved progression-free survival (PFS) and intracranial activity versus crizotinib in patients with previously untreated, advanced, ALK-positive non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the phase III CROWN study. Here, we report long-term outcomes from CROWN after 5 years of follow-up. METHODS Two hundred ninety-six patients with ALK-positive NSCLC were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive lorlatinib 100 mg once daily (n = 149) or crizotinib 250 mg twice daily (n = 147). This post hoc analysis presents updated investigator-assessed efficacy outcomes, safety, and biomarker analyses. RESULTS With a median follow-up for PFS of 60.2 and 55.1 months, respectively, median PFS was not reached (NR [95% CI, 64.3 to NR]) with lorlatinib and 9.1 months (95% CI, 7.4 to 10.9) with crizotinib (hazard ratio [HR], 0.19 [95% CI, 0.13 to 0.27]); 5-year PFS was 60% (95% CI, 51 to 68) and 8% (95% CI, 3 to 14), respectively. Median time to intracranial progression was NR (95% CI, NR to NR) with lorlatinib and 16.4 months (95% CI, 12.7 to 21.9) with crizotinib (HR, 0.06 [95% CI, 0.03 to 0.12]). Safety profile was consistent with that in prior analyses. Emerging new ALK resistance mutations were not detected in circulating tumor DNA collected at the end of lorlatinib treatment. CONCLUSION After 5 years of follow-up, median PFS has yet to be reached in the lorlatinib group, corresponding to the longest PFS ever reported with any single-agent molecular targeted treatment in advanced…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 149 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free