Alectinib versus crizotinib in previously untreated ALK-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer: final overall survival analysis of the phase III ALEX study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: ALEX, a global, randomized, phase III trial evaluated alectinib versus crizotinib in patients with advanced ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This final analysis provides mature overall survival (OS), duration of response (DOR) and long-term safety data. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Treatment-naïve patients with stage III/IV ALK-positive NSCLC were randomly assigned to receive alectinib [600 mg twice daily (b.i.d.)] or crizotinib (250 mg b.i.d.) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal, or death. Primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (previously reported). Key secondary endpoints included OS, DOR and safety. RESULTS: A total of 303 patients (alectinib, n = 152; crizotinib, n = 151) were enrolled. At the updated data cut-off (28 April 2025), after a median follow-up of 53.5 (alectinib) and 23.3 (crizotinib) months, median OS was 81.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 62.3 months-not estimable] versus 54.2 (95% CI 34.6-75.6 months) months, respectively [hazard ratio (HR) 0.78; 95% CI 0.56-1.08]. Improvement in median OS was observed with alectinib in patients with and without central nervous system (CNS) metastases at baseline [with CNS metastases: 63.4 (n = 59) versus 30.9 (n = 53) months with alectinib versus crizotinib, respectively (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.40-1.15); without CNS metastases: 94.0 (n = 93) versus 69.8 (n = 98) months (HR 0.87; 95% CI 0.58-1.32)]. Median DOR in confirmed responders was longer with alectinib (42.3 months, 95% CI 31.3-51.3 months) versus crizotinib [11.1 months, 95% CI 7.9-13.0 months (HR 0.41; 95% CI 0.30-0.56)]. Long-term safety (median duration of alectinib treatment, 28.1 months) remained consistent with earlier reports, with no new or unexpected safety concerns identified. CONCLUSIONS: These final OS data show the sustained long-term systemic and intracranial efficacy of alectinib in the first-line treatment of ALK-positive NSCLC and confirm alectinib as a standard of care in this setting.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".