Effectiveness of crizotinib versus entrectinib in <i>ROS1</i> -positive non-small-cell lung cancer using clinical and real-world data

Abstract

<b>Aims:</b> To compare clinical trial results for crizotinib and entrectinib in <i>ROS1</i>-positive non-small-cell lung cancer and compare clinical trial data and real-world outcomes for crizotinib. <b>Patients & methods:</b> 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. <b>Results:</b> 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. <b>Conclusions:</b> Crizotinib and entrectinib have comparable efficacy in <i>ROS1</i>-positive non-small-cell lung cancer.