METHODS: Treatment-naive patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC were randomized one-to-one to lazertinib (240 mg/d) or gefitinib (250 mg/d). Patients with asymptomatic or stable CNS metastases were included if any planned radiation, surgery, or steroids were completed more than 2 weeks before randomization. For patients with CNS metastases confirmed at screening or subsequently suspected, CNS imaging was performed every 6 weeks for 18 months, then every 12 weeks. End points assessed by blinded independent central review and Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 included intracranial progression-free survival, intracranial objective response rate, and intracranial duration of response.
RESULTS: Of the 393 patients enrolled in LASER301, 86 (lazertinib, n = 45; gefitinib, n = 41) had measurable and or non-measurable baseline CNS metastases. The median intracranial progression-free survival in the lazertinib group was 28.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.8-28.2) versus 8.4 months (95% CI: 6.7-not reached [NR]) in the gefitinib group (hazard ratio = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.20-0.89, p = 0.02). Among patients with measurable CNS lesions, the intracranial objective response rate was numerically higher with lazertinib (94%; n = 17) versus gefitinib (73%; n = 11, p = 0.124). The median intracranial duration of response with lazertinib was NR (8.3-NR) versus 6.3 months (2.8-NR) with gefitinib. Tolerability was similar to the overall LASER301 population.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CNS metastases, lazertinib significantly improved intracranial progression-free survival compared with gefitinib, with more durable responses.
METHODS: In this systematic review, meta-analysis, and modelling study, we searched PubMed, Ovid, and Web of Science for articles published from database inception until Sept 26, 2022, for prospective and retrospective cross-sectional studies that addressed serological chikungunya virus infection in any geographical region, age group, and population subgroup and for longitudinal prospective and retrospective cohort studies with data on chronic chikungunya or hospital admissions in people with chikungunya. We did a systematic review of studies on chikungunya seroprevalence and fitted catalytic models to each survey to estimate location-specific FOI (ie, the rate at which susceptible individuals acquire chikungunya infection). We performed a meta-analysis to estimate the proportion of symptomatic patients with laboratory-confirmed chikungunya who had chronic chikungunya or were admitted to hospital following infection. We used a random-effects model to assess the relationship between chronic sequelae and follow-up length using linear regression. The systematic review protocol is registered online on PROSPERO, CRD42022363102.
FINDINGS: We identified 60 studies with data on seroprevalence and chronic chikungunya symptoms done across 76 locations in 38 countries, and classified 17 (22%) of 76 locations as endemic settings and 59 (78%) as epidemic settings. The global long-term median annual FOI was 0·007 (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 0·003-0·010) and varied from 0·0001 (0·00004-0·0002) to 0·113 (0·07-0·20). The highest estimated median seroprevalence at age 10 years was in south Asia (8·0% [95% UI 6·5-9·6]), followed by Latin America and the Caribbean (7·8% [4·9-14·6]), whereas median seroprevalence was lowest in the Middle East (1·0% [0·5-1·9]). We estimated that 51% (95% CI 45-58) of people with laboratory-confirmed symptomatic chikungunya had chronic disability after infection and 4% (3-5) were admitted to hospital following infection.
INTERPRETATION: We inferred subnational heterogeneity in long-term average annual FOI and transmission dynamics and identified both endemic and epidemic settings across different countries. Brazil, Ethiopia, Malaysia, and India included both endemic and epidemic settings. Long-term average annual FOI was higher in epidemic settings than endemic settings. However, long-term cumulative incidence of chikungunya can be similar between large outbreaks in epidemic settings with a high FOI and endemic settings with a relatively low FOI.
FUNDING: International Vaccine Institute.