Head-to-head evidence
Brigatinib vs Ceritinib
Same mechanism, same race: design-graded trial evidence for both assets, with the grading rationale shown. Grades describe the quality of the evidence, never the merits of either security.
Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Shared mechanism: ALK · full Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer pipeline
Brigatinib
Marketed by Takeda Pharmaceutical Company
NCT02737501 · Phase 3 · completed
This was a randomized, open-label active-controlled trial of 275 participants, with progression-free survival assessed by a blinded independent review committee as the primary clinical endpoint. The primary comparison favored brigatinib and was statistically significant, but the lack of participant and investigator blinding limits the strength of the evidence.
Next expected readout: November 2026 · NCT04223596 (registry estimate)
Ceritinib
Marketed by Novartis
NCT01828099 · Phase 3 · completed
The trial was randomized and actively controlled, with 189 patients assigned to ceritinib and 187 to chemotherapy, but treatment was open-label rather than double-blind. Its clinical primary endpoint, progression-free survival assessed by an independent review committee, was met: median progression-free survival was 16.6 versus 8.1 months, with hazard ratio 0.55 (95% CI 0.42–0.73; p<0.001).
Next expected readout: April 2027 · NCT02393625 (registry estimate)
The full competitive landscape for each asset (every same-race competitor with aligned evidence, sortable) is on the asset pages: Brigatinib's landscape · Ceritinib's landscape