Skip to content

Randomized Trial Of Exemestane Versus Continued Tamoxifen In Postmenopausal Women With Early Breast Cancer

Randomized Double-Blind Trial In Postmenopausal Women With Primary Breast Cancer Who Have Received Adjuvant Tamoxifen For 2-3 Years, Comparing Subsequent Adjuvant Exemestane Treatment With Further Tamoxifen

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT00038467
Acronym
IES
Enrollment
4740
Registered
2002-06-03
Start date
1998-02-28
Completion date
2013-03-31
Last updated
2014-05-07

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Breast Neoplasms

Brief summary

To compare the sequential administration of exemestane with administration of further tamoxifen until 5 years in postmenopausal women with operable breast cancer who have already received 2-3 years of adjuvant tamoxifen, in terms of disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), incidence of contralateral breast cancer and long-term tolerability.

Interventions

DRUGTamoxifen

Tamoxifen 20 mg/day tablets administered p.o. for a period ranging from 2.5 to 3 years.

DRUGExemestane

Exemestane 25 mg/day tablets administered p.o. for a period ranging from 2.5 to 3 years.

Sponsors

International Collaborative Cancer Group
CollaboratorOTHER
Pfizer
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Investigator)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
30 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* postmenopausal women with histologically or cytologically confirmed primary breast adenocarcinoma, receiving tamoxifen and have been treated with tamoxifen continuously for between 2 and 3 years and one month, and still free of disease

Exclusion criteria

* unresectable breast cancer * ER negative primary tumor

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Disease-Free Survival (DFS) at Month 36 Post-Randomization: Main StudyBaseline up to Month 36DFS defined as time from randomization to earliest documentation of breast cancer relapse or death from any cause. DFS at Month 36 post-randomization was defined as probability of participants alive and disease-free at 36 months after the randomization. Participants withdrawn from the study for any reason in the absence of relapse were censored at the date they were last seen. Relapse was categorized as follows: loco-regional: ipsilateral breast or axillary nodal relapse; distant: distant relapse, including supraclavicular nodes; second primary breast cancer: contralateral breast cancer, excluding ductal carcinoma in situ.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Events of Second Breast Cancer in Contralateral Breast: Main StudyBaseline up to Month 120Number of events of second primary breast cancer in contralateral breast (excluding ductal carcinoma in situ) were reported.
Percent Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12, 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyBaseline, 6, 12, 24 months after randomization (on-treatment), 24 months post-treatmentBMD measurements for Lumbar spine (LS) and Proximal Femur (Total Hip \[TH\]) were performed using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) for participants who entered the bone-metabolism sub-study. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.
Percent Change From Baseline in Femoral Neck and Femoral Wards Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyBaseline, 6, 12, 24 months after randomization (on-treatment), 24 months post-treatmentBMD measurements for femoral neck (FN) and femoral wards (FW) were performed using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) for participants who entered the bone-metabolism sub-study. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.
Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyBaseline, 6, 12, 24 months after randomization (on-treatment), 24 months post-treatmentBMD measurements for Lumbar spine (LS) and Proximal Femur (Total Hip \[TH\]) were performed using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) for participants who entered the bone-metabolism sub-study. Results were scored as T-score. T-score indicated how many standard deviations higher or lower participant's value was when compared to the young normal reference mean. Using the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria for osteoporosis, a T-score of greater than or equal to (\>=)-1.0 was classified as normal, a T-score of greater than -2.5 to less than -1.0 as osteopenic, and a T-score less than or equal to (\<=)-2.5 as osteoporotic. Here 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.
Percentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyBaseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30 months after randomization (on-treatment), 36 months after randomization (end of treatment), 12, 24 months post-treatmentBone specific alkaline phosphatase (BAP) serum concentration analyzed using enzyme immuno assay (EIA) at post-baseline time points was expressed as percentage of baseline BAP serum concentration. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.
Percentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyBaseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30 months after randomization (on-treatment), 36 months after randomization (end of treatment), 12, 24 months post-treatmentC-terminal telopeptide (CTX) serum concentration analyzed using competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) at post-baseline time points was expressed as percentage of baseline CTX serum concentration. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.
Percentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyBaseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30 months after randomization (on-treatment), 36 months after randomization (end of treatment), 12, 24 months post-treatmentOsteocalcin (OC) serum concentration analyzed using ELISA and procollagen T1 c-peptide (PICP) serum concentration analyzed using sandwich EIA at post-baseline time points was expressed as percentage of baseline OC serum concentration and baseline PICP serum concentration, respectively. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points, for each group respectively.
Percentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyBaseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30 months after randomization (on-treatment), 36 months after randomization (end of treatment), 12, 24 months post-treatmentDeoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) urine concentration (adjusted for urinary creatinine) analyzed using competitive EIA at post-baseline time points was expressed as percentage of baseline DPD urine concentration. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.
Percentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyBaseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30 months after randomization (on-treatment), 36 months after randomization (end of treatment), 12, 24 months post-treatmentN-telopeptide of Type 1 collagen (NTX) urine concentration (adjusted for urinary creatinine) analyzed using competitive inhibition EIA at post-baseline time points was expressed as percentage of baseline NTX urine concentration. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.
Number of Participants With Fracture: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyBaseline up to 24 months post-treatment
Change From Baseline in Treatment Outcome Index (TOI) at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyBaseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomizationThe TOI was defined as the sum of 23 items based on following Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast version \[FACT-B\] subscales: Physical well-being (7 items), Functional well-being (7 items), Breast cancer subscale (9 items). Each item was scaled from 0='Not at all' to 4='Very much'. Total TOI score ranged from 0 to 92, where higher TOI score indicated better health-related quality of life (QoL). A change of five points in the TOI scores was considered clinically meaningful. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively. Results for 30, 36, 48, 60 months were not reported because data for these time points was only summarized as graphical presentation.
Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Endocrine Subscale (FACT-ES) Total Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyBaseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomizationThe FACT-ES assessed health-related QoL in participants with breast cancer. ES subscale comprised of 18 items (hot flushes,cold sweats,night sweats, vaginal discharge,vaginal irritation,vaginal bleeding,vaginal dryness,discomfort with intercourse,lost interest in sex,gained weight,light headed/dizzy,vomiting,had diarrhea,headaches,felt bloated,breast tenderness,mood swings, felt irritable).Participants indicated how true a statement was for them using a 5-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). For items that were negatively framed, the scores were reversed for the analysis so that higher scores equated to a good QoL. Total FACT-ES score was calculated as sum of all the 18 items and ranged from 0 to 72, where higher score indicated better QoL. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.
Change From Baseline in Emotional Well-Being (EWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyBaseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomizationThe EWB subscale assessed emotional well-being related QoL in participants with breast cancer. EWB subscale comprised of 6 items (felt sad, proud of coping, lost hope, felt nervous, worried about dying, worried about condition worsening). Participants indicated how true a statement had been for them using a 5-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). For items that were negatively framed, the scores were reversed for the analysis so that higher scores equate to a good QoL. Total EWB score was calculated as the sum of the 6 items and ranged from 0 to 24, where higher score indicated better emotional well-being related QoL. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.
Overall Survival (OS) at Month 36 Post-Randomization: Main StudyBaseline up to Month 120OS was defined as the duration from randomization to death (due to any cause). OS at Month 36 post-randomization was defined as probability of participants' survival at 36 months after the randomization. For participants who were alive, OS was censored at the last available assessment. Probability of OS at Month 36 post-randomization was reported using Kaplan-Meier estimates at Month 36 post-randomization based on 120-month follow-up data.
Change From Baseline in Physical Well-Being (PWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyBaseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomizationThe PWB subscale assessed physical well-being related QoL in participants with breast cancer. PWB subscale comprised of 7 items (energy lack, nausea, family needs, pain, side effects, felt ill, forced to stay in bed). Participants indicated how true a statement had been for them using a 5-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). For items that were negatively framed, the scores were reversed for the analysis so that higher scores equated to a good QoL. Total PWB score was calculated as the sum of all the 7 items and ranged from 0 to 28, where higher score indicated better physical well-being related QoL. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.
Change From Baseline in Social/Family Well-Being (SWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyBaseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomizationThe SWB subscale assessed social/family well-being related QoL in participants with breast cancer. SWB subscale comprised of 7 items (distant from friends, emotional support, support from friends, family acceptance, family communication, close to main support, sexual satisfaction). Participants indicated how true a statement had been for them using a 5-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). For items that were negatively framed, the scores were reversed for the analysis so that higher scores equated to a good QoL. Total SWB score was calculated as the sum of all the 7 items and ranged from 0 to 28, where higher score indicated better social/family well-being related QoL. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.
Change From Baseline in Relationship With Doctor (RWD) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL SubstudyBaseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomizationThe RWD subscale assessed relationship with doctor in participants with breast cancer. RWD subscale comprised of 2 items (confidence in doctors, doctor answered questions). Participants indicated how true a statement had been for them using a 5-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). Total RWD score was calculated as the sum of the 2 items and ranged from 0 to 8, where higher score indicated better relationship with doctor. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.
Change From Baseline in Functional Well-Being (FWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyBaseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomizationThe FWB subscale assessed functional well-being related QoL in participants with breast cancer. FWB subscale comprised of 7 items (able to work, work fulfilled, able to enjoy life, acceptance of illness, sleeping well, enjoyed normal fun activities, contented with QoL). Participants indicated how true a statement had been for them using a 5-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). Total FWB score was calculated as the sum of the 7 items and ranged from 0 to 28, where higher score indicated better functional well-being related QoL. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.
Change From Baseline in Breast Cancer Subscale (BCS) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyBaseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomizationThe BCS subscale assessed health related QoL in participants with breast cancer. BCS subscale comprised of 9 items (short of breath, self-conscious dress, tender/swollen arms, sexually attractive, bothered by hair loss, worried about familial risk, worried about family stress, bothered by weight change, able to feel like a woman). Participants indicated how true a statement had been for them using a 5-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). For items that were negatively framed, the scores were reversed for the analysis so that higher scores equated to a good QoL. Total BCS score was calculated as the sum of the 9 items and ranged from 0 to 36, where higher score indicated better QoL. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.
Number of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyBaseline up to 24 months after randomizationParticipants indicated prevalence of an endocrine subscale items using a 5-point scale, where 0 (not at all), 1 (a little bit), 2 (somewhat), 3 (quite a bit), 4 (very much). Endocrine items were grouped in five categories vasomotor (hot flushes, cold sweats, night sweats, sleeping difficulties), neuropsychological (lack of energy, nervous feeling, lightheaded/dizzy, headaches, mood swings, feeling irritable), gastrointestinal symptoms (nausea, gained weight, vomiting, diarrhea, bloated feeling), gynecological symptoms (vaginal discharge, vaginal irritation, vaginal bleeding, vaginal dryness, discomfort with intercourse, lost interest in sex, breast tenderness) and other symptoms (pain, feeling ill, side effects). Number of participants who reported severe endocrine symptoms (defined as response categories quite a bit and very much) were presented.
Percentage of Participants With Endometrial Thickness Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 5 Millimeter (mm): Endometrial Sub-study6, 12, 24, 36 months after randomization, 6, 12, 24 months post-treatmentEndometrial thickness was assessed using transvaginal ultrasound examination. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.
Endometrial Thickness: Endometrial Sub-studyBaseline, 6, 12, 24, 36 months after randomization, 6, 12, 24 months post-treatmentEndometrial thickness was assessed using transvaginal ultrasound examination. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.
Uterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-study6, 12, 24, 36 months after randomization, 6, 12, 24 months post-treatmentUterine volume (UV) and ovarian volume was estimated using ultrasonography. Uterine volume = (longitudinal diameter \* transverse diameter \* anteroposterior diameter of uterus)/(2\*1000). Ovary volume = \[(longitudinal diameter \* transverse diameter \* anteroposterior diameter of ovary) \* 3.14\]/(6\*1000). Overall ovary volume (OV) is calculated as the sum of the right and left ovary volume. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.
Number of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-study6, 12, 24, 36 months after randomization, 6, 12, 24 months post-treatmentNumber of participants with presence of polyps (POL) and fibroids (FIB) at post-baseline time points compared to the baseline (BL) status of 'yes', 'no' or 'missing' (that is, participants reporting POL/FIB at post-baseline time points who had yes, no or missing POL/FIB status at baseline, respectively) were presented. Result for number of participants with ovarian cysts was not analyzed at post-baseline time points as very few participants reported ovarian cysts at baseline.
Percentage of Participants With at Least 1 Gynecological Symptoms: Endometrial Sub-studyBaseline up to 24 months post-treatmentGynecological symptoms included bleeding/spotting, pelvic pain, leucorrhoea and vaginal itching.
Number of Participants With Histological Findings: Endometrial Sub-studyBaseline up to 24 months post-treatment
Change From Baseline in Total Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General Breast and Endocrine (FACT-GBE) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyBaseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomizationFACT-GBE assessed health-related quality of life (QoL) in participants with breast cancer. It consisted of 56 items,summarized to 7 subscales(subscale 1 to 6 constituted total FACT-B and subscale 7 constituted total ES):physical well-being(7 items), social/family well-being(7 items),relationship with doctor (2 items),emotional well-being(6 items),functional well-being(7 items),breast cancer subscale(9 items),endocrine symptoms(18 items). Participants indicated how true a statement had been for them using 5-point scale from 0(not at all) to 4(very much). For items that were negatively framed,scores were reversed for analysis so that higher scores equated to good QoL. Total FACT-GBE score=sum of all 56 items(range 0 to 224, where higher score indicated better QoL. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.

Countries

Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Denmark, Egypt, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom, United States

Participant flow

Recruitment details

The publication describing study results (Coombes RC et al; N Engl J Med 350; 1119) stated that 4742 participants were enrolled in study. It was later discovered that 2 participants were randomized twice. Hence, 4740 participants were enrolled in this study.

Pre-assignment details

Main study also included 3 sub-studies only for the purpose of tolerability assessment: endometrial status, bone metabolism and quality of life (QoL). Out of 4740 enrolled participants, data for 16 participants from a center were excluded since it was considered unreliable. Results are reported for remaining 4724 participants.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Exemestane
Participants diagnosed with breast cancer who remained disease-free after previously receiving 2 to 3 years of tamoxifen 20 milligram (mg) or 30 mg tablet-in-capsule orally once daily as per standard medical practice, received exemestane (Aromasin) 25 mg tablet-in-capsule orally once daily for the remainder of 5-year period.
2,352
Tamoxifen
Participants diagnosed with breast cancer who remained disease-free after previously receiving 2 to 3 years of tamoxifen 20 mg or 30 mg tablet-in-capsule orally once daily as per standard medical practice, received the same dose of tamoxifen tablet-in-capsule orally once daily for the remainder of 5-year period.
2,372
Total4,724

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Overall StudyAdverse Event170145
Overall StudyDeath2216
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up1510
Overall StudyOther2628
Overall StudyProtocol Violation1922
Overall StudyRandomized, but not treated3135
Overall StudyRecurrence109179
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject150107

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicExemestaneTamoxifenTotal
Age, Continuous63.78 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.12
63.69 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.22
63.73 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.17
Sex: Female, Male
Female
2352 Participants2372 Participants4724 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
1,905 / 2,2491,888 / 2,279
serious
Total, serious adverse events
383 / 2,320439 / 2,338

Outcome results

Primary

Disease-Free Survival (DFS) at Month 36 Post-Randomization: Main Study

DFS defined as time from randomization to earliest documentation of breast cancer relapse or death from any cause. DFS at Month 36 post-randomization was defined as probability of participants alive and disease-free at 36 months after the randomization. Participants withdrawn from the study for any reason in the absence of relapse were censored at the date they were last seen. Relapse was categorized as follows: loco-regional: ipsilateral breast or axillary nodal relapse; distant: distant relapse, including supraclavicular nodes; second primary breast cancer: contralateral breast cancer, excluding ductal carcinoma in situ.

Time frame: Baseline up to Month 36

Population: Intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all participants assigned to the treatment group to which they were randomized, irrespective of the treatment they actually received.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
ExemestaneDisease-Free Survival (DFS) at Month 36 Post-Randomization: Main Study0.90 probability of DFS
TamoxifenDisease-Free Survival (DFS) at Month 36 Post-Randomization: Main Study0.86 probability of DFS
p-value: 0.0000395% CI: [0.58, 0.82]Log Rank
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Breast Cancer Subscale (BCS) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-study

The BCS subscale assessed health related QoL in participants with breast cancer. BCS subscale comprised of 9 items (short of breath, self-conscious dress, tender/swollen arms, sexually attractive, bothered by hair loss, worried about familial risk, worried about family stress, bothered by weight change, able to feel like a woman). Participants indicated how true a statement had been for them using a 5-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). For items that were negatively framed, the scores were reversed for the analysis so that higher scores equated to a good QoL. Total BCS score was calculated as the sum of the 9 items and ranged from 0 to 36, where higher score indicated better QoL. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.

Time frame: Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomization

Population: ITT population for QoL sub-study. Results for 30, 36, 48, 60 months were not reported because data for these time points was only summarized as graphical presentation.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Breast Cancer Subscale (BCS) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 12 months (n=233, 238)0.61 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.08
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Breast Cancer Subscale (BCS) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 3 months (n=255, 252)0.05 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.76
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Breast Cancer Subscale (BCS) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 18 months (n=233, 227)0.06 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.61
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Breast Cancer Subscale (BCS) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 6 months (n=246, 244)-0.33 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.17
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Breast Cancer Subscale (BCS) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 24 months (n=222, 214)0.36 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.33
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Breast Cancer Subscale (BCS) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 9 months (n=243, 239)0.3 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.99
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Breast Cancer Subscale (BCS) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 24 months (n=222, 214)0.72 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.35
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Breast Cancer Subscale (BCS) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 9 months (n=243, 239)0.48 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.22
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Breast Cancer Subscale (BCS) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 6 months (n=246, 244)0.17 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.31
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Breast Cancer Subscale (BCS) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 12 months (n=233, 238)0.38 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.12
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Breast Cancer Subscale (BCS) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 18 months (n=233, 227)0.67 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.35
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Breast Cancer Subscale (BCS) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 3 months (n=255, 252)-0.003 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.96
Comparison: 3 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.87695% CI: [-0.62, 0.73]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 6 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.19595% CI: [-1.25, 0.26]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 9 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.6395% CI: [-0.92, 0.55]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 12 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.5395% CI: [-0.5, 0.98]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 18 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.14795% CI: [-1.43, 0.21]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 24 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.38995% CI: [-1.18, 0.46]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Emotional Well-Being (EWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-study

The EWB subscale assessed emotional well-being related QoL in participants with breast cancer. EWB subscale comprised of 6 items (felt sad, proud of coping, lost hope, felt nervous, worried about dying, worried about condition worsening). Participants indicated how true a statement had been for them using a 5-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). For items that were negatively framed, the scores were reversed for the analysis so that higher scores equate to a good QoL. Total EWB score was calculated as the sum of the 6 items and ranged from 0 to 24, where higher score indicated better emotional well-being related QoL. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.

Time frame: Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomization

Population: ITT population for QoL sub-study. Results for 30, 36, 48, 60 months were not reported because data for these time points was only summarized as graphical presentation.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Emotional Well-Being (EWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 3 months (n=255, 252)0.06 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.84
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Emotional Well-Being (EWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 6 months (n=246, 243)-0.32 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.88
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Emotional Well-Being (EWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 9 months (n=243, 236)-0.47 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.05
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Emotional Well-Being (EWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 12 months (n=232, 235)-0.03 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.55
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Emotional Well-Being (EWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 18 months (n=235, 226)-0.3 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.05
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Emotional Well-Being (EWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 24 months (n=222, 214)-0.18 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.05
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Emotional Well-Being (EWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 18 months (n=235, 226)-0.04 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.26
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Emotional Well-Being (EWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 3 months (n=255, 252)-0.01 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.77
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Emotional Well-Being (EWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 12 months (n=232, 235)-0.33 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.86
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Emotional Well-Being (EWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 6 months (n=246, 243)-0.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.1
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Emotional Well-Being (EWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 24 months (n=222, 214)0.07 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.09
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Emotional Well-Being (EWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 9 months (n=243, 236)-0.27 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.12
Comparison: 3 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.79295% CI: [-0.42, 0.56]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 6 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.40595% CI: [-0.76, 0.31]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 9 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.48495% CI: [-0.75, 0.36]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 12 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.22995% CI: [-0.19, 0.8]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 18 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.38195% CI: [-0.84, 0.32]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 24 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.40595% CI: [-0.82, 0.33]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Endocrine Subscale (FACT-ES) Total Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-study

The FACT-ES assessed health-related QoL in participants with breast cancer. ES subscale comprised of 18 items (hot flushes,cold sweats,night sweats, vaginal discharge,vaginal irritation,vaginal bleeding,vaginal dryness,discomfort with intercourse,lost interest in sex,gained weight,light headed/dizzy,vomiting,had diarrhea,headaches,felt bloated,breast tenderness,mood swings, felt irritable).Participants indicated how true a statement was for them using a 5-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). For items that were negatively framed, the scores were reversed for the analysis so that higher scores equated to a good QoL. Total FACT-ES score was calculated as sum of all the 18 items and ranged from 0 to 72, where higher score indicated better QoL. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.

Time frame: Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomization

Population: ITT population for QoL sub-study. Results for 30, 36, 48, 60 months were not reported because data for these time points was only summarized as graphical presentation.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Endocrine Subscale (FACT-ES) Total Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 3 months (n=254, 253)0.04 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.67
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Endocrine Subscale (FACT-ES) Total Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 6 months (n=245, 243)0.17 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.26
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Endocrine Subscale (FACT-ES) Total Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 9 months (n=243, 238)1.10 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.54
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Endocrine Subscale (FACT-ES) Total Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 12 months (n=233, 236)1.98 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.72
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Endocrine Subscale (FACT-ES) Total Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 18 months (n=235, 226)1.25 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.52
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Endocrine Subscale (FACT-ES) Total Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 24 months (n=222, 214)1.93 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.26
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Endocrine Subscale (FACT-ES) Total Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 18 months (n=235, 226)1.41 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.67
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Endocrine Subscale (FACT-ES) Total Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 3 months (n=254, 253)0.70 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.4
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Endocrine Subscale (FACT-ES) Total Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 12 months (n=233, 236)1.15 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.08
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Endocrine Subscale (FACT-ES) Total Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 6 months (n=245, 243)0.96 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.54
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Endocrine Subscale (FACT-ES) Total Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 24 months (n=222, 214)1.51 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.87
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Endocrine Subscale (FACT-ES) Total Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 9 months (n=243, 238)1.32 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.29
Comparison: 3 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.2695% CI: [-1.8, 0.49]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 6 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.20995% CI: [-2.02, 0.44]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 9 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.69895% CI: [-1.38, 0.92]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 12 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.19295% CI: [-0.42, 2.09]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 18 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.81395% CI: [-1.46, 1.15]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 24 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.53795% CI: [-0.91, 1.75]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Functional Well-Being (FWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-study

The FWB subscale assessed functional well-being related QoL in participants with breast cancer. FWB subscale comprised of 7 items (able to work, work fulfilled, able to enjoy life, acceptance of illness, sleeping well, enjoyed normal fun activities, contented with QoL). Participants indicated how true a statement had been for them using a 5-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). Total FWB score was calculated as the sum of the 7 items and ranged from 0 to 28, where higher score indicated better functional well-being related QoL. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.

Time frame: Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomization

Population: ITT population for QoL sub-study. Results for 30, 36, 48, 60 months were not reported because data for these time points was only summarized as graphical presentation.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Functional Well-Being (FWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 3 months (n=254, 253)-0.32 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.79
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Functional Well-Being (FWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 6 months (n=246, 244)-0.77 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.31
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Functional Well-Being (FWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 9 months (n=243, 238)-1.03 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.96
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Functional Well-Being (FWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 12 months (n=232, 238)-0.68 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.07
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Functional Well-Being (FWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 18 months (n=232, 227)-0.83 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.14
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Functional Well-Being (FWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 24 months (n=222, 214)-0.91 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.49
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Functional Well-Being (FWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 18 months (n=232, 227)-0.8 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.89
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Functional Well-Being (FWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 3 months (n=254, 253)-0.18 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.32
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Functional Well-Being (FWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 12 months (n=232, 238)-0.91 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.38
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Functional Well-Being (FWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 6 months (n=246, 244)-0.43 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.01
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Functional Well-Being (FWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 24 months (n=222, 214)-0.45 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.72
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Functional Well-Being (FWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 9 months (n=243, 238)-0.38 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.62
Comparison: 3 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.64895% CI: [-0.77, 0.48]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 6 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.36695% CI: [-1.08, 0.4]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 9 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.06295% CI: [-1.33, 0.03]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 12 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.54595% CI: [-0.53, 1]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 18 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.93295% CI: [-0.77, 0.7]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 24 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.24495% CI: [-1.24, 0.32]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-study

BMD measurements for Lumbar spine (LS) and Proximal Femur (Total Hip \[TH\]) were performed using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) for participants who entered the bone-metabolism sub-study. Results were scored as T-score. T-score indicated how many standard deviations higher or lower participant's value was when compared to the young normal reference mean. Using the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria for osteoporosis, a T-score of greater than or equal to (\>=)-1.0 was classified as normal, a T-score of greater than -2.5 to less than -1.0 as osteopenic, and a T-score less than or equal to (\<=)-2.5 as osteoporotic. Here 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.

Time frame: Baseline, 6, 12, 24 months after randomization (on-treatment), 24 months post-treatment

Population: Evaluable population for bone metabolism substudy: all treated participants who did not violate any exclusion criteria, received treatment for at least 9 months and had baseline and at least on-treatment Month 12 and/or Month 24 assessment available for parameter to be analyzed. Participants were analyzed according to treatment actually received.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyBaseline: LS (n=86,99)-0.62 T-scoreStandard Deviation 1.12
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyBaseline: TH (n=86,99)-0.27 T-scoreStandard Deviation 0.97
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 6 months on-treatment: LS (n=84,96)-0.24 T-scoreStandard Deviation 0.26
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 12 months on-treatment: LS (n=82,96)-0.26 T-scoreStandard Deviation 0.3
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months on-treatment: LS (n=82,92)-0.32 T-scoreStandard Deviation 0.41
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months on-treatment: TH (n=79,93)-0.21 T-scoreStandard Deviation 0.27
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months post-treatment: LS (n=74,81)-0.21 T-scoreStandard Deviation 0.47
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months post-treatment: TH (n=73,84)-0.25 T-scoreStandard Deviation 0.38
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 6 months on-treatment: TH (n=82,96)-0.10 T-scoreStandard Deviation 0.19
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 12 months on-treatment: TH (n=82,95)-0.16 T-scoreStandard Deviation 0.21
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months post-treatment: TH (n=73,84)-0.34 T-scoreStandard Deviation 0.33
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyBaseline: LS (n=86,99)-0.45 T-scoreStandard Deviation 1.14
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months on-treatment: TH (n=79,93)-0.07 T-scoreStandard Deviation 0.24
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyBaseline: TH (n=86,99)-0.12 T-scoreStandard Deviation 1.01
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months on-treatment: LS (n=82,92)-0.04 T-scoreStandard Deviation 0.31
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 6 months on-treatment: LS (n=84,96)-0.02 T-scoreStandard Deviation 0.23
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 6 months on-treatment: TH (n=82,96)-0.00 T-scoreStandard Deviation 0.16
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months post-treatment: LS (n=74,81)-0.33 T-scoreStandard Deviation 0.41
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 12 months on-treatment: TH (n=82,95)-0.03 T-scoreStandard Deviation 0.18
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 12 months on-treatment: LS (n=82,96)-0.02 T-scoreStandard Deviation 0.32
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Physical Well-Being (PWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-study

The PWB subscale assessed physical well-being related QoL in participants with breast cancer. PWB subscale comprised of 7 items (energy lack, nausea, family needs, pain, side effects, felt ill, forced to stay in bed). Participants indicated how true a statement had been for them using a 5-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). For items that were negatively framed, the scores were reversed for the analysis so that higher scores equated to a good QoL. Total PWB score was calculated as the sum of all the 7 items and ranged from 0 to 28, where higher score indicated better physical well-being related QoL. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.

Time frame: Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomization

Population: ITT population for QoL sub-study. Results for 30, 36, 48, 60 months were not reported because data for these time points was only summarized as graphical presentation.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Physical Well-Being (PWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 6 months(n=246, 244)-1.08 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.16
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Physical Well-Being (PWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 12 months (n=233, 238)-0.26 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.9
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Physical Well-Being (PWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 3 months (n=253, 252)-0.32 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.05
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Physical Well-Being (PWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 18 months(n=234, 228)-0.19 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.09
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Physical Well-Being (PWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 9 months (n=242, 237)-0.37 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.16
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Physical Well-Being (PWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 24 months (n=223, 214)-0.005 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.208
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Physical Well-Being (PWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 9 months (n=242, 237)0.06 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.16
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Physical Well-Being (PWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 3 months (n=253, 252)-0.02 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.98
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Physical Well-Being (PWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 6 months(n=246, 244)0.13 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.88
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Physical Well-Being (PWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 24 months (n=223, 214)0.22 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.214
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Physical Well-Being (PWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 12 months (n=233, 238)-0.12 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.3
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Physical Well-Being (PWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 18 months(n=234, 228)0.02 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.81
Comparison: 3 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.26595% CI: [-0.83, 0.23]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 6 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.000295% CI: [-1.84, -0.57]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 9 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.13295% CI: [-1, 0.13]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 12 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.63595% CI: [-0.7, 0.43]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 18 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.44995% CI: [-0.75, 0.33]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 24 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.45495% CI: [-0.81, 0.36]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Relationship With Doctor (RWD) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Substudy

The RWD subscale assessed relationship with doctor in participants with breast cancer. RWD subscale comprised of 2 items (confidence in doctors, doctor answered questions). Participants indicated how true a statement had been for them using a 5-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). Total RWD score was calculated as the sum of the 2 items and ranged from 0 to 8, where higher score indicated better relationship with doctor. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.

Time frame: Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomization

Population: ITT population for QoL sub-study. Results for 30, 36, 48, 60 months were not reported because data for these time points was only summarized as graphical presentation.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Relationship With Doctor (RWD) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL SubstudyChange at 12 months (n=233, 233)-0.01 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.2
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Relationship With Doctor (RWD) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL SubstudyChange at 6 months (n=244, 240)-0.02 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.34
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Relationship With Doctor (RWD) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL SubstudyChange at 18 months (n=233, 222)-0.03 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.27
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Relationship With Doctor (RWD) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL SubstudyChange at 3 months (n=254, 250)0.07 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.2
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Relationship With Doctor (RWD) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL SubstudyChange at 24 months (n=221, 213)-0.005 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.25
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Relationship With Doctor (RWD) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL SubstudyChange at 9 months (n=243, 235)-0.06 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.12
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Relationship With Doctor (RWD) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL SubstudyChange at 24 months (n=221, 213)-0.12 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.14
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Relationship With Doctor (RWD) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL SubstudyChange at 3 months (n=254, 250)0.08 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.94
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Relationship With Doctor (RWD) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL SubstudyChange at 6 months (n=244, 240)-0.04 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.14
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Relationship With Doctor (RWD) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL SubstudyChange at 12 months (n=233, 233)-0.07 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.12
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Relationship With Doctor (RWD) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL SubstudyChange at 18 months (n=233, 222)-0.21 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.2
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Relationship With Doctor (RWD) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL SubstudyChange at 9 months (n=243, 235)-0.07 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.06
Comparison: 3 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.89295% CI: [-0.2, 0.18]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 6 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.88195% CI: [-0.21, 0.24]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 9 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.88395% CI: [-0.18, 0.21]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 12 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.60495% CI: [-0.16, 0.27]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 18 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.11895% CI: [-0.05, 0.41]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 24 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.30795% CI: [-0.11, 0.34]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Social/Family Well-Being (SWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-study

The SWB subscale assessed social/family well-being related QoL in participants with breast cancer. SWB subscale comprised of 7 items (distant from friends, emotional support, support from friends, family acceptance, family communication, close to main support, sexual satisfaction). Participants indicated how true a statement had been for them using a 5-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). For items that were negatively framed, the scores were reversed for the analysis so that higher scores equated to a good QoL. Total SWB score was calculated as the sum of all the 7 items and ranged from 0 to 28, where higher score indicated better social/family well-being related QoL. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.

Time frame: Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomization

Population: ITT population for QoL sub-study. Results for 30, 36, 48, 60 months were not reported because data for these time points was only summarized as graphical presentation.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Social/Family Well-Being (SWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 3 months (n=252, 249)-0.25 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.9
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Social/Family Well-Being (SWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 6 months (n=245, 241)-0.43 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.84
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Social/Family Well-Being (SWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 9 months (n=242, 235)-0.58 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.61
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Social/Family Well-Being (SWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 12 months (n=231, 235)0.05 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.03
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Social/Family Well-Being (SWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 18 months(n=234, 226)-0.5 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.62
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Social/Family Well-Being (SWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 24 months (n=219, 212)-0.99 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.96
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Social/Family Well-Being (SWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 18 months(n=234, 226)-0.69 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.31
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Social/Family Well-Being (SWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 3 months (n=252, 249)-0.37 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.59
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Social/Family Well-Being (SWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 12 months (n=231, 235)-0.56 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.87
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Social/Family Well-Being (SWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 6 months (n=245, 241)-0.47 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.01
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Social/Family Well-Being (SWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 24 months (n=219, 212)-0.72 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.44
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Social/Family Well-Being (SWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 9 months (n=242, 235)-0.53 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.22
Comparison: 3 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.71295% CI: [-0.53, 0.335]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 6 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.89995% CI: [-0.65, 0.356]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 9 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.88295% CI: [-0.76, 0.359]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 18 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.60495% CI: [-0.54, 0.37]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 24 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.56295% CI: [-1.16, 0.454]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Total Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General Breast and Endocrine (FACT-GBE) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-study

FACT-GBE assessed health-related quality of life (QoL) in participants with breast cancer. It consisted of 56 items,summarized to 7 subscales(subscale 1 to 6 constituted total FACT-B and subscale 7 constituted total ES):physical well-being(7 items), social/family well-being(7 items),relationship with doctor (2 items),emotional well-being(6 items),functional well-being(7 items),breast cancer subscale(9 items),endocrine symptoms(18 items). Participants indicated how true a statement had been for them using 5-point scale from 0(not at all) to 4(very much). For items that were negatively framed,scores were reversed for analysis so that higher scores equated to good QoL. Total FACT-GBE score=sum of all 56 items(range 0 to 224, where higher score indicated better QoL. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.

Time frame: Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomization

Population: ITT population for QoL sub-study. Results for 30, 36, 48, 60 months were not reported because data for these time points was only summarized as graphical presentation.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Total Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General Breast and Endocrine (FACT-GBE) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 3 months (n=252, 252)-0.91 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.41
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Total Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General Breast and Endocrine (FACT-GBE) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 6 months (n=244, 243)-3.12 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.84
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Total Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General Breast and Endocrine (FACT-GBE) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 9 months (n=243, 236)-1.28 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.09
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Total Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General Breast and Endocrine (FACT-GBE) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 12 months (n=229, 236)0.38 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 18.91
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Total Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General Breast and Endocrine (FACT-GBE) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 18 months (n=232, 225)-0.67 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.37
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Total Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General Breast and Endocrine (FACT-GBE) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 24 months (n=220, 212)-1.48 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 22.44
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Total Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General Breast and Endocrine (FACT-GBE) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 18 months (n=232, 225)0.06 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.26
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Total Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General Breast and Endocrine (FACT-GBE) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 3 months (n=252, 252)-0.38 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.17
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Total Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General Breast and Endocrine (FACT-GBE) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 12 months (n=229, 236)-0.53 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 14.71
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Total Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General Breast and Endocrine (FACT-GBE) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 6 months (n=244, 243)-0.04 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.21
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Total Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General Breast and Endocrine (FACT-GBE) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 24 months (n=220, 212)1.43 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.32
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Total Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General Breast and Endocrine (FACT-GBE) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 9 months (n=243, 236)-0.38 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.99
Comparison: 3 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.72795% CI: [-3.46, 2.42]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 6 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.04795% CI: [-6.12, -0.05]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 9 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.55395% CI: [-3.88, 2.08]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 12 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.56395% CI: [-2.17, 3.99]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 18 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.64395% CI: [-3.83, 2.36]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 24 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.12695% CI: [-6.63, 0.82]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Treatment Outcome Index (TOI) at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-study

The TOI was defined as the sum of 23 items based on following Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast version \[FACT-B\] subscales: Physical well-being (7 items), Functional well-being (7 items), Breast cancer subscale (9 items). Each item was scaled from 0='Not at all' to 4='Very much'. Total TOI score ranged from 0 to 92, where higher TOI score indicated better health-related quality of life (QoL). A change of five points in the TOI scores was considered clinically meaningful. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively. Results for 30, 36, 48, 60 months were not reported because data for these time points was only summarized as graphical presentation.

Time frame: Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomization

Population: ITT population for QoL sub-study included all randomized participants with available data for any given endpoint and were grouped according to randomized treatment, irrespective of whether they were actually treated or not.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Treatment Outcome Index (TOI) at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 12 months (n=230, 238)-0.40 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.03
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Treatment Outcome Index (TOI) at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 3 months (n=251, 251)-0.61 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.72
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Treatment Outcome Index (TOI) at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 18 months (n=232, 227)-0.95 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.99
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Treatment Outcome Index (TOI) at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 9 months (n=242, 235)-1.18 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.62
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Treatment Outcome Index (TOI) at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 24 months (n=221, 213)-0.57 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 9.06
ExemestaneChange From Baseline in Treatment Outcome Index (TOI) at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 6 months (n=244, 243)-2.10 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 9.66
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Treatment Outcome Index (TOI) at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 24 months (n=221, 213)0.54 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.36
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Treatment Outcome Index (TOI) at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 6 months (n=244, 243)-0.01 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.96
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Treatment Outcome Index (TOI) at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 9 months (n=242, 235)0.17 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.1
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Treatment Outcome Index (TOI) at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 12 months (n=230, 238)-0.66 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.49
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Treatment Outcome Index (TOI) at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 18 months (n=232, 227)-0.11 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.32
TamoxifenChange From Baseline in Treatment Outcome Index (TOI) at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-studyChange at 3 months (n=251, 251)-0.16 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.24
Comparison: 3 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.595% CI: [-1.76, 0.86]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 6 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.00995% CI: [-3.67, -0.52]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 9 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.07995% CI: [-2.86, 0.16]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 12 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.72995% CI: [-1.24, 1.77]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 18 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.30295% CI: [-2.43, 0.75]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 24 months: p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.18795% CI: [-2.76, 0.54]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Endometrial Thickness: Endometrial Sub-study

Endometrial thickness was assessed using transvaginal ultrasound examination. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.

Time frame: Baseline, 6, 12, 24, 36 months after randomization, 6, 12, 24 months post-treatment

Population: Evaluable population for endometrial sub-study included all treated participants who did not violate any exclusion criteria, received treatment for at least 2 years, and had on-treatment endometrial ultrasound examination performed between 22 and 26 months from treatment start. Analysis was based on actual treatment received.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
ExemestaneEndometrial Thickness: Endometrial Sub-study36 months (n=31, 17)3.0 mm
ExemestaneEndometrial Thickness: Endometrial Sub-study12 months (n=59, 52)3.3 mm
ExemestaneEndometrial Thickness: Endometrial Sub-study6 months post-treatment (n=16, 17)3.0 mm
ExemestaneEndometrial Thickness: Endometrial Sub-studyBaseline (n=60, 52)6.0 mm
ExemestaneEndometrial Thickness: Endometrial Sub-study12 months post-treatment (n=49, 37)3.0 mm
ExemestaneEndometrial Thickness: Endometrial Sub-study24 months (n=60, 52)4.0 mm
ExemestaneEndometrial Thickness: Endometrial Sub-study24 months post-treatment (n=40, 31)3.0 mm
ExemestaneEndometrial Thickness: Endometrial Sub-study6 months (n=58, 49)4.0 mm
TamoxifenEndometrial Thickness: Endometrial Sub-study24 months post-treatment (n=40, 31)3.8 mm
TamoxifenEndometrial Thickness: Endometrial Sub-studyBaseline (n=60, 52)6.0 mm
TamoxifenEndometrial Thickness: Endometrial Sub-study12 months (n=59, 52)5.5 mm
TamoxifenEndometrial Thickness: Endometrial Sub-study24 months (n=60, 52)5.0 mm
TamoxifenEndometrial Thickness: Endometrial Sub-study36 months (n=31, 17)7.0 mm
TamoxifenEndometrial Thickness: Endometrial Sub-study6 months post-treatment (n=16, 17)5.8 mm
TamoxifenEndometrial Thickness: Endometrial Sub-study12 months post-treatment (n=49, 37)4.0 mm
TamoxifenEndometrial Thickness: Endometrial Sub-study6 months (n=58, 49)5.9 mm
Secondary

Number of Events of Second Breast Cancer in Contralateral Breast: Main Study

Number of events of second primary breast cancer in contralateral breast (excluding ductal carcinoma in situ) were reported.

Time frame: Baseline up to Month 120

Population: ITT population included all participants assigned to the treatment group to which they were randomized, irrespective of the treatment they actually received.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
ExemestaneNumber of Events of Second Breast Cancer in Contralateral Breast: Main Study57 events
TamoxifenNumber of Events of Second Breast Cancer in Contralateral Breast: Main Study75 events
Secondary

Number of Participants With Fracture: Bone Metabolism Sub-study

Time frame: Baseline up to 24 months post-treatment

Population: As treated population for bone metabolism sub-study included all treated participants, irrespective of the treatment duration and allocated to the group that corresponded to the treatment they actually received.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Fracture: Bone Metabolism Sub-study7 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Fracture: Bone Metabolism Sub-study10 participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Histological Findings: Endometrial Sub-study

Time frame: Baseline up to 24 months post-treatment

Population: Results were not reported for this outcome measure because no data was collected as per change in planned analysis.

Secondary

Number of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-study

Number of participants with presence of polyps (POL) and fibroids (FIB) at post-baseline time points compared to the baseline (BL) status of 'yes', 'no' or 'missing' (that is, participants reporting POL/FIB at post-baseline time points who had yes, no or missing POL/FIB status at baseline, respectively) were presented. Result for number of participants with ovarian cysts was not analyzed at post-baseline time points as very few participants reported ovarian cysts at baseline.

Time frame: 6, 12, 24, 36 months after randomization, 6, 12, 24 months post-treatment

Population: Evaluable population for endometrial sub-study. Analysis was based on actual treatment received. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group,respectively.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 36 months, BL Missing (n=33,18)0 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 12 months post-treatment, BL Missing (n=51,380 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 36 months, BL Yes (n=33,18)2 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 24 months post-treatment, BL Yes (n=43,31)2 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 6 months post-treatment, BL Yes (n=16,17)1 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 24 months post-treatment, BL No (n=43,31)2 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 24 months, BL Missing (n=61,52)0 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 24 months post-treatment, BL Missing(n=43,31)1 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 6 months post-treatment, BL No (n=16,17)1 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 24 months post-treatment, BL Yes (n=43,31)0 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 36 months, BL No (n=33,18)3 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 24 months post-treatment, BL No (n=43,31)1 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 6 months post-treatment,BL Missing(n=16,17)0 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 24 months post-treatment, BL Missing(n=43,31)2 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 24 months, BL No (n=61,52)0 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 6 months, BL Yes (n=60,50)4 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 6 months post-treatment, BL Yes (n=16,17)0 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 6 months, BL No (n=60,50)2 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 36 months, BL Missing (n=33,18)0 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 6 months, BL Missing (n=60,50)2 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 6 months post-treatment, BL No (n=16,17)0 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 6 months, BL Yes (n=60,50)0 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 12 months post-treatment, BL Yes (n=51,38)0 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 6 months, BL No (n=60,50)2 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 6 months post-treatment,BL Missing(n=16,17)1 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 6 months, BL Missing (n=60,50)1 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 36 months, BL Yes (n=33,18)0 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 12 months, BL Yes (n=61,52)3 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 12 months post-treatment, BL Yes (n=51,38)1 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 12 months, BL No (n=61,52)2 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 24 months, BL Missing (n=61,52)0 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 12 months, BL Missing (n=61,52)4 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 12 months post-treatment, BL No (n=51,38)2 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 12 months, BL Yes (n=61,52)0 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 36 months, BL No (n=33,18)1 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 12 months, BL No (n=61,52)0 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 12 months post-treatment, BL Missing(n=51,38)1 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 12 months, BL Missing (n=61,52)1 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 24 months, BL Yes (n=61,52)1 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 24 months, BL Yes (n=61,52)3 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 12 months post-treatment, BL No (n=51,38)0 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 24 months, BL No (n=61,52)3 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 24 months post-treatment, BL Yes (n=43,31)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 24 months, BL No (n=61,52)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 24 months, BL Missing (n=61,52)2 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 24 months, BL Yes (n=61,52)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 24 months, BL No (n=61,52)1 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 24 months, BL Missing (n=61,52)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 36 months, BL Yes (n=33,18)1 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 36 months, BL No (n=33,18)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 36 months, BL Missing (n=33,18)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 36 months, BL Yes (n=33,18)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 36 months, BL No (n=33,18)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 36 months, BL Missing (n=33,18)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 6 months post-treatment, BL Yes (n=16,17)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 6 months post-treatment, BL No (n=16,17)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 6 months post-treatment,BL Missing(n=16,17)2 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 6 months post-treatment, BL Yes (n=16,17)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 6 months post-treatment, BL No (n=16,17)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 6 months post-treatment,BL Missing(n=16,17)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 12 months post-treatment, BL Yes (n=51,38)1 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 12 months post-treatment, BL No (n=51,38)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 12 months post-treatment, BL Yes (n=51,38)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 12 months post-treatment, BL No (n=51,38)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 12 months post-treatment, BL Missing (n=51,382 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 24 months post-treatment, BL Yes (n=43,31)2 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 24 months post-treatment, BL No (n=43,31)1 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 24 months post-treatment, BL Missing(n=43,31)2 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 12 months post-treatment, BL Missing(n=51,38)1 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 24 months post-treatment, BL No (n=43,31)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 24 months post-treatment, BL Missing(n=43,31)1 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 6 months, BL Yes (n=60,50)6 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 6 months, BL No (n=60,50)1 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 6 months, BL Missing (n=60,50)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 6 months, BL Yes (n=60,50)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 6 months, BL No (n=60,50)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 6 months, BL Missing (n=60,50)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 12 months, BL Yes (n=61,52)7 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 12 months, BL No (n=61,52)1 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 12 months, BL Missing (n=61,52)1 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 12 months, BL Yes (n=61,52)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 12 months, BL No (n=61,52)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyPOL: 12 months, BL Missing (n=61,52)0 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Polyps, Fibroids and Ovarian Cysts: Endometrial Sub-studyFIB: 24 months, BL Yes (n=61,52)5 participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-study

Participants indicated prevalence of an endocrine subscale items using a 5-point scale, where 0 (not at all), 1 (a little bit), 2 (somewhat), 3 (quite a bit), 4 (very much). Endocrine items were grouped in five categories vasomotor (hot flushes, cold sweats, night sweats, sleeping difficulties), neuropsychological (lack of energy, nervous feeling, lightheaded/dizzy, headaches, mood swings, feeling irritable), gastrointestinal symptoms (nausea, gained weight, vomiting, diarrhea, bloated feeling), gynecological symptoms (vaginal discharge, vaginal irritation, vaginal bleeding, vaginal dryness, discomfort with intercourse, lost interest in sex, breast tenderness) and other symptoms (pain, feeling ill, side effects). Number of participants who reported severe endocrine symptoms (defined as response categories quite a bit and very much) were presented.

Time frame: Baseline up to 24 months after randomization

Population: ITT population for QoL sub-study. Results for 30, 36, 48, 60 months were not reported because data for these time points was only summarized as graphical presentation.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyNight sweats115 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyLightheaded/dizzy34 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyVomiting6 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyCold sweats60 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyDiarrhea20 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyHeadaches56 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyBloated feeling75 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studySleeping difficulties110 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyVaginal discharge36 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyMood swings70 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyVaginal irritation37 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyVaginal dryness78 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyLack of energy115 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyDiscomfort with intercourse47 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyFeeling irritable53 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyLost interest in sex128 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyHot flushes151 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyBreast tenderness66 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyNausea16 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyPain66 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyNervous feeling68 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyFeeling ill24 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyGained weight150 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studySide effects54 participants
ExemestaneNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyVaginal bleeding10 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studySide effects57 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studySleeping difficulties110 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyHot flushes146 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyCold sweats52 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyNight sweats117 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyLack of energy108 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyNervous feeling65 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyLightheaded/dizzy37 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyHeadaches49 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyMood swings66 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyFeeling irritable48 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyNausea14 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyVaginal bleeding11 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyGained weight152 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyVomiting6 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyDiarrhea21 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyBloated feeling88 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyVaginal discharge55 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyVaginal dryness88 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyDiscomfort with intercourse45 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyLost interest in sex142 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyBreast tenderness76 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyPain60 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyFeeling ill24 participants
TamoxifenNumber of Participants With Severe Endocrine Symptoms: QoL Sub-studyVaginal irritation45 participants
Secondary

Overall Survival (OS) at Month 36 Post-Randomization: Main Study

OS was defined as the duration from randomization to death (due to any cause). OS at Month 36 post-randomization was defined as probability of participants' survival at 36 months after the randomization. For participants who were alive, OS was censored at the last available assessment. Probability of OS at Month 36 post-randomization was reported using Kaplan-Meier estimates at Month 36 post-randomization based on 120-month follow-up data.

Time frame: Baseline up to Month 120

Population: ITT population included all participants assigned to the treatment group to which they were randomized, irrespective of the treatment they actually received.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
ExemestaneOverall Survival (OS) at Month 36 Post-Randomization: Main Study0.953 probability of OS
TamoxifenOverall Survival (OS) at Month 36 Post-Randomization: Main Study0.941 probability of OS
p-value: 0.1573795% CI: [0.806, 1.036]Log Rank
Secondary

Percentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study

Bone specific alkaline phosphatase (BAP) serum concentration analyzed using enzyme immuno assay (EIA) at post-baseline time points was expressed as percentage of baseline BAP serum concentration. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.

Time frame: Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30 months after randomization (on-treatment), 36 months after randomization (end of treatment), 12, 24 months post-treatment

Population: As treated population for bone metabolism sub-study included all treated participants, irrespective of the treatment duration and allocated to the group that corresponded to the treatment they actually received. Analysis population for biomarkers included as treated population with baseline and at least 1 on-treatment assessment available.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (GEOMETRIC_MEAN)
ExemestanePercentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study3 months: on-treatment (n=81, 92)113.47 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study6 months: on-treatment (n=83, 95)121.01 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study9 months: on-treatment (n=79, 92)139.62 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months: on-treatment (n=82, 96)148.96 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study18 months: on-treatment (n=80, 95)158.33 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months: on-treatment (n=81, 90)155.89 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months: post-treatment (n=67, 87)140.19 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study30 months: on-treatment (n=50, 65)144.89 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study36 months: end of treatment (n=19, 31)150.82 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months: post-treatment (n=62, 77)128.73 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study30 months: on-treatment (n=50, 65)108.33 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study3 months: on-treatment (n=81, 92)104.35 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months: on-treatment (n=81, 90)105.12 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study6 months: on-treatment (n=83, 95)104.34 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months: post-treatment (n=62, 77)142.20 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study9 months: on-treatment (n=79, 92)98.17 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months: post-treatment (n=67, 87)149.69 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months: on-treatment (n=82, 96)100.47 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study36 months: end of treatment (n=19, 31)113.87 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study18 months: on-treatment (n=80, 95)102.72 percentage of baseline concentration
Secondary

Percentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study

C-terminal telopeptide (CTX) serum concentration analyzed using competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) at post-baseline time points was expressed as percentage of baseline CTX serum concentration. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.

Time frame: Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30 months after randomization (on-treatment), 36 months after randomization (end of treatment), 12, 24 months post-treatment

Population: As treated population for bone metabolism sub-study included all treated participants, irrespective of the treatment duration and allocated to the group that corresponded to the treatment they actually received. Analysis population for biomarkers included as treated population with baseline and at least 1 on-treatment assessment available.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (GEOMETRIC_MEAN)
ExemestanePercentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study6 months: on-treatment (n=83, 95)197.47 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study30 months: on-treatment (n=50, 65)179.29 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study9 months: on-treatment (n=79, 92)226.04 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months: on-treatment (n=81, 90)177.80 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months: on-treatment (n=81, 96)232.69 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study36 months: end of treatment (n=19, 31)130.00 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months: post-treatment (n=67, 87)110.87 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study3 months: on-treatment (n=81, 93)144.14 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months: post-treatment (n=62, 77)100.34 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study18 months: on-treatment (n=80, 95)199.68 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months: post-treatment (n=62, 77)124.03 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study18 months: on-treatment (n=80, 95)90.35 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months: on-treatment (n=81, 90)88.80 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study30 months: on-treatment (n=50, 65)91.62 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study3 months: on-treatment (n=81, 93)99.19 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study6 months: on-treatment (n=83, 95)93.67 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study9 months: on-treatment (n=79, 92)94.40 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study36 months: end of treatment (n=19, 31)99.34 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months: post-treatment (n=67, 87)136.50 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months: on-treatment (n=81, 96)94.59 percentage of baseline concentration
Secondary

Percentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study

Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) urine concentration (adjusted for urinary creatinine) analyzed using competitive EIA at post-baseline time points was expressed as percentage of baseline DPD urine concentration. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.

Time frame: Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30 months after randomization (on-treatment), 36 months after randomization (end of treatment), 12, 24 months post-treatment

Population: As treated population for bone metabolism sub-study included all treated participants, irrespective of the treatment duration and allocated to the group that corresponded to the treatment they actually received. Analysis population for biomarkers included as treated population with baseline and at least 1 on-treatment assessment available.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (GEOMETRIC_MEAN)
ExemestanePercentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study3 months: on-treatment (n=82, 91)130.49 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study6 months: on-treatment (n=83, 95)145.13 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study9 months: on-treatment (n=80, 92)160.12 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months: on-treatment (n=82, 97)155.53 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study18 months: on-treatment (n=77, 96)139.57 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months: on-treatment (n=78, 90)135.30 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study30 months: on-treatment (n=49, 63)121.39 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study36 months: end of treatment (n=19, 31)107.64 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months: post-treatment (n=65, 84)117.94 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months: post-treatment (n=61, 77)105.50 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study36 months: end of treatment (n=19, 31)101.04 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study3 months: on-treatment (n=82, 91)106.99 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months: on-treatment (n=78, 90)99.11 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study6 months: on-treatment (n=83, 95)103.42 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months: post-treatment (n=61, 77)120.84 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study9 months: on-treatment (n=80, 92)101.08 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study30 months: on-treatment (n=49, 63)95.97 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months: on-treatment (n=82, 97)104.51 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months: post-treatment (n=65, 84)128.47 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study18 months: on-treatment (n=77, 96)99.25 percentage of baseline concentration
Secondary

Percentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study

N-telopeptide of Type 1 collagen (NTX) urine concentration (adjusted for urinary creatinine) analyzed using competitive inhibition EIA at post-baseline time points was expressed as percentage of baseline NTX urine concentration. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.

Time frame: Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30 months after randomization (on-treatment), 36 months after randomization (end of treatment), 12, 24 months post-treatment

Population: As treated population for bone metabolism sub-study included all treated participants, irrespective of the treatment duration and allocated to the group that corresponded to the treatment they actually received. Analysis population for biomarkers included as treated population with baseline and at least 1 on-treatment assessment available.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (GEOMETRIC_MEAN)
ExemestanePercentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months: on-treatment (n=78, 90)167.87 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study9 months: on-treatment (n=80, 92)168.15 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study30 months: on-treatment (n=49, 63)168.52 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study6 months: on-treatment (n=83, 95)153.67 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study36 months: end of treatment (n=19, 31)152.13 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months: on-treatment (n=82, 97)177.58 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months: post-treatment (n=65, 84)121.00 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study18 months: on-treatment (n=77, 96)171.46 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months: post-treatment (n=61, 77)108.18 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study3 months: on-treatment (n=82, 91)128.35 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months: post-treatment (n=61, 77)143.98 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months: on-treatment (n=82, 97)104.42 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study6 months: on-treatment (n=83, 95)100.64 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study9 months: on-treatment (n=80, 92)101.44 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study18 months: on-treatment (n=77, 96)98.74 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months: on-treatment (n=78, 90)104.55 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study30 months: on-treatment (n=49, 63)96.51 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study36 months: end of treatment (n=19, 31)105.58 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months: post-treatment (n=65, 84)158.12 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study3 months: on-treatment (n=82, 91)101.92 percentage of baseline concentration
Secondary

Percentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study

Osteocalcin (OC) serum concentration analyzed using ELISA and procollagen T1 c-peptide (PICP) serum concentration analyzed using sandwich EIA at post-baseline time points was expressed as percentage of baseline OC serum concentration and baseline PICP serum concentration, respectively. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points, for each group respectively.

Time frame: Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30 months after randomization (on-treatment), 36 months after randomization (end of treatment), 12, 24 months post-treatment

Population: As treated population for bone metabolism sub-study included all treated participants, irrespective of the treatment duration and allocated to the group that corresponded to the treatment they actually received. Analysis population for biomarkers included as treated population with baseline and at least 1 on-treatment assessment available.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (GEOMETRIC_MEAN)
ExemestanePercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study3 months, on-treatment: PICP (n=81, 92)117.23 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study30 months, on-treatment: PICP (n=50, 65)113.76 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study6 months, on-treatment: PICP (n=83, 95)133.50 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months, on-treatment: PICP (n=82, 96)128.68 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study36 months, end of treatment: OC (n=19, 30)167.03 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study18 months, on-treatment: OC (n=80, 95)230.72 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study18 months, on-treatment: PICP (n=80, 95)125.40 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study36 months, end of treatment: PICP (n=19, 31)95.33 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months, on-treatment: OC (n=81, 90)190.18 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study9 months, on-treatment: PICP (n=79, 92)131.73 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months: on-treatment: PICP (n=81, 90)123.75 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study30 months, on-treatment: OC (n=50, 65)187.23 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months, post-treatment: OC (n=67, 87)143.85 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months, on-treatment: OC (n=82, 96)227.59 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months, post-treatment: PICP (n=67, 87)91.53 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study6 months, on-treatment: OC (n=83, 95)193.44 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months, post-treatment: OC (n=62, 77)130.78 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study9 months, on-treatment: OC (n=79, 93)230.41 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months, post-treatment: PICP (n=62, 77)90.46 percentage of baseline concentration
ExemestanePercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study3 months, on-treatment: OC (n=81, 92)149.49 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months, post-treatment: PICP (n=62, 77)100.74 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study3 months, on-treatment: OC (n=81, 92)101.02 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study3 months, on-treatment: PICP (n=81, 92)102.19 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study6 months, on-treatment: OC (n=83, 95)97.69 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study18 months, on-treatment: OC (n=80, 95)93.98 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months: on-treatment: PICP (n=81, 90)103.94 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study30 months, on-treatment: PICP (n=50, 65)103.36 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study36 months, end of treatment: PICP (n=19, 31)87.22 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months, post-treatment: OC (n=67, 87)152.32 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study6 months, on-treatment: PICP (n=83, 95)99.78 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study9 months, on-treatment: OC (n=79, 93)92.52 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study9 months, on-treatment: PICP (n=79, 92)96.52 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months, on-treatment: OC (n=82, 96)95.75 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months, on-treatment: PICP (n=82, 96)100.18 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study18 months, on-treatment: PICP (n=80, 95)103.25 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months, on-treatment: OC (n=81, 90)89.29 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study30 months, on-treatment: OC (n=50, 65)87.34 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study36 months, end of treatment: OC (n=19, 30)90.77 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study12 months, post-treatment: PICP (n=67, 87)108.67 percentage of baseline concentration
TamoxifenPercentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study24 months, post-treatment: OC (n=62, 77)146.36 percentage of baseline concentration
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With at Least 1 Gynecological Symptoms: Endometrial Sub-study

Gynecological symptoms included bleeding/spotting, pelvic pain, leucorrhoea and vaginal itching.

Time frame: Baseline up to 24 months post-treatment

Population: As treated population included all treated participants, irrespective of the treatment duration and allocated to the group that corresponded to the treatment they actually received.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
ExemestanePercentage of Participants With at Least 1 Gynecological Symptoms: Endometrial Sub-study16.28 percentage of participants
TamoxifenPercentage of Participants With at Least 1 Gynecological Symptoms: Endometrial Sub-study21.28 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Endometrial Thickness Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 5 Millimeter (mm): Endometrial Sub-study

Endometrial thickness was assessed using transvaginal ultrasound examination. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.

Time frame: 6, 12, 24, 36 months after randomization, 6, 12, 24 months post-treatment

Population: Evaluable population for endometrial sub-study included all treated participants who did not violate any exclusion criteria, received treatment for at least 2 years, and had on-treatment endometrial ultrasound examination performed between 22 and 26 months from treatment start. Analysis was based on actual treatment received.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
ExemestanePercentage of Participants With Endometrial Thickness Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 5 Millimeter (mm): Endometrial Sub-study24 months (n=61, 52)36.1 percentage of participants
ExemestanePercentage of Participants With Endometrial Thickness Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 5 Millimeter (mm): Endometrial Sub-study6 months post-treatment (n=16, 17)31.3 percentage of participants
ExemestanePercentage of Participants With Endometrial Thickness Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 5 Millimeter (mm): Endometrial Sub-study12 months (n=60, 52)30.0 percentage of participants
ExemestanePercentage of Participants With Endometrial Thickness Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 5 Millimeter (mm): Endometrial Sub-study12 months post-treatment (n=50, 37)30.0 percentage of participants
ExemestanePercentage of Participants With Endometrial Thickness Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 5 Millimeter (mm): Endometrial Sub-study36 months (n=32, 17)21.9 percentage of participants
ExemestanePercentage of Participants With Endometrial Thickness Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 5 Millimeter (mm): Endometrial Sub-study24 months post-treatment (n=41, 31)34.1 percentage of participants
ExemestanePercentage of Participants With Endometrial Thickness Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 5 Millimeter (mm): Endometrial Sub-study6 months (n=58, 49)46.6 percentage of participants
TamoxifenPercentage of Participants With Endometrial Thickness Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 5 Millimeter (mm): Endometrial Sub-study24 months post-treatment (n=41, 31)29.0 percentage of participants
TamoxifenPercentage of Participants With Endometrial Thickness Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 5 Millimeter (mm): Endometrial Sub-study6 months (n=58, 49)69.4 percentage of participants
TamoxifenPercentage of Participants With Endometrial Thickness Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 5 Millimeter (mm): Endometrial Sub-study12 months (n=60, 52)55.8 percentage of participants
TamoxifenPercentage of Participants With Endometrial Thickness Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 5 Millimeter (mm): Endometrial Sub-study24 months (n=61, 52)63.5 percentage of participants
TamoxifenPercentage of Participants With Endometrial Thickness Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 5 Millimeter (mm): Endometrial Sub-study36 months (n=32, 17)76.5 percentage of participants
TamoxifenPercentage of Participants With Endometrial Thickness Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 5 Millimeter (mm): Endometrial Sub-study6 months post-treatment (n=16, 17)70.6 percentage of participants
TamoxifenPercentage of Participants With Endometrial Thickness Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 5 Millimeter (mm): Endometrial Sub-study12 months post-treatment (n=50, 37)32.4 percentage of participants
Comparison: 6 months: p-value for percentage of participants with an endometrial thickness of \>=5 mm was analyzed using Chi-squared test.p-value: 0.0174Chi-squared
Comparison: 12 months: p-value for percentage of participants with an endometrial thickness of \>=5 mm was analyzed using Chi-squared test.p-value: 0.0059Chi-squared
Comparison: 24 months: p-value for percentage of participants with an endometrial thickness of \>=5 mm was analyzed using Chi-squared test.p-value: 0.0037Chi-squared
Comparison: 12 months post-treatment: p-value for percentage of participants with an endometrial thickness of \>=5 mm was analyzed using Chi-squared test.p-value: 0.8084Chi-squared
Comparison: 24 months post-treatment: p-value for percentage of participants with an endometrial thickness of \>=5 mm was analyzed using Chi-squared test.p-value: 0.6449Chi-squared
Secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in Femoral Neck and Femoral Wards Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-study

BMD measurements for femoral neck (FN) and femoral wards (FW) were performed using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) for participants who entered the bone-metabolism sub-study. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.

Time frame: Baseline, 6, 12, 24 months after randomization (on-treatment), 24 months post-treatment

Population: Evaluable population for bone metabolism substudy: all treated participants who did not violate any exclusion criteria, received treatment for at least 9 months and had baseline and at least on-treatment Month 12 and/or Month 24 assessment available for parameter to be analyzed. Participants were analyzed according to treatment actually received.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
ExemestanePercent Change From Baseline in Femoral Neck and Femoral Wards Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 6 months on-treatment: FN (n=82,94)-1.91 percent changeStandard Deviation 3.17
ExemestanePercent Change From Baseline in Femoral Neck and Femoral Wards Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 6 months on-treatment: FW (n=82,94)-2.02 percent changeStandard Deviation 4.57
ExemestanePercent Change From Baseline in Femoral Neck and Femoral Wards Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 12 months on-treatment: FN (n=82,95)-2.56 percent changeStandard Deviation 3.26
ExemestanePercent Change From Baseline in Femoral Neck and Femoral Wards Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 12 months on-treatment: FW (n=81,95)-3.51 percent changeStandard Deviation 4.88
ExemestanePercent Change From Baseline in Femoral Neck and Femoral Wards Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months on-treatment: FN (n=78,89)-4.00 percent changeStandard Deviation 3.61
ExemestanePercent Change From Baseline in Femoral Neck and Femoral Wards Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months on-treatment: FW (n=72,87)-4.75 percent changeStandard Deviation 6.29
ExemestanePercent Change From Baseline in Femoral Neck and Femoral Wards Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months post-treatment: FN (n=61,69)-4.10 percent changeStandard Deviation 5.57
ExemestanePercent Change From Baseline in Femoral Neck and Femoral Wards Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months post-treatment: FW (n=60,68)-6.07 percent changeStandard Deviation 7.63
TamoxifenPercent Change From Baseline in Femoral Neck and Femoral Wards Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months post-treatment: FN (n=61,69)-4.95 percent changeStandard Deviation 6.46
TamoxifenPercent Change From Baseline in Femoral Neck and Femoral Wards Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 6 months on-treatment: FN (n=82,94)-0.30 percent changeStandard Deviation 3.75
TamoxifenPercent Change From Baseline in Femoral Neck and Femoral Wards Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months on-treatment: FN (n=78,89)-0.78 percent changeStandard Deviation 4.85
TamoxifenPercent Change From Baseline in Femoral Neck and Femoral Wards Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 6 months on-treatment: FW (n=82,94)0.32 percent changeStandard Deviation 5.53
TamoxifenPercent Change From Baseline in Femoral Neck and Femoral Wards Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months on-treatment: FW (n=72,87)-1.86 percent changeStandard Deviation 7.32
TamoxifenPercent Change From Baseline in Femoral Neck and Femoral Wards Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 12 months on-treatment: FN (n=82,95)-0.32 percent changeStandard Deviation 3.6
TamoxifenPercent Change From Baseline in Femoral Neck and Femoral Wards Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months post-treatment: FW (n=60,68)-8.60 percent changeStandard Deviation 8.15
TamoxifenPercent Change From Baseline in Femoral Neck and Femoral Wards Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 12 months on-treatment: FW (n=81,95)-1.30 percent changeStandard Deviation 5.84
Secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12, 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-study

BMD measurements for Lumbar spine (LS) and Proximal Femur (Total Hip \[TH\]) were performed using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) for participants who entered the bone-metabolism sub-study. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.

Time frame: Baseline, 6, 12, 24 months after randomization (on-treatment), 24 months post-treatment

Population: Evaluable population for bone metabolism substudy: all treated participants who did not violate any exclusion criteria, received treatment for at least 9 months and had baseline and at least on-treatment Month 12 and/or Month 24 assessment available for parameter to be analyzed. Participants were analyzed according to treatment actually received.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
ExemestanePercent Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12, 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 6 months on-treatment: LS (n=84,96)-2.64 percent changeStandard Deviation 2.89
ExemestanePercent Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12, 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 6 months on-treatment: TH (n=82,96)-1.31 percent changeStandard Deviation 2.2
ExemestanePercent Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12, 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 12 months on-treatment: LS (n=82,96)-2.98 percent changeStandard Deviation 3.3
ExemestanePercent Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12, 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 12 months on-treatment: TH (n=82,95)-2.17 percent changeStandard Deviation 2.34
ExemestanePercent Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12, 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months on-treatment: LS (n=82,92)-3.69 percent changeStandard Deviation 4.12
ExemestanePercent Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12, 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months on-treatment: TH (n=79,93)-2.81 percent changeStandard Deviation 2.61
ExemestanePercent Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12, 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months post-treatment: LS (n=74,81)-2.17 percent changeStandard Deviation 5.09
ExemestanePercent Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12, 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months post-treatment: TH (n=73,84)-3.06 percent changeStandard Deviation 4.35
TamoxifenPercent Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12, 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months post-treatment: TH (n=73,84)-4.15 percent changeStandard Deviation 4.01
TamoxifenPercent Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12, 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 6 months on-treatment: LS (n=84,96)-0.22 percent changeStandard Deviation 2.55
TamoxifenPercent Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12, 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months on-treatment: LS (n=82,92)-0.47 percent changeStandard Deviation 3.38
TamoxifenPercent Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12, 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 6 months on-treatment: TH (n=82,96)-0.13 percent changeStandard Deviation 1.9
TamoxifenPercent Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12, 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months post-treatment: LS (n=74,81)-3.44 percent changeStandard Deviation 4.28
TamoxifenPercent Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12, 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 12 months on-treatment: LS (n=82,96)-0.19 percent changeStandard Deviation 3.53
TamoxifenPercent Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12, 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 24 months on-treatment: TH (n=79,93)-0.91 percent changeStandard Deviation 2.66
TamoxifenPercent Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12, 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-studyChange at 12 months on-treatment: TH (n=82,95)-0.39 percent changeStandard Deviation 2.17
Comparison: 6 months on-treatment (lumbar spine): p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [1.63, 3.23]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 6 months on-treatment (total hip): p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: 0.000295% CI: [0.57, 1.79]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 12 months on-treatment (lumbar spine): p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [1.77, 3.81]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 12 months on-treatment (total hip): p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [1.12, 2.46]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 24 months on-treatment (lumbar spine): p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [2.1, 4.35]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: 24 months on-treatment (total hip): p-value was estimated using 2-sided t-test.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [1.1, 2.69]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Uterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-study

Uterine volume (UV) and ovarian volume was estimated using ultrasonography. Uterine volume = (longitudinal diameter \* transverse diameter \* anteroposterior diameter of uterus)/(2\*1000). Ovary volume = \[(longitudinal diameter \* transverse diameter \* anteroposterior diameter of ovary) \* 3.14\]/(6\*1000). Overall ovary volume (OV) is calculated as the sum of the right and left ovary volume. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.

Time frame: 6, 12, 24, 36 months after randomization, 6, 12, 24 months post-treatment

Population: Evaluable population for endometrial sub-study included all treated participants who did not violate any exclusion criteria, received treatment for at least 2 years, and had on-treatment endometrial ultrasound examination performed between 22 and 26 months from treatment start. Analysis was based on actual treatment received.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
ExemestaneUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyUV: 6 months (n=57, 47)25.2 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
ExemestaneUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyOV: 6 months (n=8, 6)1.8 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
ExemestaneUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyUV: 12 months (n=56, 49)23.3 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
ExemestaneUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyOV: 12 months (n=6, 5)2.3 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
ExemestaneUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyUV: 24 months (n=54, 51)26.3 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
ExemestaneUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyOV: 24 months (n=5, 6)2.0 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
ExemestaneUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyUV: 36 months (n=30, 18)21.5 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
ExemestaneUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyOV: 36 months (n=3, 2)1.5 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
ExemestaneUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyUV: 6 months post-treatment (n=14, 16)25.6 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
ExemestaneUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyOV: 6 months post-treatment (n=2, 4)10.1 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
ExemestaneUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyUV: 12 months post-treatment (n=42, 35)21.7 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
ExemestaneUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyOV: 12 months post-treatment (n=5, 4)2.8 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
ExemestaneUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyUV: 24 months post-treatment (n=38, 28)22.6 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
ExemestaneUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyOV: 24 months post-treatment (n=4, 4)1.6 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
TamoxifenUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyUV: 12 months post-treatment (n=42, 35)30.0 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
TamoxifenUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyUV: 6 months (n=57, 47)36.5 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
TamoxifenUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyOV: 36 months (n=3, 2)2.5 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
TamoxifenUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyOV: 6 months (n=8, 6)1.2 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
TamoxifenUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyUV: 24 months post-treatment (n=38, 28)27.8 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
TamoxifenUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyUV: 12 months (n=56, 49)39.2 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
TamoxifenUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyUV: 6 months post-treatment (n=14, 16)31.6 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
TamoxifenUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyOV: 12 months (n=6, 5)2.2 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
TamoxifenUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyOV: 12 months post-treatment (n=5, 4)2.9 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
TamoxifenUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyUV: 24 months (n=54, 51)40.3 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
TamoxifenUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyOV: 6 months post-treatment (n=2, 4)4.7 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
TamoxifenUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyOV: 24 months (n=5, 6)2.7 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
TamoxifenUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyOV: 24 months post-treatment (n=4, 4)3.4 cubic centimeter (cm^3)
TamoxifenUterine and Overall Ovary Volume: Endometrial Sub-studyUV: 36 months (n=30, 18)36.8 cubic centimeter (cm^3)

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026