Skip to content

An Observational Study of Tarceva (Erlotinib) in Elderly Patients With Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Erlotinib (Tarceva®) in Routine Clinical Practice in Patients With Advanced Non Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) After Failure of at Least One Prior Chemotherapy Regimen With Focus on the Elderly Patient.

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01535729
Enrollment
465
Registered
2012-02-20
Start date
2011-05-31
Completion date
2014-06-30
Last updated
2015-10-29

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

Conditions

Non-Squamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Brief summary

This prospective observational study will evaluate the efficacy and safety of Tarceva (erlotinib) in elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after failure of at least one prior chemotherapy regimen. Data of patients treated with Tarceva in routine clinical practice will be collected for 1 year.

Interventions

None listed

Sponsors

Hoffmann-La Roche
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Observational model
COHORT
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
65 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Adult patients, \> 65 years of age * Locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (Stage IIIb or IV) * Failure of at least one prior standard platinum-based chemotherapy

Exclusion criteria

* Age \< 65 years

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Percentage of Participants Who Were Alive 1 Year After Start of TreatmentYear 1Overall survival was defined as the time from the date of first medication to the date of death from any cause. If death was not observed during the study, survival time was censored at the last day of observation (latest at the end of study after one year). Overall percentage of participants who were alive 1 year after study treatment and those based on the factor of age (65-69, 70-74, 75-79, ≥ 80 years) were reported.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Median Overall Survival: AgeFrom Baseline then every 3 months from Month 3 until death (Maximum follow-up to Month 40)Overall Survival was defined as the time from the date of first medication to the date of death from any cause. If death was not observed during the study, survival time was censored at the last day of observation (latest at the end of study after one year). Overall Survival was analyzed by means of Kaplan-Meier Methods. Median survival based on the factor of age (65-69, 70-74, 75-79, ≥80 years) were reported.
Percentage of Participants With FatigueMonths 3, 6, 9, 12
Percentage of Participants With RashMonths 3, 6, 9, 12
Percentage of Participants With DiarrheaMonths 3, 6, 9, 12
Percentage of Participants With Rash Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonths 3, 6, 9, 12Severity was categorized as Grades 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. Grade 1= mild; asymptomatic or mild symptoms; clinical or diagnostic observations only; intervention not indicated. Grade 2= moderate; minimal, local or non-invasive intervention indicated; limiting age-appropriate instrumental activities of daily living (ADL). Grade 3= severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care ADL. Grade 4= life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention indicated. Grade 5= death related to adverse event. Only participants that were included in any of the specified categories were reported.
Percentage of Participants With Diarrhea Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonths 3, 6, 9, 12Severity was categorized as Grades 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. Grade 1= mild; asymptomatic or mild symptoms; clinical or diagnostic observations only; intervention not indicated. Grade 2= moderate; minimal, local or non-invasive intervention indicated; limiting age-appropriate instrumental activities of daily living (ADL). Grade 3= severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care ADL. Grade 4= life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention indicated. Grade 5= death related to adverse event. Only participants that were included in any of the specified categories were reported.
Percentage of Participants With Fatigue Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonths 3, 6, 9, 12Severity was categorized as Grades 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. Grade 1= mild; asymptomatic or mild symptoms; clinical or diagnostic observations only; intervention not indicated. Grade 2= moderate; minimal, local or non-invasive intervention indicated; limiting age-appropriate instrumental activities of daily living (ADL). Grade 3= severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care ADL. Grade 4= life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention indicated. Grade 5= death related to adverse event. Only participants that were included in any of the specified categories were reported.
Percentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonths 3, 6, 9, 12Dose modification included increase or decreased in the dose of the drug and interrupted dose. Reasons for dose modification included progression, participants' wish, intolerance and others. Only participants that were included in any of the specified categories were reported.
Percentage of Participants With Dose Withdrawals by ReasonMonths 3, 6, 9, 12Reasons for dose withdrawals included progression, participants' wish, intolerance, others and not known. Only participants that were included in any of the specified categories were reported.
Percentage of Participants With Cough by SeverityBaseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12Severity of cough was categorized as mild, moderate, severe and unknown. Only participants that were included in any of the specified categories in the course of time were reported. Participants with no cough were not included.
Percentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR) and Stable Disease (SD)Months 3, 6, 9, 12Response rate was observed during the treatment period according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). It consisted of CR, PR, SD and progressive disease (PD). Participants with CR, PR and SD were reported. CR: disappearance of all target lesions (TLs) and non-TLs, with any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) having a reduction in short axis to less than 10 millimeters (mm). PR: at least a 30 percent (%) decrease in the sum of diameters of TLs, taking as reference the baseline (BL) sum diameters. SD was defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR, nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameters while on study. PD: at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of TLs, taking as a reference the smallest sum on study (this included the BL sum if that was the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum also demonstrated an absolute increase of at least 5 mm.
Percentage of Participants With Dyspnea by SeverityBaseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12Severity of dyspnea was categorized as mild, moderate, severe, life-threatening and unknown. Only participants that were included in any of the specified categories in the course of time were reported. Participants with no dyspnea were not included.
Percentage of Participants With Remission of CR and PRMonths 3, 6, 9, 12Remission was defined as participants with CR or PR. CR: disappearance of all TLs and non-TLs, with any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) having a reduction in short axis to less than 10 mm. PR: at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of TLs, taking as reference the BL sum diameters.
Median Progression Free Survival: OverallFrom Baseline then every 3 months from Month 3 until disease progression (Maximum follow-up to Month 40)Progression-free survival time was defined as the time from the date of first medication to the date of disease progression or death from any cause. If neither progression no death was observed during the study, PFS time was censored at the last day of observation. PD was at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of TLs, taking as a reference the smallest sum on study (this included the BL sum if that was the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also have demonstrated an absolute increase of at least 5 mm.
Median Progression Free Survival: AgeFrom Baseline then every 3 months from Month 3 until disease progression (Maximum follow-up to Month 40)Progression-free survival time was defined as the time from the date of first medication to the date of disease progression or death from any cause. If neither progression nor death was observed during the study, PFS time was censored at the last day of observation. PD was at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of TLs, taking as a reference the smallest sum on study (this included the BL sum if that was the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also have demonstrated an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. Median progression-free survival based on the factor of age (65-69, 70-74, 75-79, ≥80 years) were reported.
Median Progression Free Survival: GenderFrom Baseline then every 3 months from Month 3 until disease progression (Maximum follow-up to Month 40)Progression-free survival time was defined as the time from the date of first medication to the date of disease progression or death from any cause. If neither progression nor death was observed during the study, PFS time was censored at the last day of observation. PD was at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of TLs, taking as a reference the smallest sum on study (this included the BL sum if that was the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also have demonstrated an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. Median progression-free survival based on the factor of gender (male and female) were reported.
Median Progression Free Survival: Smoking StatusFrom Baseline then every 3 months from Month 3 until disease progression (Maximum follow-up to Month 40)Progression-free survival time was defined as the time from the date of first medication to the date of disease progression or death from any cause. If neither progression nor death was observed during the study, PFS time was censored at the last day of observation. PD was at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of TLs, taking as a reference the smallest sum on study (this included the BL sum if that was the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also have demonstrated an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. Median progression-free survival based on the factor of smoking status (smoker, non-smoker and ex-smoker) were reported.
Median Progression Free Survival: Best Response to Prior ChemotherapyFrom Baseline then every 3 months from Month 3 until disease progression (Maximum follow-up to Month 40)Progression-free survival time was defined as the time from the date of first medication to the date of disease progression or death from any cause. If neither progression nor death was observed during the study, PFS time was censored at the last day of observation. PD was at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of TLs, taking as a reference the smallest sum on study (this included the BL sum if that was the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also have demonstrated an absolute increase of at least 5 mm.
Median Overall Survival: OverallFrom Baseline then every 3 months from Month 3 until death (Maximum follow-up to Month 40)Overall Survival was defined as the time from the date of first medication to the date of death from any cause. If death was not observed during the study, survival time was censored at the last day of observation (latest at the end of study after one year). Overall Survival was analyzed by means of Kaplan-Meier Methods.
Median Overall Survival: GenderFrom Baseline then every 3 months from Month 3 until death (Maximum follow-up to Month 40)Overall Survival was defined as the time from the date of first medication to the date of death from any cause. If death was not observed during the study, survival time was censored at the last day of observation (latest at the end of study after one year). Overall Survival was analyzed by means of Kaplan-Meier Methods. Median survival based on the factor of gender (male and female) were reported.
Median Overall Survival: Smoking StatusFrom Baseline then every 3 months from Month 3 until death (Maximum follow-up to Month 40)Overall Survival was defined as the time from the date of first medication to the date of death from any cause. If death was not observed during the study, survival time was censored at the last day of observation (latest at the end of study after one year). Overall Survival was analyzed by means of Kaplan-Meier Methods. Median survival based on the factor of smoking status (smoker, non-smoker and ex-smoker) were reported.
Median Overall Survival: Best Response to Prior ChemotherapyFrom Baseline then every 3 months from Month 3 until death (Maximum follow-up to Month 40)Overall Survival was defined as the time from the date of first medication to the date of death from any cause. If death was not observed during the study, survival time was censored at the last day of observation (latest at the end of study after one year). Overall Survival was analyzed by means of Kaplan-Meier Methods.
Time to Start of Erlotinib Therapy After End of First Line TherapyBaseline

Countries

Germany

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
NSCLC Elderly Participants
Elderly Participants (≥ 65 years) with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC, on erlotinib (Tarceva®) prescribed in accordance with the terms of the marketing authorization, were observed for maximum of 12 months.
385
Total385

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000
Overall StudyDeath52
Overall StudyDid not sign informed consent1
Overall StudyDiscontinued treatment25
Overall StudyDisease progression230
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up8
Overall StudyNo participant record available5
Overall StudyNo previous chemotherapy33
Overall StudyNot treated9
Overall StudyNSCLC grade IV histology not confirmed20
Overall StudyOther19
Overall StudyProtocol Violation11
Overall StudyScreening failure1
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject2

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicNSCLC Elderly Participants
Age, Continuous72.66 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.23
Sex: Female, Male
Female
127 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
258 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
135 / 385
serious
Total, serious adverse events
79 / 385

Outcome results

Primary

Percentage of Participants Who Were Alive 1 Year After Start of Treatment

Overall survival was defined as the time from the date of first medication to the date of death from any cause. If death was not observed during the study, survival time was censored at the last day of observation (latest at the end of study after one year). Overall percentage of participants who were alive 1 year after study treatment and those based on the factor of age (65-69, 70-74, 75-79, ≥ 80 years) were reported.

Time frame: Year 1

Population: SAF

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants Who Were Alive 1 Year After Start of TreatmentOverall30.6 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants Who Were Alive 1 Year After Start of Treatment65-69 years26.6 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants Who Were Alive 1 Year After Start of Treatment70-74 years29.8 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants Who Were Alive 1 Year After Start of Treatment75-79 years37.2 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants Who Were Alive 1 Year After Start of Treatment≥ 80 years25.6 percentage of participants
Secondary

Median Overall Survival: Age

Overall Survival was defined as the time from the date of first medication to the date of death from any cause. If death was not observed during the study, survival time was censored at the last day of observation (latest at the end of study after one year). Overall Survival was analyzed by means of Kaplan-Meier Methods. Median survival based on the factor of age (65-69, 70-74, 75-79, ≥80 years) were reported.

Time frame: From Baseline then every 3 months from Month 3 until death (Maximum follow-up to Month 40)

Population: SAF

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsMedian Overall Survival: Age65-69 years7.039 months
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsMedian Overall Survival: Age70-74 years6.612 months
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsMedian Overall Survival: Age75-79 years7.928 months
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsMedian Overall Survival: Age≥ 80 years6.020 months
Comparison: Comparison between 70-74 years and 65-69 years was reported. Parameter estimates, standard errors, Wald Chi-Squares, p-values, hazard ratios and confidence limits were based on a univariate Cox regression with factor age.p-value: 0.75695% CI: [0.684, 1.318]Wald Chi-Squares
Comparison: Comparison between 75-79 years and 65-69 years was reported. Parameter estimates, standard errors, Wald Chi-Squares, p-values, hazard ratios and confidence limits were based on a univariate Cox regression with factor age.p-value: 0.1195% CI: [0.518, 1.07]Wald Chi-Squares
Comparison: Comparison between ≥ 80 years and 65-69 years was reported. Parameter estimates, standard errors, Wald Chi-Squares, p-values, hazard ratios and confidence limits were based on a univariate Cox regression with factor age.p-value: 0.82995% CI: [0.656, 1.692]Wald Chi-Squares
Secondary

Median Overall Survival: Best Response to Prior Chemotherapy

Overall Survival was defined as the time from the date of first medication to the date of death from any cause. If death was not observed during the study, survival time was censored at the last day of observation (latest at the end of study after one year). Overall Survival was analyzed by means of Kaplan-Meier Methods.

Time frame: From Baseline then every 3 months from Month 3 until death (Maximum follow-up to Month 40)

Population: Data for best response to prior chemotherapy could not be collected, as it was not recorded in the CRF, hence, the analysis could not be performed.

Secondary

Median Overall Survival: Gender

Overall Survival was defined as the time from the date of first medication to the date of death from any cause. If death was not observed during the study, survival time was censored at the last day of observation (latest at the end of study after one year). Overall Survival was analyzed by means of Kaplan-Meier Methods. Median survival based on the factor of gender (male and female) were reported.

Time frame: From Baseline then every 3 months from Month 3 until death (Maximum follow-up to Month 40)

Population: SAF

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsMedian Overall Survival: GenderMale6.283 months
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsMedian Overall Survival: GenderFemale8.125 months
Comparison: Comparison between female and male was reported. Parameter estimates, standard errors, Wald Chi-Squares, p-values, hazard ratios and confidence limits were based on a univariate Cox regression with factor gender.p-value: 0.02795% CI: [0.535, 0.962]Wald Chi-Squares
Secondary

Median Overall Survival: Overall

Overall Survival was defined as the time from the date of first medication to the date of death from any cause. If death was not observed during the study, survival time was censored at the last day of observation (latest at the end of study after one year). Overall Survival was analyzed by means of Kaplan-Meier Methods.

Time frame: From Baseline then every 3 months from Month 3 until death (Maximum follow-up to Month 40)

Population: SAF

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsMedian Overall Survival: Overall7.1 months
Secondary

Median Overall Survival: Smoking Status

Overall Survival was defined as the time from the date of first medication to the date of death from any cause. If death was not observed during the study, survival time was censored at the last day of observation (latest at the end of study after one year). Overall Survival was analyzed by means of Kaplan-Meier Methods. Median survival based on the factor of smoking status (smoker, non-smoker and ex-smoker) were reported.

Time frame: From Baseline then every 3 months from Month 3 until death (Maximum follow-up to Month 40)

Population: SAF

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsMedian Overall Survival: Smoking StatusSmoker6.612 months
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsMedian Overall Survival: Smoking StatusNon-smoker11.184 months
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsMedian Overall Survival: Smoking StatusEx-smoker5.855 months
Comparison: Comparison between ex-smoker and non-smoker was reported. Parameter estimates, standard errors, Wald Chi-Squares, p-values, hazard ratios and confidence limits were based on a univariate Cox regression with factor smoking.p-value: 095% CI: [1.362, 2.749]Wald Chi-Squares
Comparison: Comparison between smoker and non-smoker was reported. Parameter estimates, standard errors, Wald Chi-Squares, p-values, hazard ratios and confidence limits were based on a univariate Cox regression with factor smoking.p-value: 0.00395% CI: [1.239, 2.859]Wald Chi-Squares
Secondary

Median Progression Free Survival: Age

Progression-free survival time was defined as the time from the date of first medication to the date of disease progression or death from any cause. If neither progression nor death was observed during the study, PFS time was censored at the last day of observation. PD was at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of TLs, taking as a reference the smallest sum on study (this included the BL sum if that was the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also have demonstrated an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. Median progression-free survival based on the factor of age (65-69, 70-74, 75-79, ≥80 years) were reported.

Time frame: From Baseline then every 3 months from Month 3 until disease progression (Maximum follow-up to Month 40)

Population: SAF

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsMedian Progression Free Survival: Age65-69 years3.257 months
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsMedian Progression Free Survival: Age70-74 years3.388 months
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsMedian Progression Free Survival: Age75-79 years5.033 months
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsMedian Progression Free Survival: Age≥ 80 years2.928 months
Comparison: Comparison between 70-74 years and 65-69 years was reported. Parameter estimates, standard errors, Wald Chi-Squares, p-values, hazard ratios and confidence limits were based on a univariate Cox regression with factor age.p-value: 0.89595% CI: [0.741, 1.299]Wald Chi-Squares
Comparison: Comparison between 75-79 years and 65-69 years was reported. Parameter estimates, standard errors, Wald Chi-Squares, p-values, hazard ratios and confidence limits were based on a univariate Cox regression with factor age.p-value: 0.02295% CI: [0.501, 0.947]Wald Chi-Squares
Comparison: Comparison between ≥ 80 years and 65-69 years was reported. Parameter estimates, standard errors, Wald Chi-Squares, p-values, hazard ratios and confidence limits were based on a univariate Cox regression with factor age.p-value: 0.47995% CI: [0.767, 1.759]Wald Chi-Squares
Secondary

Median Progression Free Survival: Best Response to Prior Chemotherapy

Progression-free survival time was defined as the time from the date of first medication to the date of disease progression or death from any cause. If neither progression nor death was observed during the study, PFS time was censored at the last day of observation. PD was at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of TLs, taking as a reference the smallest sum on study (this included the BL sum if that was the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also have demonstrated an absolute increase of at least 5 mm.

Time frame: From Baseline then every 3 months from Month 3 until disease progression (Maximum follow-up to Month 40)

Population: Data for best response to prior chemotherapy could not be collected, as it was not recorded in the Case Report Form (CRF), hence, the analysis could not be performed.

Secondary

Median Progression Free Survival: Gender

Progression-free survival time was defined as the time from the date of first medication to the date of disease progression or death from any cause. If neither progression nor death was observed during the study, PFS time was censored at the last day of observation. PD was at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of TLs, taking as a reference the smallest sum on study (this included the BL sum if that was the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also have demonstrated an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. Median progression-free survival based on the factor of gender (male and female) were reported.

Time frame: From Baseline then every 3 months from Month 3 until disease progression (Maximum follow-up to Month 40)

Population: SAF

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsMedian Progression Free Survival: GenderMale3.355 months
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsMedian Progression Free Survival: GenderFemale4.046 months
Comparison: Comparison between female and male was reported. Parameter estimates, standard errors, Wald Chi-Squares, p-values, hazard ratios and confidence limits were based on a univariate Cox regression with factor gender.p-value: 0.01595% CI: [0.569, 0.941]Wald Chi-Squares
Secondary

Median Progression Free Survival: Overall

Progression-free survival time was defined as the time from the date of first medication to the date of disease progression or death from any cause. If neither progression no death was observed during the study, PFS time was censored at the last day of observation. PD was at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of TLs, taking as a reference the smallest sum on study (this included the BL sum if that was the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also have demonstrated an absolute increase of at least 5 mm.

Time frame: From Baseline then every 3 months from Month 3 until disease progression (Maximum follow-up to Month 40)

Population: SAF

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsMedian Progression Free Survival: Overall3.5 months
Secondary

Median Progression Free Survival: Smoking Status

Progression-free survival time was defined as the time from the date of first medication to the date of disease progression or death from any cause. If neither progression nor death was observed during the study, PFS time was censored at the last day of observation. PD was at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of TLs, taking as a reference the smallest sum on study (this included the BL sum if that was the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also have demonstrated an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. Median progression-free survival based on the factor of smoking status (smoker, non-smoker and ex-smoker) were reported.

Time frame: From Baseline then every 3 months from Month 3 until disease progression (Maximum follow-up to Month 40)

Population: SAF

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsMedian Progression Free Survival: Smoking StatusSmoker3.454 months
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsMedian Progression Free Survival: Smoking StatusNon-smoker5.526 months
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsMedian Progression Free Survival: Smoking StatusEx-smoker2.993 months
Comparison: Comparison between ex-smoker and non-smoker was reported. Parameter estimates, standard errors, Wald Chi-Squares, p-values, hazard ratios and confidence limits were based on a univariate Cox regression with factor smoking.p-value: 095% CI: [1.402, 2.582]Wald Chi-Squares
Comparison: Comparison between smoker and non-smoker was reported. Parameter estimates, standard errors, Wald Chi-Squares, p-values, hazard ratios and confidence limits were based on a univariate Cox regression with factor smoking.p-value: 0.00295% CI: [1.248, 2.557]Wald Chi-Squares
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR) and Stable Disease (SD)

Response rate was observed during the treatment period according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). It consisted of CR, PR, SD and progressive disease (PD). Participants with CR, PR and SD were reported. CR: disappearance of all target lesions (TLs) and non-TLs, with any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) having a reduction in short axis to less than 10 millimeters (mm). PR: at least a 30 percent (%) decrease in the sum of diameters of TLs, taking as reference the baseline (BL) sum diameters. SD was defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR, nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameters while on study. PD: at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of TLs, taking as a reference the smallest sum on study (this included the BL sum if that was the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum also demonstrated an absolute increase of at least 5 mm.

Time frame: Months 3, 6, 9, 12

Population: SAF

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR) and Stable Disease (SD)Month 3: CR0.8 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR) and Stable Disease (SD)Month 3: PR4.9 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR) and Stable Disease (SD)Month 3: SD25.2 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR) and Stable Disease (SD)Month 6: CR0.5 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR) and Stable Disease (SD)Month 6: PR3.1 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR) and Stable Disease (SD)Month 6: SD14.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR) and Stable Disease (SD)Month 9: CR0.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR) and Stable Disease (SD)Month 9: PR1.6 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR) and Stable Disease (SD)Month 9: PD10.6 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR) and Stable Disease (SD)Month 12: CR0.5 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR) and Stable Disease (SD)Month 12: PR1.6 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR) and Stable Disease (SD)Month 12: SD8.1 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Cough by Severity

Severity of cough was categorized as mild, moderate, severe and unknown. Only participants that were included in any of the specified categories in the course of time were reported. Participants with no cough were not included.

Time frame: Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12

Population: SAF

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Cough by SeverityBaseline: Mild13.8 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Cough by SeverityBaseline: Moderate24.9 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Cough by SeverityBaseline: Severe2.9 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Cough by SeverityBaseline: Unknown1.6 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Cough by SeverityMonth 3: Mild15.1 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Cough by SeverityMonth 3: Moderate14.5 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Cough by SeverityMonth 3: Severe0.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Cough by SeverityMonth 3: Unknown0.5 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Cough by SeverityMonth 6: Mild4.4 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Cough by SeverityMonth 6: Moderate3.6 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Cough by SeverityMonth 6: Severe0.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Cough by SeverityMonth 6: Unknown0.5 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Cough by SeverityMonth 9: Mild4.7 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Cough by SeverityMonth 9: Moderate0.5 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Cough by SeverityMonth 9: Unknown0.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Cough by SeverityMonth 12: Mild1.8 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Cough by SeverityMonth 12: Moderate1.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Cough by SeverityMonth 12: Severe0.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Cough by SeverityMonth 12: Unknown0.3 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Diarrhea

Time frame: Months 3, 6, 9, 12

Population: SAF

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With DiarrheaMonth 389.6 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With DiarrheaMonth 639.0 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With DiarrheaMonth 919.5 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With DiarrheaMonth 1213.8 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Diarrhea Based on Severity During the Course of Time

Severity was categorized as Grades 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. Grade 1= mild; asymptomatic or mild symptoms; clinical or diagnostic observations only; intervention not indicated. Grade 2= moderate; minimal, local or non-invasive intervention indicated; limiting age-appropriate instrumental activities of daily living (ADL). Grade 3= severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care ADL. Grade 4= life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention indicated. Grade 5= death related to adverse event. Only participants that were included in any of the specified categories were reported.

Time frame: Months 3, 6, 9, 12

Population: SAF

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Diarrhea Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 6: Grade 12.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Diarrhea Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 6: Grade 20.8 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Diarrhea Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 6: Grade 30.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Diarrhea Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 9: Grade 11.0 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Diarrhea Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 9: Grade 20.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Diarrhea Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 9: Grade 30.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Diarrhea Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 12: Grade 10.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Diarrhea Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 3: Grade 111.9 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Diarrhea Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 3: Grade 27.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Diarrhea Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 3: Grade 30.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Diarrhea Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 3: Grade 40.3 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by Reason

Dose modification included increase or decreased in the dose of the drug and interrupted dose. Reasons for dose modification included progression, participants' wish, intolerance and others. Only participants that were included in any of the specified categories were reported.

Time frame: Months 3, 6, 9, 12

Population: SAF

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonth 3: Increased (other)1.0 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonth 6: Increased (other)0.8 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonth 9: Increased (other)0.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonth 12: Increased (participants' wish)0.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonth 12: Increased (other)0.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonth 3: Decreased (participants' wish)0.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonth 3: Decreased (intolerance)7.0 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonth 3: Decreased (other)0.8 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonth 6: Decreased (participants' wish)0.8 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonth 6: Decreased (intolerance)1.6 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonth 6: Decreased (other)0.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonth 9: Decreased (intolerance)0.8 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonth 9: Decreased (other)0.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonth 12: Decreased (intolerance)0.5 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonth 3: Interruption (progression)0.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonth 3: Interruption (intolerance)1.8 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonth 3: Interruption (other)2.9 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonth 6: Interruption (progression)1.0 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonth 6: Interruption (other)1.6 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonth 9: Interruption (progression)0.5 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonth 9: Interruption (other)0.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Modifications by ReasonMonth 12: Interruption (other)0.5 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Dose Withdrawals by Reason

Reasons for dose withdrawals included progression, participants' wish, intolerance, others and not known. Only participants that were included in any of the specified categories were reported.

Time frame: Months 3, 6, 9, 12

Population: SAF

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Withdrawals by ReasonMonth 9: Other1.0 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Withdrawals by ReasonMonth 3: Progression34.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Withdrawals by ReasonMonth 3: Participants' wish2.9 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Withdrawals by ReasonMonth 3: Intolerance3.4 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Withdrawals by ReasonMonth 3: Other8.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Withdrawals by ReasonMonth 3: Not known1.0 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Withdrawals by ReasonMonth 6: Progression12.7 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Withdrawals by ReasonMonth 6: Participants' wish0.5 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Withdrawals by ReasonMonth 6: Intolerance0.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Withdrawals by ReasonMonth 6: Other2.9 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Withdrawals by ReasonMonth 6: Not known0.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Withdrawals by ReasonMonth 9: Progression4.7 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Withdrawals by ReasonMonth 9: Participants' wish0.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Withdrawals by ReasonMonth 9: Intolerance0.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dose Withdrawals by ReasonMonth 12: Progression2.9 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Dyspnea by Severity

Severity of dyspnea was categorized as mild, moderate, severe, life-threatening and unknown. Only participants that were included in any of the specified categories in the course of time were reported. Participants with no dyspnea were not included.

Time frame: Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12

Population: SAF

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dyspnea by SeverityBaseline: Mild16.1 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dyspnea by SeverityBaseline: Moderate20.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dyspnea by SeverityBaseline: Severe8.1 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dyspnea by SeverityBaseline: Unknown1.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dyspnea by SeverityMonth 3: Mild10.1 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dyspnea by SeverityMonth 3: Moderate17.4 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dyspnea by SeverityMonth 3: Severe4.4 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dyspnea by SeverityMonth 3: Life-threatening0.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dyspnea by SeverityMonth 3: Unknown0.8 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dyspnea by SeverityMonth 6: Mild4.7 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dyspnea by SeverityMonth 6: Moderate3.4 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dyspnea by SeverityMonth 6: Severe2.1 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dyspnea by SeverityMonth 6: Unknown0.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dyspnea by SeverityMonth 9: Mild3.4 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dyspnea by SeverityMonth 9: Moderate1.0 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dyspnea by SeverityMonth 9: Severe0.5 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dyspnea by SeverityMonth 9: Unknown0.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dyspnea by SeverityMonth 12: Mild1.6 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dyspnea by SeverityMonth 12: Moderate0.8 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dyspnea by SeverityMonth 12: Severe0.5 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Dyspnea by SeverityMonth 12: Unknown0.3 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Fatigue

Time frame: Months 3, 6, 9, 12

Population: SAF

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With FatigueMonth 389.1 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With FatigueMonth 638.7 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With FatigueMonth 919.5 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With FatigueMonth 1213.8 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Fatigue Based on Severity During the Course of Time

Severity was categorized as Grades 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. Grade 1= mild; asymptomatic or mild symptoms; clinical or diagnostic observations only; intervention not indicated. Grade 2= moderate; minimal, local or non-invasive intervention indicated; limiting age-appropriate instrumental activities of daily living (ADL). Grade 3= severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care ADL. Grade 4= life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention indicated. Grade 5= death related to adverse event. Only participants that were included in any of the specified categories were reported.

Time frame: Months 3, 6, 9, 12

Population: SAF

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Fatigue Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 3: Grade 16.8 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Fatigue Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 3: Grade 28.1 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Fatigue Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 3: Grade 30.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Fatigue Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 6: Grade 11.8 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Fatigue Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 6: Grade 21.8 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Fatigue Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 6: Grade 30.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Fatigue Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 9: Grade 11.0 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Fatigue Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 9: Grade 20.5 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Fatigue Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 12: Grade 10.5 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Fatigue Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 12: Grade 20.3 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Rash

Time frame: Months 3, 6, 9, 12

Population: SAF

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With RashMonth 390.6 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With RashMonth 637.9 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With RashMonth 919.5 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With RashMonth 1213.8 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Rash Based on Severity During the Course of Time

Severity was categorized as Grades 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. Grade 1= mild; asymptomatic or mild symptoms; clinical or diagnostic observations only; intervention not indicated. Grade 2= moderate; minimal, local or non-invasive intervention indicated; limiting age-appropriate instrumental activities of daily living (ADL). Grade 3= severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care ADL. Grade 4= life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention indicated. Grade 5= death related to adverse event. Only participants that were included in any of the specified categories were reported.

Time frame: Months 3, 6, 9, 12

Population: SAF

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Rash Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 3: Grade 119.2 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Rash Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 3: Grade 223.1 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Rash Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 3: Grade 34.4 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Rash Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 6: Grade 18.1 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Rash Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 6: Grade 25.7 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Rash Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 6: Grade 31.0 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Rash Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 9: Grade 13.6 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Rash Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 9: Grade 22.3 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Rash Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 12: Grade 11.8 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Rash Based on Severity During the Course of TimeMonth 12: Grade 21.6 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Remission of CR and PR

Remission was defined as participants with CR or PR. CR: disappearance of all TLs and non-TLs, with any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) having a reduction in short axis to less than 10 mm. PR: at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of TLs, taking as reference the BL sum diameters.

Time frame: Months 3, 6, 9, 12

Population: SAF

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Remission of CR and PRMonth 35.7 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Remission of CR and PRMonth 63.6 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Remission of CR and PRMonth 91.8 percentage of participants
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With Remission of CR and PRMonth 122.1 percentage of participants
Secondary

Time to Start of Erlotinib Therapy After End of First Line Therapy

Time frame: Baseline

Population: SAF with number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
NSCLC Elderly ParticipantsTime to Start of Erlotinib Therapy After End of First Line Therapy2.30 months

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 24, 2026