NeuroEndocrine Tumours
Conditions
Keywords
NET, Symptomatic response, Functioning NeuroEndocrine Tumours, midgut region
Brief summary
Circulating tumour cells (CTCs) are detectable in the blood in around 50% of patients with functioning NeuroEndocrine Tumours (NET) arising in the midgut area (tumours which are secreting hormones and are located in the area in the middle of the digestive system) and their presence usually means that the prognosis for the patient is poor. CTCs have also been shown to be valuable as predictive markers following treatment and there is increasing interest in using CTCs as 'liquid biopsies' that can help to inform treatment decisions. CTC analysis has the benefit of being relatively non- invasive and quick compared with a conventional CT scan and is therefore an attractive method of monitoring the tumour throughout the treatment period. The purpose of this study is to assess the clinical value that enumeration will have in predicting the clinical symptomatic response and progression free survival in patients receiving Somatuline Autogel for functioning midgut NETs over a one year period.
Interventions
Somatuline Autogel injection 120mg for first 3 months then 120, 90 or 60 mg administered via the deep subcutaneous route every 28 days
Sponsors
Study design
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
* Provision of written informed consent prior to any study related procedures. * Patients (either sex) must be 18 years or older. * Patients must be suffering from symptoms of diarrhoea and/or flushing at the time of study enrolment. * Patients must have a documented diagnosis of a functioning midgut NET. * In order to avoid patients with rapidly progressing tumours, only patients with well or moderately differentiated tumours and with a Ki67 proliferation index of \<20% will be recruited. * The clinically appropriate treatment for the patient must be therapy with a somatostatin analogue. * Patients must have had either a positive somatostatin receptor scintigraphy result or a positive 68Gallium-DOTATATE PET imaging result.
Exclusion criteria
* If the patient is at risk of pregnancy or is breast feeding, unless treatment with Somatuline Autogel is clearly needed (as determined by the clinician). * The patient is, in the opinion of the investigator, unable to comply fully with the protocol and the study instructions, or present any concomitant condition which could compromise the objectives of the study and/or preclude the protocol-defined procedures (e.g. severe medical conditions, brain metastases, psychiatric disorders, active or uncontrolled infection, known pituitary disease). * The patient has been treated with any other unlicensed drug within the last 30 days before study entry or will require a concurrent treatment with any other experimental drugs or treatments. * The patient has been treated with a somatostatin analogue prior to study entry, unless a washout period of at least 2 weeks for subcutaneous octreotide, or at least 6 weeks for a single dose of long acting somatostatin analogue has occurred. * The patient has received interferon, chemotherapy, chemoembolisation or radionuclide therapy within 3 months prior to study entry. * The patient has a history of hypersensitivity to drugs with a similar chemical structure. * Females of childbearing potential must be using oral, double barrier or injectable contraception. Non childbearing potential is defined as being post-menopause for at least 1 year, surgical sterilisation or hysterectomy at least three months before the start of the study. * The patient has abnormal baseline findings, any other medical condition(s) or laboratory findings that, in the opinion of the Investigator, might jeopardise the patient's safety or decrease the chance of obtaining satisfactory data needed to achieve the objective(s) of the study.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Assessment of Clinical Symptomatic Response | From baseline up to Week 53. | This endpoint was assessed using 2 efficacy variables: * CTCs, enumerated at baseline and Weeks 5, 17, 25, 53 * Clinical symptomatic response, assessed by the use of symptom reporting Subjects recorded 24-hour symptom frequency and severity for 7 days prior to first treatment (baseline), throughout the study, and up to 28 days following final drug administration. Symptoms were recorded by answering predetermined questions on the interactive voice response system (IVRS). Subjects were considered to have a clinical symptomatic response between baseline and last study visit if any 1 of the following criteria were fulfilled: the average number of episodes of diarrhoea decreased by at least 50%, the average number of episodes of flushing decreased by at least 50%, the mode severity of flushing decreased by at least 1 level. Clinical symptomatic response was assessed as a qualitative variable (Yes/No) and reported according to CTC presence at baseline and overall. |
| Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 25 and Week 53. | Subjects underwent Computed Tomography (CT) or Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scans at baseline, Visit 8 (Week 25) and Visit 15 (Week 53). Progression was assessed by investigators using RECIST v1.1, and classified as a complete response, partial response, stable disease, progressive disease or non evaluable. The time point responses at Week 25 and Week 53 were analysed by CTC presence at baseline and overall. The percentage of subjects within each response category are presented. Percentages are based on the number of subjects in the concerned population with available responses. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | From baseline up to Week 53. | The effect of lanreotide Autogel treatment on QoL was assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30 at baseline, Weeks 13 (Visit 5), 25 (Visit 8) and 53 (Visit 15/end of study). The 30 item scale is divided into 9 multi item scales (including 5 functional scales, 1 global health status/QoL scale and 3 general symptom scales) and 6 single items. Possible answers to the first 28 items (all items except the 2 concerning global quality of life) go from 1 (Not at all) to 4 (Very much). The answers for the 2 last questions (Q29- 30) go from 1 (Very poor) to 7 (Excellent). All of the scales and single-item measures range in score from 0 to 100. For multi-item scales, the raw score will be calculated by the addition of item responses divided by the number of items. Higher scores for global health and functional domains indicate a better QoL, while higher symptom scores indicate worse symptoms. The mean change from baseline at each time point is reported for each of the category subscores. |
| Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and Flushing | From baseline up to Week 53. | The effect of lanreotide Autogel on the symptoms of diarrhoea and flushing in subjects was assessed through subject reporting of symptoms every 24-hours for the 7 days prior to treatment (baseline), for the first 16 weeks and on days 11 to 17 after each subsequent injection interval. After the final study drug injection at Week 49, subjects provided 24-hour symptom frequency on days 11 to 28 (up to Week 53). Symptom frequency was recorded by answering predetermined questions on the IVRS. Mean change from baseline in frequency (number of episodes) of diarrhoea and flushing are described at Visit 2 (average number of episodes in Week 1) and at Visit 14 (average number of episodes over days 11 to 17 after Week 49 injection and over days 11 to 28 after Week 49 injection) by CTC presence at baseline and overall. A negative change indicates an improvement in symptoms from baseline. |
| Percentage of Subjects Alive and Progression Free at One Year | From baseline up to Week 53. | Subjects underwent CT or MRI scans at baseline and Week 53. Progression was assessed by investigators using RECIST v1.1. The best overall response to study treatment is the highest time point response achieved by the subject and was assessed as a complete response, partial response, stable disease, progressive disease or non evaluable. For analysis of PFS, event dates were assigned to the first time that progressive disease was noted or the date of death. In case of progressive disease followed by death, the first event was considered in the analysis. Censoring dates were defined in subjects with no progressive disease or death before end of study. At one year (end of study), the mean percentage of subjects who were alive and progression free, as calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, is reported by CTC presence and overall. |
| QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | From baseline up to Week 53. | The effect of lanreotide Autogel treatment on QoL was assessed using the EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 at baseline, Weeks 13 (Visit 5), 25 (Visit 8) and 53 (Visit 15/end of study). The QLQ-G.I.NET21 questionnaire contained 21 questions that used a 4-point scale (1 = Not at all, 2 = A little, 3 = Quite a bit, 4 = Very much) to evaluate 3 defined multi-item symptom scales (endocrine, gastrointestinal and treatment related side effects), 2 single item symptoms (bone/muscle pain and concern about weight loss), 2 psychosocial scales (social function and disease-related worries) and 2 other single items (sexuality and communication). Each individual subscore was transformed to range from 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate worse symptoms or more problems. The mean change from baseline at each time point is reported for each of the category subscores. |
| Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | From baseline up to Week 53. | The effect of lanreotide Autogel on the mode severity of flushing was assessed through subject reporting of symptoms every 24-hours for the 7 days prior to treatment (baseline), for the first 16 weeks and on days 11 to 17 after each subsequent injection interval until Week 49. After the final study drug injection at Week 49, subjects provided 24-hour symptom severity on days 11 to 28 (up to Week 53). Symptom severity was recorded by answering predetermined questions on the IVRS using a three-point system (mild, moderate or severe). The mode (most frequent) intensity of flushing are reported at baseline and at Visit 14 (average number of episodes over days 11 to 17 after Week 49 injection and over days 11 to 28 after Week 49 injection). Percentages of subjects in each severity category are based on the number of subjects in the analysis set with available responses. Data is presented according to CTC presence at baseline and overall. |
Countries
United Kingdom
Participant flow
Recruitment details
Recruitment to this prospective, pilot, phase IV, multicentre, open-label, single-group study began on 16 May 2014. Subjects with a documented diagnosis of functioning midgut NET and who suffered from symptoms of diarrhoea and/or flushing at the time of enrolment were recruited to 11 study centres in the United Kingdom.
Pre-assignment details
Overall, 54 subjects were screened, 50 of whom were enrolled and treated in the study.
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Lanreotide Autogel Subjects received deep subcutaneous injections of lanreotide Autogel for 1 year to treat the symptoms of functioning midgut NETs.
A washout period was required for subjects receiving either subcutaneous octreotide (at least 2 weeks) or 1 injection of long-acting somatostatin analogue (at least 6 weeks) prior to treatment in the study.
Initially subjects began treatment with a dose of lanreotide Autogel 120 mg every 28 days for 3 months. Thereafter, the dose administered was determined on an individual subject basis by the treating clinician. Subjects could remain on the 120 mg dose, or be titrated to either 60 mg or 90 mg lanreotide Autogel, administered every 28 days according to their symptomatic response. | 50 |
| Total | 50 |
Withdrawals & dropouts
| Period | Reason | FG000 |
|---|---|---|
| Overall Study | Adverse Event | 5 |
| Overall Study | Death | 1 |
| Overall Study | Increasing Symptoms | 1 |
| Overall Study | Investigator's decision | 1 |
| Overall Study | Symptom management | 1 |
| Overall Study | Withdrawal by Subject | 1 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Lanreotide Autogel |
|---|---|
| Age, Continuous years | 63.4 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.6 |
| Race (NIH/OMB) American Indian or Alaska Native | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Asian | 2 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Black or African American | 3 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) More than one race | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) White | 45 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 23 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 27 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk |
|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 3 / 50 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 47 / 50 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 12 / 50 |
Outcome results
Assessment of Clinical Symptomatic Response
This endpoint was assessed using 2 efficacy variables: * CTCs, enumerated at baseline and Weeks 5, 17, 25, 53 * Clinical symptomatic response, assessed by the use of symptom reporting Subjects recorded 24-hour symptom frequency and severity for 7 days prior to first treatment (baseline), throughout the study, and up to 28 days following final drug administration. Symptoms were recorded by answering predetermined questions on the interactive voice response system (IVRS). Subjects were considered to have a clinical symptomatic response between baseline and last study visit if any 1 of the following criteria were fulfilled: the average number of episodes of diarrhoea decreased by at least 50%, the average number of episodes of flushing decreased by at least 50%, the mode severity of flushing decreased by at least 1 level. Clinical symptomatic response was assessed as a qualitative variable (Yes/No) and reported according to CTC presence at baseline and overall.
Time frame: From baseline up to Week 53.
Population: Analysis was performed on the Intention-to-treat (ITT) population, defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication. Only subjects with data available for analysis are presented.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Assessment of Clinical Symptomatic Response | Clinical Symptomatic Response = Yes(2) | 77.8 Percentage of Subjects |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Assessment of Clinical Symptomatic Response | Clinical Symptomatic Response = No(3) | 22.2 Percentage of Subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Assessment of Clinical Symptomatic Response | Clinical Symptomatic Response = Yes(2) | 95.5 Percentage of Subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Assessment of Clinical Symptomatic Response | Clinical Symptomatic Response = No(3) | 4.5 Percentage of Subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Assessment of Clinical Symptomatic Response | Clinical Symptomatic Response = Yes(2) | 87.5 Percentage of Subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Assessment of Clinical Symptomatic Response | Clinical Symptomatic Response = No(3) | 12.5 Percentage of Subjects |
Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53
Subjects underwent Computed Tomography (CT) or Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scans at baseline, Visit 8 (Week 25) and Visit 15 (Week 53). Progression was assessed by investigators using RECIST v1.1, and classified as a complete response, partial response, stable disease, progressive disease or non evaluable. The time point responses at Week 25 and Week 53 were analysed by CTC presence at baseline and overall. The percentage of subjects within each response category are presented. Percentages are based on the number of subjects in the concerned population with available responses.
Time frame: Week 25 and Week 53.
Population: Analysis was performed on subjects from the ITT population, defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication. Only subjects with data available for analysis are presented.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 53: Partial Response | 6.7 percentage of subjects |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 25: Stable Disease | 72.7 percentage of subjects |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 53: Stable Disease | 66.7 percentage of subjects |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 53: Progressive Disease | 26.7 percentage of subjects |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 53: Non evaluable | 0.0 percentage of subjects |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 25: Complete Response | 0.0 percentage of subjects |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 25: Progressive Disease | 9.1 percentage of subjects |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 25: Partial Response | 18.2 percentage of subjects |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 25: Non evaluable | 0.0 percentage of subjects |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 53: Complete Response | 0.0 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 53: Partial Response | 4.5 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 25: Progressive Disease | 16.7 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 53: Complete Response | 0.0 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 53: Stable Disease | 63.6 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 25: Stable Disease | 75.0 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 25: Complete Response | 0.0 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 53: Progressive Disease | 31.8 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 25: Non evaluable | 0.0 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 53: Non evaluable | 0.0 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 25: Partial Response | 8.3 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 53: Non evaluable | 0.0 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 25: Complete Response | 0.0 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 25: Partial Response | 13.0 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 25: Stable Disease | 73.9 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 25: Progressive Disease | 13.0 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 25: Non evaluable | 0.0 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 53: Complete Response | 0.0 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 53: Partial Response | 5.4 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 53: Stable Disease | 64.9 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Percentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53 | Week 53: Progressive Disease | 29.7 percentage of subjects |
Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and Flushing
The effect of lanreotide Autogel on the symptoms of diarrhoea and flushing in subjects was assessed through subject reporting of symptoms every 24-hours for the 7 days prior to treatment (baseline), for the first 16 weeks and on days 11 to 17 after each subsequent injection interval. After the final study drug injection at Week 49, subjects provided 24-hour symptom frequency on days 11 to 28 (up to Week 53). Symptom frequency was recorded by answering predetermined questions on the IVRS. Mean change from baseline in frequency (number of episodes) of diarrhoea and flushing are described at Visit 2 (average number of episodes in Week 1) and at Visit 14 (average number of episodes over days 11 to 17 after Week 49 injection and over days 11 to 28 after Week 49 injection) by CTC presence at baseline and overall. A negative change indicates an improvement in symptoms from baseline.
Time frame: From baseline up to Week 53.
Population: Analysis was performed on the ITT population, defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication. Only subjects with data available for analysis at each time point are reported.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) |
|---|---|---|---|
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and Flushing | Diarrhoea: Visit 2 (daily) | -0.66 number of episodes |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and Flushing | Diarrhoea: Visit 14 (days 11-17) | -1.91 number of episodes |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and Flushing | Diarrhoea: Visit 14 (days 11-28) | -2.15 number of episodes |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and Flushing | Flushing: Visit 2 (daily) | -1.76 number of episodes |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and Flushing | Flushing: Visit 14 (days 11-17) | -3.37 number of episodes |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and Flushing | Flushing: Visit 14 (days 11-28) | -3.49 number of episodes |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and Flushing | Diarrhoea: Visit 14 (days 11-28) | -0.63 number of episodes |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and Flushing | Diarrhoea: Visit 2 (daily) | -0.27 number of episodes |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and Flushing | Diarrhoea: Visit 14 (days 11-17) | -0.64 number of episodes |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and Flushing | Flushing: Visit 14 (days 11-28) | -2.23 number of episodes |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and Flushing | Flushing: Visit 2 (daily) | -1.25 number of episodes |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and Flushing | Flushing: Visit 14 (days 11-17) | -2.51 number of episodes |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and Flushing | Diarrhoea: Visit 2 (daily) | 0.38 number of episodes |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and Flushing | Flushing: Visit 2 (daily) | 0.00 number of episodes |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and Flushing | Flushing: Visit 2 (daily) | -1.43 number of episodes |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and Flushing | Flushing: Visit 14 (days 11-17) | -2.88 number of episodes |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and Flushing | Diarrhoea: Visit 14 (days 11-28) | -1.30 number of episodes |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and Flushing | Flushing: Visit 14 (days 11-28) | -2.79 number of episodes |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and Flushing | Diarrhoea: Visit 14 (days 11-17) | -1.18 number of episodes |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and Flushing | Diarrhoea: Visit 2 (daily) | -0.42 number of episodes |
Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing
The effect of lanreotide Autogel on the mode severity of flushing was assessed through subject reporting of symptoms every 24-hours for the 7 days prior to treatment (baseline), for the first 16 weeks and on days 11 to 17 after each subsequent injection interval until Week 49. After the final study drug injection at Week 49, subjects provided 24-hour symptom severity on days 11 to 28 (up to Week 53). Symptom severity was recorded by answering predetermined questions on the IVRS using a three-point system (mild, moderate or severe). The mode (most frequent) intensity of flushing are reported at baseline and at Visit 14 (average number of episodes over days 11 to 17 after Week 49 injection and over days 11 to 28 after Week 49 injection). Percentages of subjects in each severity category are based on the number of subjects in the analysis set with available responses. Data is presented according to CTC presence at baseline and overall.
Time frame: From baseline up to Week 53.
Population: Analysis was performed on the ITT population, defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication. Only subjects with data available for analysis are presented.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Severe: Baseline | 4.5 percentage of subjects |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Mild: Baseline | 27.3 percentage of subjects |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | No flushing: Baseline | 22.7 percentage of subjects |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Mild: Visit 14 (days 11-17) | 43.8 percentage of subjects |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | No flushing: Visit 14 (days 11-17) | 37.5 percentage of subjects |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Severe: Visit 14 (days 11-28) | 0.0 percentage of subjects |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Mild: Visit 14 (days 11-28) | 60.0 percentage of subjects |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | No flushing: Visit 14 (days 11-28) | 13.3 percentage of subjects |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Moderate: Baseline | 45.5 percentage of subjects |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Moderate: Visit 14 (days 11-28) | 26.7 percentage of subjects |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Severe: Visit 14 (days 11-17) | 0.0 percentage of subjects |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Moderate: Visit 14 (days 11-17) | 18.8 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Mild: Visit 14 (days 11-17) | 47.6 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | No flushing: Baseline | 0.0 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Mild: Baseline | 50.0 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Moderate: Baseline | 50.0 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Severe: Baseline | 0.0 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | No flushing: Visit 14 (days 11-17) | 28.6 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Moderate: Visit 14 (days 11-17) | 23.8 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Severe: Visit 14 (days 11-17) | 0.0 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | No flushing: Visit 14 (days 11-28) | 31.6 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Mild: Visit 14 (days 11-28) | 52.6 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Moderate: Visit 14 (days 11-28) | 10.5 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Severe: Visit 14 (days 11-28) | 5.3 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Severe: Baseline | 0.0 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Moderate: Baseline | 0.0 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Mild: Baseline | 0.0 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | No flushing: Baseline | 100 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Moderate: Visit 14 (days 11-28) | 17.6 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | No flushing: Visit 14 (days 11-28) | 23.5 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Mild: Visit 14 (days 11-28) | 55.9 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | No flushing: Visit 14 (days 11-17) | 32.4 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Severe: Baseline | 2.0 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Mild: Visit 14 (days 11-17) | 45.9 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Moderate: Baseline | 46.0 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Moderate: Visit 14 (days 11-17) | 21.6 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | No flushing: Baseline | 14.0 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Severe: Visit 14 (days 11-28) | 2.9 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Severe: Visit 14 (days 11-17) | 0.0 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Mode Symptom Severity of Episodes of Flushing | Mild: Baseline | 38.0 percentage of subjects |
Percentage of Subjects Alive and Progression Free at One Year
Subjects underwent CT or MRI scans at baseline and Week 53. Progression was assessed by investigators using RECIST v1.1. The best overall response to study treatment is the highest time point response achieved by the subject and was assessed as a complete response, partial response, stable disease, progressive disease or non evaluable. For analysis of PFS, event dates were assigned to the first time that progressive disease was noted or the date of death. In case of progressive disease followed by death, the first event was considered in the analysis. Censoring dates were defined in subjects with no progressive disease or death before end of study. At one year (end of study), the mean percentage of subjects who were alive and progression free, as calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, is reported by CTC presence and overall.
Time frame: From baseline up to Week 53.
Population: Analysis was performed on the ITT population, defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication. Only subjects with data available for analysis are presented.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) |
|---|---|---|
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Percentage of Subjects Alive and Progression Free at One Year | 69.00 percentage of subjects |
| No CTC Presence at Baseline | Percentage of Subjects Alive and Progression Free at One Year | 67.75 percentage of subjects |
| Lanreotide Autogel | Percentage of Subjects Alive and Progression Free at One Year | 66.43 percentage of subjects |
QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21
The effect of lanreotide Autogel treatment on QoL was assessed using the EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 at baseline, Weeks 13 (Visit 5), 25 (Visit 8) and 53 (Visit 15/end of study). The QLQ-G.I.NET21 questionnaire contained 21 questions that used a 4-point scale (1 = Not at all, 2 = A little, 3 = Quite a bit, 4 = Very much) to evaluate 3 defined multi-item symptom scales (endocrine, gastrointestinal and treatment related side effects), 2 single item symptoms (bone/muscle pain and concern about weight loss), 2 psychosocial scales (social function and disease-related worries) and 2 other single items (sexuality and communication). Each individual subscore was transformed to range from 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate worse symptoms or more problems. The mean change from baseline at each time point is reported for each of the category subscores.
Time frame: From baseline up to Week 53.
Population: Analysis was performed on the ITT population, defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication. Only subjects with data available for analysis are presented.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Muscle/Bone pain: Visit 8 | -6.5 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 31.7 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Endocrine symptoms: Visit 5 | -15.4 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 21.6 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Endocrine symptoms: Visit 8 | -17.0 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 22.9 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Endocrine symptoms: End of study | -16.0 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 22.8 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Gastrointestinal symptoms: Visit 5 | 2.1 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 16.9 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Gastrointestinal symptoms: Visit 8 | 1.2 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 15.6 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Gastrointestinal symptoms: End of study | 1.0 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 16.7 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Treatment symptoms: Visit 5 | 1.2 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 15.2 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Treatment symptoms: Visit 8 | 7.6 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 8.9 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Treatment symptoms: End of study | 12.0 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 12.4 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Social function: Visit 5 | -11.3 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 26.6 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Social function: Visit 8 | -6.5 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 29.3 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Social function: End of study | -4.5 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 24.1 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Disease related worries: Visit 5 | -14.1 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 25.2 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Disease related worries: Visit 8 | -15.9 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 33.8 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Disease related worries: End of study | -12.2 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 36.3 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Muscle/Bone pain: Visit 5 | -7.9 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 36.7 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Muscle/Bone pain: End of study | -11.8 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 39.3 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Sexual function: Visit 5 | -5.6 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 34.8 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Sexual function: Visit 8 | -8.9 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 34.4 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Sexual function: End of study | -13.3 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 27.6 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Information/communication function: Visit 5 | -8.5 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 26.2 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Information/communication function: Visit 8 | -3.7 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 31.7 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Information/communication function: End of study | -5.6 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 25.8 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Body image: Visit 5 | 0.9 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 41 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Body image: Visit 8 | 1.9 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 41.2 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | QoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21 | Body image: End of study | -1.0 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 35.8 |
Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30
The effect of lanreotide Autogel treatment on QoL was assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30 at baseline, Weeks 13 (Visit 5), 25 (Visit 8) and 53 (Visit 15/end of study). The 30 item scale is divided into 9 multi item scales (including 5 functional scales, 1 global health status/QoL scale and 3 general symptom scales) and 6 single items. Possible answers to the first 28 items (all items except the 2 concerning global quality of life) go from 1 (Not at all) to 4 (Very much). The answers for the 2 last questions (Q29- 30) go from 1 (Very poor) to 7 (Excellent). All of the scales and single-item measures range in score from 0 to 100. For multi-item scales, the raw score will be calculated by the addition of item responses divided by the number of items. Higher scores for global health and functional domains indicate a better QoL, while higher symptom scores indicate worse symptoms. The mean change from baseline at each time point is reported for each of the category subscores.
Time frame: From baseline up to Week 53.
Population: Analysis was performed on the ITT population, defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication. Only subjects with data available for analysis are presented.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Physical functioning: Visit 5 | 1.2 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 17.9 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Physical functioning: Visit 8 | 2.0 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 17.6 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Physical functioning: End of study | 1.9 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 21.7 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Role functioning: Visit 5 | 1.3 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 30.9 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Role functioning: Visit 8 | 3.2 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 32.1 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Role functioning: End of study | -1.4 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 33.7 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Emotional functioning: Visit 5 | 6.1 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 24.8 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Emotional functioning: Visit 8 | 4.3 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 18.3 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Emotional functioning: End of study | 1.1 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 23 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Cognitive functioning: Visit 5 | -0.9 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 19.9 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Cognitive functioning: Visit 8 | 1.5 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 15.6 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Cognitive functioning: End of study | -2.4 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 19.9 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Social functioning: Visit 5 | 10.0 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 26.9 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Social functioning: Visit 8 | 4.5 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 30.1 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Social functioning: End of study | 3.9 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 27.8 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Global QoL: Visit 5 | 12.5 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 26.4 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Global QoL: Visit 8 | 7.4 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 24.3 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Global QoL: End of study | 4.3 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 22.8 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Fatigue: Visit 5 | -4.4 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 26.7 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Fatigue: Visit 8 | -6.3 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 21.2 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Fatigue: End of study | -4.2 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 25.6 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Nausea and vomiting: Visit 5 | -4.2 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 20.9 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Nausea and vomiting: Visit 8 | -1.4 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 20.9 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Nausea and vomiting: End of study | -0.9 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 29.1 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Pain: Visit 5 | -7.9 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 32.5 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Pain: Visit 8 | -2.3 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 30.2 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Pain: End of study | 1.8 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 30.6 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Dyspnoea: Visit 5 | -3.5 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 25.5 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Dyspnoea: Visit 8 | 1.0 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 20.6 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Dyspnoea: End of study | -4.8 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 30.4 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Insomnia: Visit 5 | -6.3 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 27 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Insomnia: Visit 8 | -5.7 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 22.1 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Insomnia: End of study | -2.9 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 37 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Appetite loss: Visit 5 | -0.9 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 37.1 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Appetite loss: Visit 8 | -6.5 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 36.4 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Appetite loss: End of study | -0.0 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 34.7 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Constipation: Visit 5 | 1.9 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 19.4 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Constipation: Visit 8 | -1.0 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 13.1 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Constipation: End of study | 1.9 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 13.9 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Diarrhoea: Visit 5 | -18.5 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 33.3 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Diarrhoea: Visit 8 | -12.7 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 30.7 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Diarrhoea: End of study | -10.8 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 32.5 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Financial difficulties: Visit 5 | -6.7 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 25.3 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Financial difficulties: Visit 8 | -4.0 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 30.9 |
| CTC Presence at Baseline | Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 | Financial difficulties: End of study | -1.0 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 38 |