Skip to content

Circulating Tumour Cells in Somatuline Autogel Treated NeuroEndocrine Tumours Patients

A Phase IV, Multicentre, Open Label, Single Group Exploratory Study to Assess the Clinical Value of Enumeration of Circulating Tumour Cells (CTCs) to Predict Clinical Symptomatic Response and Progression Free Survival in Patients Receiving Deep Subcutaneous Administrations of Somatuline® (Lanreotide) Autogel® to Treat the Symptoms of Functioning Midgut NeuroEndocrine Tumours (NET)

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02075606
Acronym
CALM-NET
Enrollment
50
Registered
2014-03-03
Start date
2014-05-31
Completion date
2017-06-30
Last updated
2019-06-07

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

Conditions

NeuroEndocrine Tumours

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

Ipsen
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
DIAGNOSTIC
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

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

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

MeasureTime frameDescription
Assessment of Clinical Symptomatic ResponseFrom 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 53Week 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

MeasureTime frameDescription
Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30From 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 FlushingFrom 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 YearFrom 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.NET21From 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 FlushingFrom 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

ArmCount
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
Total50

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000
Overall StudyAdverse Event5
Overall StudyDeath1
Overall StudyIncreasing Symptoms1
Overall StudyInvestigator's decision1
Overall StudySymptom management1
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject1

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicLanreotide 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 typeEG000
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

Primary

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.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
CTC Presence at BaselineAssessment of Clinical Symptomatic ResponseClinical Symptomatic Response = Yes(2)77.8 Percentage of Subjects
CTC Presence at BaselineAssessment of Clinical Symptomatic ResponseClinical Symptomatic Response = No(3)22.2 Percentage of Subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselineAssessment of Clinical Symptomatic ResponseClinical Symptomatic Response = Yes(2)95.5 Percentage of Subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselineAssessment of Clinical Symptomatic ResponseClinical Symptomatic Response = No(3)4.5 Percentage of Subjects
Lanreotide AutogelAssessment of Clinical Symptomatic ResponseClinical Symptomatic Response = Yes(2)87.5 Percentage of Subjects
Lanreotide AutogelAssessment of Clinical Symptomatic ResponseClinical Symptomatic Response = No(3)12.5 Percentage of Subjects
Comparison: Clinical symptomatic response as dependent variable and CTC presence at baseline as explanatory variable was used to perform the logistic regression analysis.p-value: =0.12695% CI: [0.02, 1.65]Regression, Logistic
Primary

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.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
CTC Presence at BaselinePercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 53: Partial Response6.7 percentage of subjects
CTC Presence at BaselinePercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 25: Stable Disease72.7 percentage of subjects
CTC Presence at BaselinePercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 53: Stable Disease66.7 percentage of subjects
CTC Presence at BaselinePercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 53: Progressive Disease26.7 percentage of subjects
CTC Presence at BaselinePercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 53: Non evaluable0.0 percentage of subjects
CTC Presence at BaselinePercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 25: Complete Response0.0 percentage of subjects
CTC Presence at BaselinePercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 25: Progressive Disease9.1 percentage of subjects
CTC Presence at BaselinePercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 25: Partial Response18.2 percentage of subjects
CTC Presence at BaselinePercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 25: Non evaluable0.0 percentage of subjects
CTC Presence at BaselinePercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 53: Complete Response0.0 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselinePercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 53: Partial Response4.5 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselinePercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 25: Progressive Disease16.7 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselinePercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 53: Complete Response0.0 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselinePercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 53: Stable Disease63.6 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselinePercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 25: Stable Disease75.0 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselinePercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 25: Complete Response0.0 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselinePercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 53: Progressive Disease31.8 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselinePercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 25: Non evaluable0.0 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselinePercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 53: Non evaluable0.0 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselinePercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 25: Partial Response8.3 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelPercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 53: Non evaluable0.0 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelPercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 25: Complete Response0.0 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelPercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 25: Partial Response13.0 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelPercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 25: Stable Disease73.9 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelPercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 25: Progressive Disease13.0 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelPercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 25: Non evaluable0.0 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelPercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 53: Complete Response0.0 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelPercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 53: Partial Response5.4 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelPercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 53: Stable Disease64.9 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelPercentage of Subjects With Time Point Responses According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) Assessments at Weeks 25 and 53Week 53: Progressive Disease29.7 percentage of subjects
Secondary

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.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)
CTC Presence at BaselineMean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and FlushingDiarrhoea: Visit 2 (daily)-0.66 number of episodes
CTC Presence at BaselineMean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and FlushingDiarrhoea: Visit 14 (days 11-17)-1.91 number of episodes
CTC Presence at BaselineMean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and FlushingDiarrhoea: Visit 14 (days 11-28)-2.15 number of episodes
CTC Presence at BaselineMean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and FlushingFlushing: Visit 2 (daily)-1.76 number of episodes
CTC Presence at BaselineMean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and FlushingFlushing: Visit 14 (days 11-17)-3.37 number of episodes
CTC Presence at BaselineMean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and FlushingFlushing: Visit 14 (days 11-28)-3.49 number of episodes
No CTC Presence at BaselineMean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and FlushingDiarrhoea: Visit 14 (days 11-28)-0.63 number of episodes
No CTC Presence at BaselineMean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and FlushingDiarrhoea: Visit 2 (daily)-0.27 number of episodes
No CTC Presence at BaselineMean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and FlushingDiarrhoea: Visit 14 (days 11-17)-0.64 number of episodes
No CTC Presence at BaselineMean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and FlushingFlushing: Visit 14 (days 11-28)-2.23 number of episodes
No CTC Presence at BaselineMean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and FlushingFlushing: Visit 2 (daily)-1.25 number of episodes
No CTC Presence at BaselineMean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and FlushingFlushing: Visit 14 (days 11-17)-2.51 number of episodes
Lanreotide AutogelMean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and FlushingDiarrhoea: Visit 2 (daily)0.38 number of episodes
Lanreotide AutogelMean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and FlushingFlushing: Visit 2 (daily)0.00 number of episodes
Lanreotide AutogelMean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and FlushingFlushing: Visit 2 (daily)-1.43 number of episodes
Lanreotide AutogelMean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and FlushingFlushing: Visit 14 (days 11-17)-2.88 number of episodes
Lanreotide AutogelMean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and FlushingDiarrhoea: Visit 14 (days 11-28)-1.30 number of episodes
Lanreotide AutogelMean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and FlushingFlushing: Visit 14 (days 11-28)-2.79 number of episodes
Lanreotide AutogelMean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and FlushingDiarrhoea: Visit 14 (days 11-17)-1.18 number of episodes
Lanreotide AutogelMean Change From Baseline in Number of Episodes of Diarrhoea and FlushingDiarrhoea: Visit 2 (daily)-0.42 number of episodes
Secondary

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.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingSevere: Baseline4.5 percentage of subjects
CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingMild: Baseline27.3 percentage of subjects
CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingNo flushing: Baseline22.7 percentage of subjects
CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingMild: Visit 14 (days 11-17)43.8 percentage of subjects
CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingNo flushing: Visit 14 (days 11-17)37.5 percentage of subjects
CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingSevere: Visit 14 (days 11-28)0.0 percentage of subjects
CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingMild: Visit 14 (days 11-28)60.0 percentage of subjects
CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingNo flushing: Visit 14 (days 11-28)13.3 percentage of subjects
CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingModerate: Baseline45.5 percentage of subjects
CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingModerate: Visit 14 (days 11-28)26.7 percentage of subjects
CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingSevere: Visit 14 (days 11-17)0.0 percentage of subjects
CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingModerate: Visit 14 (days 11-17)18.8 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingMild: Visit 14 (days 11-17)47.6 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingNo flushing: Baseline0.0 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingMild: Baseline50.0 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingModerate: Baseline50.0 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingSevere: Baseline0.0 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingNo flushing: Visit 14 (days 11-17)28.6 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingModerate: Visit 14 (days 11-17)23.8 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingSevere: Visit 14 (days 11-17)0.0 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingNo flushing: Visit 14 (days 11-28)31.6 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingMild: Visit 14 (days 11-28)52.6 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingModerate: Visit 14 (days 11-28)10.5 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselineMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingSevere: Visit 14 (days 11-28)5.3 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingSevere: Baseline0.0 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingModerate: Baseline0.0 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingMild: Baseline0.0 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingNo flushing: Baseline100 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingModerate: Visit 14 (days 11-28)17.6 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingNo flushing: Visit 14 (days 11-28)23.5 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingMild: Visit 14 (days 11-28)55.9 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingNo flushing: Visit 14 (days 11-17)32.4 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingSevere: Baseline2.0 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingMild: Visit 14 (days 11-17)45.9 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingModerate: Baseline46.0 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingModerate: Visit 14 (days 11-17)21.6 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingNo flushing: Baseline14.0 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingSevere: Visit 14 (days 11-28)2.9 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingSevere: Visit 14 (days 11-17)0.0 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelMode Symptom Severity of Episodes of FlushingMild: Baseline38.0 percentage of subjects
Secondary

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.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)
CTC Presence at BaselinePercentage of Subjects Alive and Progression Free at One Year69.00 percentage of subjects
No CTC Presence at BaselinePercentage of Subjects Alive and Progression Free at One Year67.75 percentage of subjects
Lanreotide AutogelPercentage of Subjects Alive and Progression Free at One Year66.43 percentage of subjects
Secondary

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.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Muscle/Bone pain: Visit 8-6.5 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 31.7
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Endocrine symptoms: Visit 5-15.4 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 21.6
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Endocrine symptoms: Visit 8-17.0 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 22.9
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Endocrine symptoms: End of study-16.0 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 22.8
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Gastrointestinal symptoms: Visit 52.1 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.9
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Gastrointestinal symptoms: Visit 81.2 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.6
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Gastrointestinal symptoms: End of study1.0 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.7
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Treatment symptoms: Visit 51.2 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.2
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Treatment symptoms: Visit 87.6 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.9
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Treatment symptoms: End of study12.0 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.4
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Social function: Visit 5-11.3 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 26.6
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Social function: Visit 8-6.5 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 29.3
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Social function: End of study-4.5 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 24.1
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Disease related worries: Visit 5-14.1 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 25.2
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Disease related worries: Visit 8-15.9 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 33.8
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Disease related worries: End of study-12.2 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 36.3
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Muscle/Bone pain: Visit 5-7.9 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 36.7
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Muscle/Bone pain: End of study-11.8 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 39.3
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Sexual function: Visit 5-5.6 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 34.8
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Sexual function: Visit 8-8.9 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 34.4
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Sexual function: End of study-13.3 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 27.6
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Information/communication function: Visit 5-8.5 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 26.2
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Information/communication function: Visit 8-3.7 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 31.7
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Information/communication function: End of study-5.6 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 25.8
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Body image: Visit 50.9 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 41
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Body image: Visit 81.9 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 41.2
CTC Presence at BaselineQoL Questionnaire: EORTC QLQ-G.I.NET21Body image: End of study-1.0 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 35.8
Secondary

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.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Physical functioning: Visit 51.2 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.9
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Physical functioning: Visit 82.0 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.6
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Physical functioning: End of study1.9 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 21.7
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Role functioning: Visit 51.3 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 30.9
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Role functioning: Visit 83.2 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 32.1
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Role functioning: End of study-1.4 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 33.7
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Emotional functioning: Visit 56.1 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 24.8
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Emotional functioning: Visit 84.3 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 18.3
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Emotional functioning: End of study1.1 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 23
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Cognitive functioning: Visit 5-0.9 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.9
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Cognitive functioning: Visit 81.5 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.6
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Cognitive functioning: End of study-2.4 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.9
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Social functioning: Visit 510.0 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 26.9
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Social functioning: Visit 84.5 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 30.1
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Social functioning: End of study3.9 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 27.8
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Global QoL: Visit 512.5 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 26.4
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Global QoL: Visit 87.4 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 24.3
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Global QoL: End of study4.3 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 22.8
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Fatigue: Visit 5-4.4 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 26.7
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Fatigue: Visit 8-6.3 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 21.2
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Fatigue: End of study-4.2 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 25.6
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Nausea and vomiting: Visit 5-4.2 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.9
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Nausea and vomiting: Visit 8-1.4 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.9
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Nausea and vomiting: End of study-0.9 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 29.1
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Pain: Visit 5-7.9 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 32.5
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Pain: Visit 8-2.3 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 30.2
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Pain: End of study1.8 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 30.6
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Dyspnoea: Visit 5-3.5 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 25.5
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Dyspnoea: Visit 81.0 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.6
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Dyspnoea: End of study-4.8 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 30.4
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Insomnia: Visit 5-6.3 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 27
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Insomnia: Visit 8-5.7 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 22.1
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Insomnia: End of study-2.9 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 37
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Appetite loss: Visit 5-0.9 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 37.1
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Appetite loss: Visit 8-6.5 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 36.4
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Appetite loss: End of study-0.0 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 34.7
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Constipation: Visit 51.9 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.4
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Constipation: Visit 8-1.0 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 13.1
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Constipation: End of study1.9 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 13.9
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Diarrhoea: Visit 5-18.5 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 33.3
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Diarrhoea: Visit 8-12.7 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 30.7
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Diarrhoea: End of study-10.8 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 32.5
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Financial difficulties: Visit 5-6.7 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 25.3
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Financial difficulties: Visit 8-4.0 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 30.9
CTC Presence at BaselineQuality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30Financial difficulties: End of study-1.0 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 38

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 28, 2026