Breast Neoplasms
Conditions
Keywords
breast cancer, postmenopausal women, estrogen-receptor positive, HER2 negative, locoregionally recurrent, metastatic
Brief summary
The study is designed to compare the clinical benefit following treatment with letrozole in combination with Palbociclib versus letrozole in combination with placebo in Asian postmenopausal women with ER(+)/HER2(-) advanced breast cancer who have not received prior systemic anti cancer therapies for their advanced/metastatic disease.
Interventions
Palbociclib, 125mg, orally once daily on Day 1 to Day 21 of every 28-day cycle followed by 7 days off treatment
Letrozole, 2.5mg, orally once daily (continuously)
Placebo, 125mg, orally once daily on Day 1 to Day 21 of every 28-day cycle followed by 7 days off treatment
Sponsors
Study design
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
* Adult Asian women with locoregionally recurrent or metastatic disease not amenable to curative therapy * Confirmed diagnosis of ER positive breast cancer * No prior systemic anti-cancer therapy for advanced ER+ disease * Postmenopausal women * Measurable disease as per Response Evaluation Criterion in Solid Tumors \[RECIST\] or bone-only disease * Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group \[ECOG\] 0-1 * Adequate organ and marrow function * Patient must agree to provide tumor tissue
Exclusion criteria
* Confirmed diagnosis of HER2 positive disease * Patients with advanced, symptomatic, visceral spread that are at risk of life threatening complication in the short term * Known uncontrolled or symptomatic CNS metastases * Prior neoadjuvant or adjuvant treatment with a non steroidal aromatase inhibitor (ie, anastrozole or letrozole) with disease recurrence while on or within 12 months of completing treatment * Prior treatment with any CDK 4/6 inhibitor
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Progression-Free Survival (PFS) Based on Investigator's Assessment: Up to Primary Completion Date | Randomization up to 65 months | PFS was based on Kaplan-Meier estimates. PFS was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of the first documentation of objective progression of disease (PD) or death due to any cause in the absence of documented PD, whichever occurred first. PD is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) as a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target measurable lesions above the smallest sum observed (over baseline if no decrease in the sum is observed during therapy), with a minimum absolute increase of 5 mm. In this outcome measure, PFS was based on investigator's assessment. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Progression-Free Survival (PFS) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR): Up to Primary Completion Date | Randomization up to 65 months | PFS was based on Kaplan-Meier estimates. PFS was defined as time from the first dose of study treatment to the first documentation of objective tumor progression or to death due to any cause in the absence of documented progressive disease, whichever occurs first. In this outcome measure, PFS was based on BICR. |
| Percentage of Participants With Objective Response (OR) Based on Investigator Assessment: Up to Primary Completion Date | Randomization up to 65 months | OR was defined as a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 recorded from randomization until disease progression or death due to any cause. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions with the exception of nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis \<10 mm). No new lesions. The PR was defined as greater than or equal to 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. The short diameter was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No new lesions. In this outcome measure, OR was based on investigator assessment. |
| Percentage of Participants With Objective Response (OR) Based on Investigator Assessment (Participants With Measurable Disease at Baseline): Up to Primary Completion Date | Randomization up to 65 months | OR was defined as a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 recorded from randomization until disease progression or death due to any cause. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions with the exception of nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis \<10 mm). No new lesions. The PR was defined as greater than or equal to 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. The short diameter was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No new lesions. In this outcome measure, OR was based on investigator assessment. |
| Percentage of Participants With Objective Response (OR) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR): Up to Primary Completion Date | Randomization up to 65 months | OR was defined as a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 recorded from randomization until disease progression or death due to any cause. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions with the exception of nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis \<10 mm). No new lesions. The PR was defined as greater than or equal to 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. The short diameter was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No new lesions. In this outcome measure, OR was based on BICR. |
| Percentage of Participants With Objective Response (OR) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) (Participants With Measurable Disease at Baseline): Up to Primary Completion Date | Randomization up to 65 months | OR was defined as a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 recorded from randomization until disease progression or death due to any cause. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions with the exception of nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis \<10 mm). No new lesions. The PR was defined as greater than or equal to 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. The short diameter was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No new lesions. In this outcome measure, OR was based on BICR. |
| Duration of Response (DOR) Based on Investigator Assessment (Participants With Objective Disease Response): Up to Primary Completion Date | Randomization up to 65 months | DOR was defined as the time from the first documentation of objective tumor response (complete response \[CR\] or partial response \[PR\]) to the first documentation of objective tumor progression or to death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. DOR data was censored on the date of the last tumor assessment on study for participants who did not have objective tumor progression and who did not die due to any cause while on study. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions with the exception of nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis \<10 mm). No new lesions. The PR was defined as greater than or equal to 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. The short diameter was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No new lesions. In this outcome measure, DOR was based on investigator assessment. |
| Duration of Response (DOR) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) (Participants With Objective Disease Response): Up to Primary Completion Date | Randomization up to 65 months | DOR was defined as the time from the first documentation of objective tumor response (complete response \[CR\] or partial response \[PR\]) to the first documentation of objective tumor progression or to death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. DOR data was censored on the date of the last tumor assessment on study for participants who did not have objective tumor progression and who did not die due to any cause while on study. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions with the exception of nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis \<10 mm). No new lesions. The PR was defined as greater than or equal to 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. The short diameter was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No new lesions. In this outcome measure, DOR was based on BICR. |
| Percentage of Participants With Disease Control/Clinical Benefit Response (DC/CBR) Based on Investigator Assessment: Up to Primary Completion Date | Randomization up to 65 months | DC/CBR was defined as CR, PR, or stable disease (SD) \>=24 weeks according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST v1.1) recorded in the time period between randomization and disease progression or death to any cause. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions except for nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis \<10 mm). No new lesions. The PR was defined as \>=30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. The short diameter was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No new lesions. SD was defined as not qualifying for CR, PR, PD. PD is defined using RECIST v1.1 as a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target measurable lesions above the smallest sum observed, with a minimum absolute increase of 5 mm. In this outcome measure, DC/CBR was based on investigator assessment. |
| Percentage of Participants With Disease Control/Clinical Benefit Response (DC/CBR) Based on Investigator Assessment (Participants With Measurable Disease at Baseline): Up to Primary Completion Date | Randomization up to 65 months | DC/CBR was defined as CR, PR, or stable disease (SD) \>=24 weeks according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST v1.1) recorded in the time period between randomization and disease progression or death to any cause. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions except for nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis \<10 mm). No new lesions. The PR was defined as greater than or equal to 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. The short diameter was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No new lesions. SD was defined as not qualifying for CR, PR, PD. PD is defined using RECIST v1.1 as a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target measurable lesions above the smallest sum observed, with a minimum absolute increase of 5 mm. In this outcome measure, DC/CBR was based on investigator assessment. |
| Percentage of Participants With Disease Control/Clinical Benefit Response (DC/CBR) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR): Up to Primary Completion Date | Randomization up to 65 months | DC/CBR was defined as CR, PR, or stable disease (SD) \>=24 weeks according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST v1.1) recorded in the time period between randomization and disease progression or death to any cause. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions except for nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis \<10 mm). No new lesions. The PR was defined as greater than or equal to 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. The short diameter was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No new lesions. SD was defined as not qualifying for CR, PR, PD. PD is defined using RECIST v1.1 as a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target measurable lesions above the smallest sum observed, with a minimum absolute increase of 5 mm. In this outcome measure, DC/CBR was based on BICR. |
| Percentage of Participants With Disease Control/Clinical Benefit Response (DC/CBR) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) (Participants With Measurable Disease at Baseline): Up to Primary Completion Date | Randomization up to 65 months | DC/CBR was defined as CR, PR, or stable disease (SD) \>=24 weeks according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST v1.1) recorded in the time period between randomization and disease progression or death to any cause. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions except for nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis \<10 mm). No new lesions. The PR was defined as greater than or equal to 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. The short diameter was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No new lesions. SD was defined as not qualifying for CR, PR, PD. PD is defined using RECIST v1.1 as a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target measurable lesions above the smallest sum observed, with a minimum absolute increase of 5 mm. In this outcome measure, DC/CBR was based on BICR. |
| Overall Survival (OS): Up to Primary Completion Date | Randomization up to 65 months | OS was defined as the time from date of randomization to date of death due to any cause. In the absence of confirmation of death, survival time was censored to last date the participant was known to be alive. OS was assessed using Kaplan-Meier methods. |
| 1-Year, 2-Year and 3-Year Survival Probability: Up to Primary Completion Date | Randomization up to 65 months | OS was defined as the time from date of randomization to date of death due to any cause. In the absence of confirmation of death, survival time was censored to last date the participant was known to be alive. The 1-year survival probability was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and a 2-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) for the log \[-log(1 year survival probability)\] was be calculated using a normal approximation, and then back transformed to give a CI for the 1-year survival probability itself. The 2-year, and 3-year survival probabilities were estimated similarly. |
| Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities): Up to Primary Completion Date | Randomization up to 65 months | An adverse event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. A serious AE (SAE) was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent are events between first dose of study drug and up to 28 days after last dose that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state. Participants were counted only once per treatment in each row. |
| Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related): Up to Primary Completion Date | Randomization up to 65 months | An adverse event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. A serious AE (SAE) was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent are events between first dose of study drug and up to 28 days after last dose that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state. Relatedness to treatment was assessed by the investigator (Yes/No). Participants were counted only once per treatment in each row. |
| Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Hematology: Up to Primary Completion Date | Randomization up to 65 months | The laboratory results were graded according to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) CTCAE v4.0 severity grade. Shift tables were provided to examine the distribution of laboratory toxicities. The following hematology parameters had met the criteria of CTCAE grade shift change from Grade \<=2 at baseline to Grade 3 or 4 post baseline: neutrophils (absolute), white blood cells, platelets, anemia and hemoglobin increased. |
| Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry: Up to Primary Completion Date | Randomization up to 65 months | The laboratory results were graded according to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) CTCAE v4.0 severity grade. Shift tables were provided to examine the distribution of laboratory toxicities. The following chemistry parameters had met the criteria of CTCAE grade shift change from Grade \<=2 at baseline to Grade 3 or 4 post baseline: alanine aminotransferase (ALT), alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), bilirubin (total), creatinine, hypercalcemia, hyperglycemia, hyperkalemia, hypermagnesemia, hypernatremia, hypoalbuminemia, hypocalcemia, hypoglycemia, hypokalemia, hypomagnesemia, and hyponatremia. |
| Trough Plasma Concentration of Palbociclib | Pre-dose on Day 14 of Cycle 1 and Cycle 2 | Summary of palbociclib trough concentrations. |
| Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score: Up to Primary Completion Date | Baseline up to Cycle 65 Day 1 | The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) is a modular approach to assess participant health related quality of life using a "core" set of questions (FACT-G) as well as a cancer site specific module. The FACT-G was a 27-item compilation of general questions divided into 4 domains: Physical Well Being, Social/Family Well Being, Emotional Well Being, and Functional Well Being. The FACT-B consists of the FACT-G (27 items) and a breast specific module: a 10-item instrument designed to assess participant concerns relating to breast cancer. For all questions, participants were asked to respond to a 5-level scale ranging from 0=Not at all to 4=Very much. FACT-B total score = FACT-G + Breast Cancer Subscale. As each of the items ranges from 0-4, the range of possible scores is 0-148, with 0 being the worst possible score and 148 the best. A positive change of the total score indicated improvement from baseline and a negative change indicated deterioration. |
| Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores: Up to Primary Completion Date | Baseline up to Cycle 65 Day 1 | The EQ-5D is a 6-item instrument designed to assess health status in terms of a single index value or utility score. It consists of 5 descriptors of current health state (mobility, self care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression); a participant was asked to rate each state on a 3 level scale (1=no problem, 2=some problem, and 3=extreme problem) with higher levels indicating greater severity/impairment. |
| Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores: Up to Primary Completion Date | Baseline up to Cycle 65 Day 1 | The EQ VAS recorded the participant's self rated questionnaire to assess generic health status on a scale from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state). Published weights were available that allow for the creation of a single summary score. |
| Median Baseline Percent (%) Positive Cells for Ki67 | Baseline | Archived formalin-fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE) specimen from the original diagnostic tumor tissue was collected and sent to the sponsor-designated central laboratories for assessment of Ki67 associated with sensitivity and/or resistance to Palbociclib. |
| Number of Participants With Detection in Estrogen Receptor (ER) | Baseline | Archived formalin-fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE) specimen from the original diagnostic tumor tissue was collected and sent to the sponsor-designated central laboratories for assessment of ER associated with sensitivity and/or resistance to Palbociclib. |
Countries
China, Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand
Contacts
Pfizer
Participant flow
Pre-assignment details
This was a multicenter, randomized (1:1), double blind, placebo controlled, parallel group Phase 3 trial comparing the efficacy and safety of palbociclib in combination with letrozole versus placebo plus letrozole in Asian postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative advanced breast cancer.
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole Participants were planned to receive palbociclib 125 mg orally once a day (QD) for 21 days of every 28-day cycle followed by 7 days off treatment together with letrozole 2.5 mg orally QD continuously. The maximum duration of treatment for palbociclib and for letrozole were 1872 days and 1872 days, respectively. | 169 |
| Placebo + Letrozole Participants were planned to receive placebo 125 mg orally once a day (QD) for 21 days of every 28-day cycle followed by 7 days off treatment together with letrozole 2.5 mg orally QD continuously. The maximum duration of treatment for placebo and for letrozole were 1834 days and 1834 days, respectively. | 171 |
| Total | 340 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Palbociclib + Letrozole | Placebo + Letrozole | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | 53.8 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.5 | 53.7 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 9.1 | 53.8 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.8 |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Asian | 169 Participants | 171 Participants | 340 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 169 Participants | 171 Participants | 340 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 102 / 168 | 126 / 171 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 168 / 168 | 143 / 171 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 34 / 168 | 19 / 171 |
Outcome results
Progression-Free Survival (PFS) Based on Investigator's Assessment
PFS was based on Kaplan-Meier estimates. PFS was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of the first documentation of objective progression of disease (PD) or death due to any cause in the absence of documented PD, whichever occurred first. PD is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) as a 20% increase in the sum of of diameters of target measurable lesions above the smallest sum observed (over baseline if no decrease in the sum is observed during therapy), with a minimum absolute increase of 5 mm. In this outcome measure, PFS was based on investigator's assessment.
Time frame: Randomization up to 65 months
Population: This was intent-to-treat (ITT) population, including all participants who were randomized, with study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug from that to which they were randomized.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEDIAN) |
|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Progression-Free Survival (PFS) Based on Investigator's Assessment | 21.5 Months |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Progression-Free Survival (PFS) Based on Investigator's Assessment | 13.9 Months |
1-Year, 2-Year and 3-Year Survival Probability
OS was defined as the time from date of randomization to date of death due to any cause. In the absence of confirmation of death, survival time was censored to last date the participant was known to be alive. The 1-year survival probability was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and a 2-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) for the log \[-log(1 year survival probability)\] was be calculated using a normal approximation, and then back transformed to give a CI for the 1-year survival probability itself. The 2-year, and 3-year survival probabilities were estimated similarly.
Time frame: Randomization up to 65 months
Population: This was intent-to-treat (ITT) population, including all participants who were randomized, with study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug from that to which they were randomized.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | 1-Year, 2-Year and 3-Year Survival Probability | 1-year survival probability | 92.8 Percentage of participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | 1-Year, 2-Year and 3-Year Survival Probability | 2-year survival probability | 80.3 Percentage of participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | 1-Year, 2-Year and 3-Year Survival Probability | 3-year survival probability | 67.1 Percentage of participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | 1-Year, 2-Year and 3-Year Survival Probability | 1-year survival probability | 90.5 Percentage of participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | 1-Year, 2-Year and 3-Year Survival Probability | 2-year survival probability | 78.0 Percentage of participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | 1-Year, 2-Year and 3-Year Survival Probability | 3-year survival probability | 60.6 Percentage of participants |
Duration of Response (DOR) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) (Participants With Objective Disease Response)
DOR was defined as the time from the first documentation of objective tumor response (complete response \[CR\] or partial response \[PR\]) to the first documentation of objective tumor progression or to death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. DOR data was censored on the date of the last tumor assessment on study for participants who did not have objective tumor progression and who did not die due to any cause while on study. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions with the exception of nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis \<10 mm). No new lesions. The PR was defined as greater than or equal to 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. The short diameter was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No new lesions. In this outcome measure, DOR was based on BICR.
Time frame: Randomization up to 65 months
Population: This was intent-to-treat (ITT) population with objective disease response, including all participants who were randomized, with objective disease response and study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug from that to which they were randomized.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEDIAN) |
|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Duration of Response (DOR) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) (Participants With Objective Disease Response) | 30.3 Months |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Duration of Response (DOR) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) (Participants With Objective Disease Response) | 24.9 Months |
Duration of Response (DOR) Based on Investigator Assessment (Participants With Objective Disease Response)
DOR was defined as the time from the first documentation of objective tumor response (complete response \[CR\] or partial response \[PR\]) to the first documentation of objective tumor progression or to death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. DOR data was censored on the date of the last tumor assessment on study for participants who did not have objective tumor progression and who did not die due to any cause while on study. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions with the exception of nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis \<10 mm). No new lesions. The PR was defined as greater than or equal to 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. The short diameter was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No new lesions. In this outcome measure, DOR was based on investigator assessment.
Time frame: Randomization up to 65 months
Population: This was intent-to-treat (ITT) population with objective disease response, including all participants who were randomized, with objective disease response and study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug from that to which they were randomized.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEDIAN) |
|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Duration of Response (DOR) Based on Investigator Assessment (Participants With Objective Disease Response) | 22.4 Months |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Duration of Response (DOR) Based on Investigator Assessment (Participants With Objective Disease Response) | 19.4 Months |
Median Baseline Percent (%) Positive Cells for Ki67
Archived formalin-fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE) specimen from the original diagnostic tumor tissue was collected and sent to the sponsor-designated central laboratories for assessment of Ki67 associated with sensitivity and/or resistance to Palbociclib.
Time frame: Baseline
Population: This was a subset of as-treated (AT) population (participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, with treatment assignments designated according to actual study treatment received), who had both baseline and at least 1 follow-up values for Ki67.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEDIAN) |
|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Median Baseline Percent (%) Positive Cells for Ki67 | 30.0 Percentage of Ki67 positive cells |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Median Baseline Percent (%) Positive Cells for Ki67 | 27.5 Percentage of Ki67 positive cells |
Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores
The EQ-5D is a 6-item instrument designed to assess health status in terms of a single index value or utility score. It consists of 5 descriptors of current health state (mobility, self care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression); a participant was asked to rate each state on a 3 level scale (1=no problem, 2=some problem, and 3=extreme problem) with higher levels indicating greater severity/impairment.
Time frame: Baseline up to Cycle 65 Day 1
Population: This was a subset of intent-to-treat (ITT) population (participants who were randomized, with study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug from that to which they were randomized), who had both baseline and who completed all 5 items needed to calculated the index-based summary score ata the respective cycle.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 15 Day 1 | 0.000 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 35 Day 1 | -0.020 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 2 Day 1 | 0.013 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 37 Day 1 | -0.022 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 17 Day 1 | -0.002 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 39 Day 1 | -0.024 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 9 Day 1 | 0.006 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 41 Day 1 | -0.027 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 19 Day 1 | -0.004 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 43 Day 1 | -0.029 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 5 Day 1 | 0.010 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 45 Day 1 | -0.031 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 21 Day 1 | -0.006 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 47 Day 1 | -0.033 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 31 Day 1 | -0.016 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 49 Day 1 | -0.035 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 23 Day 1 | -0.008 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 51 Day 1 | -0.037 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 11 Day 1 | 0.004 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 53 Day 1 | -0.039 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 25 Day 1 | -0.010 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 55 Day 1 | -0.041 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 3 Day 1 | 0.012 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 57 Day 1 | -0.043 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 27 Day 1 | -0.012 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 59 Day 1 | -0.045 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 13 Day 1 | 0.02 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 61 Day 1 | -0.047 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 29 Day 1 | -0.014 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 63 Day 1 | -0.049 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 7 Day 1 | 0.008 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 65 Day 1 | -0.051 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 33 Day 1 | -0.018 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 65 Day 1 | -0.164 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 2 Day 1 | 0.014 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 3 Day 1 | 0.011 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 5 Day 1 | 0.005 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 7 Day 1 | 0.000 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 9 Day 1 | -0.006 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 11 Day 1 | -0.012 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 13 Day 1 | -0.017 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 15 Day 1 | -0.023 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 17 Day 1 | -0.029 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 19 Day 1 | -0.034 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 21 Day 1 | -0.040 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 23 Day 1 | -0.045 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 25 Day 1 | -0.051 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 27 Day 1 | -0.057 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 31 Day 1 | -0.068 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 33 Day 1 | -0.074 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 35 Day 1 | -0.079 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 37 Day 1 | -0.085 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 39 Day 1 | -0.090 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 41 Day 1 | -0.096 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 43 Day 1 | -0.102 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 45 Day 1 | -0.107 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 47 Day 1 | -0.113 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 49 Day 1 | -0.119 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 51 Day 1 | -0.124 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 53 Day 1 | -0.130 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 55 Day 1 | -0.136 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 57 Day 1 | -0.141 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 59 Day 1 | -0.147 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 61 Day 1 | -0.152 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 63 Day 1 | -0.158 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D) Index Scores | Cycle 29 Day 1 | -0.062 Units on a scale |
Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores
The EQ VAS recorded the participant's self rated questionnaire to assess generic health status on a scale from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state). Published weights were available that allow for the creation of a single summary score.
Time frame: Baseline up to Cycle 65 Day 1
Population: This was a subset of intent-to-treat (ITT) population (participants who were randomized, with study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug from that to which they were randomized), who had both baseline and who completed all 5 items needed to calculated the index-based summary score ata the respective cycle.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 65 Day 1 | 7.918 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 2 Day 1 | 3.047 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 3 Day 1 | 3.125 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 5 Day 1 | 3.279 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 7 Day 1 | 3.434 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 9 Day 1 | 3.589 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 11 Day 1 | 3.743 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 13 Day 1 | 3.898 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 15 Day 1 | 4.052 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 17 Day 1 | 4.207 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 19 Day 1 | 4.362 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 21 Day 1 | 4.516 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 23 Day 1 | 4.671 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 25 Day 1 | 4.826 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 27 Day 1 | 4.980 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 29 Day 1 | 5.135 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 31 Day 1 | 5.289 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 33 Day 1 | 5.444 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 35 Day 1 | 5.599 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 37 Day 1 | 5.753 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 39 Day 1 | 5.908 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 41 Day 1 | 6.063 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 43 Day 1 | 6.217 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 45 Day 1 | 6.372 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 47 Day 1 | 6.526 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 49 Day 1 | 6.681 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 51 Day 1 | 6.836 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 53 Day 1 | 6.990 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 55 Day 1 | 7.145 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 57 Day 1 | 7.300 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 59 Day 1 | 7.454 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 61 Day 1 | 7.609 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 63 Day 1 | 7.763 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 49 Day 1 | -0.272 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 33 Day 1 | 0.454 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 2 Day 1 | 1.861 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 65 Day 1 | -0.998 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 3 Day 1 | 1.815 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 35 Day 1 | 0.363 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 5 Day 1 | 1.724 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 51 Day 1 | -0.363 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 7 Day 1 | 1.634 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 37 Day 1 | 0.272 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 9 Day 1 | 1.543 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 59 Day 1 | -0.726 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 11 Day 1 | 1.452 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 39 Day 1 | 0.182 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 13 Day 1 | 1.361 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 53 Day 1 | -0.454 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 15 Day 1 | 1.271 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 41 Day 1 | 0.091 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 17 Day 1 | 1.180 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 63 Day 1 | -0.907 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 19 Day 1 | 1.089 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 43 Day 1 | 0.000 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 21 Day 1 | 0.998 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 55 Day 1 | -0.544 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 23 Day 1 | 0.908 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 45 Day 1 | -0.091 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 25 Day 1 | 0.817 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 61 Day 1 | -0.817 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 27 Day 1 | 0.726 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 47 Day 1 | -0.181 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 29 Day 1 | 0.635 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 57 Day 1 | -0.635 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores | Cycle 31 Day 1 | 0.545 Units on a scale |
Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score
The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) is a modular approach to assess participant health related quality of life using a core set of questions (FACT-G) as well as a cancer site specific module. The FACT-G was a 27-item compilation of general questions divided into 4 domains: Physical Well Being, Social/Family Well Being, Emotional Well Being, and Functional Well Being. The FACT-B consists of the FACT-G (27 items) and a breast specific module: a 10-item instrument designed to assess participant concerns relating to breast cancer. For all questions, participants were asked to respond to a 5-level scale ranging from 0=Not at all to 4=Very much. FACT-B total score = FACT-G + Breast Cancer Subscale. As each of the items ranges from 0-4, the range of possible scores is 0-148, with 0 being the worst possible score and 148 the best. A positive change of the total score indicated improvement from baseline and a negative change indicated deterioration.
Time frame: Baseline up to Cycle 65 Day 1
Population: This was a subset of intent-to-treat (ITT) population (participants who were randomized, with study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug from that to which they were randomized), who had both baseline and who completed \>80% of the corresponding questions and had valid scores for the relevant subscales.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 3 Day 1 | 1.441 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 35 Day 1 | -4.227 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 19 Day 1 | -1.393 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 37 Day 1 | -4.582 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 11 Day 1 | 0.024 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 39 Day 1 | -4.936 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 21 Day 1 | -1.748 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 41 Day 1 | -5.290 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 7 Day 1 | 0.732 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 43 Day 1 | -5.644 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 23 Day 1 | -2.102 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 45 Day 1 | -5.999 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 13 Day 1 | -0.331 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 47 Day 1 | -6.353 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 25 Day 1 | -2.456 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 49 Day 1 | -6.707 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 5 Day 1 | 1.087 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 51 Day 1 | -7.061 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 27 Day 1 | -2.810 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 53 Day 1 | -7.416 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 15 Day 1 | -0.685 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 55 Day 1 | -7.770 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 29 Day 1 | -3.165 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 57 Day 1 | -8.124 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 9 Day 1 | 0.378 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 59 Day 1 | -8.478 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 31 Day 1 | -3.519 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 61 Day 1 | -8.833 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 17 Day 1 | -1.039 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 63 Day 1 | -9.187 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 33 Day 1 | -3.873 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 65 Day 1 | -9.541 Units on a scale |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 2 Day 1 | 1.618 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 65 Day 1 | -9.707 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 2 Day 1 | 1.021 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 3 Day 1 | 0.850 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 5 Day 1 | 0.510 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 7 Day 1 | 0.169 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 9 Day 1 | -0.171 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 11 Day 1 | -0.512 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 13 Day 1 | -0.852 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 15 Day 1 | -1.193 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 17 Day 1 | -1.534 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 19 Day 1 | -1.874 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 21 Day 1 | -2.215 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 23 Day 1 | -2.555 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 25 Day 1 | -2.896 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 27 Day 1 | -3.326 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 29 Day 1 | -3.577 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 31 Day 1 | -3.918 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 33 Day 1 | -4.258 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 35 Day 1 | -4.599 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 37 Day 1 | -4.939 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 39 Day 1 | -5.280 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 41 Day 1 | -5.620 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 43 Day 1 | -5.961 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 45 Day 1 | -6.301 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 47 Day 1 | -6.642 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 49 Day 1 | -6.983 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 51 Day 1 | -7.323 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 53 Day 1 | -7.664 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 55 Day 1 | -8.004 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 57 Day 1 | -8.345 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 59 Day 1 | -8.685 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 61 Day 1 | -9.026 Units on a scale |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Model Estimated Mean Changes From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B) Total Score | Cycle 63 Day 1 | -9.367 Units on a scale |
Number of Participants With Detection in Estrogen Receptor (ER)
Archived formalin-fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE) specimen from the original diagnostic tumor tissue was collected and sent to the sponsor-designated central laboratories for assessment of ER associated with sensitivity and/or resistance to Palbociclib.
Time frame: Baseline
Population: This was a subset of as-treated (AT) population (participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, with treatment assignments designated according to actual study treatment received), who had both baseline and at least 1 follow-up values for ER.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Detection in Estrogen Receptor (ER) | Positive | 152 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Detection in Estrogen Receptor (ER) | Negative | 2 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Detection in Estrogen Receptor (ER) | Unknown | 14 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Detection in Estrogen Receptor (ER) | Positive | 162 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Detection in Estrogen Receptor (ER) | Negative | 1 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Detection in Estrogen Receptor (ER) | Unknown | 8 Participants |
Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry
The laboratory results were graded according to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) CTCAE v4.0 severity grade. Shift tables were provided to examine the distribution of laboratory toxicities. The following chemistry parameters had met the criteria of CTCAE grade shift change from Grade \<=2 at baseline to Grade 3 or 4 post baseline: alanine aminotransferase (ALT), alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), bilirubin (total), creatinine, hypercalcemia, hyperglycemia, hyperkalemia, hypermagnesemia, hypernatremia, hypoalbuminemia, hypocalcemia, hypoglycemia, hypokalemia, hypomagnesemia, and hyponatremia.
Time frame: Randomization up to 65 months
Population: This was as-treated (AT) population, including all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, with treatment assignments designated according to actual study treatment received.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | ALT | 9 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Alkaline phosphatase | 0 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | AST | 9 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Bilirubin (total) | 2 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Creatinine | 1 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Hypercalcemia | 1 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Hyperglycemia | 1 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Hyperkalemia | 1 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Hypermagnesemia | 10 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Hypernatremia | 2 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Hypoalbuminemia | 0 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Hypocalcemia | 1 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Hypoglycemia | 0 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Hypokalemia | 3 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Hypomagnesemia | 3 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Hyponatremia | 11 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Hyponatremia | 2 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | ALT | 1 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Hypermagnesemia | 8 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Alkaline phosphatase | 2 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Hypoglycemia | 1 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | AST | 6 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Hypernatremia | 1 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Bilirubin (total) | 2 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Hypomagnesemia | 1 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Creatinine | 0 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Hypoalbuminemia | 0 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Hypercalcemia | 2 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Hypokalemia | 6 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Hyperglycemia | 1 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Hypocalcemia | 1 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Chemistry | Hyperkalemia | 0 Participants |
Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Hematology
The laboratory results were graded according to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) CTCAE v4.0 severity grade. Shift tables were provided to examine the distribution of laboratory toxicities. The following hematology parameters had met the criteria of CTCAE grade shift change from Grade \<=2 at baseline to Grade 3 or 4 post baseline: neutrophils (absolute), white blood cells, platelets, anemia and hemoglobin increased.
Time frame: Randomization up to 65 months
Population: This was as-treated (AT) population, including all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, with treatment assignments designated according to actual study treatment received.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Hematology | White blood cells | 77 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Hematology | Anemia | 10 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Hematology | Platelets | 13 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Hematology | Hemoglobin increased | 3 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Hematology | Neutrophils (absolute) | 143 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Hematology | Hemoglobin increased | 0 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Hematology | Neutrophils (absolute) | 2 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Hematology | White blood cells | 1 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Hematology | Platelets | 1 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Postbaseline Laboratory Abnormalities of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Grade 3 or 4 (Participants With Baseline Laboratory Abnormalities of CTCAE Grade <=2) - Hematology | Anemia | 3 Participants |
Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities)
An adverse event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. A serious AE (SAE) was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent are events between first dose of study drug and up to 28 days after last dose that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state. Participants were counted only once per treatment in each row.
Time frame: Randomization up to 65 months
Population: This was as-treated (AT) population, including all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, with treatment assignments designated according to actual study treatment received.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants with AEs | 168 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants with SAEs | 26 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants with Grade 3 or 4 AEs | 152 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants with Grade 5 AEs | 4 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants discontinued study due to AEs | 13 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants discontinued Palbociclib/Placebo or Letrozole due to AEs | 11 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants discontinued Palbociclib/Placebo due to AEs | 11 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants discontinued Letrozole due to AEs | 10 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants temporarily discontinued Palbociclib/Placebo due to AEs | 136 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants temporarily discontinued Letrozole due to AEs | 11 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants with dose reduction of Palbociclib/Placebo due to AEs | 16 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants with dose reduction and temporary discontinuations of Palbociclib/Placebo due to AEs | 38 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants with dose reduction of Palbociclib/Placebo due to AEs | 2 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants with AEs | 155 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants discontinued Palbociclib/Placebo due to AEs | 4 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants with SAEs | 16 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants temporarily discontinued Letrozole due to AEs | 9 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants with Grade 3 or 4 AEs | 38 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants discontinued Letrozole due to AEs | 3 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants with Grade 5 AEs | 2 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants with dose reduction and temporary discontinuations of Palbociclib/Placebo due to AEs | 2 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants discontinued study due to AEs | 5 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants temporarily discontinued Palbociclib/Placebo due to AEs | 17 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (All Causalities) | Participants discontinued Palbociclib/Placebo or Letrozole due to AEs | 4 Participants |
Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related)
An adverse event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. A serious AE (SAE) was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent are events between first dose of study drug and up to 28 days after last dose that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state. Relatedness to treatment was assessed by the investigator (Yes/No). Participants were counted only once per treatment in each row.
Time frame: Randomization up to 65 months
Population: This was as-treated (AT) population, including all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, with treatment assignments designated according to actual study treatment received.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants temporarily discontinued Palbociclib/Placebo due to AEs | 132 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants temporarily discontinued Letrozole due to AEs | 7 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants with dose reduction of Palbociclib/Placebo due to AEs | 15 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants with dose reduction and temporary discontinuations of Palbociclib/Placebo due to AEs | 37 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants with AEs | 167 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants with SAEs | 8 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants with Grade 3 or 4 AEs | 149 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants with Grade 5 AEs | 1 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants discontinued study due to AEs | 6 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants discontinued Palbociclib/Placebo or Letrozole due to AEs | 5 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants discontinued due to AEs related to Palbociclib/Placebo | 5 Participants |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants discontinued due to AEs related to Letrozole | 1 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants discontinued due to AEs related to Palbociclib/Placebo | 2 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants temporarily discontinued Palbociclib/Placebo due to AEs | 11 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants with Grade 3 or 4 AEs | 18 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants temporarily discontinued Letrozole due to AEs | 5 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants discontinued Palbociclib/Placebo or Letrozole due to AEs | 2 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants with dose reduction of Palbociclib/Placebo due to AEs | 2 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants with Grade 5 AEs | 0 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants with dose reduction and temporary discontinuations of Palbociclib/Placebo due to AEs | 2 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants discontinued due to AEs related to Letrozole | 0 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants with AEs | 123 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants discontinued study due to AEs | 2 Participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Treatment Related) | Participants with SAEs | 3 Participants |
Overall Survival (OS)
OS was defined as the time from date of randomization to date of death due to any cause. In the absence of confirmation of death, survival time was censored to last date the participant was known to be alive. OS was assessed using Kaplan-Meier methods.
Time frame: Randomization up to 65 months
Population: This was intent-to-treat (ITT) population, including all participants who were randomized, with study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug from that to which they were randomized.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEDIAN) |
|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Overall Survival (OS) | 51.7 Months |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Overall Survival (OS) | 51.5 Months |
Percentage of Participants Wiht Objective Response (OR) Based on Investigator Assessment
OR was defined as a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 recorded from randomization until disease progression or death due to any cause. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions with the exception of nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis \<10 mm). No new lesions. The PR was defined as greater than or equal to 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. The short diameter was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No new lesions. In this outcome measure, OR was based on investigator assessment.
Time frame: Randomization up to 65 months
Population: This was intent-to-treat (ITT) population, including all participants who were randomized, with study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug from that to which they were randomized.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Percentage of Participants Wiht Objective Response (OR) Based on Investigator Assessment | 37.3 Percentage of participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Percentage of Participants Wiht Objective Response (OR) Based on Investigator Assessment | 31.6 Percentage of participants |
Percentage of Participants With Disease Control/Clinical Benefit Response (DC/CBR) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR)
DC/CBR was defined as CR, PR, or stable disease (SD) \>=24 weeks according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST v1.1) recorded in the time period between randomization and disease progression or death to any cause. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions except for nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis \<10 mm). No new lesions. The PR was defined as greater than or equal to 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. The short diameter was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No new lesions. SD was defined as not qualifying for CR, PR, PD. PD is defined using RECIST v1.1 as a 20% increase in the sum of of diameters of target measurable lesions above the smallest sum observed, with a minimum absolute increase of 5 mm. In this outcome measure, DC/CBR was based on BICR.
Time frame: Randomization up to 65 months
Population: This was intent-to-treat (ITT) population, including all participants who were randomized, with study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug from that to which they were randomized.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Percentage of Participants With Disease Control/Clinical Benefit Response (DC/CBR) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) | 76.9 Percentage of participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Percentage of Participants With Disease Control/Clinical Benefit Response (DC/CBR) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) | 73.1 Percentage of participants |
Percentage of Participants With Disease Control/Clinical Benefit Response (DC/CBR) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) (Participants With Measureable Disease at Baseline)
DC/CBR was defined as CR, PR, or stable disease (SD) \>=24 weeks according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST v1.1) recorded in the time period between randomization and disease progression or death to any cause. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions except for nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis \<10 mm). No new lesions. The PR was defined as greater than or equal to 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. The short diameter was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No new lesions. SD was defined as not qualifying for CR, PR, PD. PD is defined using RECIST v1.1 as a 20% increase in the sum of of diameters of target measurable lesions above the smallest sum observed, with a minimum absolute increase of 5 mm. In this outcome measure, DC/CBR was based on BICR.
Time frame: Randomization up to 65 months
Population: This was intent-to-treat (ITT) population with measureable disease at baseline, including the participants, who were randomized, with measureable disease at baseline, and study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug from that to which they were randomized.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Percentage of Participants With Disease Control/Clinical Benefit Response (DC/CBR) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) (Participants With Measureable Disease at Baseline) | 78.1 Percentage of participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Percentage of Participants With Disease Control/Clinical Benefit Response (DC/CBR) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) (Participants With Measureable Disease at Baseline) | 71.8 Percentage of participants |
Percentage of Participants With Disease Control/Clinical Benefit Response (DC/CBR) Based on Investigator Assessment
DC/CBR was defined as CR, PR, or stable disease (SD) \>=24 weeks according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST v1.1) recorded in the time period between randomization and disease progression or death to any cause. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions except for nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis \<10 mm). No new lesions. The PR was defined as \>=30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. The short diameter was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No new lesions. SD was defined as not qualifying for CR, PR, PD. PD is defined using RECIST v1.1 as a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target measurable lesions above the smallest sum observed, with a minimum absolute increase of 5 mm. In this outcome measure, DC/CBR was based on investigator assessment.
Time frame: Randomization up to 65 months
Population: This was intent-to-treat (ITT) population, including all participants who were randomized, with study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug from that to which they were randomized.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Percentage of Participants With Disease Control/Clinical Benefit Response (DC/CBR) Based on Investigator Assessment | 79.3 Percentage of participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Percentage of Participants With Disease Control/Clinical Benefit Response (DC/CBR) Based on Investigator Assessment | 80.1 Percentage of participants |
Percentage of Participants With Disease Control/Clinical Benefit Response (DC/CBR) Based on Investigator Assessment (Participants With Measureable Disease at Baseline)
DC/CBR was defined as CR, PR, or stable disease (SD) \>=24 weeks according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST v1.1) recorded in the time period between randomization and disease progression or death to any cause. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions except for nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis \<10 mm). No new lesions. The PR was defined as greater than or equal to 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. The short diameter was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No new lesions. SD was defined as not qualifying for CR, PR, PD. PD is defined using RECIST v1.1 as a 20% increase in the sum of of diameters of target measurable lesions above the smallest sum observed, with a minimum absolute increase of 5 mm. In this outcome measure, DC/CBR was based on investigator assessment.
Time frame: Randomization up to 65 months
Population: This was intent-to-treat (ITT) population with measureable disease at baseline, including the participants, who were randomized, with measureable disease at baseline, and study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug from that to which they were randomized.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Percentage of Participants With Disease Control/Clinical Benefit Response (DC/CBR) Based on Investigator Assessment (Participants With Measureable Disease at Baseline) | 77.9 Percentage of participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Percentage of Participants With Disease Control/Clinical Benefit Response (DC/CBR) Based on Investigator Assessment (Participants With Measureable Disease at Baseline) | 79.6 Percentage of participants |
Percentage of Participants With Objective Response (OR) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR)
OR was defined as a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 recorded from randomization until disease progression or death due to any cause. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions with the exception of nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis \<10 mm). No new lesions. The PR was defined as greater than or equal to 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. The short diameter was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No new lesions. In this outcome measure, OR was based on BICR.
Time frame: Randomization up to 65 months
Population: This was intent-to-treat (ITT) population, including all participants who were randomized, with study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug from that to which they were randomized.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Percentage of Participants With Objective Response (OR) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) | 40.2 Percentage of participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Percentage of Participants With Objective Response (OR) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) | 33.9 Percentage of participants |
Percentage of Participants With Objective Response (OR) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) (Participants With Measureable Disease at Baseline)
OR was defined as a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 recorded from randomization until disease progression or death due to any cause. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions with the exception of nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis \<10 mm). No new lesions. The PR was defined as greater than or equal to 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. The short diameter was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No new lesions. In this outcome measure, OR was based on BICR.
Time frame: Randomization up to 65 months
Population: This was intent-to-treat (ITT) population with measureable disease at baseline, including the participants, who were randomized, with measureable disease at baseline, and study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug from that to which they were randomized.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Percentage of Participants With Objective Response (OR) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) (Participants With Measureable Disease at Baseline) | 52.3 Percentage of participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Percentage of Participants With Objective Response (OR) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) (Participants With Measureable Disease at Baseline) | 43.5 Percentage of participants |
Percentage of Participants With Objective Response (OR) Based on Investigator Assessment (Participants With Measureable Disease at Baseline)
OR was defined as a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 recorded from randomization until disease progression or death due to any cause. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions with the exception of nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis \<10 mm). No new lesions. The PR was defined as greater than or equal to 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. The short diameter was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No new lesions. In this outcome measure, OR was based on investigator assessment.
Time frame: Randomization up to 65 months
Population: This was intent-to-treat (ITT) population with measureable disease at baseline, including the participants, who were randomized, with measureable disease at baseline, and study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug from that to which they were randomized.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Percentage of Participants With Objective Response (OR) Based on Investigator Assessment (Participants With Measureable Disease at Baseline) | 43.4 Percentage of participants |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Percentage of Participants With Objective Response (OR) Based on Investigator Assessment (Participants With Measureable Disease at Baseline) | 38.0 Percentage of participants |
Progression-Free Survival (PFS) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR)
PFS was based on Kaplan-Meier estimates. PFS was defined as time from the first dose of study treatment to the first documentation of objective tumor progression or to death due to any cause in the absence of documented progressive disease, whichever occurs first. In this outcome measure, PFS was based on BICR.
Time frame: Randomization up to 65 months
Population: This was intent-to-treat (ITT) population, including all participants who were randomized, with study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug from that to which they were randomized.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEDIAN) |
|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Progression-Free Survival (PFS) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) | 21.6 Months |
| Placebo + Letrozole | Progression-Free Survival (PFS) Based on Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) | 16.4 Months |
Trough Plasma Concentration of Palbociclib
Summary of palbociclib trough concentrations
Time frame: Pre-dose on Day 14 of Cycle 1 and Cycle 2
Population: This was a subset of as-treated (AT) population (participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, with treatment assignments designated according to actual study treatment received), including all participants who are treated with palbociclib and have at least 1 measured plasma concentration.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (GEOMETRIC_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Trough Plasma Concentration of Palbociclib | Cycle 1 | 81.1 ng/mL | Geometric Coefficient of Variation 29 |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Trough Plasma Concentration of Palbociclib | Cycle 2 | 77.4 ng/mL | Geometric Coefficient of Variation 43 |
| Palbociclib + Letrozole | Trough Plasma Concentration of Palbociclib | Average trough concentration | 80.2 ng/mL | Geometric Coefficient of Variation 36 |