Skip to content

Evaluate the Impact of Afatinib on Quality of Life and Symptom Burden of Greek Subjects With Advanced NSCLC in Routine Patient Care Settings

A Multicentre, Cohort Study to Assess the Impact on SYMptom Burden and Patient Health-related Quality of Life of Afatinib Treatment in Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer in a Real World Setting in Greece.

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02440854
Enrollment
80
Registered
2015-05-12
Start date
2016-02-16
Completion date
2021-02-17
Last updated
2022-04-27

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

Conditions

Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung

Brief summary

This non-interventional study will include a representative sample of patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC harboring Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR)-mutations in Greece. Eligible NSCLC patients, for whom the physician has decided to initiate treatment with the study medication (afatinib, GIOTRIF®) will be treated according to the local prescribing information and standard medical practice in terms of visit frequency and types of assessments performed. The study will investigate the impact of GIOTRIF (Afatinib) on patients' disease-related symptom burden and Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) in a real world clinical setting in Greece.The Average Symptom Burden Index (ASBI) score of the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) in eligible patients, after 6 months of therapy, will be analyzed. The overall study duration period is expected to be 60 months, including a 48-month enrollment period and a minimum 12-month follow-up period.

Detailed description

Study Design:

Interventions

DRUGafatinib

Patients were treated as per the routine medical practice in terms of visit frequency, types of assessments performed and with adherence to the local prescribing requirements for afatinib.

Sponsors

Boehringer Ingelheim
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Observational model
OTHER
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

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

Inclusion criteria

* Adult outpatients (18 years and older) of either gender; * Histologically or cytologically confirmed locally advanced or metastatic (IIIB/IV) NSCLC of any histological type with activating EGFR mutation(s) according to local laboratory EGFR testing; * EGFR- tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) naive patients; * Patients for whom the decision to prescribe therapy with afatinib (GIOTRIF®) according to the locally approved product's summary of product characteristics (SmPC) has already been taken prior to their enrolment in the study; the assignment of the patient to this therapeutic strategy is not decided in advance by the study protocol but falls within current practice and the prescription of afatinib is clearly separated from the physicians decision to include the patient in the current study; * Patients must be able and willing to provide written informed consent and to comply with the requirements of this study protocol;

Exclusion criteria

* Patients who have initiated treatment with Afatinib more than 7 days prior to their enrolment into the study; * Patients that meet any of the contraindications to the administration of the study drug according to the approved SmPC; * Receipt of any investigational agent within 30 days or 5 half-lives of the investigational agent (whichever is longer) before the commencement of therapy with afatinib

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Patients Who Experienced a Minimum Clinically Important Improvement in Symptoms Over 6 Months of TreatmentBaseline and 6 months following start of treatment.Number of patients who experience a minimum clinically important improvement in symptoms is reported. A patient was categorized as having an improvement if the mean score of any two consecutive post-baseline Average Symptom Burden Index (ASBI) score of Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) assessments for that patient was at least 10 points below the patient's ASBI score of LCSS at enrolment, over 6 months of treatment. The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Each item is scored on a 100-millimeter (mm) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with score reported from 0 to 100, with 0 representing the best score. ASBI score was calculated by the mean of the 6 major lung cancer symptoms (loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis). For a given assessment, if any of the six symptom-specific questions was not completed, the ASBI score was not calculated.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Patient-rated Total Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) ScoreBaseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.Patient-rated total LCSS score -defined as the average of the aggregate score of all 9 items that comprise the LCSS- at enrolment and at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Each item was scored on a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with scores reported from 0 to 100 with 0 representing the best score. ASBI score was calculated by the mean of the 6 major lung cancer symptoms (loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis). For a given assessment, if any of the six symptom-specific questions had not been completed, the ASBI score was not calculated.
Patient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Loss of AppetiteBaseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.Patient-rated LCSS individual item scores: Loss of appetite at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Loss of appetite was scored on a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with scores reported from 0 to 100 with 0 representing the best score.
Patient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: FatigueBaseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.Patient-rated LCSS individual item scores: Fatigue at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Fatigue was scored on a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with scores reported from 0 to 100 with 0 representing the best score.
Patient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: CoughBaseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.Patient-rated LCSS individual item scores: Cough at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Cough was scored on a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with scores reported from 0 to 100 with 0 representing the best score.
Patient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: DyspnoeaBaseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.Patient-rated LCSS individual item scores: Dyspnoea at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Dyspnoea was scored on a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with scores reported from 0 to 100 with 0 representing the best score.
Patient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: HaemoptysisBaseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.Patient-rated LCSS individual item scores: Haemoptysis at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Haemoptysis was scored on a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with scores reported from 0 to 100 with 0 representing the best score.
Patient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: PainBaseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.Patient-rated LCSS individual item scores: Pain at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Pain was scored on a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with scores reported from 0 to 100 with 0 representing the best score.
Patient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Overall Symptomatic DistressBaseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.Patient-rated LCSS individual item scores: Overall symptomatic distress at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Overall symptomatic distress was scored on a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with scores reported from 0 to 100 with 0 representing the best score. ASBI score was calculated by the mean of the 6 major lung cancer symptoms (loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis). For a given assessment, if any of the six symptom-specific questions had not been completed, the ASBI score was not calculated.
Patient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Interference With Normal ActivityBaseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.Patient-rated LCSS individual item scores: Interference with normal activity at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Interference with normal activity was scored on a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with scores reported from 0 to 100 with 0 representing the best score. ASBI score was calculated by the mean of the 6 major lung cancer symptoms (loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis). For a given assessment, if any of the six symptom-specific questions had not been completed, the ASBI score was not calculated.
Patient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Global Quality of Life (QoL)Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.Patient-rated LCSS individual item scores: Global Quality of Life (QoL) at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Global Quality of Life (QoL) was scored on a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with scores reported from 0 to 100 with 0 representing the best score. ASBI score was calculated by the mean of the 6 major lung cancer symptoms (loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis). For a given assessment, if any of the six symptom-specific questions had not been completed, the ASBI score was not calculated.
Percentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: MobilityBaseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.Percentage of patients with reported problems for the EQ-5D-3L utility index score dimension: Mobility. The EQ-5D-3L descriptive system consists of 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels: 1=no problems; 2=some problems; 3= extreme problems. Reported are the percentage of patients with problem, consisting of both level 2 (some problems) and level 3 (extreme problems) with the remaining subjects having reported level 1 (no problems).
Percentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Self-careBaseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.Percentage of patients with reported problems for the EQ-5D-3L utility index score dimension: Self-care. The EQ-5D-3L descriptive system consists of 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels: 1=no problems; 2=some problems; 3= extreme problems. Reported are the percentage of patients with problem, consisting of both level 2 (some problems) and level 3 (extreme problems) with the remaining subjects having reported level 1 (no problems).
Percentage of Patients With Reported Problems for theEuropean Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Usual ActivitiesBaseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.Percentage of patients with reported problems for the EQ-5D-3L utility index score dimension: Usual activities. The EQ-5D-3L descriptive system consists of 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels: 1=no problems; 2=some problems; 3= extreme problems. Reported are the percentage of patients with problem, consisting of both level 2 (some problems) and level 3 (extreme problems) with the remaining subjects having reported level 1 (no problems).
Percentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Pain/DiscomfortBaseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.Percentage of patients with reported problems for the EQ-5D-3L utility index score dimension: Pain/discomfort. The EQ-5D-3L descriptive system consists of 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels: 1=no problems; 2=some problems; 3= extreme problems. Reported are the percentage of patients with problem, consisting of both level 2 (some problems) and level 3 (extreme problems) with the remaining subjects having reported level 1 (no problems).
Patient-rated Average Symptom Burden Index (ASBI) Score of Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS)Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.Patient-rated ASBI score of LCSS at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study) is reported. The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Each item was scored on a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with scores reported from 0 to 100 with 0 representing the best score. ASBI score was calculated by the mean of the 6 major lung cancer symptoms (loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis). For a given assessment, if any of the six symptom-specific questions had not been completed, the ASBI score was not calculated.
EQ-VAS ScoreBaseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.EQ-VAS score at enrolment and at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). The EQ-VAS is a visual analogue scale (VAS) that takes values between 100 (best imaginable health) and 0 (worst imaginable health), on which patients provide a global assessment of their health.
Percentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 0Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.Percentage of participants with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) score 0 at baseline and at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). ECOG has 6 grades (0-5, where 0 is the best possible score and 5 the worst): 0 = Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction. 1. = Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature, e.g., light house work, office work. 2. = Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out any work activities. Up and about more than 50% of waking hours. 3. = Capable of only limited selfcare, confined to bed or chair more than 50% of waking hours. 4. = Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any selfcare. Totally confined to bed or chair. 5. = Dead.
Percentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 1Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.Percentage of participants with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) score 1 at baseline and at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). ECOG has 6 grades (0-5, where 0 is the best possible score and 5 the worst): 0 = Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction. 1. = Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature, e.g., light house work, office work. 2. = Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out any work activities. Up and about more than 50% of waking hours. 3. = Capable of only limited selfcare, confined to bed or chair more than 50% of waking hours. 4. = Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any selfcare. Totally confined to bed or chair. 5. = Dead.
Percentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 2Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.Percentage of participants with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) score 2 at baseline and at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). ECOG has 6 grades (0-5, where 0 is the best possible score and 5 the worst): 0 = Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction. 1. = Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature, e.g., light house work, office work. 2. = Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out any work activities. Up and about more than 50% of waking hours. 3. = Capable of only limited selfcare, confined to bed or chair more than 50% of waking hours. 4. = Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any selfcare. Totally confined to bed or chair. 5. = Dead.
Percentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 3Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.Percentage of participants with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) score 3 at baseline and at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). ECOG has 6 grades (0-5, where 0 is the best possible score and 5 the worst): 0 = Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction. 1. = Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature, e.g., light house work, office work. 2. = Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out any work activities. Up and about more than 50% of waking hours. 3. = Capable of only limited selfcare, confined to bed or chair more than 50% of waking hours. 4. = Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any selfcare. Totally confined to bed or chair. 5. = Dead.
Percentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 4Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.Percentage of participants with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) score 4 at baseline and at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). ECOG has 6 grades (0-5, where 0 is the best possible score and 5 the worst): 0 = Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction. 1. = Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature, e.g., light house work, office work. 2. = Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out any work activities. Up and about more than 50% of waking hours. 3. = Capable of only limited selfcare, confined to bed or chair more than 50% of waking hours. 4. = Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any selfcare. Totally confined to bed or chair. 5. = Dead.
Ratio of Afatinib Tablets Actually Taken to Doses Prescribed Over the Study Participation PeriodUp to 42 months.Ratio of afatinib tablets actually taken to doses prescribed over the study participation period. Ratio = doses taken / doses prescribed.
Number of Patients With a Reason for Missing Afatinib TabletsUp to 42 months.Number of patients with a reason for missing afatinib tablets. One participant can have multiple missing doses for multiple reasons.
Number of Patients With a Reason for Discontinuation of AfatinibUp to 42 months.Number of patients with a reason for discontinuation of Afatinib throughout the study observation period.
Number of Patients With a Reason for Treatment InterruptionsUp to 42 months.Number of patients with a reason for treatment interruptions throughout the study observation period. One participant can have multiple interruptions for multiple reasons.
Number of Participants With Afatinib Interruptions or Dose ModificationsUp to 42 months.Number of participants with Afatinib interruptions or dose modifications (i.e., a dose increase or decrease).
Number of Patients With a Reason for Dose ReductionUp to 42 months.Number of patients with a reason for dose reduction throughout the study observation period.
Number of Patients With a Reason for Dose IncreaseUp to 42 months.Number of patients with a reason for dose increase throughout the study observation period.
Percentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Anxiety/DepressionBaseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.Percentage of patients with reported problems for the EQ-5D-3L utility index score dimension: Anxiety/depression. The EQ-5D-3L descriptive system consists of 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels: 1=no problems; 2=some problems; 3= extreme problems. Reported are the percentage of patients with problem, consisting of both level 2 (some problems) and level 3 (extreme problems) with the remaining subjects having reported level 1 (no problems).

Countries

Greece

Participant flow

Recruitment details

This was a non-interventional, multicentre, cohort study, based on new data collection, which included a representative sample of patients with advanced/metastatic Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in Greece.

Pre-assignment details

Patients were treated according to the local prescribing information of the study medication (afatinib, GIOTRIF®) and routine medical practice in terms of visit frequency and types of assessments performed. The assignment of the patient to this therapeutic strategy was not decided in advance by the study protocol but fell within current practice and the prescription of afatinib was clearly separated from the physician's decision to include the patient in the current study.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With Afatinib
Patients with advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in Greece treated with afatinib. Patients were treated as per the routine medical practice in terms of visit frequency, types of assessments performed and with adherence to the local prescribing requirements for afatinib. Patients were observed in the context of the study until the end of study participation, defined as a maximum of 48 months after afatinib treatment initiation or until disease progression, death, withdrawal of consent, unacceptable toxicity, study completion or physician's decision whichever occurred earlier.
77
Total77

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000
Overall StudyAfatinib discontinuation46
Overall StudyDeath6
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up10
Overall StudyRelocation of patient1
Overall Studystopped study at earlier timepoint14
Overall StudyStudy medication not received1
Overall StudyViolation of inclusion criteria2

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicPatients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With Afatinib
Age, Continuous66.9 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
77 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
48 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
29 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
7 / 80
other
Total, other adverse events
56 / 77
serious
Total, serious adverse events
49 / 77

Outcome results

Primary

Number of Patients Who Experienced a Minimum Clinically Important Improvement in Symptoms Over 6 Months of Treatment

Number of patients who experience a minimum clinically important improvement in symptoms is reported. A patient was categorized as having an improvement if the mean score of any two consecutive post-baseline Average Symptom Burden Index (ASBI) score of Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) assessments for that patient was at least 10 points below the patient's ASBI score of LCSS at enrolment, over 6 months of treatment. The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Each item is scored on a 100-millimeter (mm) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with score reported from 0 to 100, with 0 representing the best score. ASBI score was calculated by the mean of the 6 major lung cancer symptoms (loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis). For a given assessment, if any of the six symptom-specific questions was not completed, the ASBI score was not calculated.

Time frame: Baseline and 6 months following start of treatment.

Population: All eligible subjects that have received at least one dose of afatinib in the study and who had two consecutive post-baseline Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Average Symptom Burden Index (ASBI) assessments over the 6-month treatment period.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Patients Who Experienced a Minimum Clinically Important Improvement in Symptoms Over 6 Months of Treatment13 Participants
Secondary

EQ-VAS Score

EQ-VAS score at enrolment and at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). The EQ-VAS is a visual analogue scale (VAS) that takes values between 100 (best imaginable health) and 0 (worst imaginable health), on which patients provide a global assessment of their health.

Time frame: Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who provided data to this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibEQ-VAS ScoreMonth 3685.4 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.1
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibEQ-VAS ScoreBaseline75.5 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.7
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibEQ-VAS ScoreMonth 275.4 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 15
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibEQ-VAS ScoreMonth 477.2 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 13.6
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibEQ-VAS ScoreMonth 677.1 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.6
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibEQ-VAS ScoreMonth 876.3 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 18.8
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibEQ-VAS ScoreMonth 1076.6 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 18.4
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibEQ-VAS ScoreMonth 1280.0 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.1
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibEQ-VAS ScoreMonth 1879.0 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.4
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibEQ-VAS ScoreMonth 2478.6 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 14.9
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibEQ-VAS ScoreMonth 3076.2 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 18.4
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibEQ-VAS ScoreMonth 4285.0 Score on a scale
Comparison: Baseline vs 2-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.098Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Comparison: Baseline vs 4-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.359Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Comparison: Baseline vs 6-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.393Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Comparison: Baseline vs 8-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.055Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Comparison: Baseline vs 10-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.124Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Comparison: Baseline vs 12-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.376Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Comparison: Baseline vs 18-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.033Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Comparison: Baseline vs 24-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.048Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Comparison: Baseline vs 30-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.071Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Comparison: Baseline vs 36-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.848Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Secondary

Number of Participants With Afatinib Interruptions or Dose Modifications

Number of participants with Afatinib interruptions or dose modifications (i.e., a dose increase or decrease).

Time frame: Up to 42 months.

Population: All eligible subjects that have received at least one dose of Afatinib in the study.

ArmMeasureCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Participants With Afatinib Interruptions or Dose ModificationsNo interruptions/dosage modifications42 Participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Participants With Afatinib Interruptions or Dose ModificationsInterruptions & Dosage modifications17 Participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Participants With Afatinib Interruptions or Dose ModificationsDosage modifications only9 Participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Participants With Afatinib Interruptions or Dose ModificationsInterruptions only9 Participants
Secondary

Number of Patients With a Reason for Discontinuation of Afatinib

Number of patients with a reason for discontinuation of Afatinib throughout the study observation period.

Time frame: Up to 42 months.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who discontinued treatment.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Patients With a Reason for Discontinuation of AfatinibAdverse event7 Participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Patients With a Reason for Discontinuation of AfatinibDisease progression43 Participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Patients With a Reason for Discontinuation of AfatinibLost to follow-up4 Participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Patients With a Reason for Discontinuation of AfatinibPatient's non-compliance1 Participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Patients With a Reason for Discontinuation of AfatinibPhysician's decision1 Participants
Secondary

Number of Patients With a Reason for Dose Increase

Number of patients with a reason for dose increase throughout the study observation period.

Time frame: Up to 42 months.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who had a dose increase.

ArmMeasureCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Patients With a Reason for Dose IncreaseAdverse event resolution1 Participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Patients With a Reason for Dose IncreasePhysician's decision (with no further specification)2 Participants
Secondary

Number of Patients With a Reason for Dose Reduction

Number of patients with a reason for dose reduction throughout the study observation period.

Time frame: Up to 42 months.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who had a dose reduction.

ArmMeasureCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Patients With a Reason for Dose ReductionAdverse event/Disease progression23 Participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Patients With a Reason for Dose ReductionPhysician's decision (with no further specification)1 Participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Patients With a Reason for Dose ReductionPhysician's decision due to patient's impaired general health state1 Participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Patients With a Reason for Dose ReductionPhysician's decision due to patient's impaired performance status1 Participants
Secondary

Number of Patients With a Reason for Missing Afatinib Tablets

Number of patients with a reason for missing afatinib tablets. One participant can have multiple missing doses for multiple reasons.

Time frame: Up to 42 months.

Population: All subjects who were evaluable for treatment adherence and had missed doses. One participant can have multiple missing doses for multiple reasons.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Patients With a Reason for Missing Afatinib TabletsPatients' initiative due to adverse event11 Participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Patients With a Reason for Missing Afatinib TabletsPatient's negligence1 Participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Patients With a Reason for Missing Afatinib TabletsTravel1 Participants
Secondary

Number of Patients With a Reason for Treatment Interruptions

Number of patients with a reason for treatment interruptions throughout the study observation period. One participant can have multiple interruptions for multiple reasons.

Time frame: Up to 42 months.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who had treatment interruptions. One participant can have multiple interruptions for multiple reasons.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Patients With a Reason for Treatment InterruptionsAdverse event/Disease progression24 Participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Patients With a Reason for Treatment InterruptionsPhysician's advice due to receipt of antibiotic therapy2 Participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Patients With a Reason for Treatment InterruptionsSurgery2 Participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Patients With a Reason for Treatment InterruptionsTravel1 Participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Patients With a Reason for Treatment InterruptionsPhysician's decision while waiting for the liquid biopsy results1 Participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibNumber of Patients With a Reason for Treatment InterruptionsScheduled dental work1 Participants
Secondary

Patient-rated Average Symptom Burden Index (ASBI) Score of Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS)

Patient-rated ASBI score of LCSS at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study) is reported. The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Each item was scored on a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with scores reported from 0 to 100 with 0 representing the best score. ASBI score was calculated by the mean of the 6 major lung cancer symptoms (loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis). For a given assessment, if any of the six symptom-specific questions had not been completed, the ASBI score was not calculated.

Time frame: Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who provided data to this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Average Symptom Burden Index (ASBI) Score of Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS)Baseline14.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.2
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Average Symptom Burden Index (ASBI) Score of Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS)Month 211.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 10.3
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Average Symptom Burden Index (ASBI) Score of Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS)Month 49.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 9
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Average Symptom Burden Index (ASBI) Score of Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS)Month 67.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.3
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Average Symptom Burden Index (ASBI) Score of Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS)Month 87.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.3
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Average Symptom Burden Index (ASBI) Score of Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS)Month 107.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.7
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Average Symptom Burden Index (ASBI) Score of Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS)Month 127.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 10.5
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Average Symptom Burden Index (ASBI) Score of Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS)Month 185.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.4
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Average Symptom Burden Index (ASBI) Score of Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS)Month 246.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.5
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Average Symptom Burden Index (ASBI) Score of Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS)Month 307.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.1
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Average Symptom Burden Index (ASBI) Score of Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS)Month 3611.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.9
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Average Symptom Burden Index (ASBI) Score of Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS)Month 421.0 score on a scale
Comparison: Baseline vs 2-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.002t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 4-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.014t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 6-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.246t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 8-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.103t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 10-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.004t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 12-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 18-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.012t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 24-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.024t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 30-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.009t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 36-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.008t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Patient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Cough

Patient-rated LCSS individual item scores: Cough at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Cough was scored on a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with scores reported from 0 to 100 with 0 representing the best score.

Time frame: Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who provided data to this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: CoughBaseline14.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 21.5
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: CoughMonth 26.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 10.9
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: CoughMonth 48.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 14.5
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: CoughMonth 64.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.1
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: CoughMonth 84.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.5
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: CoughMonth 104.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.1
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: CoughMonth 126.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 13.5
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: CoughMonth 182.4 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.1
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: CoughMonth 244.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.6
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: CoughMonth 3010.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.2
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: CoughMonth 365.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.6
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: CoughMonth 420.0 score on a scale
Comparison: Baseline vs 2-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 4-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 6-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 8-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 10-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 12-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 18-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 24-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 30-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.002t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 36-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.025t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Patient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Dyspnoea

Patient-rated LCSS individual item scores: Dyspnoea at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Dyspnoea was scored on a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with scores reported from 0 to 100 with 0 representing the best score.

Time frame: Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who provided data to this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: DyspnoeaBaseline10.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.4
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: DyspnoeaMonth 27.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.5
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: DyspnoeaMonth 45.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 11.6
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: DyspnoeaMonth 63.4 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.4
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: DyspnoeaMonth 83.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.9
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: DyspnoeaMonth 104.4 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 9.1
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: DyspnoeaMonth 125.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 13.7
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: DyspnoeaMonth 182.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.9
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: DyspnoeaMonth 243.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.9
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: DyspnoeaMonth 308.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 13.4
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: DyspnoeaMonth 365.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 10
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: DyspnoeaMonth 420.0 score on a scale
Comparison: Baseline vs 2-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 4-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 6-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 8-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 10-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 12-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 18-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 24-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 30-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.003t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 36-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.025t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Patient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Fatigue

Patient-rated LCSS individual item scores: Fatigue at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Fatigue was scored on a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with scores reported from 0 to 100 with 0 representing the best score.

Time frame: Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who provided data to this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: FatigueBaseline27.4 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 26.1
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: FatigueMonth 222.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 21.8
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: FatigueMonth 420.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 18.3
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: FatigueMonth 616.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.9
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: FatigueMonth 817.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.9
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: FatigueMonth 1017.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.5
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: FatigueMonth 1214.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.1
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: FatigueMonth 1812.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.5
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: FatigueMonth 2414.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.8
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: FatigueMonth 3012.4 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.1
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: FatigueMonth 3625.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.3
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: FatigueMonth 426.0 score on a scale
Comparison: Baseline vs 2-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.003t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 4-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.009t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 6-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.012t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 8-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.332t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 10-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.029t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 12-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 18-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.177t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 24-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.436t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 30-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.302t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 36-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.291t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Patient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Global Quality of Life (QoL)

Patient-rated LCSS individual item scores: Global Quality of Life (QoL) at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Global Quality of Life (QoL) was scored on a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with scores reported from 0 to 100 with 0 representing the best score. ASBI score was calculated by the mean of the 6 major lung cancer symptoms (loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis). For a given assessment, if any of the six symptom-specific questions had not been completed, the ASBI score was not calculated.

Time frame: Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who provided data to this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Global Quality of Life (QoL)Baseline29.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 24.8
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Global Quality of Life (QoL)Month 227.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 23
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Global Quality of Life (QoL)Month 423.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 18.6
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Global Quality of Life (QoL)Month 623.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 21.8
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Global Quality of Life (QoL)Month 826.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 23
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Global Quality of Life (QoL)Month 1024.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.6
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Global Quality of Life (QoL)Month 1221.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Global Quality of Life (QoL)Month 1818.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.8
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Global Quality of Life (QoL)Month 2422.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.1
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Global Quality of Life (QoL)Month 3023.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Global Quality of Life (QoL)Month 3636.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 34.1
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Global Quality of Life (QoL)Month 4212.0 score on a scale
Comparison: Baseline vs 2-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.062t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 4-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.062t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 6-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.027t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 8-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.17t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 10-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.271t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 12-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.002t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 18-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.003t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 24-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.157t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 30-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.064t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 36-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.439t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Patient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Haemoptysis

Patient-rated LCSS individual item scores: Haemoptysis at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Haemoptysis was scored on a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with scores reported from 0 to 100 with 0 representing the best score.

Time frame: Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who provided data to this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: HaemoptysisBaseline1.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 5
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: HaemoptysisMonth 21.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.9
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: HaemoptysisMonth 41.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.4
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: HaemoptysisMonth 60.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.5
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: HaemoptysisMonth 81.4 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.4
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: HaemoptysisMonth 101.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.8
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: HaemoptysisMonth 121.4 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.3
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: HaemoptysisMonth 181.4 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.4
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: HaemoptysisMonth 240.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.5
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: HaemoptysisMonth 300.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.5
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: HaemoptysisMonth 360.4 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: HaemoptysisMonth 420.0 score on a scale
Comparison: Baseline vs 2-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 4-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 6-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 8-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 10-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 12-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 18-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 24-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 30-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 36-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Patient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Interference With Normal Activity

Patient-rated LCSS individual item scores: Interference with normal activity at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Interference with normal activity was scored on a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with scores reported from 0 to 100 with 0 representing the best score. ASBI score was calculated by the mean of the 6 major lung cancer symptoms (loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis). For a given assessment, if any of the six symptom-specific questions had not been completed, the ASBI score was not calculated.

Time frame: Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who provided data to this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Interference With Normal ActivityBaseline22.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 26.3
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Interference With Normal ActivityMonth 219.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.8
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Interference With Normal ActivityMonth 416.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.4
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Interference With Normal ActivityMonth 616.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.1
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Interference With Normal ActivityMonth 818.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.9
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Interference With Normal ActivityMonth 1015.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.5
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Interference With Normal ActivityMonth 1216.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.4
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Interference With Normal ActivityMonth 1812.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.4
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Interference With Normal ActivityMonth 2415.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 12
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Interference With Normal ActivityMonth 3017.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 14.3
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Interference With Normal ActivityMonth 3610.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.9
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Interference With Normal ActivityMonth 4213.0 score on a scale
Comparison: Baseline vs 2-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 4-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.004t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 6-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.008t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 8-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.315t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 10-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.237t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 12-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 18-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.002t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 24-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.004t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 30-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.01t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 36-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.683t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Patient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Loss of Appetite

Patient-rated LCSS individual item scores: Loss of appetite at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Loss of appetite was scored on a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with scores reported from 0 to 100 with 0 representing the best score.

Time frame: Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who provided data to this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Loss of AppetiteBaseline17.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 21.9
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Loss of AppetiteMonth 221.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 26.2
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Loss of AppetiteMonth 415.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.9
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Loss of AppetiteMonth 614.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 23.9
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Loss of AppetiteMonth 812.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.4
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Loss of AppetiteMonth 1013.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 22.6
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Loss of AppetiteMonth 1211.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.6
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Loss of AppetiteMonth 188.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 14.8
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Loss of AppetiteMonth 247.4 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.3
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Loss of AppetiteMonth 307.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 10
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Loss of AppetiteMonth 3628.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 32.2
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Loss of AppetiteMonth 420.0 score on a scale
Comparison: Baseline vs 10-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 2-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 4-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.003t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 6-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 8-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 12-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 18-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 24-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 30-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 36-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.163t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Patient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Overall Symptomatic Distress

Patient-rated LCSS individual item scores: Overall symptomatic distress at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Overall symptomatic distress was scored on a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with scores reported from 0 to 100 with 0 representing the best score. ASBI score was calculated by the mean of the 6 major lung cancer symptoms (loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis). For a given assessment, if any of the six symptom-specific questions had not been completed, the ASBI score was not calculated.

Time frame: Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who provided data to this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Overall Symptomatic DistressBaseline16.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.7
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Overall Symptomatic DistressMonth 215.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.6
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Overall Symptomatic DistressMonth 417.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Overall Symptomatic DistressMonth 613.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.3
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Overall Symptomatic DistressMonth 814.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.7
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Overall Symptomatic DistressMonth 1012.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 14.5
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Overall Symptomatic DistressMonth 1212.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 13.4
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Overall Symptomatic DistressMonth 1812.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.7
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Overall Symptomatic DistressMonth 2411.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.7
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Overall Symptomatic DistressMonth 3011.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.3
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Overall Symptomatic DistressMonth 368.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.1
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Overall Symptomatic DistressMonth 4210.0 score on a scale
Comparison: Baseline vs 2-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.022t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 4-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 6-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.004t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 8-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.032t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 10-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.066t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 12-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.042t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 18-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.045t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 24-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.014t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 30-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.015t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 36-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.462t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Patient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: Pain

Patient-rated LCSS individual item scores: Pain at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Pain was scored on a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with scores reported from 0 to 100 with 0 representing the best score.

Time frame: Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who provided data to this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: PainBaseline12.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.4
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: PainMonth 29.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.3
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: PainMonth 44.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.6
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: PainMonth 63.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.4
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: PainMonth 87.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 14.2
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: PainMonth 106.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 11.4
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: PainMonth 126.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 10.9
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: PainMonth 184.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.7
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: PainMonth 247.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 14
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: PainMonth 305.4 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.3
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: PainMonth 364.4 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.9
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Individual Item Scores: PainMonth 420.0 score on a scale
Comparison: Baseline vs 2-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 4-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 6-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 8-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 10-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 12-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 18-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 24-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 30-month post-baseline.p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 36-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.002t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Patient-rated Total Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Score

Patient-rated total LCSS score -defined as the average of the aggregate score of all 9 items that comprise the LCSS- at enrolment and at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). The patient-rated scale consists of six symptom-specific questions that address loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis. Each item was scored on a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), with scores reported from 0 to 100 with 0 representing the best score. ASBI score was calculated by the mean of the 6 major lung cancer symptoms (loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnoea, pain and haemoptysis). For a given assessment, if any of the six symptom-specific questions had not been completed, the ASBI score was not calculated.

Time frame: Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who provided data to this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Total Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) ScoreBaseline17.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 13.1
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Total Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) ScoreMonth 214.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 11.3
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Total Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) ScoreMonth 412.4 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 10.1
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Total Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) ScoreMonth 610.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 9.2
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Total Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) ScoreMonth 811.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.6
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Total Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) ScoreMonth 1011.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 9.3
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Total Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) ScoreMonth 1210.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 10.6
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Total Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) ScoreMonth 188.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.8
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Total Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) ScoreMonth 249.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.7
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Total Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) ScoreMonth 3010.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.8
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Total Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) ScoreMonth 3613.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.1
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPatient-rated Total Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) ScoreMonth 424.6 score on a scale
Comparison: Baseline vs 2-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.027t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 4-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.03t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 6-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.351t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 8-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.143t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 10-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.163t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 12-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.001t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 18-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.003t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 24-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.036t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 30-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.043t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Baseline vs 36-month post-baseline.p-value: 0.04t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 0

Percentage of participants with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) score 0 at baseline and at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). ECOG has 6 grades (0-5, where 0 is the best possible score and 5 the worst): 0 = Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction. 1. = Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature, e.g., light house work, office work. 2. = Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out any work activities. Up and about more than 50% of waking hours. 3. = Capable of only limited selfcare, confined to bed or chair more than 50% of waking hours. 4. = Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any selfcare. Totally confined to bed or chair. 5. = Dead.

Time frame: Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who provided data to this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 0Baseline59.7 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 0Month 279.4 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 0Month 483.1 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 0Month 676.9 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 0Month 872.9 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 0Month 1073.8 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 0Month 1272.5 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 0Month 1880.8 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 0Month 2469.6 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 0Month 30100 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 0Month 36100 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 0Month 42100 Percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 1

Percentage of participants with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) score 1 at baseline and at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). ECOG has 6 grades (0-5, where 0 is the best possible score and 5 the worst): 0 = Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction. 1. = Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature, e.g., light house work, office work. 2. = Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out any work activities. Up and about more than 50% of waking hours. 3. = Capable of only limited selfcare, confined to bed or chair more than 50% of waking hours. 4. = Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any selfcare. Totally confined to bed or chair. 5. = Dead.

Time frame: Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who provided data to this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 1Baseline28.6 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 1Month 217.5 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 1Month 411.9 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 1Month 621.2 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 1Month 827.1 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 1Month 1026.2 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 1Month 1225.0 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 1Month 1815.4 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 1Month 2426.1 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 1Month 300 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 1Month 360 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 1Month 420 Percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 2

Percentage of participants with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) score 2 at baseline and at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). ECOG has 6 grades (0-5, where 0 is the best possible score and 5 the worst): 0 = Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction. 1. = Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature, e.g., light house work, office work. 2. = Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out any work activities. Up and about more than 50% of waking hours. 3. = Capable of only limited selfcare, confined to bed or chair more than 50% of waking hours. 4. = Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any selfcare. Totally confined to bed or chair. 5. = Dead.

Time frame: Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who provided data to this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 2Baseline9.1 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 2Month 23.2 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 2Month 45.1 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 2Month 61.9 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 2Month 80 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 2Month 100 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 2Month 122.5 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 2Month 180 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 2Month 240 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 2Month 300 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 2Month 360 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 2Month 420 Percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 3

Percentage of participants with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) score 3 at baseline and at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). ECOG has 6 grades (0-5, where 0 is the best possible score and 5 the worst): 0 = Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction. 1. = Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature, e.g., light house work, office work. 2. = Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out any work activities. Up and about more than 50% of waking hours. 3. = Capable of only limited selfcare, confined to bed or chair more than 50% of waking hours. 4. = Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any selfcare. Totally confined to bed or chair. 5. = Dead.

Time frame: Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who provided data to this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 3Baseline1.3 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 3Month 20 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 3Month 40 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 3Month 60 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 3Month 80 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 3Month 100 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 3Month 120 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 3Month 183.8 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 3Month 244.3 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 3Month 300 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 3Month 360 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 3Month 420 Percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 4

Percentage of participants with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) score 4 at baseline and at the post-baseline predefined timepoints (i.e., every 2 months (± 3 weeks) during the first 12 months of therapy and every 6 months (±3 weeks) thereafter until the end of patient's participation in the study). ECOG has 6 grades (0-5, where 0 is the best possible score and 5 the worst): 0 = Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction. 1. = Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature, e.g., light house work, office work. 2. = Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out any work activities. Up and about more than 50% of waking hours. 3. = Capable of only limited selfcare, confined to bed or chair more than 50% of waking hours. 4. = Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any selfcare. Totally confined to bed or chair. 5. = Dead.

Time frame: Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who provided data to this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 4Baseline1.3 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 4Month 20 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 4Month 40 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 4Month 60 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 4Month 80 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 4Month 100 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 4Month 120 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 4Month 180 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 4Month 240 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 4Month 300 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 4Month 360 Percentage of participants
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) Score 4Month 420 Percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Anxiety/Depression

Percentage of patients with reported problems for the EQ-5D-3L utility index score dimension: Anxiety/depression. The EQ-5D-3L descriptive system consists of 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels: 1=no problems; 2=some problems; 3= extreme problems. Reported are the percentage of patients with problem, consisting of both level 2 (some problems) and level 3 (extreme problems) with the remaining subjects having reported level 1 (no problems).

Time frame: Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who provided data to this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Anxiety/DepressionBaseline51.3 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Anxiety/DepressionMonth 264.3 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Anxiety/DepressionMonth 459.3 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Anxiety/DepressionMonth 653.2 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Anxiety/DepressionMonth 850.0 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Anxiety/DepressionMonth 1055.6 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Anxiety/DepressionMonth 1247.4 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Anxiety/DepressionMonth 1848.0 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Anxiety/DepressionMonth 2463.6 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Anxiety/DepressionMonth 3050.0 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Anxiety/DepressionMonth 3650.0 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Anxiety/DepressionMonth 42100 Percentage of patients
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 2 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: 0.21McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 4 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: 0.263McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 6 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 8 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 10 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: 0.629McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 12 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 18 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 24 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 30 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 36 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Secondary

Percentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Mobility

Percentage of patients with reported problems for the EQ-5D-3L utility index score dimension: Mobility. The EQ-5D-3L descriptive system consists of 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels: 1=no problems; 2=some problems; 3= extreme problems. Reported are the percentage of patients with problem, consisting of both level 2 (some problems) and level 3 (extreme problems) with the remaining subjects having reported level 1 (no problems).

Time frame: Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who provided data to this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: MobilityBaseline44.7 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: MobilityMonth 230.4 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: MobilityMonth 422.2 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: MobilityMonth 617.0 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: MobilityMonth 835.0 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: MobilityMonth 1030.6 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: MobilityMonth 1228.9 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: MobilityMonth 1828.0 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: MobilityMonth 2427.3 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: MobilityMonth 3010.0 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: MobilityMonth 3625.0 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: MobilityMonth 420 Percentage of patients
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 2 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: 0.388McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 4 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: 0.006McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 6 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: 0.077McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 8 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 10 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: 0.508McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 12 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 18 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 24 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 30 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 36 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Secondary

Percentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Pain/Discomfort

Percentage of patients with reported problems for the EQ-5D-3L utility index score dimension: Pain/discomfort. The EQ-5D-3L descriptive system consists of 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels: 1=no problems; 2=some problems; 3= extreme problems. Reported are the percentage of patients with problem, consisting of both level 2 (some problems) and level 3 (extreme problems) with the remaining subjects having reported level 1 (no problems).

Time frame: Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who provided data to this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Pain/DiscomfortBaseline47.4 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Pain/DiscomfortMonth 225.0 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Pain/DiscomfortMonth 416.7 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Pain/DiscomfortMonth 614.9 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Pain/DiscomfortMonth 830.0 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Pain/DiscomfortMonth 1025.0 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Pain/DiscomfortMonth 1228.9 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Pain/DiscomfortMonth 1820.0 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Pain/DiscomfortMonth 2422.7 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Pain/DiscomfortMonth 3030.0 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Pain/DiscomfortMonth 3625.0 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Pain/DiscomfortMonth 420 Percentage of patients
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 2 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: 0.077McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 4 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: <0.001McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 6 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: 0.006McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 8 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: 0.344McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 10 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: 0.146McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 12 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: 0.18McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 18 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: 0.289McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 24 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: 0.125McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 30 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 36 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: 0.5McNemar
Secondary

Percentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Self-care

Percentage of patients with reported problems for the EQ-5D-3L utility index score dimension: Self-care. The EQ-5D-3L descriptive system consists of 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels: 1=no problems; 2=some problems; 3= extreme problems. Reported are the percentage of patients with problem, consisting of both level 2 (some problems) and level 3 (extreme problems) with the remaining subjects having reported level 1 (no problems).

Time frame: Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who provided data to this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Self-careBaseline22.4 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Self-careMonth 214.3 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Self-careMonth 416.7 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Self-careMonth 614.9 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Self-careMonth 812.5 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Self-careMonth 108.3 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Self-careMonth 1210.5 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Self-careMonth 1812.0 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Self-careMonth 2413.6 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Self-careMonth 3010.0 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Self-careMonth 3612.5 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Self-careMonth 420 Percentage of patients
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 2 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 4 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 6 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 8 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 10 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 12 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 18 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Secondary

Percentage of Patients With Reported Problems for theEuropean Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Usual Activities

Percentage of patients with reported problems for the EQ-5D-3L utility index score dimension: Usual activities. The EQ-5D-3L descriptive system consists of 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels: 1=no problems; 2=some problems; 3= extreme problems. Reported are the percentage of patients with problem, consisting of both level 2 (some problems) and level 3 (extreme problems) with the remaining subjects having reported level 1 (no problems).

Time frame: Baseline (Day 0) and at month 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 post baseline.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who provided data to this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for theEuropean Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Usual ActivitiesBaseline39.5 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for theEuropean Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Usual ActivitiesMonth 233.9 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for theEuropean Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Usual ActivitiesMonth 429.6 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for theEuropean Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Usual ActivitiesMonth 621.3 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for theEuropean Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Usual ActivitiesMonth 830.0 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for theEuropean Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Usual ActivitiesMonth 1027.8 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for theEuropean Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Usual ActivitiesMonth 1231.6 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for theEuropean Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Usual ActivitiesMonth 1824.0 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for theEuropean Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Usual ActivitiesMonth 2413.6 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for theEuropean Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Usual ActivitiesMonth 3040.0 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for theEuropean Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Usual ActivitiesMonth 3612.5 Percentage of patients
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibPercentage of Patients With Reported Problems for theEuropean Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Utility Index Score Dimension: Usual ActivitiesMonth 420 Percentage of patients
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 2 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: 0.774McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 4 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 6 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: 0.607McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 8 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: 0.774McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 10 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 12 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: 0.453McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 18 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: 0.688McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 24 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 30 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: 0.25McNemar
Comparison: Shift in patient distribution between baseline and Month 36 post-baseline, according to problems/no problems.p-value: >0.999McNemar
Secondary

Ratio of Afatinib Tablets Actually Taken to Doses Prescribed Over the Study Participation Period

Ratio of afatinib tablets actually taken to doses prescribed over the study participation period. Ratio = doses taken / doses prescribed.

Time frame: Up to 42 months.

Population: All eligible subjects who have been enrolled into the study regardless of whether or not they have finally completed their projected participation in the study and who were evaluable for treatment adherence.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated With AfatinibRatio of Afatinib Tablets Actually Taken to Doses Prescribed Over the Study Participation Period0.99 RatioStandard Deviation 0.02

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