Skip to content

Durvalumab ± Tremelimumab in Combination With Platinum Based Chemotherapy in Untreated Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer (CASPIAN)

A Phase III, Randomized, Multicenter,Open-Label, Comparative Study to Determine the Efficacy of Durvalumab or Durvalumab and Tremelimumab in Combination With Platinum-Based Chemotherapy for the First-Line Treatment in Patients With Extensive Disease Small-Cell Lung Cancer (SCLC) (CASPIAN)

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03043872
Acronym
CASPIAN
Enrollment
987
Registered
2017-02-06
Start date
2017-03-27
Completion date
2026-12-31
Last updated
2026-07-16

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

Conditions

Small Cell Lung Carcinoma Extensive Disease

Keywords

Carcinoma, Small Cell Lung, Oat Cell Carcinoma of Lung, Oat Cell Lung Cancer, Small Cell Cancer Of The Lung, Small Cell Lung Cancer

Brief summary

This is a phase III, randomized, open-label, multicenter, global study to determine the efficacy and safety of combining durvalumab ± tremelimumab with platinum based chemotherapy (EP) followed by durvalumab ± tremelimumab maintenance therapy versus EP alone as first-line treatment in patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer

Detailed description

Primary objective of this study is to assess the efficacy of durvalumab + tremelimumab + EP treatment compared with EP and the efficacy of durvalumab + EP treatment compared with EP in terms of OS. All patients will be randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio in a stratified manner according to the planned platinum-based therapy for Cycle 1 (cisplatin or carboplatin) to receive treatment with durvalumab + tremelimumab + EP (Arm 1), durvalumab + EP (Arm 2), or standard of care- EP (Arm 3). Arm 1 and Arm 2 patients receive the treatment until confirmed disease progression while Arm 3 patients receive up to 6 cycles of EP and prophylactic cranial irradiation if clinically indicated, at the Investigators' discretion.Patients who have discontinued treatment due to toxicity or symptomatic deterioration, clinical progression, or who have commenced subsequent anticancer therapy will be followed up until confirmed disease progression and for survival. Targeted population are adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically or cytologically documented extensive disease (American Joint Committee on Cancer Stage (7th edition) IV SCLC \[T any, N any,M1 a/b\]), or T3-4 due to multiple lung nodules that are too extensive or have tumor/nodal volume that is too large to be encompassed in a tolerable radiation plan. Patients must have WHO/ECOG performance status of 0 or 1. Tumor assessments will be performed at Screening as baseline with follow-up at Week 6 ±1 week from the date of randomization, at Week 12 ±1 week from the date of randomization, and then every 8 weeks ±1 week until confirmed objective disease progression. An independent data monitoring committee (IDMC) comprised of independent experts will be convened to confirm the safety and tolerability of the proposed dose and schedule of durvalumab ± tremelimumab in combination with platinum based chemotherapy at two early stages of enrolment.

Interventions

DRUGDurvalumab

IV infusions every 3 weeks for 12 weeks (4 cycles) and every 4 weeks thereafter until PD or other discontinuation criteria.

DRUGTremelimumab

IV infusions every 3 weeks for 12 weeks(4 cycles). An additional dose of tremelimumab will be administered in the week 16.

DRUGCarboplatin

up to 4 cycles every 3 weeks in Arm 1 and 2, up to 6 cycles every 3 weeks in Arm 3

DRUGCisplatin

up to 4 cycles every 3 weeks in Arm 1 and 2, up to 6 cycles every 3 weeks in Arm 3

DRUGEtoposide

up to 4 cycles every 3 weeks in Arm 1 and 2, up to 6 cycles every 3 weeks in Arm 3

Sponsors

AstraZeneca
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 130 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

1. Histologically or cytologically documented extensive disease. Brain metastases; must be asymptomatic or treated and stable off steroids and anti-convulsants for at least 1 month prior to study treatment. 2. Suitable to receive a platinum-based chemotherapy regimen as 1st line treatment. 3. Life expectancy ≥12 weeks at Day 1. 4. ECOG 0 or 1 at enrolment. 5. No prior exposure to immune-mediated therapy excluding therapeutic anticancer vaccines.

Exclusion criteria

1. Any history of radiotherapy to the chest prior to systemic therapy or planned consolidation chest radiation therapy (except paliative care outside of the chest). 2. Paraneoplastic syndrome of autoimmune nature, requiring systemic treatment or clinical symptomatology suggesting worsening of PNS 3. Active infection including tuberculosis, HIV, hepatitis B anc C 4. Active or prior documented autoimmune or inflammatory disorders 5. Uncontrolled intercurrent illness, including but not limited to interstitial lung disease.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Overall Survival (OS) in the Global Cohort; Assessed at Global Cohort Interim Analysis; D + EP Compared With EPFrom baseline until death due to any cause. Assessed until global cohort interim analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 23 months).OS was defined as the time from date of randomization until death due to any cause. Any patient not known to have died at the time of analysis was censored based on the last recorded date on which the patient was known to be alive. Median OS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique. An interim analysis of OS in the global cohort was pre-specified after approximately 318 OS events occurred each between the D + EP and EP groups (60% maturity), and between the D + T + EP and EP groups (60% maturity). At the global cohort interim analysis DCO (11 March 2019), comparison of OS in the D + EP versus (vs) EP groups had crossed the pre-specified boundary. Since these results were considered final in terms of formal statistical testing, they are presented here as a primary outcome measure. Analysis of OS for D + EP vs EP and for D + T + EP vs EP at the time of the global cohort final analysis is presented separately in the subsequent primary outcome measure.
OS in the Global Cohort; Assessed at Global Cohort Final Analysis; D + EP Compared With EP and D + T + EP Compared With EPFrom baseline until death due to any cause. Assessed until global cohort final analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 33 months).OS was defined as the time from date of randomization until death due to any cause. Any patient not known to have died at the time of analysis was censored based on the last recorded date on which the patient was known to be alive. Median OS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique. This primary outcome measure presents OS for the analysis of D + EP vs EP and D + T + EP vs EP at the time of the global cohort final analysis DCO (27 January 2020). Analysis of D + EP vs EP at the global cohort interim analysis DCO is presented in the previous primary outcome measure. Analysis of D + T + EP vs D + EP (global cohort final analysis) is presented as a secondary outcome measure.
OS in the China Cohort; Assessed at China Cohort First Analysis; D + EP Compared With EPFrom baseline until death due to any cause. Assessed until China cohort first analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 19 months).OS was defined as the time from date of randomization until death due to any cause. Any patient not known to have died at the time of analysis was censored based on the last recorded date on which the patient was known to be alive. Median OS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique. An analysis of OS for D + EP vs EP in the China cohort was pre-specified at approximately 60% maturity (to ensure a similar maturity to the interim analysis of the Global cohort). This primary outcome measure presents OS for analysis of D + EP vs EP at the China cohort first analysis DCO (06 January 2020), and is comparable in terms of maturity with the interim analysis of OS for D + EP vs EP in the Global cohort. Analysis of OS for D + EP vs EP and for D + T + EP vs EP at the time of the China cohort second analysis is presented separately in the subsequent primary outcome measure.
OS in the China Cohort; Assessed at China Cohort Second Analysis; D + EP Compared With EP and D + T + EP Compared With EPFrom baseline until death due to any cause. Assessed until China cohort second analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 29 months).OS was defined as the time from date of randomization until death due to any cause. Any patient not known to have died at the time of analysis was censored based on the last recorded date on which the patient was known to be alive. Median OS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique. An analysis of OS for D + T + EP vs EP in the China cohort was pre-specified at approximately 80% maturity (to ensure a similar maturity to the final analysis of the Global cohort). This primary outcome measure presents OS for analysis of D + EP vs EP and D + T + EP vs EP at the time of the China cohort second analysis DCO (02 November 2020), and is comparable in terms of maturity with the final analysis of OS for D + EP vs EP and D + T + EP vs EP in the Global cohort. Analysis of D + EP vs EP at the China cohort first analysis DCO is presented in the previous primary outcome measure. Analysis of D + T + EP vs D + EP (China cohort second analysis) is presented as a secondary outcome measure.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
OS in the Global Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With D + EPFrom baseline until death due to any cause. Assessed until global cohort final analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 33 months).OS was defined as the time from the date of randomization until death due to any cause. Any patient not known to have died at the time of analysis was censored based on the last recorded date on which the patient was known to be alive. Median OS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique. This secondary outcome measure presents OS for the analysis of D + T + EP vs D + EP in the global cohort. The alternative treatment comparisons in the global cohort were performed as primary outcome measures.
Progression-Free Survival (PFS) in the Global CohortTumour scans performed at baseline, Week 6, Week 12 then every 8 weeks relative to the date of randomization until RECIST 1.1-defined progression. Assessed until global cohort final analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 33 months).PFS (per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 \[RECIST 1.1\] using Investigator assessments) was defined as time from date of randomization until date of objective disease progression or death (by any cause in the absence of progression), regardless of whether the patient withdrew from randomized therapy or received another anticancer therapy prior to progression. Progression (ie, PD) was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions (TLs), taking as reference the smallest previous sum of diameters (nadir) and an absolute increase of ≥5 millimeters (mm) for the sum from nadir. For evaluation of non-target lesions (NTLs), PD was defined as unequivocal progression of existing NTLs. Median PFS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique.
Objective Response Rate (ORR) in the Global CohortTumour scans performed at baseline, Week 6, Week 12 then every 8 weeks relative to the date of randomization until RECIST 1.1-defined progression. Assessed until global cohort final analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 33 months).ORR (per RECIST 1.1 using Investigator assessments) was defined as the percentage of patients with at least 1 visit response of Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR). CR was defined as disappearance of all TLs since baseline (any pathological lymph nodes selected as TLs must have a reduction in short axis diameter to \<10 mm) or disappearance of all NTLs since baseline (all lymph nodes must be non-pathological in size \[\<10 mm short axis\]). PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of TLs (taking as reference the baseline sum of diameters).
Percentage of Patients Alive and Progression Free at 6 Months (APF6) in the Global CohortTumour scans performed at baseline, Week 6, Week 12 then every 8 weeks relative to the date of randomization until RECIST 1.1-defined progression. Assessed until 6 months post-randomization.The APF6 was defined as the percentage of patients who were alive and progression free at 6 months from randomization (ie, PFS rate at 6 months). PFS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique.
Percentage of Patients Alive and Progression Free at 12 Months (APF12) in the Global CohortTumour scans performed at baseline, Week 6, Week 12 then every 8 weeks relative to the date of randomization until RECIST 1.1-defined progression. Assessed until 12 months post-randomization.The APF12 was defined as the percentage of patients who were alive and progression free at 12 months from randomization (ie, PFS rate at 12 months). PFS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique.
Percentage of Patients Alive at 18 Months (OS18) in the Global CohortAt 18 months post-randomization. Assessed at the global cohort final analysis DCO (27 January 2020).OS18 was defined as the percentage of patients who were alive at 18 months after randomization per the Kaplan-Meier estimate of OS at 18 months.
Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Durvalumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the Global CohortSamples were collected post-dose on Day 1 (Week 0), and pre-dose on Weeks 3 and 12. Assessed at the global cohort final analysis DCO (27 January 2020).To evaluate PK, blood samples were collected at pre-specified timepoints and peak and trough serum concentrations of durvalumab were determined. Peak concentration on Week 0 is the post-infusion concentration of Week 0 (collected within 10 minutes of the end of infusion). Trough concentrations on Weeks 3 and 12 are the pre-infusion concentrations of Weeks 3 and 12, respectively.
PK of Tremelimumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the Global CohortSamples were collected post-dose on Day 1 (Week 0), and pre-dose on Weeks 3 and 12. Assessed at the global cohort final analysis DCO (27 January 2020).To evaluate PK, blood samples were collected at pre-specified timepoints and peak and trough serum concentrations of tremelimumab were determined. Peak concentration on Week 0 is the post-infusion concentration of Week 0 (collected within 10 minutes of the end of infusion). Trough concentrations on Weeks 3 and 12 are the pre-infusion concentrations of Weeks 3 and 12, respectively.
Number of Patients With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) Response to Durvalumab in the Global CohortSamples were collected on Day 1 (Week 0), Week 12 and at 3 months after the last dose of IP (ie, durvalumab). Assessed at the global cohort final analysis DCO (27 January 2020).Serum sampling for ADA assessment was conducted utilizing a tiered approach (screen, confirm, titer). ADA positive post-baseline only was also referred to as treatment-induced ADA. Treatment-emergent ADA was defined as the sum of treatment-induced ADA and treatment-boosted ADA (defined as baseline positive ADA titer that was boosted to ≥4-fold during the study period). Persistently positive was defined as having ≥2 post-baseline ADA positive measurements with ≥16 weeks between first and last positive, or an ADA positive result at the last available assessment. Transiently positive was defined as having ≥1 post-baseline ADA positive measurement and not fulfilling the conditions for persistently positive. Presence of neutralizing antibody (nAb) was tested for all ADA positive samples. Results are reported as number of patients with ADA responses to durvalumab for each indicated category.
Number of Patients With ADA Response to Tremelimumab in the Global CohortSamples were collected on Day 1 (Week 0), Week 12 and at 3 months after the last dose of IP (ie, tremelimumab). Assessed at the global cohort final analysis DCO (27 January 2020).Serum sampling for ADA assessment was conducted utilizing a tiered approach (screen, confirm, titer). ADA positive post-baseline only was also referred to as treatment-induced ADA. Treatment-emergent ADA (or ADA incidence) was defined as the sum of treatment-induced ADA and treatment-boosted ADA (defined as baseline positive ADA titer that was boosted to ≥4-fold during the study period). Persistently positive was defined as having ≥2 post-baseline ADA positive measurements with ≥16 weeks between first and last positive, or an ADA positive result at the last available assessment. Transiently positive was defined as having ≥1 post-baseline ADA positive measurement and not fulfilling the conditions for persistently positive. The presence of nAb was tested for all ADA positive samples. Results are reported as number of patients with ADA responses to tremelimumab for each indicated category.
Time to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortAt baseline, Weeks 3, 6, 9, 12, 16 and 20, then Q4W until PD, on Day 28 and 2 months post-PD, then every 8 weeks until second progression/death (whichever comes first). Assessed until global cohort final analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 33 months).The EORTC QLQ-Core 30 version 3 (QLQ-C30 v3) was included for assessing HRQoL. It assesses HRQoL/health status through 9 multi-item scales: 5 functional scales (physical, role, cognitive, emotional, and social), 3 symptom scales (fatigue, pain, and nausea and vomiting), and a global health and QoL scale. 6 single-item symptom measures are also included: dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, and financial difficulties. Scores from 0 to 100 were derived for each of the 15 domains, with higher scores representing greater functioning, greater HRQoL, or greater level of symptoms. Time to deterioration (calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique) was defined as time from randomization until the date of first clinically meaningful deterioration (a decrease in score from baseline of ≥10) that is confirmed at a subsequent visit or death (by any cause) in the absence of a clinically meaningful deterioration.
Time to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 (QLQ-LC13) in the Global CohortAt baseline, Weeks 3, 6, 9, 12, 16 and 20, then Q4W until PD, on Day 28 and 2 months post-PD, then every 8 weeks until second progression/death (whichever comes first). Assessed until global cohort final analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 33 months).The EORTC QLQ-LC13 is a disease-specific 13-item self-administered questionnaire for lung cancer, to be used in conjunction with the EORTC QLQ-C30. It comprises both multi-item and single-item measures of lung cancer-associated symptoms (ie, coughing, hemoptysis, dyspnea, and pain) and side effects from conventional chemotherapy and radiotherapy (ie, hair loss, neuropathy, sore mouth, and dysphagia). Scores from 0 to 100 were derived for each symptom item, with higher scores representing greater level of symptoms. Time to deterioration (calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique) was defined as time from randomization until the date of first clinically meaningful deterioration (an increase in score from baseline of ≥10) that is confirmed at a subsequent visit or death (by any cause) in the absence of a clinically meaningful deterioration.
Change From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the Global Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EPAt baseline, Weeks 3, 6, 9, 12, 16 and 20, then Q4W until PD, on Day 28 and 2 months post-PD, then every 8 weeks until second progression/death (whichever comes first). Assessed up to 12 months.A mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis of EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 was performed for 5 primary PRO symptoms (cough, dyspnea, chest pain, fatigue and appetite loss), and considered all data from baseline to PD or 12 months, excluding visits with excessive missing data (defined as \>75% missing data). An outcome variable consisting of a score from 0 to 100 was derived for each of the symptom scales/symptom items, with higher scores representing greater symptom severity. An improvement in symptoms was indicated by a negative change from baseline. A positive change from baseline indicated a deterioration of symptoms. A minimum clinically meaningful change was defined as an absolute change from baseline of ≥10. This outcome measure presents change from baseline for primary PRO symptoms (reported as adjusted means) for analysis of D + T + EP vs P. Analysis of D + EP vs EP is presented in a separate outcome measure.
Change From Baseline in Primary Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the Global Cohort; D + EP Compared With EPAt baseline, Weeks 3, 6, 9, 12, 16 and 20, then Q4W until PD, on Day 28 and 2 months post-PD, then every 8 weeks until second progression/death (whichever comes first). Assessed up to 12 months.A MMRM analysis of EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 was performed for 5 primary PRO symptoms (cough, dyspnea, chest pain, fatigue and appetite loss), and considered all data from baseline to PD or 12 months, excluding visits with excessive missing data (defined as \>75% missing data). An outcome variable consisting of a score from 0 to 100 was derived for each of the symptom scales/symptom items, with higher scores representing greater symptom severity. An improvement in symptoms was indicated by a negative change from baseline. A positive change from baseline indicated a deterioration of symptoms. A minimum clinically meaningful change was defined as an absolute change from baseline of ≥10. This outcome measure presents change from baseline for primary PRO symptoms (reported as adjusted means) for analysis of D + EP vs EP. Analysis of D + T + EP vs EP is presented in a separate outcome measure.
OS in the China Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With D + EPFrom baseline until death due to any cause. Assessed until China cohort second analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 29 months).OS was defined as the time from the date of randomization until death due to any cause. Any patient not known to have died at the time of analysis was censored based on the last recorded date on which the patient was known to be alive. Median OS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique. This secondary outcome measure presents OS for the analysis of D + T + EP vs D + EP at the China cohort second analysis DCO (02 November 2020). The alternative treatment comparisons were performed as primary outcome measures.
PFS in the China CohortTumour scans performed at baseline, Week 6, Week 12 then every 8 weeks relative to the date of randomization until RECIST 1.1-defined progression. Assessed until China cohort second analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 29 months).PFS (per RECIST 1.1 using Investigator assessments) was defined as time from date of randomization until date of objective disease progression or death (by any cause in the absence of progression), regardless of whether the patient withdrew from randomized therapy or received another anticancer therapy prior to progression. Progression (ie, PD) was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of TLs, taking as reference the smallest previous sum of diameters (nadir) and an absolute increase of ≥5 mm for the sum from nadir. For evaluation of NTLs, PD was defined as unequivocal progression of existing NTLs. Median PFS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique.
ORR in the China CohortTumour scans performed at baseline, Week 6, Week 12 then every 8 weeks relative to the date of randomization until RECIST 1.1-defined progression. Assessed until China cohort second analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 29 months).ORR (per RECIST 1.1 using Investigator assessments) was defined as the percentage of patients with at least 1 visit response of CR or PR. CR was defined as disappearance of all TLs since baseline (any pathological lymph nodes selected as TLs must have a reduction in short axis diameter to \<10 mm) or disappearance of all NTLs since baseline (all lymph nodes must be non-pathological in size \[\<10 mm short axis\]). PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of TLs (taking as reference the baseline sum of diameters).
APF6 in the China CohortTumour scans performed at baseline, Week 6, Week 12 then every 8 weeks relative to the date of randomization until RECIST 1.1-defined progression. Assessed until 6 months post-randomization.The APF6 was defined as the percentage of patients who were alive and progression free at 6 months from randomization (ie, PFS rate at 6 months). PFS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique.
APF12 in the China CohortTumour scans performed at baseline, Week 6, Week 12 then every 8 weeks relative to the date of randomization until RECIST 1.1-defined progression. Assessed until 12 months post-randomization.The APF12 was defined as the percentage of patients who were alive and progression free at 12 months from randomization (ie, PFS rate at 12 months). PFS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique.
OS18 in the China CohortAt 18 months post-randomization. Assessed at the China cohort second analysis DCO (02 November 2020).OS18 was defined as the percentage of patients who were alive at 18 months after randomization per the Kaplan-Meier estimate of OS at 18 months.
PK of Durvalumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the China CohortSamples were collected post-dose on Day 1 (Week 0), and pre-dose on Weeks 3 and 12. Assessed at the China cohort second analysis DCO (02 November 2020).To evaluate PK, blood samples were collected at pre-specified timepoints and peak and trough serum concentrations of durvalumab were determined. Peak concentration on Week 0 is the post-infusion concentration of Week 0 (collected within 10 minutes of the end of infusion). Trough concentrations on Weeks 3 and 12 are the pre-infusion concentrations of Weeks 3 and 12, respectively.
PK of Tremelimumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the China CohortSamples were collected post-dose on Day 1 (Week 0), and pre-dose on Weeks 3 and 12. Assessed at the China cohort second analysis DCO (02 November 2020).To evaluate PK, blood samples were collected at pre-specified timepoints and peak and trough serum concentrations of tremelimumab were determined. Peak concentration on Week 0 is the post-infusion concentration of Week 0 (collected within 10 minutes of the end of infusion). Trough concentrations on Weeks 3 and 12 are the pre-infusion concentrations of Weeks 3 and 12, respectively.
Number of Patients With ADA Response to Durvalumab in the China CohortSamples were collected on Day 1 (Week 0), Week 12 and at 3 months after the last dose of IP (ie, durvalumab). Assessed at the China cohort second analysis DCO (02 November 2020).Serum sampling for ADA assessment was conducted utilizing a tiered approach (screen, confirm, titer). ADA positive post-baseline only was also referred to as treatment-induced ADA. Treatment-emergent ADA was defined as the sum of treatment-induced ADA and treatment-boosted ADA (defined as baseline positive ADA titer that was boosted to ≥4-fold during the study period). Persistently positive was defined as having ≥2 post-baseline ADA positive measurements with ≥16 weeks between first and last positive, or an ADA positive result at the last available assessment. Transiently positive was defined as having ≥1 post-baseline ADA positive measurement and not fulfilling the conditions for persistently positive. Presence of nAb was tested for all ADA positive samples. Results are reported as number of patients with ADA responses to durvalumab for each indicated category.
Number of Patients With ADA Response to Tremelimumab in the China CohortSamples were collected on Day 1 (Week 0), Week 12 and at 3 months after the last dose of IP (ie, tremelimumab). Assessed at the China cohort second analysis DCO (02 November 2020).Serum sampling for ADA assessment was conducted utilizing a tiered approach (screen, confirm, titer). ADA positive post-baseline only was also referred to as treatment-induced ADA. Treatment-emergent ADA (or ADA incidence) was defined as the sum of treatment-induced ADA and treatment-boosted ADA (defined as baseline positive ADA titer that was boosted to ≥4-fold during the study period). Persistently positive was defined as having ≥2 post-baseline ADA positive measurements with ≥16 weeks between first and last positive, or an ADA positive result at the last available assessment. Transiently positive was defined as having ≥1 post-baseline ADA positive measurement and not fulfilling the conditions for persistently positive. The presence of nAb was tested for all ADA positive samples. Results are reported as number of patients with ADA responses to tremelimumab for each indicated category.
Time to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortAt baseline, Weeks 3, 6, 9, 12, 16 and 20, then Q4W until PD, on Day 28 and 2 months post-PD, then every 8 weeks until second progression/death (whichever comes first). Assessed until China cohort second analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 29 months).The EORTC QLQ-C30 v3 was included for assessing HRQoL. It assesses HRQoL/health status through 9 multi-item scales: 5 functional scales (physical, role, cognitive, emotional, and social), 3 symptom scales (fatigue, pain, and nausea and vomiting), and a global health and QoL scale. 6 single-item symptom measures are also included: dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, and financial difficulties. Scores from 0 to 100 were derived for each of the 15 domains, with higher scores representing greater functioning, greater HRQoL, or greater level of symptoms. Time to deterioration (calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique) was defined as time from randomization until the date of first clinically meaningful deterioration (a decrease in score from baseline of ≥10) that is confirmed at a subsequent visit or death (by any cause) in the absence of a clinically meaningful deterioration.
Time to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China CohortAt baseline, Weeks 3, 6, 9, 12, 16 and 20, then Q4W until PD, on Day 28 and 2 months post-PD, then every 8 weeks until second progression/death (whichever comes first). Assessed until China cohort second analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 29 months).The EORTC QLQ-LC13 is a disease-specific 13-item self-administered questionnaire for lung cancer, to be used in conjunction with the EORTC QLQ-C30. It comprises both multi-item and single-item measures of lung cancer-associated symptoms (ie, coughing, hemoptysis, dyspnea, and pain) and side effects from conventional chemotherapy and radiotherapy (ie, hair loss, neuropathy, sore mouth, and dysphagia). Scores from 0 to 100 were derived for each symptom item, with higher scores representing greater level of symptoms. Time to deterioration (calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique) was defined as time from randomization until the date of first clinically meaningful deterioration (an increase in score from baseline of ≥10) that is confirmed at a subsequent visit or death (by any cause) in the absence of a clinically meaningful deterioration.
Change From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EPAt baseline, Weeks 3, 6, 9, 12, 16 and 20, then Q4W until PD, on Day 28 and 2 months post-PD, then every 8 weeks until second progression/death (whichever comes first). Assessed up to 12 months.A MMRM analysis of EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 was performed for 5 primary PRO symptoms (cough, dyspnea, chest pain, fatigue and appetite loss), and considered all data from baseline to PD or 12 months, excluding visits with excessive missing data (defined as \>75% missing data). An outcome variable consisting of a score from 0 to 100 was derived for each of the symptom scales/symptom items, with higher scores representing greater symptom severity. An improvement in symptoms was indicated by a negative change from baseline. A positive change from baseline indicated a deterioration of symptoms. A minimum clinically meaningful change was defined as an absolute change from baseline of ≥10. This outcome measure presents change from baseline for primary PRO symptoms (reported as adjusted means) for analysis of D + T + EP vs EP. Analysis of D + EP vs EP is presented in a separate outcome measure.
Change From Baseline in Primary Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the China Cohort; D + EP Compared With EPAt baseline, Weeks 3, 6, 9, 12, 16 and 20, then Q4W until PD, on Day 28 and 2 months post-PD, then every 8 weeks until second progression/death (whichever comes first). Assessed up to 12 months.A MMRM analysis of EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 was performed for 5 primary PRO symptoms (cough, dyspnea, chest pain, fatigue and appetite loss), and considered all data from baseline to PD or 12 months, excluding visits with excessive missing data (defined as \>75% missing data). An outcome variable consisting of a score from 0 to 100 was derived for each of the symptom scales/symptom items, with higher scores representing greater symptom severity. An improvement in symptoms was indicated by a negative change from baseline. A positive change from baseline indicated a deterioration of symptoms. A minimum clinically meaningful change was defined as an absolute change from baseline of ≥10. This outcome measure presents change from baseline for primary PRO symptoms (reported as adjusted means) for analysis of D + EP vs EP. Analysis of D + T + EP vs EP is presented in a separate outcome measure.

Countries

Argentina, Austria, Brazil, Bulgaria, China, Czechia, France, Germany, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan, Turkey (Türkiye), Ukraine, United States

Contacts

STUDY_DIRECTORHaiyi Jiang, M.D.

AstraZeneca

Participant flow

Recruitment details

Study was conducted in 209 study centers across 23 countries. It included a global cohort (805 patients) and China cohort (188 patients). China cohort comprised 6 patients also in the global cohort and a further 182 patients randomized after end of global cohort recruitment. Results of the global and China cohorts were reported separately.

Pre-assignment details

Patients were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive treatment with durvalumab + tremelimumab + etoposide and platinum-based chemotherapy (EP), durvalumab + EP or EP alone. 987 participants were randomized in the study overall. Patients included in both cohorts for Started, Completed and Reasons for Not Completed are not double-counted for participant flow.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
All Patients: D + T + EP
During Chemotherapy: Patients received durvalumab (D) 1500 mg in combination with tremelimumab (T) 75 mg IV infusion Q3W for 4 doses/cycles (Weeks 0, 3, 6 and 9). For chemotherapy (EP), patients received etoposide (80-100 mg/m\^2) with either carboplatin (area under the curve 5-6) or cisplatin (75-80 mg/m\^2) IV infusion Q3W for 4 doses/cycles (Weeks 0, 3, 6 and 9). Post-Chemotherapy: Patients then continued to receive durvalumab 1500 mg IV infusion Q4W from Week 12 until PD, unless there was unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or another discontinuation criterion was met. Patients also received an additional dose of tremelimumab 75 mg IV infusion post-chemotherapy (in combination with durvalumab) at Week 16 if they completed all 4 doses of durvalumab + tremelimumab during chemotherapy.
329
All Patients: D + EP
During Chemotherapy: Patients received durvalumab (D) 1500 mg IV infusion Q3W for 4 doses/cycles (Weeks 0, 3, 6 and 9). For chemotherapy (EP), patients received etoposide (80-100 mg/m\^2) with either carboplatin (area under the curve 5-6) or cisplatin (75-80 mg/m\^2) IV infusion Q3W for 4 doses/cycles (Weeks 0, 3, 6 and 9). Post-Chemotherapy: Patients then continued to receive durvalumab 1500 mg IV infusion Q4W from Week 12 until PD, unless there was unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or another discontinuation criterion was met.
328
All Patients: EP
For chemotherapy (EP), patients received etoposide (80-100 mg/m\^2) with either carboplatin (area under the curve 5-6) or cisplatin (75-80 mg/m\^2) IV infusion Q3W for 4 doses/cycles (Weeks 0, 3, 6 and 9). An additional 2 doses of EP (at Weeks 12 and 15) could be given at the investigators' discretion if clinically indicated.
330
Total987

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicAll Patients: D + EPAll Patients: EPAll Patients: D + T + EPTotal
Age, Customized
Al Patients
<50
13 Participants28 Participants21 Participants62 Participants
Age, Customized
Al Patients
≥50 to <65
195 Participants169 Participants175 Participants539 Participants
Age, Customized
Al Patients
≥65 to <75
98 Participants110 Participants108 Participants316 Participants
Age, Customized
Al Patients
≥75
22 Participants23 Participants25 Participants70 Participants
Age, Customized
China Cohort
<50
3 Participants8 Participants5 Participants16 Participants
Age, Customized
China Cohort
≥50 to <65
39 Participants33 Participants40 Participants112 Participants
Age, Customized
China Cohort
≥65 to <75
16 Participants20 Participants17 Participants53 Participants
Age, Customized
China Cohort
≥75
3 Participants1 Participants3 Participants7 Participants
Age, Customized
Global Cohort
<50
10 Participants20 Participants16 Participants46 Participants
Age, Customized
Global Cohort
≥50 to <65
157 Participants137 Participants138 Participants432 Participants
Age, Customized
Global Cohort
≥65 to <75
82 Participants90 Participants91 Participants263 Participants
Age, Customized
Global Cohort
≥75
19 Participants22 Participants23 Participants64 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
All Patients
Hispanic or Latino
10 Participants6 Participants7 Participants23 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
All Patients
Not Hispanic or Latino
315 Participants322 Participants321 Participants958 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
All Patients
Unknown or Not Reported
3 Participants2 Participants1 Participants6 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
China Cohort
Hispanic or Latino
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
China Cohort
Not Hispanic or Latino
61 Participants62 Participants65 Participants188 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
China Cohort
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Global Cohort
Hispanic or Latino
10 Participants6 Participants7 Participants23 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Global Cohort
Not Hispanic or Latino
255 Participants261 Participants260 Participants776 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Global Cohort
Unknown or Not Reported
3 Participants2 Participants1 Participants6 Participants
Race
All Patients
Asian
96 Participants103 Participants108 Participants307 Participants
Race
All Patients
Black or African American
2 Participants3 Participants1 Participants6 Participants
Race
All Patients
Missing
0 Participants1 Participants0 Participants1 Participants
Race
All Patients
Other
1 Participants2 Participants5 Participants8 Participants
Race
All Patients
White
229 Participants221 Participants215 Participants665 Participants
Race
China Cohort
Asian
61 Participants62 Participants65 Participants188 Participants
Race
China Cohort
Black or African American
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race
China Cohort
Missing
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race
China Cohort
Other
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race
China Cohort
White
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race
Global Cohort
Asian
36 Participants42 Participants47 Participants125 Participants
Race
Global Cohort
Black or African American
2 Participants3 Participants1 Participants6 Participants
Race
Global Cohort
Missing
0 Participants1 Participants0 Participants1 Participants
Race
Global Cohort
Other
1 Participants2 Participants5 Participants8 Participants
Race
Global Cohort
White
229 Participants221 Participants215 Participants665 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
All Patients
Female
86 Participants95 Participants74 Participants255 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
All Patients
Male
242 Participants235 Participants255 Participants732 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
China Cohort
Female
9 Participants10 Participants8 Participants27 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
China Cohort
Male
52 Participants52 Participants57 Participants161 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Global Cohort
Female
78 Participants85 Participants66 Participants229 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Global Cohort
Male
190 Participants184 Participants202 Participants576 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
EG002
affected / at risk
EG003
affected / at risk
EG004
affected / at risk
EG005
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
225 / 266218 / 265247 / 26650 / 6551 / 6155 / 62
other
Total, other adverse events
249 / 266247 / 265248 / 26665 / 6561 / 6161 / 62
serious
Total, serious adverse events
126 / 26686 / 26597 / 26631 / 6526 / 6122 / 62

Outcome results

Primary

OS in the China Cohort; Assessed at China Cohort First Analysis; D + EP Compared With EP

OS was defined as the time from date of randomization until death due to any cause. Any patient not known to have died at the time of analysis was censored based on the last recorded date on which the patient was known to be alive. Median OS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique. An analysis of OS for D + EP vs EP in the China cohort was pre-specified at approximately 60% maturity (to ensure a similar maturity to the interim analysis of the Global cohort). This primary outcome measure presents OS for analysis of D + EP vs EP at the China cohort first analysis DCO (06 January 2020), and is comparable in terms of maturity with the interim analysis of OS for D + EP vs EP in the Global cohort. Analysis of OS for D + EP vs EP and for D + T + EP vs EP at the time of the China cohort second analysis is presented separately in the subsequent primary outcome measure.

Time frame: From baseline until death due to any cause. Assessed until China cohort first analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 19 months).

Population: The China FAS included all randomized patients in the China cohort. China cohort first analysis for OS was performed for comparison of the D + EP vs EP groups only.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
Global Cohort: D + EPOS in the China Cohort; Assessed at China Cohort First Analysis; D + EP Compared With EP14.4 months
Global Cohort: EPOS in the China Cohort; Assessed at China Cohort First Analysis; D + EP Compared With EP10.9 months
Comparison: D + EP vs EP. HR \<1 favors D + EP to be associated with a longer OS than EP. The study was not designed or powered to show statistical significance for efficacy endpoints in the China cohort, so all statistical analyses for the China cohort were considered exploratory.p-value: 0.066495% CI: [0.414, 1.029]Log Rank
Primary

OS in the China Cohort; Assessed at China Cohort Second Analysis; D + EP Compared With EP and D + T + EP Compared With EP

OS was defined as the time from date of randomization until death due to any cause. Any patient not known to have died at the time of analysis was censored based on the last recorded date on which the patient was known to be alive. Median OS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique. An analysis of OS for D + T + EP vs EP in the China cohort was pre-specified at approximately 80% maturity (to ensure a similar maturity to the final analysis of the Global cohort). This primary outcome measure presents OS for analysis of D + EP vs EP and D + T + EP vs EP at the time of the China cohort second analysis DCO (02 November 2020), and is comparable in terms of maturity with the final analysis of OS for D + EP vs EP and D + T + EP vs EP in the Global cohort. Analysis of D + EP vs EP at the China cohort first analysis DCO is presented in the previous primary outcome measure. Analysis of D + T + EP vs D + EP (China cohort second analysis) is presented as a secondary outcome measure.

Time frame: From baseline until death due to any cause. Assessed until China cohort second analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 29 months).

Population: The China FAS included all randomized patients in the China cohort.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
Global Cohort: D + EPOS in the China Cohort; Assessed at China Cohort Second Analysis; D + EP Compared With EP and D + T + EP Compared With EP16.1 months
Global Cohort: EPOS in the China Cohort; Assessed at China Cohort Second Analysis; D + EP Compared With EP and D + T + EP Compared With EP14.4 months
Global Cohort: EPOS in the China Cohort; Assessed at China Cohort Second Analysis; D + EP Compared With EP and D + T + EP Compared With EP10.9 months
Comparison: D + EP vs EP. HR \<1 favors D + EP to be associated with a longer OS than EP. The study was not designed or powered to show statistical significance for efficacy endpoints in the China cohort, so all statistical analyses for the China cohort were considered exploratory.p-value: 0.145595% CI: [0.504, 1.106]Log Rank
Comparison: D + T + EP vs EP. HR \<1 favors D + T + EP to be associated with a longer OS than EP. The study was not designed or powered to show statistical significance for efficacy endpoints in the China cohort, so all statistical analyses for the China cohort were considered exploratory.p-value: 0.031495% CI: [0.439, 0.964]Log Rank
Primary

OS in the Global Cohort; Assessed at Global Cohort Final Analysis; D + EP Compared With EP and D + T + EP Compared With EP

OS was defined as the time from date of randomization until death due to any cause. Any patient not known to have died at the time of analysis was censored based on the last recorded date on which the patient was known to be alive. Median OS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique. This primary outcome measure presents OS for the analysis of D + EP vs EP and D + T + EP vs EP at the time of the global cohort final analysis DCO (27 January 2020). Analysis of D + EP vs EP at the global cohort interim analysis DCO is presented in the previous primary outcome measure. Analysis of D + T + EP vs D + EP (global cohort final analysis) is presented as a secondary outcome measure.

Time frame: From baseline until death due to any cause. Assessed until global cohort final analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 33 months).

Population: The global FAS included all patients randomized prior to the end of global recruitment.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
Global Cohort: D + EPOS in the Global Cohort; Assessed at Global Cohort Final Analysis; D + EP Compared With EP and D + T + EP Compared With EP10.4 months
Global Cohort: EPOS in the Global Cohort; Assessed at Global Cohort Final Analysis; D + EP Compared With EP and D + T + EP Compared With EP12.9 months
Global Cohort: EPOS in the Global Cohort; Assessed at Global Cohort Final Analysis; D + EP Compared With EP and D + T + EP Compared With EP10.5 months
Comparison: D + EP vs EP. HR \<1 favors D + EP to be associated with a longer OS than EP.p-value: 0.003295% CI: [0.625, 0.91]Log Rank
Comparison: D + T + EP vs EP. The alpha level applied at the global cohort final analysis was adjusted (using a generalized Haybittle-Peto method) to account for actual alpha spent at the interim analysis based on the actual final total number of events, and thus maintain control of overall Type I error. Boundary for declaring statistical significance was 0.0418 for a 5% overall alpha.~HR \<1 favors D + T + EP to be associated with a longer OS than EP.p-value: 0.045195% CI: [0.682, 0.995]Log Rank
Primary

Overall Survival (OS) in the Global Cohort; Assessed at Global Cohort Interim Analysis; D + EP Compared With EP

OS was defined as the time from date of randomization until death due to any cause. Any patient not known to have died at the time of analysis was censored based on the last recorded date on which the patient was known to be alive. Median OS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique. An interim analysis of OS in the global cohort was pre-specified after approximately 318 OS events occurred each between the D + EP and EP groups (60% maturity), and between the D + T + EP and EP groups (60% maturity). At the global cohort interim analysis DCO (11 March 2019), comparison of OS in the D + EP versus (vs) EP groups had crossed the pre-specified boundary. Since these results were considered final in terms of formal statistical testing, they are presented here as a primary outcome measure. Analysis of OS for D + EP vs EP and for D + T + EP vs EP at the time of the global cohort final analysis is presented separately in the subsequent primary outcome measure.

Time frame: From baseline until death due to any cause. Assessed until global cohort interim analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 23 months).

Population: The global FAS included all patients randomized prior to the end of global recruitment. Interim analysis for OS in the global cohort was performed for comparison of the D + EP vs EP groups only.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
Global Cohort: D + EPOverall Survival (OS) in the Global Cohort; Assessed at Global Cohort Interim Analysis; D + EP Compared With EP13.0 months
Global Cohort: EPOverall Survival (OS) in the Global Cohort; Assessed at Global Cohort Interim Analysis; D + EP Compared With EP10.3 months
Comparison: D + EP vs EP. The global cohort interim analysis of OS was based on a Lan-DeMets alpha spending function with O'Brien Fleming type boundary, using the actual number of events observed as a proportion of the planned total. Boundary for declaring statistical significance was 0.0178 for a 4% overall alpha. Hazard Ratio (HR) \<1 favors D + EP to be associated with a longer OS than EP.p-value: 0.004795% CI: [0.591, 0.909]Log Rank
Secondary

APF12 in the China Cohort

The APF12 was defined as the percentage of patients who were alive and progression free at 12 months from randomization (ie, PFS rate at 12 months). PFS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique.

Time frame: Tumour scans performed at baseline, Week 6, Week 12 then every 8 weeks relative to the date of randomization until RECIST 1.1-defined progression. Assessed until 12 months post-randomization.

Population: The China FAS included all randomized patients in the China cohort.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Global Cohort: D + EPAPF12 in the China Cohort21.0 percentage of patients
Global Cohort: EPAPF12 in the China Cohort12.3 percentage of patients
Global Cohort: EPAPF12 in the China Cohort6.2 percentage of patients
Secondary

APF6 in the China Cohort

The APF6 was defined as the percentage of patients who were alive and progression free at 6 months from randomization (ie, PFS rate at 6 months). PFS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique.

Time frame: Tumour scans performed at baseline, Week 6, Week 12 then every 8 weeks relative to the date of randomization until RECIST 1.1-defined progression. Assessed until 6 months post-randomization.

Population: The China FAS included all randomized patients in the China cohort.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Global Cohort: D + EPAPF6 in the China Cohort43.7 percentage of patients
Global Cohort: EPAPF6 in the China Cohort35.2 percentage of patients
Global Cohort: EPAPF6 in the China Cohort43.1 percentage of patients
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the Global Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EP

A mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis of EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 was performed for 5 primary PRO symptoms (cough, dyspnea, chest pain, fatigue and appetite loss), and considered all data from baseline to PD or 12 months, excluding visits with excessive missing data (defined as \>75% missing data). An outcome variable consisting of a score from 0 to 100 was derived for each of the symptom scales/symptom items, with higher scores representing greater symptom severity. An improvement in symptoms was indicated by a negative change from baseline. A positive change from baseline indicated a deterioration of symptoms. A minimum clinically meaningful change was defined as an absolute change from baseline of ≥10. This outcome measure presents change from baseline for primary PRO symptoms (reported as adjusted means) for analysis of D + T + EP vs P. Analysis of D + EP vs EP is presented in a separate outcome measure.

Time frame: At baseline, Weeks 3, 6, 9, 12, 16 and 20, then Q4W until PD, on Day 28 and 2 months post-PD, then every 8 weeks until second progression/death (whichever comes first). Assessed up to 12 months.

Population: The global FAS included all patients randomized prior to the end of global recruitment. For each symptom scale, only patients with data available were included in the analysis.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Global Cohort: D + EPChange From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the Global Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Dyspnea-6.8 scores on a scaleStandard Error 1.6
Global Cohort: D + EPChange From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the Global Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-C30 Fatigue-6.1 scores on a scaleStandard Error 1.84
Global Cohort: D + EPChange From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the Global Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Chest pain-7.4 scores on a scaleStandard Error 1.65
Global Cohort: D + EPChange From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the Global Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-C30 Appetite loss-8.7 scores on a scaleStandard Error 2.02
Global Cohort: D + EPChange From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the Global Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Cough-15.1 scores on a scaleStandard Error 1.74
Global Cohort: EPChange From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the Global Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-C30 Appetite loss-9.5 scores on a scaleStandard Error 2.05
Global Cohort: EPChange From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the Global Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Cough-14.6 scores on a scaleStandard Error 1.76
Global Cohort: EPChange From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the Global Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Dyspnea-6.6 scores on a scaleStandard Error 1.62
Global Cohort: EPChange From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the Global Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Chest pain-7.0 scores on a scaleStandard Error 1.67
Global Cohort: EPChange From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the Global Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-C30 Fatigue-6.3 scores on a scaleStandard Error 1.86
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EP

A MMRM analysis of EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 was performed for 5 primary PRO symptoms (cough, dyspnea, chest pain, fatigue and appetite loss), and considered all data from baseline to PD or 12 months, excluding visits with excessive missing data (defined as \>75% missing data). An outcome variable consisting of a score from 0 to 100 was derived for each of the symptom scales/symptom items, with higher scores representing greater symptom severity. An improvement in symptoms was indicated by a negative change from baseline. A positive change from baseline indicated a deterioration of symptoms. A minimum clinically meaningful change was defined as an absolute change from baseline of ≥10. This outcome measure presents change from baseline for primary PRO symptoms (reported as adjusted means) for analysis of D + T + EP vs EP. Analysis of D + EP vs EP is presented in a separate outcome measure.

Time frame: At baseline, Weeks 3, 6, 9, 12, 16 and 20, then Q4W until PD, on Day 28 and 2 months post-PD, then every 8 weeks until second progression/death (whichever comes first). Assessed up to 12 months.

Population: The China FAS included all randomized patients in the China cohort. For each symptom scale, only patients with data available were included in the analysis.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Global Cohort: D + EPChange From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Cough-12.8 scores on a scaleStandard Error 2.49
Global Cohort: D + EPChange From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-C30 Fatigue2.8 scores on a scaleStandard Error 2.1
Global Cohort: D + EPChange From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-C30 Appetite loss3.0 scores on a scaleStandard Error 2.36
Global Cohort: D + EPChange From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Dyspnea-3.6 scores on a scaleStandard Error 2.21
Global Cohort: D + EPChange From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Chest pain-5.1 scores on a scaleStandard Error 2.16
Global Cohort: EPChange From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-C30 Appetite loss0.8 scores on a scaleStandard Error 2.42
Global Cohort: EPChange From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Dyspnea-0.8 scores on a scaleStandard Error 2.17
Global Cohort: EPChange From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Chest pain-5.4 scores on a scaleStandard Error 2.16
Global Cohort: EPChange From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Cough-12.9 scores on a scaleStandard Error 2.5
Global Cohort: EPChange From Baseline in Primary PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-C30 Fatigue2.9 scores on a scaleStandard Error 2.11
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Primary Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the China Cohort; D + EP Compared With EP

A MMRM analysis of EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 was performed for 5 primary PRO symptoms (cough, dyspnea, chest pain, fatigue and appetite loss), and considered all data from baseline to PD or 12 months, excluding visits with excessive missing data (defined as \>75% missing data). An outcome variable consisting of a score from 0 to 100 was derived for each of the symptom scales/symptom items, with higher scores representing greater symptom severity. An improvement in symptoms was indicated by a negative change from baseline. A positive change from baseline indicated a deterioration of symptoms. A minimum clinically meaningful change was defined as an absolute change from baseline of ≥10. This outcome measure presents change from baseline for primary PRO symptoms (reported as adjusted means) for analysis of D + EP vs EP. Analysis of D + T + EP vs EP is presented in a separate outcome measure.

Time frame: At baseline, Weeks 3, 6, 9, 12, 16 and 20, then Q4W until PD, on Day 28 and 2 months post-PD, then every 8 weeks until second progression/death (whichever comes first). Assessed up to 12 months.

Population: The China FAS included all randomized patients in the China cohort. For each symptom scale, only patients with data available were included in the analysis.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Global Cohort: D + EPChange From Baseline in Primary Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the China Cohort; D + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-C30 Appetite loss3.6 scores on a scaleStandard Error 2.47
Global Cohort: D + EPChange From Baseline in Primary Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the China Cohort; D + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Dyspnea-2.2 scores on a scaleStandard Error 1.93
Global Cohort: D + EPChange From Baseline in Primary Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the China Cohort; D + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Chest pain-6.7 scores on a scaleStandard Error 1.93
Global Cohort: D + EPChange From Baseline in Primary Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the China Cohort; D + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-C30 Fatigue1.5 scores on a scaleStandard Error 2.06
Global Cohort: D + EPChange From Baseline in Primary Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the China Cohort; D + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Cough-14.9 scores on a scaleStandard Error 2.66
Global Cohort: EPChange From Baseline in Primary Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the China Cohort; D + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-C30 Fatigue0.8 scores on a scaleStandard Error 2.11
Global Cohort: EPChange From Baseline in Primary Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the China Cohort; D + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Cough-16.7 scores on a scaleStandard Error 2.68
Global Cohort: EPChange From Baseline in Primary Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the China Cohort; D + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-C30 Appetite loss-2.2 scores on a scaleStandard Error 2.51
Global Cohort: EPChange From Baseline in Primary Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the China Cohort; D + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Dyspnea-3.0 scores on a scaleStandard Error 1.97
Global Cohort: EPChange From Baseline in Primary Symptoms as Assessed by EORTC QLQ in the China Cohort; D + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Chest pain-7.7 scores on a scaleStandard Error 1.95
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Primary Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the Global Cohort; D + EP Compared With EP

A MMRM analysis of EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 was performed for 5 primary PRO symptoms (cough, dyspnea, chest pain, fatigue and appetite loss), and considered all data from baseline to PD or 12 months, excluding visits with excessive missing data (defined as \>75% missing data). An outcome variable consisting of a score from 0 to 100 was derived for each of the symptom scales/symptom items, with higher scores representing greater symptom severity. An improvement in symptoms was indicated by a negative change from baseline. A positive change from baseline indicated a deterioration of symptoms. A minimum clinically meaningful change was defined as an absolute change from baseline of ≥10. This outcome measure presents change from baseline for primary PRO symptoms (reported as adjusted means) for analysis of D + EP vs EP. Analysis of D + T + EP vs EP is presented in a separate outcome measure.

Time frame: At baseline, Weeks 3, 6, 9, 12, 16 and 20, then Q4W until PD, on Day 28 and 2 months post-PD, then every 8 weeks until second progression/death (whichever comes first). Assessed up to 12 months.

Population: The global FAS included all patients randomized prior to the end of global recruitment. For each symptom scale, only patients with data available were included in the analysis.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Global Cohort: D + EPChange From Baseline in Primary Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the Global Cohort; D + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Dyspnea-7.1 scores on a scaleStandard Error 1.44
Global Cohort: D + EPChange From Baseline in Primary Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the Global Cohort; D + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-C30 Fatigue-5.8 scores on a scaleStandard Error 1.62
Global Cohort: D + EPChange From Baseline in Primary Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the Global Cohort; D + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Chest pain-7.8 scores on a scaleStandard Error 1.59
Global Cohort: D + EPChange From Baseline in Primary Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the Global Cohort; D + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-C30 Appetite loss-10.1 scores on a scaleStandard Error 1.73
Global Cohort: D + EPChange From Baseline in Primary Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the Global Cohort; D + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Cough-15.0 scores on a scaleStandard Error 1.64
Global Cohort: EPChange From Baseline in Primary Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the Global Cohort; D + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-C30 Appetite loss-7.6 scores on a scaleStandard Error 1.81
Global Cohort: EPChange From Baseline in Primary Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the Global Cohort; D + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Cough-15.4 scores on a scaleStandard Error 1.72
Global Cohort: EPChange From Baseline in Primary Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the Global Cohort; D + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Dyspnea-6.5 scores on a scaleStandard Error 1.5
Global Cohort: EPChange From Baseline in Primary Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the Global Cohort; D + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-LC13 Chest pain-7.2 scores on a scaleStandard Error 1.65
Global Cohort: EPChange From Baseline in Primary Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the Global Cohort; D + EP Compared With EPEORTC QLQ-C30 Fatigue-4.5 scores on a scaleStandard Error 1.69
Secondary

Number of Patients With ADA Response to Durvalumab in the China Cohort

Serum sampling for ADA assessment was conducted utilizing a tiered approach (screen, confirm, titer). ADA positive post-baseline only was also referred to as treatment-induced ADA. Treatment-emergent ADA was defined as the sum of treatment-induced ADA and treatment-boosted ADA (defined as baseline positive ADA titer that was boosted to ≥4-fold during the study period). Persistently positive was defined as having ≥2 post-baseline ADA positive measurements with ≥16 weeks between first and last positive, or an ADA positive result at the last available assessment. Transiently positive was defined as having ≥1 post-baseline ADA positive measurement and not fulfilling the conditions for persistently positive. Presence of nAb was tested for all ADA positive samples. Results are reported as number of patients with ADA responses to durvalumab for each indicated category.

Time frame: Samples were collected on Day 1 (Week 0), Week 12 and at 3 months after the last dose of IP (ie, durvalumab). Assessed at the China cohort second analysis DCO (02 November 2020).

Population: The China ADA evaluable patients included those in the China safety analysis set who had non-missing baseline ADA and at least 1 non-missing post-baseline ADA result. ADA for durvalumab was performed for the D + T + EP and D + EP groups only. The denominator was durvalumab ADA evaluable patients.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Durvalumab in the China CohortADA positive at baseline only0 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Durvalumab in the China CohortTreatment-emergent ADA positive (ADA incidence)0 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Durvalumab in the China CohortADA positive post-baseline and positive at baseline0 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Durvalumab in the China CohortADA positive at any visit (ADA prevalence)0 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Durvalumab in the China CohortPersistently positive0 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Durvalumab in the China CohortTreatment-boosted ADA0 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Durvalumab in the China CohortTransiently positive0 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Durvalumab in the China CohortnAb positive at any visit0 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Durvalumab in the China CohortTreatment-induced ADA (ADA positive post-baseline only)0 Participants
Global Cohort: EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Durvalumab in the China CohortnAb positive at any visit0 Participants
Global Cohort: EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Durvalumab in the China CohortADA positive at any visit (ADA prevalence)0 Participants
Global Cohort: EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Durvalumab in the China CohortTreatment-emergent ADA positive (ADA incidence)0 Participants
Global Cohort: EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Durvalumab in the China CohortTreatment-boosted ADA0 Participants
Global Cohort: EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Durvalumab in the China CohortADA positive at baseline only0 Participants
Global Cohort: EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Durvalumab in the China CohortADA positive post-baseline and positive at baseline0 Participants
Global Cohort: EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Durvalumab in the China CohortPersistently positive0 Participants
Global Cohort: EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Durvalumab in the China CohortTransiently positive0 Participants
Global Cohort: EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Durvalumab in the China CohortTreatment-induced ADA (ADA positive post-baseline only)0 Participants
Secondary

Number of Patients With ADA Response to Tremelimumab in the China Cohort

Serum sampling for ADA assessment was conducted utilizing a tiered approach (screen, confirm, titer). ADA positive post-baseline only was also referred to as treatment-induced ADA. Treatment-emergent ADA (or ADA incidence) was defined as the sum of treatment-induced ADA and treatment-boosted ADA (defined as baseline positive ADA titer that was boosted to ≥4-fold during the study period). Persistently positive was defined as having ≥2 post-baseline ADA positive measurements with ≥16 weeks between first and last positive, or an ADA positive result at the last available assessment. Transiently positive was defined as having ≥1 post-baseline ADA positive measurement and not fulfilling the conditions for persistently positive. The presence of nAb was tested for all ADA positive samples. Results are reported as number of patients with ADA responses to tremelimumab for each indicated category.

Time frame: Samples were collected on Day 1 (Week 0), Week 12 and at 3 months after the last dose of IP (ie, tremelimumab). Assessed at the China cohort second analysis DCO (02 November 2020).

Population: The China ADA evaluable patients included those in the China safety analysis set who had non-missing baseline ADA and at least 1 non-missing post-baseline ADA result. ADA for tremelimumab was performed for the D + T + EP group only. The denominator was tremelimumab ADA evaluable patients.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Tremelimumab in the China CohortTreatment-boosted ADA0 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Tremelimumab in the China CohortADA positive at any visit (ADA prevalence)3 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Tremelimumab in the China CohortTreatment-emergent ADA positive (ADA incidence)3 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Tremelimumab in the China CohortTreatment-induced ADA (ADA positive post-baseline only)3 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Tremelimumab in the China CohortADA positive at baseline only0 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Tremelimumab in the China CohortADA positive post-baseline and positive at baseline0 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Tremelimumab in the China CohortPersistently positive3 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Tremelimumab in the China CohortTransiently positive0 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Tremelimumab in the China CohortnAb positive at any visit0 Participants
Secondary

Number of Patients With ADA Response to Tremelimumab in the Global Cohort

Serum sampling for ADA assessment was conducted utilizing a tiered approach (screen, confirm, titer). ADA positive post-baseline only was also referred to as treatment-induced ADA. Treatment-emergent ADA (or ADA incidence) was defined as the sum of treatment-induced ADA and treatment-boosted ADA (defined as baseline positive ADA titer that was boosted to ≥4-fold during the study period). Persistently positive was defined as having ≥2 post-baseline ADA positive measurements with ≥16 weeks between first and last positive, or an ADA positive result at the last available assessment. Transiently positive was defined as having ≥1 post-baseline ADA positive measurement and not fulfilling the conditions for persistently positive. The presence of nAb was tested for all ADA positive samples. Results are reported as number of patients with ADA responses to tremelimumab for each indicated category.

Time frame: Samples were collected on Day 1 (Week 0), Week 12 and at 3 months after the last dose of IP (ie, tremelimumab). Assessed at the global cohort final analysis DCO (27 January 2020).

Population: The global ADA evaluable patients included those in the global safety analysis set who had non-missing baseline ADA and at least 1 non-missing post-baseline ADA result. ADA for tremelimumab was performed for the D + T + EP group only. The denominator was tremelimumab ADA evaluable patients.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Tremelimumab in the Global CohortADA positive at any visit (ADA prevalence)11 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Tremelimumab in the Global CohortTreatment-emergent ADA positive (ADA incidence)5 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Tremelimumab in the Global CohortTreatment-boosted ADA0 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Tremelimumab in the Global CohortTreatment-induced ADA (ADA positive post-baseline only)5 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Tremelimumab in the Global CohortADA positive at baseline only6 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Tremelimumab in the Global CohortADA positive post-baseline and positive at baseline0 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Tremelimumab in the Global CohortPersistently positive4 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Tremelimumab in the Global CohortTransiently positive1 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With ADA Response to Tremelimumab in the Global CohortnAb positive at any visit2 Participants
Secondary

Number of Patients With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) Response to Durvalumab in the Global Cohort

Serum sampling for ADA assessment was conducted utilizing a tiered approach (screen, confirm, titer). ADA positive post-baseline only was also referred to as treatment-induced ADA. Treatment-emergent ADA was defined as the sum of treatment-induced ADA and treatment-boosted ADA (defined as baseline positive ADA titer that was boosted to ≥4-fold during the study period). Persistently positive was defined as having ≥2 post-baseline ADA positive measurements with ≥16 weeks between first and last positive, or an ADA positive result at the last available assessment. Transiently positive was defined as having ≥1 post-baseline ADA positive measurement and not fulfilling the conditions for persistently positive. Presence of neutralizing antibody (nAb) was tested for all ADA positive samples. Results are reported as number of patients with ADA responses to durvalumab for each indicated category.

Time frame: Samples were collected on Day 1 (Week 0), Week 12 and at 3 months after the last dose of IP (ie, durvalumab). Assessed at the global cohort final analysis DCO (27 January 2020).

Population: The global ADA evaluable patients included those in the global safety analysis set who had non-missing baseline ADA and at least 1 non-missing post-baseline ADA result. ADA for durvalumab was performed for the D + T + EP and D + EP groups only. The denominator was durvalumab ADA evaluable patients.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) Response to Durvalumab in the Global CohortTreatment-emergent ADA positive (ADA incidence)0 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) Response to Durvalumab in the Global CohortADA positive post-baseline and positive at baseline0 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) Response to Durvalumab in the Global CohortTreatment-induced ADA (ADA positive post-baseline only)0 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) Response to Durvalumab in the Global CohortPersistently positive0 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) Response to Durvalumab in the Global CohortTreatment-boosted ADA0 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) Response to Durvalumab in the Global CohortTransiently positive0 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) Response to Durvalumab in the Global CohortADA positive at baseline only6 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) Response to Durvalumab in the Global CohortnAb positive at any visit1 Participants
Global Cohort: D + EPNumber of Patients With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) Response to Durvalumab in the Global CohortADA positive at any visit (ADA prevalence)6 Participants
Global Cohort: EPNumber of Patients With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) Response to Durvalumab in the Global CohortnAb positive at any visit0 Participants
Global Cohort: EPNumber of Patients With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) Response to Durvalumab in the Global CohortADA positive at any visit (ADA prevalence)11 Participants
Global Cohort: EPNumber of Patients With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) Response to Durvalumab in the Global CohortTreatment-emergent ADA positive (ADA incidence)0 Participants
Global Cohort: EPNumber of Patients With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) Response to Durvalumab in the Global CohortTreatment-boosted ADA0 Participants
Global Cohort: EPNumber of Patients With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) Response to Durvalumab in the Global CohortTreatment-induced ADA (ADA positive post-baseline only)0 Participants
Global Cohort: EPNumber of Patients With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) Response to Durvalumab in the Global CohortADA positive at baseline only11 Participants
Global Cohort: EPNumber of Patients With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) Response to Durvalumab in the Global CohortADA positive post-baseline and positive at baseline0 Participants
Global Cohort: EPNumber of Patients With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) Response to Durvalumab in the Global CohortPersistently positive0 Participants
Global Cohort: EPNumber of Patients With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) Response to Durvalumab in the Global CohortTransiently positive0 Participants
Secondary

Objective Response Rate (ORR) in the Global Cohort

ORR (per RECIST 1.1 using Investigator assessments) was defined as the percentage of patients with at least 1 visit response of Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR). CR was defined as disappearance of all TLs since baseline (any pathological lymph nodes selected as TLs must have a reduction in short axis diameter to \<10 mm) or disappearance of all NTLs since baseline (all lymph nodes must be non-pathological in size \[\<10 mm short axis\]). PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of TLs (taking as reference the baseline sum of diameters).

Time frame: Tumour scans performed at baseline, Week 6, Week 12 then every 8 weeks relative to the date of randomization until RECIST 1.1-defined progression. Assessed until global cohort final analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 33 months).

Population: The global FAS included all patients randomized prior to the end of global recruitment. The denominator was a subset of the FAS population who had measurable disease at baseline.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Global Cohort: D + EPObjective Response Rate (ORR) in the Global Cohort74.2 percentage of patients
Global Cohort: EPObjective Response Rate (ORR) in the Global Cohort79.5 percentage of patients
Global Cohort: EPObjective Response Rate (ORR) in the Global Cohort70.6 percentage of patients
Comparison: D + EP vs EP. An odds ratio \>1 favors D + EP.p-value: 0.017795% CI: [1.086, 2.401]Regression, Logistic
Comparison: D + T + EP vs EP. An odds ratio \>1 favors D + T + EP.p-value: 0.361195% CI: [0.817, 1.746]Regression, Logistic
Secondary

ORR in the China Cohort

ORR (per RECIST 1.1 using Investigator assessments) was defined as the percentage of patients with at least 1 visit response of CR or PR. CR was defined as disappearance of all TLs since baseline (any pathological lymph nodes selected as TLs must have a reduction in short axis diameter to \<10 mm) or disappearance of all NTLs since baseline (all lymph nodes must be non-pathological in size \[\<10 mm short axis\]). PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of TLs (taking as reference the baseline sum of diameters).

Time frame: Tumour scans performed at baseline, Week 6, Week 12 then every 8 weeks relative to the date of randomization until RECIST 1.1-defined progression. Assessed until China cohort second analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 29 months).

Population: The China FAS included all randomized patients in the China cohort.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Global Cohort: D + EPORR in the China Cohort84.6 percentage of patients
Global Cohort: EPORR in the China Cohort78.7 percentage of patients
Global Cohort: EPORR in the China Cohort72.6 percentage of patients
Comparison: D + EP vs EP. An odds ratio \>1 favors D + EP. The study was not designed or powered to show statistical significance for efficacy endpoints in the China cohort, so all statistical analyses for the China cohort were considered exploratory.p-value: 0.43295% CI: [0.61, 3.244]Regression, Logistic
Comparison: D + T + EP vs EP. An odds ratio \>1 favors D + T + EP. The study was not designed or powered to show statistical significance for efficacy endpoints in the China cohort, so all statistical analyses for the China cohort were considered exploratory.p-value: 0.098695% CI: [0.874, 5.118]Regression, Logistic
Secondary

OS18 in the China Cohort

OS18 was defined as the percentage of patients who were alive at 18 months after randomization per the Kaplan-Meier estimate of OS at 18 months.

Time frame: At 18 months post-randomization. Assessed at the China cohort second analysis DCO (02 November 2020).

Population: The China FAS included all randomized patients in the China cohort.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Global Cohort: D + EPOS18 in the China Cohort40.0 percentage of patients
Global Cohort: EPOS18 in the China Cohort36.1 percentage of patients
Global Cohort: EPOS18 in the China Cohort23.4 percentage of patients
Secondary

OS in the China Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With D + EP

OS was defined as the time from the date of randomization until death due to any cause. Any patient not known to have died at the time of analysis was censored based on the last recorded date on which the patient was known to be alive. Median OS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique. This secondary outcome measure presents OS for the analysis of D + T + EP vs D + EP at the China cohort second analysis DCO (02 November 2020). The alternative treatment comparisons were performed as primary outcome measures.

Time frame: From baseline until death due to any cause. Assessed until China cohort second analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 29 months).

Population: The China FAS included all randomized patients in the China cohort.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
Global Cohort: D + EPOS in the China Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With D + EP16.1 months
Global Cohort: EPOS in the China Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With D + EP14.4 months
Comparison: D + T + EP vs D + EP. HR \<1 favors D + T + EP to be associated with a longer OS than D + EP. The study was not designed or powered to show statistical significance for efficacy endpoints in the China cohort, so all statistical analyses for the China cohort were considered exploratory.p-value: 0.44795% CI: [0.574, 1.277]Log Rank
Secondary

OS in the Global Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With D + EP

OS was defined as the time from the date of randomization until death due to any cause. Any patient not known to have died at the time of analysis was censored based on the last recorded date on which the patient was known to be alive. Median OS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique. This secondary outcome measure presents OS for the analysis of D + T + EP vs D + EP in the global cohort. The alternative treatment comparisons in the global cohort were performed as primary outcome measures.

Time frame: From baseline until death due to any cause. Assessed until global cohort final analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 33 months).

Population: The global FAS included all patients randomized prior to the end of global recruitment.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
Global Cohort: D + EPOS in the Global Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With D + EP10.4 months
Global Cohort: EPOS in the Global Cohort; D + T + EP Compared With D + EP12.9 months
Comparison: D + T + EP vs D + EP. HR \<1 favors D + T + EP to be associated with a longer OS than D + EP.p-value: 0.435295% CI: [0.89, 1.309]Log Rank
Secondary

Percentage of Patients Alive and Progression Free at 12 Months (APF12) in the Global Cohort

The APF12 was defined as the percentage of patients who were alive and progression free at 12 months from randomization (ie, PFS rate at 12 months). PFS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique.

Time frame: Tumour scans performed at baseline, Week 6, Week 12 then every 8 weeks relative to the date of randomization until RECIST 1.1-defined progression. Assessed until 12 months post-randomization.

Population: The global FAS included all patients randomized prior to the end of global recruitment.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Global Cohort: D + EPPercentage of Patients Alive and Progression Free at 12 Months (APF12) in the Global Cohort16.9 percentage of patients
Global Cohort: EPPercentage of Patients Alive and Progression Free at 12 Months (APF12) in the Global Cohort17.9 percentage of patients
Global Cohort: EPPercentage of Patients Alive and Progression Free at 12 Months (APF12) in the Global Cohort5.3 percentage of patients
Secondary

Percentage of Patients Alive and Progression Free at 6 Months (APF6) in the Global Cohort

The APF6 was defined as the percentage of patients who were alive and progression free at 6 months from randomization (ie, PFS rate at 6 months). PFS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique.

Time frame: Tumour scans performed at baseline, Week 6, Week 12 then every 8 weeks relative to the date of randomization until RECIST 1.1-defined progression. Assessed until 6 months post-randomization.

Population: The global FAS included all patients randomized prior to the end of global recruitment.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Global Cohort: D + EPPercentage of Patients Alive and Progression Free at 6 Months (APF6) in the Global Cohort43.2 percentage of patients
Global Cohort: EPPercentage of Patients Alive and Progression Free at 6 Months (APF6) in the Global Cohort45.4 percentage of patients
Global Cohort: EPPercentage of Patients Alive and Progression Free at 6 Months (APF6) in the Global Cohort45.8 percentage of patients
Secondary

Percentage of Patients Alive at 18 Months (OS18) in the Global Cohort

OS18 was defined as the percentage of patients who were alive at 18 months after randomization per the Kaplan-Meier estimate of OS at 18 months.

Time frame: At 18 months post-randomization. Assessed at the global cohort final analysis DCO (27 January 2020).

Population: The global FAS included all patients randomized prior to the end of global recruitment.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Global Cohort: D + EPPercentage of Patients Alive at 18 Months (OS18) in the Global Cohort30.7 percentage of patients
Global Cohort: EPPercentage of Patients Alive at 18 Months (OS18) in the Global Cohort32.0 percentage of patients
Global Cohort: EPPercentage of Patients Alive at 18 Months (OS18) in the Global Cohort24.8 percentage of patients
Secondary

PFS in the China Cohort

PFS (per RECIST 1.1 using Investigator assessments) was defined as time from date of randomization until date of objective disease progression or death (by any cause in the absence of progression), regardless of whether the patient withdrew from randomized therapy or received another anticancer therapy prior to progression. Progression (ie, PD) was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of TLs, taking as reference the smallest previous sum of diameters (nadir) and an absolute increase of ≥5 mm for the sum from nadir. For evaluation of NTLs, PD was defined as unequivocal progression of existing NTLs. Median PFS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique.

Time frame: Tumour scans performed at baseline, Week 6, Week 12 then every 8 weeks relative to the date of randomization until RECIST 1.1-defined progression. Assessed until China cohort second analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 29 months).

Population: The China FAS included all randomized patients in the China cohort.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
Global Cohort: D + EPPFS in the China Cohort5.6 months
Global Cohort: EPPFS in the China Cohort4.9 months
Global Cohort: EPPFS in the China Cohort5.5 months
Comparison: D + EP vs EP. HR \<1 favors D + EP to be associated with a longer PFS than EP. The study was not designed or powered to show statistical significance for efficacy endpoints in the China cohort, so all statistical analyses for the China cohort were considered exploratory.p-value: 0.893495% CI: [0.661, 1.437]Log Rank
Comparison: D + T + EP vs EP. HR \<1 favors D + T + EP to be associated with a longer PFS than EP. The study was not designed or powered to show statistical significance for efficacy endpoints in the China cohort, so all statistical analyses for the China cohort were considered exploratory.p-value: 0.103595% CI: [0.487, 1.068]Log Rank
Comparison: D + T + EP vs D + EP. HR \<1 favors D + T + EP to be associated with a longer PFS than D + EP. The study was not designed or powered to show statistical significance for efficacy endpoints in the China cohort, so all statistical analyses for the China cohort were considered exploratory.p-value: 0.167395% CI: [0.522, 1.116]Log Rank
Secondary

Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Durvalumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the Global Cohort

To evaluate PK, blood samples were collected at pre-specified timepoints and peak and trough serum concentrations of durvalumab were determined. Peak concentration on Week 0 is the post-infusion concentration of Week 0 (collected within 10 minutes of the end of infusion). Trough concentrations on Weeks 3 and 12 are the pre-infusion concentrations of Weeks 3 and 12, respectively.

Time frame: Samples were collected post-dose on Day 1 (Week 0), and pre-dose on Weeks 3 and 12. Assessed at the global cohort final analysis DCO (27 January 2020).

Population: The global PK analysis set included all patients randomized prior to the end of global recruitment who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (IP), per the protocol for whom any post-dose PK data were available. PK for durvalumab was performed for the D + T + EP and D + EP groups only.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (GEOMETRIC_MEAN)Dispersion
Global Cohort: D + EPPharmacokinetics (PK) of Durvalumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the Global CohortWeek 0: peak concentration447.3 micrograms/milliliter (μg/mL)Geometric Coefficient of Variation 78.21
Global Cohort: D + EPPharmacokinetics (PK) of Durvalumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the Global CohortWeek 3: trough concentration91.86 micrograms/milliliter (μg/mL)Geometric Coefficient of Variation 74.36
Global Cohort: D + EPPharmacokinetics (PK) of Durvalumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the Global CohortWeek 12: trough concentration199.2 micrograms/milliliter (μg/mL)Geometric Coefficient of Variation 49.58
Global Cohort: EPPharmacokinetics (PK) of Durvalumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the Global CohortWeek 12: trough concentration239.3 micrograms/milliliter (μg/mL)Geometric Coefficient of Variation 50.68
Global Cohort: EPPharmacokinetics (PK) of Durvalumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the Global CohortWeek 0: peak concentration502.6 micrograms/milliliter (μg/mL)Geometric Coefficient of Variation 30.52
Global Cohort: EPPharmacokinetics (PK) of Durvalumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the Global CohortWeek 3: trough concentration109.5 micrograms/milliliter (μg/mL)Geometric Coefficient of Variation 64.55
Secondary

PK of Durvalumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the China Cohort

To evaluate PK, blood samples were collected at pre-specified timepoints and peak and trough serum concentrations of durvalumab were determined. Peak concentration on Week 0 is the post-infusion concentration of Week 0 (collected within 10 minutes of the end of infusion). Trough concentrations on Weeks 3 and 12 are the pre-infusion concentrations of Weeks 3 and 12, respectively.

Time frame: Samples were collected post-dose on Day 1 (Week 0), and pre-dose on Weeks 3 and 12. Assessed at the China cohort second analysis DCO (02 November 2020).

Population: The China PK analysis set included all patients in the China cohort who received at least 1 dose of IP, per the protocol for whom any post-dose PK data were available. PK for durvalumab was performed for the D + T + EP and D + EP groups only.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (GEOMETRIC_MEAN)Dispersion
Global Cohort: D + EPPK of Durvalumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the China CohortWeek 0: peak concentration429.4 μg/mLGeometric Coefficient of Variation 19.49
Global Cohort: D + EPPK of Durvalumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the China CohortWeek 3: trough concentration81.21 μg/mLGeometric Coefficient of Variation 46.14
Global Cohort: D + EPPK of Durvalumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the China CohortWeek 12: trough concentration151.0 μg/mLGeometric Coefficient of Variation 29.82
Global Cohort: EPPK of Durvalumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the China CohortWeek 0: peak concentration432.0 μg/mLGeometric Coefficient of Variation 91.79
Global Cohort: EPPK of Durvalumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the China CohortWeek 3: trough concentration96.24 μg/mLGeometric Coefficient of Variation 64.44
Global Cohort: EPPK of Durvalumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the China CohortWeek 12: trough concentration194.4 μg/mLGeometric Coefficient of Variation 53.34
Secondary

PK of Tremelimumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the China Cohort

To evaluate PK, blood samples were collected at pre-specified timepoints and peak and trough serum concentrations of tremelimumab were determined. Peak concentration on Week 0 is the post-infusion concentration of Week 0 (collected within 10 minutes of the end of infusion). Trough concentrations on Weeks 3 and 12 are the pre-infusion concentrations of Weeks 3 and 12, respectively.

Time frame: Samples were collected post-dose on Day 1 (Week 0), and pre-dose on Weeks 3 and 12. Assessed at the China cohort second analysis DCO (02 November 2020).

Population: The China PK analysis set included all patients in the China cohort who received at least 1 dose of IP, per the protocol for whom any post-dose PK data were available. PK for tremelimumab was performed for the D + T + EP group only.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (GEOMETRIC_MEAN)Dispersion
Global Cohort: D + EPPK of Tremelimumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the China CohortWeek 0: peak concentration24.34 μg/mLGeometric Coefficient of Variation 27.05
Global Cohort: D + EPPK of Tremelimumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the China CohortWeek 3: trough concentration4.530 μg/mLGeometric Coefficient of Variation 60.6
Global Cohort: D + EPPK of Tremelimumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the China CohortWeek 12: trough concentration9.523 μg/mLGeometric Coefficient of Variation 43.94
Secondary

PK of Tremelimumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the Global Cohort

To evaluate PK, blood samples were collected at pre-specified timepoints and peak and trough serum concentrations of tremelimumab were determined. Peak concentration on Week 0 is the post-infusion concentration of Week 0 (collected within 10 minutes of the end of infusion). Trough concentrations on Weeks 3 and 12 are the pre-infusion concentrations of Weeks 3 and 12, respectively.

Time frame: Samples were collected post-dose on Day 1 (Week 0), and pre-dose on Weeks 3 and 12. Assessed at the global cohort final analysis DCO (27 January 2020).

Population: The global PK analysis set included all patients randomized prior to the end of global recruitment who received at least 1 dose of IP, per the protocol for whom any post-dose PK data were available. PK for tremelimumab was performed for the D + T + EP group only.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (GEOMETRIC_MEAN)Dispersion
Global Cohort: D + EPPK of Tremelimumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the Global CohortWeek 0: peak concentration22.77 μg/mLGeometric Coefficient of Variation 52.15
Global Cohort: D + EPPK of Tremelimumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the Global CohortWeek 3: trough concentration4.245 μg/mLGeometric Coefficient of Variation 81.68
Global Cohort: D + EPPK of Tremelimumab; Peak and Trough Serum Concentrations in the Global CohortWeek 12: trough concentration7.576 μg/mLGeometric Coefficient of Variation 59.25
Secondary

Progression-Free Survival (PFS) in the Global Cohort

PFS (per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 \[RECIST 1.1\] using Investigator assessments) was defined as time from date of randomization until date of objective disease progression or death (by any cause in the absence of progression), regardless of whether the patient withdrew from randomized therapy or received another anticancer therapy prior to progression. Progression (ie, PD) was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions (TLs), taking as reference the smallest previous sum of diameters (nadir) and an absolute increase of ≥5 millimeters (mm) for the sum from nadir. For evaluation of non-target lesions (NTLs), PD was defined as unequivocal progression of existing NTLs. Median PFS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique.

Time frame: Tumour scans performed at baseline, Week 6, Week 12 then every 8 weeks relative to the date of randomization until RECIST 1.1-defined progression. Assessed until global cohort final analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 33 months).

Population: The global FAS included all patients randomized prior to the end of global recruitment.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
Global Cohort: D + EPProgression-Free Survival (PFS) in the Global Cohort4.9 months
Global Cohort: EPProgression-Free Survival (PFS) in the Global Cohort5.1 months
Global Cohort: EPProgression-Free Survival (PFS) in the Global Cohort5.4 months
Comparison: D + EP vs EP. HR \<1 favors D + EP to be associated with a longer PFS than EP.p-value: 0.015795% CI: [0.665, 0.959]Log Rank
Comparison: D + T + EP vs EP. HR \<1 favors D + T + EP to be associated with a longer PFS than EP.p-value: 0.056895% CI: [0.696, 1.005]Log Rank
Comparison: D + T + EP vs D + EP. HR \<1 favors D + T + EP to be associated with a longer PFS than D + EP.p-value: 0.75495% CI: [0.857, 1.235]Log Rank
Secondary

Time to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global Cohort

The EORTC QLQ-Core 30 version 3 (QLQ-C30 v3) was included for assessing HRQoL. It assesses HRQoL/health status through 9 multi-item scales: 5 functional scales (physical, role, cognitive, emotional, and social), 3 symptom scales (fatigue, pain, and nausea and vomiting), and a global health and QoL scale. 6 single-item symptom measures are also included: dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, and financial difficulties. Scores from 0 to 100 were derived for each of the 15 domains, with higher scores representing greater functioning, greater HRQoL, or greater level of symptoms. Time to deterioration (calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique) was defined as time from randomization until the date of first clinically meaningful deterioration (a decrease in score from baseline of ≥10) that is confirmed at a subsequent visit or death (by any cause) in the absence of a clinically meaningful deterioration.

Time frame: At baseline, Weeks 3, 6, 9, 12, 16 and 20, then Q4W until PD, on Day 28 and 2 months post-PD, then every 8 weeks until second progression/death (whichever comes first). Assessed until global cohort final analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 33 months).

Population: The global FAS included all patients randomized prior to the end of global recruitment. For QLQ-C30 function scales and global health status/HRQoL, only patients with baseline scores ≥10 (and with data available) were included in the analysis. For QLQ-C30 symptom scales/items, only patients with baseline scores ≤90 (and with data available) were included in the analysis.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Role Functioning5.0 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Cognitive Functioning6.0 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Constipation8.5 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Global Health Status / HRQoL7.2 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Pain6.9 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Fatigue4.2 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Dyspnea7.2 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Nausea / Vomiting7.5 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Emotional Functioning7.6 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Appetite Loss6.9 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Diarrhea8.9 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Physical Functioning6.0 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Insomnia7.1 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Social Functioning6.2 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Constipation11.5 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Global Health Status / HRQoL8.4 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Cognitive Functioning8.4 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Emotional Functioning11.8 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Physical Functioning8.4 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Role Functioning7.4 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Social Functioning7.4 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Fatigue5.5 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Nausea / Vomiting8.4 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Pain8.0 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Appetite Loss8.3 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Diarrhea14.7 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Dyspnea9.0 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Insomnia8.6 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Dyspnea7.5 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Appetite Loss6.6 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Role Functioning5.9 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Physical Functioning6.5 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Constipation7.3 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Emotional Functioning7.3 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Global Health Status / HRQoL7.4 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Diarrhea7.7 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Fatigue4.5 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Cognitive Functioning6.0 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Nausea / Vomiting6.6 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Social Functioning6.3 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Insomnia7.3 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Symptoms, Assessed Using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) in the Global CohortQLQ-C30 Pain6.7 months
Secondary

Time to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China Cohort

The EORTC QLQ-C30 v3 was included for assessing HRQoL. It assesses HRQoL/health status through 9 multi-item scales: 5 functional scales (physical, role, cognitive, emotional, and social), 3 symptom scales (fatigue, pain, and nausea and vomiting), and a global health and QoL scale. 6 single-item symptom measures are also included: dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, and financial difficulties. Scores from 0 to 100 were derived for each of the 15 domains, with higher scores representing greater functioning, greater HRQoL, or greater level of symptoms. Time to deterioration (calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique) was defined as time from randomization until the date of first clinically meaningful deterioration (a decrease in score from baseline of ≥10) that is confirmed at a subsequent visit or death (by any cause) in the absence of a clinically meaningful deterioration.

Time frame: At baseline, Weeks 3, 6, 9, 12, 16 and 20, then Q4W until PD, on Day 28 and 2 months post-PD, then every 8 weeks until second progression/death (whichever comes first). Assessed until China cohort second analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 29 months).

Population: The China FAS included all randomized patients in the China cohort. For QLQ-C30 function scales and global health status/HRQoL, only patients with baseline scores ≥10 (and with data available) were included in the analysis. For QLQ-C30 symptom scales/items, only patients with baseline scores ≤90 (and with data available) were included in the analysis.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Global Health Status / HRQoL14.5 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Pain6.6 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Role Functioning6.8 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Nausea / Vomiting8.4 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Social Functioning6.7 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Fatigue3.7 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Dyspnea11.6 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Cognitive Functioning7.6 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Diarrhea17.3 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 ConstipationNA months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Emotional Functioning20.4 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Insomnia7.3 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Appetite Loss8.4 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Physical Functioning21.8 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Global Health Status / HRQoL15.1 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Role Functioning6.4 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Cognitive Functioning6.8 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Emotional Functioning15.5 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Physical Functioning9.3 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Social Functioning5.8 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Fatigue5.3 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Nausea / Vomiting9.3 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Pain6.2 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Appetite Loss5.8 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Constipation12.0 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 DiarrheaNA months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Dyspnea15.5 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Insomnia15.5 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Pain6.5 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Emotional Functioning10.0 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Global Health Status / HRQoL7.8 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Appetite Loss6.9 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Cognitive Functioning6.9 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Insomnia7.8 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Social Functioning6.5 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Constipation10.9 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Fatigue3.9 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Role Functioning6.2 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Dyspnea7.3 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Nausea / Vomiting8.2 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Physical Functioning7.3 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of HRQoL and PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ in the China CohortQLQ-C30 Diarrhea10.1 months
Secondary

Time to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China Cohort

The EORTC QLQ-LC13 is a disease-specific 13-item self-administered questionnaire for lung cancer, to be used in conjunction with the EORTC QLQ-C30. It comprises both multi-item and single-item measures of lung cancer-associated symptoms (ie, coughing, hemoptysis, dyspnea, and pain) and side effects from conventional chemotherapy and radiotherapy (ie, hair loss, neuropathy, sore mouth, and dysphagia). Scores from 0 to 100 were derived for each symptom item, with higher scores representing greater level of symptoms. Time to deterioration (calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique) was defined as time from randomization until the date of first clinically meaningful deterioration (an increase in score from baseline of ≥10) that is confirmed at a subsequent visit or death (by any cause) in the absence of a clinically meaningful deterioration.

Time frame: At baseline, Weeks 3, 6, 9, 12, 16 and 20, then Q4W until PD, on Day 28 and 2 months post-PD, then every 8 weeks until second progression/death (whichever comes first). Assessed until China cohort second analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 29 months).

Population: The China FAS included all randomized patients in the China cohort. For QLQ-L13 symptom scales/items, only patients with baseline scores ≤90 (and with data available) were included in the analysis.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China CohortQLQ-LC13 CoughingNA months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China CohortQLQ-LC13 Pain in Arm or ShoulderNA months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China CohortQLQ-LC13 HemoptysisNA months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China CohortQLQ-LC13 Pain in Other PartsNA months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China CohortQLQ-LC13 Pain in ChestNA months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China CohortQLQ-LC13 Dyspnea6.9 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China CohortQLQ-LC13 HemoptysisNA months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China CohortQLQ-LC13 Coughing15.5 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China CohortQLQ-LC13 Dyspnea8.1 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China CohortQLQ-LC13 Pain in Other Parts9.3 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China CohortQLQ-LC13 Pain in Arm or Shoulder15.5 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China CohortQLQ-LC13 Pain in Chest15.5 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China CohortQLQ-LC13 Pain in Chest10.0 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China CohortQLQ-LC13 Pain in Arm or Shoulder8.6 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China CohortQLQ-LC13 Coughing8.6 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China CohortQLQ-LC13 Pain in Other Parts8.6 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China CohortQLQ-LC13 Hemoptysis10.1 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-LC13 in the China CohortQLQ-LC13 Dyspnea4.7 months
Secondary

Time to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 (QLQ-LC13) in the Global Cohort

The EORTC QLQ-LC13 is a disease-specific 13-item self-administered questionnaire for lung cancer, to be used in conjunction with the EORTC QLQ-C30. It comprises both multi-item and single-item measures of lung cancer-associated symptoms (ie, coughing, hemoptysis, dyspnea, and pain) and side effects from conventional chemotherapy and radiotherapy (ie, hair loss, neuropathy, sore mouth, and dysphagia). Scores from 0 to 100 were derived for each symptom item, with higher scores representing greater level of symptoms. Time to deterioration (calculated using the Kaplan-Meier technique) was defined as time from randomization until the date of first clinically meaningful deterioration (an increase in score from baseline of ≥10) that is confirmed at a subsequent visit or death (by any cause) in the absence of a clinically meaningful deterioration.

Time frame: At baseline, Weeks 3, 6, 9, 12, 16 and 20, then Q4W until PD, on Day 28 and 2 months post-PD, then every 8 weeks until second progression/death (whichever comes first). Assessed until global cohort final analysis DCO (maximum of approximately 33 months).

Population: The global FAS included all patients randomized prior to the end of global recruitment. For QLQ-L13 symptom scales/items, only patients with baseline scores ≤90 (and with data available) were included in the analysis.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 (QLQ-LC13) in the Global CohortQLQ-LC13 Coughing7.7 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 (QLQ-LC13) in the Global CohortQLQ-LC13 Pain in Chest8.5 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 (QLQ-LC13) in the Global CohortQLQ-LC13 Hemoptysis11.4 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 (QLQ-LC13) in the Global CohortQLQ-LC13 Pain in Arm or Shoulder7.1 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 (QLQ-LC13) in the Global CohortQLQ-LC13 Pain in Other Parts7.4 months
Global Cohort: D + EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 (QLQ-LC13) in the Global CohortQLQ-LC13 Dyspnea6.3 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 (QLQ-LC13) in the Global CohortQLQ-LC13 Hemoptysis18.3 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 (QLQ-LC13) in the Global CohortQLQ-LC13 Pain in Arm or Shoulder9.7 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 (QLQ-LC13) in the Global CohortQLQ-LC13 Coughing9.3 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 (QLQ-LC13) in the Global CohortQLQ-LC13 Dyspnea6.5 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 (QLQ-LC13) in the Global CohortQLQ-LC13 Pain in Chest11.5 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 (QLQ-LC13) in the Global CohortQLQ-LC13 Pain in Other Parts7.8 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 (QLQ-LC13) in the Global CohortQLQ-LC13 Dyspnea5.5 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 (QLQ-LC13) in the Global CohortQLQ-LC13 Pain in Other Parts6.6 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 (QLQ-LC13) in the Global CohortQLQ-LC13 Pain in Chest7.9 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 (QLQ-LC13) in the Global CohortQLQ-LC13 Coughing7.7 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 (QLQ-LC13) in the Global CohortQLQ-LC13 Hemoptysis10.8 months
Global Cohort: EPTime to Deterioration of PRO Symptoms, Assessed Using EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 (QLQ-LC13) in the Global CohortQLQ-LC13 Pain in Arm or Shoulder7.6 months

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Jul 17, 2026