A Study of Tarceva (Erlotinib) or Placebo in Combination With Platinum-Based Therapy as First Line Treatment in Patients With Advanced or Recurrent Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

A Randomized, Placebo-controlled, Double-blind Phase III Study of the Effect of First-line Treatment With Intercalated Tarceva Versus Placebo in Combination With Gemcitabine/Platinum on Progression-free Survival in Patients With Stage IIIB/IV Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

This 2 arm study will compare the efficacy and safety of sequential treatment with Tarceva or placebo, plus platinum-based therapy, as first line treatment in patients with advanced or recurrent non-small cell lung cancer. Patients will be randomized to receive gemcitabine (1250mg/m2 iv) on days 1 and 8, and cisplatin (75mg/m2) or carboplatin (5xAUC)on day 1, followed by Tarceva 150mg/day or placebo from day 15 to day 28 of each 4 week cycle for a total of 6 cycles,then followed by Tarceva or placebo monotherapy.The anticipated time on study treatment is until disease progression, and the target sample size is 100-500 individuals.

Study Overview

• Status: Completed
• Conditions: Non-Squamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
• Intervention / Treatment: Drug: Platinum chemotherapy (cisplatin or carboplatin); Drug: erlotinib [Tarceva]; Drug: gemcitabine; Drug: Placebo

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Actual): 451
• Phase: Phase 3

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• China
  • Beijing, China, 100021
  • Beijing, China, 100142
  • Beijing, China, 101149
  • Guangzhou, China
  • Guangzhou, China, 510060
  • Hangzhou, China
  • Nanjing, China, 210029
  • Shanghai, China, 200433
  • Shanghai, China, 200030
• Hong Kong
  • Hong Kong, Hong Kong
  • Hong Kong, Hong Kong, 852
  • Shatin, Hong Kong
• Indonesia
  • Jakarta, Indonesia, 13230
  • Jogjakarta, Indonesia, 55284
  • Surabaya, Indonesia, 60286
• Korea, Republic of
  • Gyeonggi-do, Korea, Republic of, 410-769
• Philippines
  • Manila, Philippines, 1000
  • Pasig City, Philippines, 1605
  • Quezon City, Philippines, 1104
• Taiwan
  • Taichung, Taiwan, 407
  • Taipei, Taiwan
  • Taipei, Taiwan, 100
  • Taipei, Taiwan, 116
• Thailand
  • Bangkok, Thailand, 10400
  • Bangkok, Thailand, 10700
  • Chiang Mai, Thailand, 50200

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No
• Genders Eligible for Study: All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

• adult patients, >=18 years of age;
• advanced (stage IIIB/IV)non-small cell lung cancer;
• measurable disease;
• Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status 0 or 1.

Exclusion Criteria:

• prior exposure to agents directed at the HER axis;
• prior chemotherapy or systemic anti-tumor therapy after advanced disease;
• unstable systemic disease;
• any other malignancy within last 5 years, except cured basal cell cancer of skin or cured cancer in situ of cervix;
• brain metastasis or spinal cord compression.

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Treatment
• Allocation: Randomized
• Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
• Masking: Double

Number of Arms

2

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: 1	Drug: Platinum chemotherapy (cisplatin or carboplatin); cisplatin --75mg/m2 oon day 1 of each 4 week cycle for 6 cycles or carboplatin--5xAUC on day 1 of each 4 week cycle for 6 cycles; Drug: erlotinib [Tarceva]; 150mg po on days 15-28 of each 4 week cycle until disease progression; Drug: gemcitabine; 1250mg/m2 iv on days 1 and 8 of each 4 week cycle for 6 cycles
Placebo Comparator: 2	Drug: Platinum chemotherapy (cisplatin or carboplatin); cisplatin --75mg/m2 oon day 1 of each 4 week cycle for 6 cycles or carboplatin--5xAUC on day 1 of each 4 week cycle for 6 cycles; Drug: gemcitabine; 1250mg/m2 iv on days 1 and 8 of each 4 week cycle for 6 cycles; Drug: Placebo; po on days 15-28 of each 4 week cycle until disease progression

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Median Progression Free Survival (PFS) Time	Tumor response was evaluated according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) (version 1.0). PD was defined as at least a 20 percent (%) increase in the sum of longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions. PFS is the time (in months) between the date of randomization and the date of first documented disease progression or death from any cause, whichever comes first. Participants who had neither progressed nor died at the time of data cut-off or who were lost to follow-up were censored at the date of the last tumor assessment where non-progression was documented or last date of follow up for progression of disease, whichever was last. Participants without post baseline tumor assessments who were known to be alive were censored at the time of randomization. Analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier method.	Randomization until PD or death (assessed at baseline and every 8 weeks thereafter until PD, death or end of study [up to approximately 1.5 years])

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Percentage of Participants Alive and Free From Disease Progression	Tumor response was evaluated according to RECIST (version 1.0). PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions.	Randomization until PD or death (assessed at baseline and every 8 weeks thereafter until PD, death or end of study [up to approximately 1.5 years])
Median PFS Time Based on Different Subgroups	Tumor response was evaluated according to RECIST (version 1.0). PD was defined in outcome measure 1. PFS is the time (in months) between the date of randomization and the date of first documented disease progression or death from any cause, whichever comes first. Participants who had neither progressed nor died at the time of data cut-off or who were lost to follow-up were censored at the date of the last tumor assessment where non-progression was documented or last date of follow up for progression of disease, whichever was last. Participants without post baseline tumor assessments who were known to be alive were censored at the time of randomization. PFS among different subgroups of type of carcinoma, smoking habit, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation type, KRAS mutation type, EGFR immunohistochemistry (IHC) test result type, and EGFR fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) result type.	Randomization until PD or death (assessed at baseline and every 8 weeks thereafter until PD, death or end of study [up to approximately 1.5 years])
Median Overall Survival (OS) Time-Overall and Among Different Subgroups	OS was defined as the time between the date of randomization and the date of death from any cause. Participants for whom no death was captured on the clinical database were censored at the most recent date they were known to be alive. Participants with no post baseline information were censored at the time of randomization. OS among different subgroups of type of carcinoma, smoking habit, EGFR mutation type, KRAS mutation type, EGFR IHC test result type, and EGFR FISH result type. Analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier method.	Randomization until death (assessed at baseline and every 8 weeks thereafter until death or end of study [up to approximately 5.5 years])
Percentage of Participants Alive at the End of Study-Overall and Among Different Subgroups		Randomization until death (assessed at baseline and every 8 weeks thereafter until death or end of study [up to approximately 5.5 years])
Non-Progression Rate: Percentage of Participants With a Confirmed Best Overall Response of Either Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR) or Stable Disease (SD) for At Least 16 Weeks	Tumor response was evaluated according to RECIST (version 1.0). CR is defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and normalization of tumor marker level; PR is defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as reference the screening sum LD; SD for target lesions is defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum LD since the treatment started and SD for non-target lesions defined as persistence of 1 or more non-target lesion(s) or/and maintenance of tumor marker level above the normal limits. Responses were confirmed with repeated assessment 4 weeks after initial response was observed.	Randomization until PD or death (assessed at baseline and every 8 weeks thereafter until PD, death or end of study [up to approximately 1.5 years])
Objective Response Rate: Percentage of Participants With a Confirmed Best Overall Response of CR or PR	Tumor response was evaluated according to RECIST (version 1.0). CR is defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and normalization of tumor marker level; PR is defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as reference the screening sum LD. Responses were confirmed with repeated assessment 4 weeks after initial response was observed.	Randomization until PD or death (assessed at baseline and every 8 weeks thereafter until PD, death or end of study [up to approximately 1.5 years])
Duration of Response	Duration of response is defined as the time between the date of first documented response (CR or PR, as determined by the RECIST criteria) and the date of first documented PD or death. Participants who did not progress or die after they had a confirmed response (CR or PR) were censored at the date of their last tumor assessment where non-progression was documented or last date of follow-up for progression of disease, whichever was last. CR and PR are defined in Outcome Measure 7.	Randomization until PD or death (assessed at baseline and every 8 weeks thereafter until PD, death or end of study [up to approximately 1.5 years])
Time to Progression	Time to progression is defined as the time between the date of randomization and the date of the first documented disease progression. Participants who have not progressed at the time of study completion (or data cut off) or who were lost to follow up were censored at the date of the last tumor assessment where non-progression was documented or last date of follow-up for progression of disease, whichever was latest. PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions. Participants with no post baseline tumor assessments were censored at the time of randomization. Analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier method.	Randomization until PD (assessed at baseline and every 8 weeks thereafter until PD or end of study [up to approximately 1.5 years])
Percentage of Participants With Symptomatic Progression Assessed Using the Lung Cancer Subscale (LCS)	LCS scores were obtained from a 7-item questionnaire from the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Lung (FACT-L) (version 4.0). Participants responded to questions such as shortness of breath, cough, tightness in chest, breathing difficulty, appetite loss, weight loss and unclear thinking; on a 5-point scale from 0-4, where 0 equaled (=) "not at all" and 4 = "very much." The participants' responses were summed to result in an overall score, scores range on a scale of 0 (most symptomatic) to 28 (asymptomatic); higher score indicates fewer symptoms. A clinically meaningful decline used to determine symptomatic progression in this study was at least a three point decline in LCS score from baseline. Participants without symptomatic progression at the time of analysis were censored at the time of the last FACT-L assessment.	Baseline, Day 1 of Cycles 3 and 5, Day 1 of post-study Visits 1 and 2 until end of study medication administration or PD (up to approximately 1.5 years)
Time to Symptomatic Progression	Time to symptomatic progression was the time from randomization until the earlier of a clinically meaningful decline from baseline in LCS score, or death on study. LCS scores were obtained from a 7-item questionnaire from the FACT-L (version 4.0). Participants responded to questions such as shortness of breath, cough, tightness in chest, breathing difficulty, appetite loss, weight loss and unclear thinking; on a 5-point scale from 0-4, where 0 = "not at all" and 4 = "very much." The participants' responses were summed to result in an overall score, scores range on a scale of 0 (most symptomatic) to 28 (asymptomatic); higher score indicates fewer symptoms. A clinically meaningful decline used to determine symptomatic progression in this study was at least a three point decline in LCS score from baseline. Participants without symptomatic progression at the time of analysis were censored at the time of the last FACT-L assessment. Analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier method.	Baseline, Day 1 of Cycles 3 and 5, Day 1 of post-study Visits 1 and 2 until end of study medication administration or PD (up to approximately 1.5 years)
Percentage of Participants With Deterioration in Trial Outcome Index (TOI) Using FACT-L Version 4.0	TOI was defined as the sum of the scores of the Physical Well-Being (PWB), Functional Well-Being (FWB), and LCS. PWB, FWB, and LCS scores were obtained from 7-item questionnaires from the FACT-L (Version 4.0). Participants responded to questions on a 5-point scale from 0-4, where 0 = "not at all" and 4 = "very much." The participants' responses were summed to result in an overall score, scores range on a scale of 0 to 84; higher score indicates better physical aspects of quality of life (QoL). A clinically meaningful decline used to determine deterioration in TOI was greater than or equal to (≥) 6-point decline from baseline. Participants without deterioration in TOI at the time of analysis were censored at the time of the last FACT-L assessment.	Baseline, Day 1 of Cycles 3 and 5, Day 1 of post-study Visits 1 and 2 until end of study medication administration or PD (up to approximately 1.5 years)
Time to Deterioration in TOI Using FACT-L Version 4.0	Time to deterioration in TOI is defined as time from randomization until the earlier of a clinically meaningful decline from baseline in TOI or death on study. TOI is defined as the sum of the scores of the PWB, FWB, and LCS. PWB, FWB, and LCS scores were obtained from 7-item questionnaires from the FACT-L (Version 4.0). Participants responded to questions on a 5-point scale from 0-4, where 0 = "not at all" and 4 = "very much." The participants' responses were summed to result in an overall score, scores range on a scale of 0 to 84; higher score indicates better physical aspects of QoL. A clinically meaningful decline used to determine deterioration in TOI was ≥6-point decline from baseline. Participants without deterioration in TOI at the time of analysis were censored at the time of the last FACT-L assessment. Analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier method.	Baseline, Day 1 of Cycles 3 and 5, Day 1 of post-study Visits 1 and 2 until end of study medication administration or PD (up to approximately 1.5 years)
Percentage of Participants With Deterioration in Quality of Life (QOL) Using FACT-L Version 4.0	Total FACT-L score was defined as the sum of the TOI, Social Well Being (SWB) and EWB of the FACT-L questionnaires. TOI (PWB + FWB + LCS), SWB and EWB scores were obtained from 7-item (6-item in the case of EWB) questionnaires from the FACT-L (Version 4.0). Participants responded to questions on a 5-point scale from 0-4, where 0 = "not at all" and 4 = "very much." The participants' responses were summed to result in an overall score, scores range on a scale of 0 to 136; higher score indicates better QoL. A clinically meaningful decline used to determine deterioration in QoL was ≥6-point decline from baseline. Participants without deterioration in QoL at the time of analysis were censored at the time of the last FACT-L assessment.	Baseline, Day 1 of Cycles 3 and 5, Day 1 of post-study Visits 1 and 2 until end of study medication administration or PD (up to approximately 1.5 years)
Time to Deterioration in QOL Using FACT-L Version 4.0	Time to deterioration in QoL is defined as time from randomization until the earlier of a clinically meaningful decline from baseline in Total FACT-L or death on study. Total FACT-L score was defined as the sum of the TOI, SWB and EWB of the FACT-L questionnaires. TOI (PWB + FWB + LCS), SWB and EWB scores were obtained from 7-item (6-item in the case of EWB) questionnaires from the FACT-L (Version 4.0). Participants responded to questions on a 5-point scale from 0-4, where 0 = "not at all" and 4 = "very much." The participants' responses were summed to result in an overall score, scores range on a scale of 0 to 136; higher score indicates better QoL. A clinically meaningful decline used to determine deterioration in QoL was ≥6-point decline from baseline. Participants without deterioration in QoL at the time of analysis were censored at the time of the last FACT-L assessment. Analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier method.	Baseline, Day 1 of Cycles 3 and 5, Day 1 of post-study Visits 1 and 2 until end of study medication administration or PD (up to approximately 1.5 years)
Median Follow-up Time During the Study	Median follow-up was calculated using 'Reverse Kaplan-Meier' analysis for Overall survival.	Randomization until PD or death (assessed at baseline and every 8 weeks thereafter until PD, death or end of study [up to approximately 5.5 years])

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Hoffmann-La Roche

Publications and helpful links

General Publications

• Wu YL, Lee JS, Thongprasert S, Yu CJ, Zhang L, Ladrera G, Srimuninnimit V, Sriuranpong V, Sandoval-Tan J, Zhu Y, Liao M, Zhou C, Pan H, Lee V, Chen YM, Sun Y, Margono B, Fuerte F, Chang GC, Seetalarom K, Wang J, Cheng A, Syahruddin E, Qian X, Ho J, Kurnianda J, Liu HE, Jin K, Truman M, Bara I, Mok T. Intercalated combination of chemotherapy and erlotinib for patients with advanced stage non-small-cell lung cancer (FASTACT-2): a randomised, double-blind trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013 Jul;14(8):777-86. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70254-7. Epub 2013 Jun 17.

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start: April 1, 2009
• Primary Completion (Actual): December 1, 2014
• Study Completion (Actual): December 1, 2014

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: April 15, 2009
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: April 17, 2009
• First Posted (Estimate): April 20, 2009

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Estimate): December 14, 2015
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: November 10, 2015
• Last Verified: November 1, 2015

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Additional Relevant MeSH Terms: Respiratory Tract Diseases; Neoplasms; Lung Diseases; Neoplasms by Site; Respiratory Tract Neoplasms; Thoracic Neoplasms; Carcinoma, Bronchogenic; Bronchial Neoplasms; Lung Neoplasms; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Physiological Effects of Drugs; Molecular Mechanisms of Pharmacological Action; Anti-Infective Agents; Antiviral Agents; Enzyme Inhibitors; Antimetabolites, Antineoplastic; Antimetabolites; Antineoplastic Agents; Immunosuppressive Agents; Immunologic Factors; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Gemcitabine; Carboplatin; Erlotinib Hydrochloride; Cisplatin
• Other Study ID Numbers: MO22201

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No
• product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.: No