ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT01120184Updated Mar 4, 2024Results posted

A Study of Trastuzumab Emtansine (T-DM1) Plus Pertuzumab/Pertuzumab Placebo Versus Trastuzumab [Herceptin] Plus a Taxane in Participants With Metastatic Breast Cancer (MARIANNE)

A Phase 3 interventional study of docetaxel and paclitaxel in Breast Cancer, sponsored by Hoffmann-La Roche. Completed at 257 sites in 38 countries. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-03-04.

Sponsored by Hoffmann-La Roche · Phase 3, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
1,095
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This randomized, 3-arm, multicenter, phase III study will evaluate the efficacy and safety of trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) with pertuzumab or trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) with pertuzumab-placebo (blinded for pertuzumab), versus the combination of trastuzumab (Herceptin) plus taxane (docetaxel or paclitaxel) in participants with HER2-positive progressive or recurrent locally advanced or previously untreated metastatic breast cancer. Participants will be randomized to 1 of 3 treatment arms (Arms A, B or C). Arm A will be open-label, whereas Arms B and C will be blinded.

02

Conditions studied

  • Breast Cancer

Browse trials for

03

In context

Breast Neoplasms

14,825 studies on the registry are indexed under Breast Neoplasms; 3,319 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 1,095 is above the median of 72 across 10,896 interventional studies indexed under Breast Neoplasms.

Browse Breast Neoplasms studies →

Lead sponsor

Hoffmann-La Roche is the lead sponsor of 2,101 studies on the registry; 87 are open to participants now.

Of its 330 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 248 (75%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Adult participants >/=18 years of age
  • -positive breast cancer
  • or cytologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the breast with locally recurrent or disease, and be a candidate for chemotherapy. Participants with locally advanced disease must have recurrent or progressive disease, which must not be amenable to resection with curative intent.
  • Participants must have measurable and/or non- which must be evaluable per (RECIST) 1.1
  • (ECOG) Performance Status 0 or 1
  • Adequate organ function as determined by laboratory results

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • History of prior (or any) chemotherapy for breast cancer or recurrent locally advanced disease
  • An interval of \<6 months from the last dose of vinca-alkaloid or taxane cytotoxic chemotherapy until the time of metastatic diagnosis
  • Hormone therapy \<7 days prior to randomization
  • Trastuzumab therapy and/or lapatinib (neo- or setting) \<21 days prior to randomization
  • Prior trastuzumab emtansine or pertuzumab therapy
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(7)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

HER2

HER2 is a protein, made from the ERBB2 gene, that drives the growth of some cancers. A study may look for a level of the protein, extra copies of the gene, or a particular change in it.

In breast cancer, protein tests are read as HER2-positive, HER2-low or HER2-negative; other cancers use their own rules. Check which test result the study requires.

Histologically or cytologically confirmed

The diagnosis was confirmed by looking at a sample under a microscope: tissue from a biopsy or surgery (histology), or cells from a fluid or needle sample (cytology).

Your pathology report is the document that shows this.

Metastases

Cancer that has spread from where it began to other parts of the body. “Metastatic” cancer is cancer that has spread this way.

Measurable disease

The amount of disease can be tracked with a defined measurement, so the study can see whether it shrinks or grows. It might be a tumour measured on a scan or, in some blood cancers such as myeloma, a marker measured in blood or urine.

The criteria or the study team say which measurement counts — having no tumour visible on a scan does not by itself rule you out.

RECIST

The standard rules for measuring tumours on CT or MRI scans, to tell whether a cancer is shrinking, stable or growing during treatment.

“Measurable disease per RECIST 1.1” usually means at least one tumour 10 mm or more at its longest on a CT scan, or a lymph node 15 mm or more across its short axis.

ECOG performance status

A scale of how much an illness limits everyday activity. For people being assessed to join a study, scores run from 0 (fully active) to 4; lower is more active.

0
Fully active, no restrictions.
1
Limited in strenuous activity, but walking and able to do light work, such as housework or office work.
2
Walking and able to look after yourself, but unable to work; up and about more than half of waking hours.
3
Able to look after yourself only in part; in bed or a chair more than half of waking hours.
4
Unable to look after yourself at all; in bed or a chair all day.

Studies most often ask for 0–1 or 0–2. Your doctor gives the score; the WHO scale uses the same steps. The full scale also has 5, which records death.

Adjuvant and neoadjuvant

Neoadjuvant treatment is given before the main treatment (usually surgery), often to shrink a tumour. Adjuvant treatment is given after it, to lower the chance of the cancer coming back.

05

Study design

Phase
Phase 3
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Triple (Participant, Investigator, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
1,095 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Trastuzumab + Taxane (docetaxel or paclitaxel)

    Drug: docetaxel · Drug: paclitaxel · Drug: trastuzumab [Herceptin]

  • Experimental
    Trastuzumab emtansine + pertuzumab

    Drug: pertuzumab · Drug: trastuzumab emtansine

  • Experimental
    Trastuzumab emtansine + pertuzumab placebo

    Drug: pertuzumab-placebo · Drug: trastuzumab emtansine

Interventions

  • 75 mg/m2 or 100 mg/m2 intravenously every 3 weeks for a minimum of 6 cycles.

  • 80 mg/m2 intravenously weekly for a minimum of 18 weeks

  • 840 mg intravenously on day 1 of cycle 1 followed by 420 mg intravenously every 3 weeks in subsequent cycles

  • Drugpertuzumab-placebo

    840 mg intravenously on day 1 of cycle 1 followed by 420 mg intravenously every 3 weeks in subsequent cycles

  • trastuzumab \[Herceptin\] doses when administered with docetaxel: 8 mg/kg intravenously on cycle 1 followed by 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks in subsequent cycles or trastuzumab (Herceptin) doses when administered with paclitaxel: 4 mg/kg intravenously on day 1 of cycle 1 followed by 2 mg/kg weekly starting on day 8 of cycle 1.

  • 3.6 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Percentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression According to Independent Review Facility (IRF) Assessment

    Tumor assessments were performed according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. Disease progression was defined as a greater than or equal to (≥) 20 percent (%) and 5-millimeter (mm) increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). The percentage of participants with death or disease progression was calculated as \[number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

    Time frame: Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)

  2. Progression-Free Survival (PFS) According to IRF Assessment

    Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. PFS was defined as the time from randomization to first documented disease progression or death from any cause. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and 5-mm increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). Median duration of PFS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and corresponding confidence intervals (CIs) were computed using the Brookmeyer-Crowley method.

    Time frame: Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)

Secondary outcomes

  1. Percentage of Participants Who Died Prior to Clinical Cutoff

    The percentage of participants who died prior to clinical cutoff was calculated as \[number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

    Time frame: Up to 70 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 15-May-2016 (every 3 months until death, loss to follow-up, withdrawal, or study termination)

  2. Overall Survival (OS) at Clinical Cutoff

    OS was defined as the time from randomization to death from any cause. Median duration of OS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and corresponding CIs were computed using the Brookmeyer-Crowley method.

    Time frame: Up to 70 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 15-May-2016 (every 3 months until death, loss to follow-up, withdrawal, or study termination)

  3. Percentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression According to Investigator Assessment

    Tumor assessments were performed by the investigator according to RECIST version 1.1. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and 5-mm increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). The percentage of participants with death or disease progression was calculated as \[number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

    Time frame: Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)

  4. PFS According to Investigator Assessment

    Tumor assessments were performed by the investigator according to RECIST version 1.1. PFS was defined as the time from randomization to first documented disease progression or death from any cause. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and 5-mm increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). Median duration of PFS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and corresponding CIs were computed using the Brookmeyer-Crowley method.

    Time frame: Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)

  5. Percentage of Participants Experiencing Treatment Failure

    Treatment failure was defined as the discontinuation of all study medications in the treatment arm for any reason including disease progression, treatment toxicity, death, physician decision, or participant withdrawal. The percentage of participants with treatment failure was calculated as \[number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

    Time frame: Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014

  6. Time to Treatment Failure (TTF)

    Treatment failure was defined as the discontinuation of all study medications in the treatment arm for any reason including disease progression, treatment toxicity, death, physician decision, or participant withdrawal. TTF was defined as the time from randomization to treatment failure. Median TTF was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and corresponding CIs were computed using the Brookmeyer-Crowley method.

    Time frame: Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014

  7. One-Year Survival Rate

    The percentage of participants alive at 1 year after randomization was estimated as the one-year survival rate using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and corresponding CIs were computed using Greenwood's estimate of the standard error.

    Time frame: From randomization until 1 year

  8. Percentage of Participants With Grade ≥3 Adverse Events

    Adverse events were graded according to National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0. Grade 3: Severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care activity of daily living with inability to perform bathing, dressing and undressing, feeding self, using the toilet, taking medications but not bedridden. Grade 4: An immediate threat to life. Urgent medical intervention is required in order to maintain survival. Grade 5: Death.

    Time frame: Up to 50 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (continuously until 28 days after last dose

  9. Percentage of Participants Who Died at 2 Years

    Time frame: From randomization until 2 years

  10. Overall Survival Truncated at 2 Years

    Overall Survival truncated at 2 years was defined as the percentage of participants alive at 2 years.

    Time frame: From randomization until 2 years

  11. Percentage of Participants With Grade 5 Adverse Events

    Adverse events were graded according to NCI CTCAE version 4.0. Grade 5 adverse events are those events which led to death.

    Time frame: Up to 50 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (continuously until 28 days after last dose)

  12. Percentage of Participants With Grade 3-4 Laboratory Parameters

    Laboratory results were graded according to NCI CTCAE version 4.0. Grade 3: Severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care activity of daily living with inability to perform bathing, dressing and undressing, feeding self, using the toilet, taking medications but not bedridden. Grade 4: An immediate threat to life. Urgent medical intervention is required in order to maintain survival.

    Time frame: Day 1, 8, and 15 of Cycle 1-3 and on Day 1 of each subsequent cycle up to 50 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014

  13. Percentage of Participants With Decline of ≥2 Points From Baseline in Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status

    The ECOG performance status is a scale used to quantify cancer participants' general well-being and activities of daily life. The scale ranges from 0 to 5, with 0 denoting perfect health and 5 indicating death. The 6 categories are 0=Asymptomatic (Fully active, able to carry on all predisease activities without restriction), 1=Symptomatic but completely ambulatory (Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature), 2=Symptomatic, \< 50% in bed during the day (Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out any work activities. Up and about more than 50% of waking hours), 3=Symptomatic, \> 50% in bed, but not bedbound (Capable of only limited self-care, confined to bed or chair 50% or more of waking hours), 4=Bedbound (Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any self-care. Totally confined to bed or chair), 5=Death.

    Time frame: Baseline, Day 1 of every Cycle up to Clinical Data Cut (up to 48 months)

  14. Hospitalization Days

    Hospitalization was defined as a non-administration-related hospitalization due to serious adverse event, while on study treatment. Reported values represent number of days admitted per participants.

    Time frame: Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014

  15. Percentage of Participants With Hospitalization

    Hospitalization was defined as a non-administration-related hospitalization due to serious adverse event, while on study treatment.

    Time frame: Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014

  16. Percentage of Participants With Objective Response According to IRF Assessment

    Objective response was defined as having complete response (CR) or partial response (PR), assessed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and short-axis reduction in pathological lymph nodes to \<10 mm. PR was defined as a ≥30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the Baseline sum. Response was determined using 2 consecutive tumor assessments at least 4 weeks apart. The percentage of participants with a best overall response of CR or PR (ie, the objective response rate \[ORR\]) was calculated as \[number of participants meeting the respective criteria divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100. Corresponding CIs were computed using the Blyth-Still-Casella exact method.

    Time frame: Up to 46 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)

  17. Percentage of Participants With Objective Response According to Investigator Assessment

    Objective response was defined as having CR or PR, assessed according to RECIST version 1.1, by investigator. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and short-axis reduction in pathological lymph nodes to \<10 mm. PR was defined as a ≥30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the Baseline sum. Response was determined using 2 consecutive tumor assessments at least 4 weeks apart. The percentage of participants with a best overall response of CR or PR (ie, the ORR) was calculated as \[number of participants meeting the respective criteria divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100. Corresponding CIs were computed using the Blyth-Still-Casella exact method.

    Time frame: Up to 46 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)

  18. Duration of Response According to IRF Assessment

    Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. Duration of response was defined as the time from confirmed PR or CR to first documented disease progression or death from any cause. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target lesions and non-target lesions and short-axis reduction in pathological lymph nodes to \<10 mm. PR was defined as a ≥30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the Baseline sum. Response was determined using 2 consecutive tumor assessments at least 4 weeks apart. Median duration of response was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and corresponding CIs were computed using the Brookmeyer-Crowley method.

    Time frame: Up to 46 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)

  19. Percentage of Participants With a Best Overall Response of CR, PR, or Stable Disease (SD) According to IRF Assessment

    Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and short-axis reduction in pathological lymph nodes to \<10 mm. PR was defined as a ≥30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the Baseline sum. SD was defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to quality for PR nor sufficient (20%) increase to qualify for disease progression. Response was determined using 2 consecutive tumor assessments at least 4 weeks apart. The percentage of participants with a best overall response of CR, PR, or SD was calculated as \[number of participants meeting the respective criteria divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

    Time frame: Up to 46 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)

  20. Percentage of Participants Experiencing a Clinically Significant Increase in Taxane-Related Treatment Symptoms as Measured by Taxane Subscale of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) Taxane (FACT-TaxS) Score

    The FACT-Taxane is a self-reported instrument which measures the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of participants receiving taxane-containing chemotherapy. The FACT-TaxS consists of 16 items including 11 neurotoxicity-related questions and 5 additional questions assessing arthralgia, myalgia, and skin discoloration. Items are rated from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much) and a total score is inversely derived. Scores may range from 0 to 64, with higher scores indicating fewer/no symptoms. A minimally clinically important difference in treatment-related symptoms was defined as a ≥5% decrease (ie, 3.2 points) in FACT-TaxS score from Baseline. The percentage of participants with treatment-related symptoms was calculated using following formula: \[number of participants meeting the above threshold divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100. Corresponding CIs were computed using the Blyth-Still-Casella exact method.

    Time frame: Up to 39 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Baseline, on Day 1 of Cycles 2 to 8 and every even-numbered cycle thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)

  21. Percentage of Participants Reporting Nausea According to the Relevant Single Items of The FACT Colorectal Cancel (FACT-C) Module

    The FACT-C is a self-reported instrument which measures HRQOL pertaining to colorectal cancer. Response options on each question may range from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). The percentage of participants with nausea was calculated using following formula: \[number of participants with any level of either symptom divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

    Time frame: At Baseline, Day 8 of Cycle 1, and Days 1 and 8 of Cycle 2

  22. Percentage of Participants Reporting Diarrhea According to the Relevant Single Items of The FACT-C Module

    The FACT-C is a self-reported instrument which measures HRQOL pertaining to colorectal cancer. Response options on each question may range from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). The percentage of participants with diarrhea was calculated using following formula: \[number of participants with any level of either symptom divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

    Time frame: At Baseline, Day 8 of Cycle 1, and Days 1 and 8 of Cycle 2

  23. Percentage of Participants With a Clinically Significant Deterioration in Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) as Measured by FACT Breast (FACT-B) Trial Outcome Index-Physical Function Breast (TOI-PFB) Score

    The FACT-B is a self-reported instrument which measures HRQOL of participants with breast cancer. It consists of 5 subscales including physical well-being (PWB), social well-being (SWB), emotional well-being (EWB), functional well-being (FWB), and a breast cancer subscale (BCS). The TOI-PFB score is taken by adding the scores from the PWB (7 items), FWB (7 items), and BCS (9 items) subscales. Items are rated from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much) and a total score is derived. Scores may range from 0 to 92, with higher scores indicating better HRQOL. A 5 point change has been identified as the clinically minimal important difference (CMID) on the FACT-TOI-PFB scale. The percentage of participants with deterioration was calculated as \[number of participants meeting the above threshold divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

    Time frame: Up to 39 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Baseline, on Day 1 of Cycles 2 to 8 and every even-numbered cycle thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)

  24. Time to Deterioration in HRQoL as Assessed by FACT-B TOI-PFB Score

    The FACT-B is a self-reported instrument which measures HRQOL of participants with breast cancer. It consists of 5 subscales including PWB, SWB, EWB, FWB, and BCS. The TOI-PFB score is taken by adding the scores from the PWB (7 items), FWB (7 items), and BCS (9 items) subscales. Items are rated from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much) and a total score is derived. Scores may range from 0 to 92, with higher scores indicating better HRQOL. A 5 point change has been identified as the clinically minimal important difference (CMID) on the FACT-TOI-PFB scale. Time to deterioration was defined as the time from Baseline until the first decrease in FACT-B TOI-PFB score. Median time to deterioration was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and corresponding CIs were computed using the Brookmeyer-Crowley method.

    Time frame: Baseline up to 39 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014

  25. Change From Baseline in Rotterdam Symptom Checklist (RSCL) Activity Level Scale Score

    The RSCL is a self-reported instrument which consists of 4 domains including physical symptom distress, psychological distress, activity level, and overall global life quality. Only the activity level scale was collected and assessed. Scores may range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating increased burden of disease. Mean RSCL activity scale score changes were calculated as \[mean score at the assessment visit minus mean score at Baseline\]. The higher the score, the higher the level of impairment or burden.

    Time frame: Baseline, Cycle 7 (Week 18)

  26. Change From Baseline in Work Productivity According to Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) Questionnaire Score

    The WPAI is a patient-reported measure which assesses the effect of general health and symptom severity on work productivity and regular activities. The General Health questionnaire asks participants to estimate the number of hours missed from work due to reasons related and unrelated to their health problems, as well as the total number of hours actually worked in the preceding 7-day period. The percentage of participants reporting that they were employed (working for pay) was assessed at baseline was assessed along with Absenteeism (work time missed), Presenteeism (impairment at work / reduced on-the-job effectiveness), Work productivity loss (overall work impairment / absenteeism plus presenteeism), and Activity Impairment. The reported changes represent change from baseline at Cycle 7. The score range for the scales of the WPAI is between 0 (no effect) to 100% (max effect)

    Time frame: Baseline, Cycle 7 (Week 18)

  27. Change From Baseline in Activity Impairment According to Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) Questionnaire Score

    The WPAI is a patient-reported measure which assesses the effect of general health and symptom severity on work productivity and regular activities. The General Health questionnaire asks participants to estimate the number of hours missed from work due to reasons related and unrelated to their health problems, as well as the total number of hours actually worked in the preceding 7-day period. The percentage of participants reporting that they were employed (working for pay) was assessed at baseline was assessed along with Absenteeism (work time missed), Presenteeism (impairment at work / reduced on-the-job effectiveness), Work productivity loss (overall work impairment / absenteeism plus presenteeism), and Activity Impairment. The reported changes represent change from baseline at Cycle 7. The score range for the scales of the WPAI is between 0 (no effect) to 100% (max effect).

    Time frame: Baseline, Cycle 7 (Week 18)

  28. Percentage of Participants With a Best Overall Response of CR or PR According to IRF Assessment Among Those With High Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2) Messenger Ribonucleic Acid (mRNA) Levels

    Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and short-axis reduction in pathological lymph nodes to \<10 mm. PR was defined as a ≥30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the Baseline sum. Response was determined using 2 consecutive tumor assessments at least 4 weeks apart. The percentage of participants with a best overall response of CR or PR (ie, the ORR) was calculated as \[number of participants meeting the respective criteria divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

    Time frame: Up to 46 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)

  29. Percentage of Participants With a Best Overall Response of CR or PR According to IRF Assessment Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels

    Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and short-axis reduction in pathological lymph nodes to \<10 mm. PR was defined as a ≥30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the Baseline sum. Response was determined using 2 consecutive tumor assessments at least 4 weeks apart. The percentage of participants with a best overall response of CR or PR (ie, the ORR) was calculated as \[number of participants meeting the respective criteria divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

    Time frame: Up to 46 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)

  30. Percentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression According to IRF Assessment Among Those With High HER2 mRNA Levels

    Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and 5-mm increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). The percentage of participants with death or disease progression was calculated as \[number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

    Time frame: Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)

  31. PFS According to IRF Assessment Among Those With High HER2 mRNA Levels

    Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. PFS was defined as the time from randomization to first documented disease progression or death from any cause. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and 5-mm increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). Median duration of PFS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis.

    Time frame: Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)

  32. Percentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression According to IRF Assessment Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels

    Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and 5-mm increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). The percentage of participants with death or disease progression was calculated as \[number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

    Time frame: Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)

  33. PFS According to IRF Assessment Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels

    Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. PFS was defined as the time from randomization to first documented disease progression or death from any cause. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and 5-mm increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). Median duration of PFS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis.

    Time frame: Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)

  34. Percentage of Participants Who Died Prior to Clinical Cutoff Among Those With High HER2 mRNA Levels

    The percentage of participants who died prior to clinical cutoff was calculated as \[number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

    Time frame: Up to 70 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 15-May-2016 (every 3 months until death, loss to follow-up, withdrawal, or study termination)

  35. OS at Clinical Cutoff Among Those With High HER2 mRNA Levels

    OS was defined as the time from randomization to death from any cause. Median duration of OS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis.

    Time frame: Up to 70 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 15-May-2016 (every 3 months until death, loss to follow-up, withdrawal, or study termination)

  36. Percentage of Participants Who Died Prior to Clinical Cutoff Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels

    The percentage of participants who died prior to clinical cutoff was calculated as \[number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

    Time frame: Up to 70 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 15-May-2016 (every 3 months until death, loss to follow-up, withdrawal, or study termination)

  37. OS at Clinical Cutoff Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels

    OS was defined as the time from randomization to death from any cause. Median duration of OS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Reported upper bound of confidence interval for "Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo" and confidence interval values for "Trastuzumab + Taxane" and "Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab" are censored values.

    Time frame: Up to 70 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 15-May-2016 (every 3 months until death, loss to follow-up, withdrawal, or study termination)

07

Results

Posted Feb 23, 2017

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Started365367363
Treated355365360
Completed000
Not completed365367363
Withdrew: Adverse event010
Withdrew: Lost to follow-up131311
Withdrew: Physician decision913
Withdrew: Reason not specified8312
Withdrew: Sponsor decision to terminate study133144143
Withdrew: Subject/ guardian decision to withdraw322925
Withdrew: Death170176169

Outcome measures

PrimaryPercentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression According to Independent Review Facility (IRF) Assessment

Tumor assessments were performed according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. Disease progression was defined as a greater than or equal to (≥) 20 percent (%) and 5-millimeter (mm) increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). The percentage of participants with death or disease progression was calculated as \[number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

Time frame:
Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression According to Independent Review Facility (IRF) Assessment
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Percentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression According to Independent Review Facility (IRF) Assessment63.364.359.8
PrimaryProgression-Free Survival (PFS) According to IRF Assessment

Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. PFS was defined as the time from randomization to first documented disease progression or death from any cause. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and 5-mm increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). Median duration of PFS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and corresponding confidence intervals (CIs) were computed using the Brookmeyer-Crowley method.

Time frame:
Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)
Reported as:
Median · months
Progression-Free Survival (PFS) According to IRF Assessment
monthsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Progression-Free Survival (PFS) According to IRF Assessment13.7 (12.4 to 14.9)14.1 (10.9 to 16.8)15.2 (12.5 to 18.8)
Statistical analysis
  • Trastuzumab + Taxane vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo · Log Rank · p = 0.3125 (Test and p-value apply for superiority test. Two-sided significance level of 2.5% was used to adjust for independent comparison between each of the trastuzumab emtansine-containing arms and the trastuzumab + taxane arm.) · Hazard ratio (hr): 0.91 · 97.5% CI 0.73 to 1.13Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo vs. Trastuzumab + Taxane
  • Trastuzumab + Taxane vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab · Log Rank · p = 0.1407 (Test and p-value apply for superiority test. Two-sided significance level of 2.5% was used to adjust for independent comparison between each of the trastuzumab emtansine-containing arms and the trastuzumab + taxane arm.) · Hazard ratio (hr): 0.87 · 97.5% CI 0.69 to 1.08Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab vs. Trastuzumab + Taxane
  • Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab · Log Rank · p = 0.3075 (Test and p-value apply for superiority test. Primary endpoint did not meet superiority of PFS for trastuzumab emtansine + pertuzumab versus trastuzumab + taxane (two-sided significance level 2.5%); thus, tests and p-value are considered descriptive.) · Hazard ratio (hr): 0.91 · 97.5% CI 0.73 to 1.13Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab vs. Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo
SecondaryPercentage of Participants Who Died Prior to Clinical Cutoff

The percentage of participants who died prior to clinical cutoff was calculated as \[number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

Time frame:
Up to 70 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 15-May-2016 (every 3 months until death, loss to follow-up, withdrawal, or study termination)
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants Who Died Prior to Clinical Cutoff
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Percentage of Participants Who Died Prior to Clinical Cutoff46.347.746.3
SecondaryOverall Survival (OS) at Clinical Cutoff

OS was defined as the time from randomization to death from any cause. Median duration of OS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and corresponding CIs were computed using the Brookmeyer-Crowley method.

Time frame:
Up to 70 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 15-May-2016 (every 3 months until death, loss to follow-up, withdrawal, or study termination)
Reported as:
Median · months
Overall Survival (OS) at Clinical Cutoff
monthsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Overall Survival (OS) at Clinical Cutoff50.86 (44.75 to 60.75)53.68 (48.36 to 64.36)51.78 (47.87 to NA)
Statistical analysis
  • Trastuzumab + Taxane vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo · Log Rank · p = 0.6568 · Hazard ratio (hr): 0.93 · 97.5% CI 0.73 to 1.20Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo vs Trastuzumab + Taxane
  • Trastuzumab + Taxane vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab · Log Rank · p = 0.5691 · Hazard ratio (hr): 0.86 · 97.5% CI 0.67 to 1.11Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab vs Trastuzumab + Taxane
SecondaryPercentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression According to Investigator Assessment

Tumor assessments were performed by the investigator according to RECIST version 1.1. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and 5-mm increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). The percentage of participants with death or disease progression was calculated as \[number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

Time frame:
Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression According to Investigator Assessment
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Percentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression According to Investigator Assessment72.170.367.5
SecondaryPFS According to Investigator Assessment

Tumor assessments were performed by the investigator according to RECIST version 1.1. PFS was defined as the time from randomization to first documented disease progression or death from any cause. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and 5-mm increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). Median duration of PFS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and corresponding CIs were computed using the Brookmeyer-Crowley method.

Time frame:
Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)
Reported as:
Median · months
PFS According to Investigator Assessment
monthsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
PFS According to Investigator Assessment12.5 (10.5 to 13.6)14.1 (12.2 to 16.7)14.8 (12.4 to 17.8)
Statistical analysis
  • Trastuzumab + Taxane vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo · Hazard ratio (hr): 0.85 · 97.5% CI 0.69 to 1.04Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtasine + Placebo vs Trastuzumab + Taxane
  • Trastuzumab + Taxane vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab · Hazard ratio (hr): 0.77 · 97.5% CI 0.63 to 0.95Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab vs Trastuzumab + Taxane
SecondaryPercentage of Participants Experiencing Treatment Failure

Treatment failure was defined as the discontinuation of all study medications in the treatment arm for any reason including disease progression, treatment toxicity, death, physician decision, or participant withdrawal. The percentage of participants with treatment failure was calculated as \[number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

Time frame:
Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants Experiencing Treatment Failure
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Percentage of Participants Experiencing Treatment Failure85.882.680.2
SecondaryTime to Treatment Failure (TTF)

Treatment failure was defined as the discontinuation of all study medications in the treatment arm for any reason including disease progression, treatment toxicity, death, physician decision, or participant withdrawal. TTF was defined as the time from randomization to treatment failure. Median TTF was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and corresponding CIs were computed using the Brookmeyer-Crowley method.

Time frame:
Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014
Reported as:
Median · months
Time to Treatment Failure (TTF)
monthsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Time to Treatment Failure (TTF)10.2 (9.2 to 11.8)12.1 (9.9 to 13.9)11.8 (9.9 to 14.2)
Statistical analysis
  • Trastuzumab + Taxane vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo · Hazard ratio (hr): 0.80 · 97.5% CI 0.66 to 0.97Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo vs Trastuzumab + Taxane
  • Trastuzumab + Taxane vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab · Hazard ratio (hr): 0.78 · 97.5% CI 0.65 to 0.95Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab vs Trastuzumab + Taxane
SecondaryOne-Year Survival Rate

The percentage of participants alive at 1 year after randomization was estimated as the one-year survival rate using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and corresponding CIs were computed using Greenwood's estimate of the standard error.

Time frame:
From randomization until 1 year
Reported as:
Number · percentage probability of being alive
One-Year Survival Rate
percentage probability of being aliveTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
One-Year Survival Rate91.4 (88.44 to 94.41)92.4 (89.62 to 95.15)91.9 (89.00 to 94.77)
SecondaryPercentage of Participants With Grade ≥3 Adverse Events

Adverse events were graded according to National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0. Grade 3: Severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care activity of daily living with inability to perform bathing, dressing and undressing, feeding self, using the toilet, taking medications but not bedridden. Grade 4: An immediate threat to life. Urgent medical intervention is required in order to maintain survival. Grade 5: Death.

Time frame:
Up to 50 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (continuously until 28 days after last dose
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With Grade ≥3 Adverse Events
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Percentage of Participants With Grade ≥3 Adverse Events54.145.446.2
SecondaryPercentage of Participants Who Died at 2 Years
Time frame:
From randomization until 2 years
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants Who Died at 2 Years
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Percentage of Participants Who Died at 2 Years20.320.219.6
SecondaryOverall Survival Truncated at 2 Years

Overall Survival truncated at 2 years was defined as the percentage of participants alive at 2 years.

Time frame:
From randomization until 2 years
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Overall Survival Truncated at 2 Years
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Overall Survival Truncated at 2 Years79.7 (NA to NA)79.8 (NA to NA)80.4 (NA to NA)
SecondaryPercentage of Participants With Grade 5 Adverse Events

Adverse events were graded according to NCI CTCAE version 4.0. Grade 5 adverse events are those events which led to death.

Time frame:
Up to 50 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (continuously until 28 days after last dose)
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With Grade 5 Adverse Events
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Percentage of Participants With Grade 5 Adverse Events1.71.11.9
SecondaryPercentage of Participants With Grade 3-4 Laboratory Parameters

Laboratory results were graded according to NCI CTCAE version 4.0. Grade 3: Severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care activity of daily living with inability to perform bathing, dressing and undressing, feeding self, using the toilet, taking medications but not bedridden. Grade 4: An immediate threat to life. Urgent medical intervention is required in order to maintain survival.

Time frame:
Day 1, 8, and 15 of Cycle 1-3 and on Day 1 of each subsequent cycle up to 50 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With Grade 3-4 Laboratory Parameters
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Hemoglobin-Low: Grade 34.35.86.9
Neutrophils-Low: Grade 320.25.55.0
Neutrophils-Low: Grade 443.81.90.8
Platelets-Low: Grade 30.912.712.9
Platelets-Low: Grade 40.32.82.5
Alkaline Phosphate-High: Grade 31.13.93.0
Alanine Transaminase-High: Grade 33.49.18.0
Alanine Transaminase-High: Grade 40.00.30.6
Aspartate Aminotransferase-High: Grade 31.111.96.9
Aspartate Aminotransferase-High: Grade 40.00.30.3
Creatinine-High: Grade 30.90.31.1
Creatinine-High: Grade 40.00.00.3
Potassium-Low: Grade 34.34.75.2
Potassium-Low: Grade 40.61.70.6
Total Bilirubin-High: Grade 30.30.30.3
SecondaryPercentage of Participants With Decline of ≥2 Points From Baseline in Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status

The ECOG performance status is a scale used to quantify cancer participants' general well-being and activities of daily life. The scale ranges from 0 to 5, with 0 denoting perfect health and 5 indicating death. The 6 categories are 0=Asymptomatic (Fully active, able to carry on all predisease activities without restriction), 1=Symptomatic but completely ambulatory (Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature), 2=Symptomatic, \< 50% in bed during the day (Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out any work activities. Up and about more than 50% of waking hours), 3=Symptomatic, \> 50% in bed, but not bedbound (Capable of only limited self-care, confined to bed or chair 50% or more of waking hours), 4=Bedbound (Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any self-care. Totally confined to bed or chair), 5=Death.

Time frame:
Baseline, Day 1 of every Cycle up to Clinical Data Cut (up to 48 months)
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With Decline of ≥2 Points From Baseline in Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Percentage of Participants With Decline of ≥2 Points From Baseline in Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status7.66.17.9
SecondaryHospitalization Days

Hospitalization was defined as a non-administration-related hospitalization due to serious adverse event, while on study treatment. Reported values represent number of days admitted per participants.

Time frame:
Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014
Reported as:
Median · days
Hospitalization Days
daysTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Hospitalization Days6 (1 to 50)5 (1 to 117)8 (1 to 381)
SecondaryPercentage of Participants With Hospitalization

Hospitalization was defined as a non-administration-related hospitalization due to serious adverse event, while on study treatment.

Time frame:
Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With Hospitalization
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Percentage of Participants With Hospitalization21.8 (17.62 to 26.36)20.2 (16.20 to 24.71)22.1 (18.03 to 26.70)
SecondaryPercentage of Participants With Objective Response According to IRF Assessment

Objective response was defined as having complete response (CR) or partial response (PR), assessed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and short-axis reduction in pathological lymph nodes to \<10 mm. PR was defined as a ≥30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the Baseline sum. Response was determined using 2 consecutive tumor assessments at least 4 weeks apart. The percentage of participants with a best overall response of CR or PR (ie, the objective response rate \[ORR\]) was calculated as \[number of participants meeting the respective criteria divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100. Corresponding CIs were computed using the Blyth-Still-Casella exact method.

Time frame:
Up to 46 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With Objective Response According to IRF Assessment
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Percentage of Participants With Objective Response According to IRF Assessment67.9 (62.26 to 73.31)59.7 (54.07 to 65.30)64.2 (58.62 to 69.65)
Statistical analysis
  • Trastuzumab + Taxane vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo · Difference in response rate: -8.2 · 95% CI -15.9 to -0.5Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo vs Trastuzumab + Taxane
  • Trastuzumab + Taxane vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab · Difference in response rate: -3.7 · 95% CI -11.4 to 3.9Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab vs Trastuzumab + Taxane
  • Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab · Difference in response rate: 4.5 · 95% CI -3.3 to 12.2Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo
SecondaryPercentage of Participants With Objective Response According to Investigator Assessment

Objective response was defined as having CR or PR, assessed according to RECIST version 1.1, by investigator. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and short-axis reduction in pathological lymph nodes to \<10 mm. PR was defined as a ≥30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the Baseline sum. Response was determined using 2 consecutive tumor assessments at least 4 weeks apart. The percentage of participants with a best overall response of CR or PR (ie, the ORR) was calculated as \[number of participants meeting the respective criteria divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100. Corresponding CIs were computed using the Blyth-Still-Casella exact method.

Time frame:
Up to 46 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With Objective Response According to Investigator Assessment
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Percentage of Participants With Objective Response According to Investigator Assessment69.3 (63.74 to 74.52)64.6 (59.12 to 69.87)67.5 (62.17 to 72.68)
Statistical analysis
  • Trastuzumab + Taxane vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo · Difference in response rate: -4.6 · 95% CI -12.1 to 2.8Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo vs Trastuzumab + Taxane
  • Trastuzumab + Taxane vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab · Difference in response rate: -1.8 · 95% CI -9.2 to 5.7Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab vs Trastuzumab + Taxane
  • Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab · Difference in response rate: 2.9 · 95% CI -4.5 to 10.3Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo
SecondaryDuration of Response According to IRF Assessment

Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. Duration of response was defined as the time from confirmed PR or CR to first documented disease progression or death from any cause. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target lesions and non-target lesions and short-axis reduction in pathological lymph nodes to \<10 mm. PR was defined as a ≥30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the Baseline sum. Response was determined using 2 consecutive tumor assessments at least 4 weeks apart. Median duration of response was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and corresponding CIs were computed using the Brookmeyer-Crowley method.

Time frame:
Up to 46 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)
Reported as:
Median · months
Duration of Response According to IRF Assessment
monthsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Duration of Response According to IRF Assessment12.5 (10.5 to 16.6)20.7 (14.8 to 25.0)21.2 (15.8 to 29.3)
Statistical analysis
  • Trastuzumab + Taxane vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo · Hazard ratio (hr): 0.60 · 97.5% CI 0.43 to 0.84Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo vs Trastuzumab + Taxane
  • Trastuzumab + Taxane vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab · Hazard ratio (hr): 0.62 · 97.5% CI 0.45 to 0.85Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab vs Trastuzumab + Taxane
SecondaryPercentage of Participants With a Best Overall Response of CR, PR, or Stable Disease (SD) According to IRF Assessment

Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and short-axis reduction in pathological lymph nodes to \<10 mm. PR was defined as a ≥30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the Baseline sum. SD was defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to quality for PR nor sufficient (20%) increase to qualify for disease progression. Response was determined using 2 consecutive tumor assessments at least 4 weeks apart. The percentage of participants with a best overall response of CR, PR, or SD was calculated as \[number of participants meeting the respective criteria divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

Time frame:
Up to 46 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

SecondaryPercentage of Participants Experiencing a Clinically Significant Increase in Taxane-Related Treatment Symptoms as Measured by Taxane Subscale of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) Taxane (FACT-TaxS) Score

The FACT-Taxane is a self-reported instrument which measures the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of participants receiving taxane-containing chemotherapy. The FACT-TaxS consists of 16 items including 11 neurotoxicity-related questions and 5 additional questions assessing arthralgia, myalgia, and skin discoloration. Items are rated from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much) and a total score is inversely derived. Scores may range from 0 to 64, with higher scores indicating fewer/no symptoms. A minimally clinically important difference in treatment-related symptoms was defined as a ≥5% decrease (ie, 3.2 points) in FACT-TaxS score from Baseline. The percentage of participants with treatment-related symptoms was calculated using following formula: \[number of participants meeting the above threshold divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100. Corresponding CIs were computed using the Blyth-Still-Casella exact method.

Time frame:
Up to 39 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Baseline, on Day 1 of Cycles 2 to 8 and every even-numbered cycle thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants Experiencing a Clinically Significant Increase in Taxane-Related Treatment Symptoms as Measured by Taxane Subscale of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) Taxane (FACT-TaxS) Score
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Percentage of Participants Experiencing a Clinically Significant Increase in Taxane-Related Treatment Symptoms as Measured by Taxane Subscale of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) Taxane (FACT-TaxS) Score93.1 (88.48 to 96.06)60.8 (53.39 to 67.93)68.8 (61.32 to 75.92)
Statistical analysis
  • Trastuzumab + Taxane vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo · Difference in symptom rate: -32.2 · 95% CI -40 to -24Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo vs Trastuzumab + Taxane
  • Trastuzumab + Taxane vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab · Difference in symptom rate: -24.2 · 95% CI -32 to -16Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab vs Trastuzumab + Taxane
  • Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab · Difference in symptom rate: 8.0 · 95% CI -2.3 to 18.4Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo
SecondaryPercentage of Participants Reporting Nausea According to the Relevant Single Items of The FACT Colorectal Cancel (FACT-C) Module

The FACT-C is a self-reported instrument which measures HRQOL pertaining to colorectal cancer. Response options on each question may range from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). The percentage of participants with nausea was calculated using following formula: \[number of participants with any level of either symptom divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

Time frame:
At Baseline, Day 8 of Cycle 1, and Days 1 and 8 of Cycle 2
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants Reporting Nausea According to the Relevant Single Items of The FACT Colorectal Cancel (FACT-C) Module
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Nausea, Baseline (n=166,166,150)22.314.521.3
Nausea, Cycle 1 Day 8 (n=121,114,95)38.036.052.6
Nausea, Cycle 2 Day 1 (n=147,151,138)27.220.536.2
Nausea, Cycle 2 Day 8 (n=122,121,105)35.228.145.7
SecondaryPercentage of Participants Reporting Diarrhea According to the Relevant Single Items of The FACT-C Module

The FACT-C is a self-reported instrument which measures HRQOL pertaining to colorectal cancer. Response options on each question may range from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). The percentage of participants with diarrhea was calculated using following formula: \[number of participants with any level of either symptom divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

Time frame:
At Baseline, Day 8 of Cycle 1, and Days 1 and 8 of Cycle 2
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants Reporting Diarrhea According to the Relevant Single Items of The FACT-C Module
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Diarrhea, Baseline (n=173,170,153)15.07.611.8
Diarrhea, Cycle 1 Day 8 (n=124,117,98)34.717.934.7
Diarrhea, Cycle 2 Day 1 (n=161,160,144)24.211.339.6
Diarrhea, Cycle 2 Day 8 (n=125,123,107)34.48.141.1
SecondaryPercentage of Participants With a Clinically Significant Deterioration in Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) as Measured by FACT Breast (FACT-B) Trial Outcome Index-Physical Function Breast (TOI-PFB) Score

The FACT-B is a self-reported instrument which measures HRQOL of participants with breast cancer. It consists of 5 subscales including physical well-being (PWB), social well-being (SWB), emotional well-being (EWB), functional well-being (FWB), and a breast cancer subscale (BCS). The TOI-PFB score is taken by adding the scores from the PWB (7 items), FWB (7 items), and BCS (9 items) subscales. Items are rated from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much) and a total score is derived. Scores may range from 0 to 92, with higher scores indicating better HRQOL. A 5 point change has been identified as the clinically minimal important difference (CMID) on the FACT-TOI-PFB scale. The percentage of participants with deterioration was calculated as \[number of participants meeting the above threshold divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

Time frame:
Up to 39 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Baseline, on Day 1 of Cycles 2 to 8 and every even-numbered cycle thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With a Clinically Significant Deterioration in Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) as Measured by FACT Breast (FACT-B) Trial Outcome Index-Physical Function Breast (TOI-PFB) Score
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Percentage of Participants With a Clinically Significant Deterioration in Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) as Measured by FACT Breast (FACT-B) Trial Outcome Index-Physical Function Breast (TOI-PFB) Score61.850.950.6
SecondaryTime to Deterioration in HRQoL as Assessed by FACT-B TOI-PFB Score

The FACT-B is a self-reported instrument which measures HRQOL of participants with breast cancer. It consists of 5 subscales including PWB, SWB, EWB, FWB, and BCS. The TOI-PFB score is taken by adding the scores from the PWB (7 items), FWB (7 items), and BCS (9 items) subscales. Items are rated from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much) and a total score is derived. Scores may range from 0 to 92, with higher scores indicating better HRQOL. A 5 point change has been identified as the clinically minimal important difference (CMID) on the FACT-TOI-PFB scale. Time to deterioration was defined as the time from Baseline until the first decrease in FACT-B TOI-PFB score. Median time to deterioration was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and corresponding CIs were computed using the Brookmeyer-Crowley method.

Time frame:
Baseline up to 39 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014
Reported as:
Median · months
Time to Deterioration in HRQoL as Assessed by FACT-B TOI-PFB Score
monthsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Time to Deterioration in HRQoL as Assessed by FACT-B TOI-PFB Score3.6 (3.0 to 4.4)7.7 (6.2 to 11.9)9.0 (5.1 to 14.5)
Statistical analysis
  • Trastuzumab + Taxane vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo · Hazard ratio (hr): 0.70 · 95% CI 0.57 to 0.86Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo vs Trastuzumab + Taxane
  • Trastuzumab + Taxane vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab · Hazard ratio (hr): 0.68 · 95% CI 0.55 to 0.84Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab vs Trastuzumab + Taxane
SecondaryChange From Baseline in Rotterdam Symptom Checklist (RSCL) Activity Level Scale Score

The RSCL is a self-reported instrument which consists of 4 domains including physical symptom distress, psychological distress, activity level, and overall global life quality. Only the activity level scale was collected and assessed. Scores may range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating increased burden of disease. Mean RSCL activity scale score changes were calculated as \[mean score at the assessment visit minus mean score at Baseline\]. The higher the score, the higher the level of impairment or burden.

Time frame:
Baseline, Cycle 7 (Week 18)
Reported as:
Mean · units on a scale
Change From Baseline in Rotterdam Symptom Checklist (RSCL) Activity Level Scale Score
units on a scaleTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Baseline (n=344,355,344)85.0 (82.9 to 87.2)85.5 (83.3 to 87.8)85.7 (83.5 to 87.8)
Change From Baseline at Cycle 7 (n=261,252,261)-1.6 (-4.2 to 1.0)2.3 (0.4 to 4.2)-0.2 (-2.1 to 1.6)
SecondaryChange From Baseline in Work Productivity According to Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) Questionnaire Score

The WPAI is a patient-reported measure which assesses the effect of general health and symptom severity on work productivity and regular activities. The General Health questionnaire asks participants to estimate the number of hours missed from work due to reasons related and unrelated to their health problems, as well as the total number of hours actually worked in the preceding 7-day period. The percentage of participants reporting that they were employed (working for pay) was assessed at baseline was assessed along with Absenteeism (work time missed), Presenteeism (impairment at work / reduced on-the-job effectiveness), Work productivity loss (overall work impairment / absenteeism plus presenteeism), and Activity Impairment. The reported changes represent change from baseline at Cycle 7. The score range for the scales of the WPAI is between 0 (no effect) to 100% (max effect)

Time frame:
Baseline, Cycle 7 (Week 18)
Reported as:
Mean · percent of work
Change From Baseline in Work Productivity According to Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) Questionnaire Score
percent of workTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
% Work Time Missed at Baseline (n=66,63,67)15.3 (9.2 to 21.4)9.5 (4.2 to 14.8)13.6 (7.7 to 19.6)
Change in % Work Time Missed (n=35,33,36)0.4 (-7.3 to 8.2)-0.0 (-4.5 to 4.5)-4.3 (-13.0 to 4.6)
% Impairment While Working at Baseline(n=67,64,67)20.0 (14.1 to 25.9)15.3 (9.5 to 21.1)19.9 (13.6 to 26.1)
Change in % Impairment While Working (n=34,32,35)8.8 (2.0 to 15.6)-0.3 (-11.0 to 10.5)-2.7 (-11.0 to 5.2)
% Overall Work Impairment at Baseline (n=65,62,66)28.5 (20.7 to 36.2)21.2 (13.8 to 28.7)28.1 (20.3 to 35.9)
Change in % Overall Work Impairment (n=34,31,35)9.1 (-0.4 to 18.6)-1.1 (-13.0 to 11.0)-4.6 (-14.0 to 5.0)
SecondaryChange From Baseline in Activity Impairment According to Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) Questionnaire Score

The WPAI is a patient-reported measure which assesses the effect of general health and symptom severity on work productivity and regular activities. The General Health questionnaire asks participants to estimate the number of hours missed from work due to reasons related and unrelated to their health problems, as well as the total number of hours actually worked in the preceding 7-day period. The percentage of participants reporting that they were employed (working for pay) was assessed at baseline was assessed along with Absenteeism (work time missed), Presenteeism (impairment at work / reduced on-the-job effectiveness), Work productivity loss (overall work impairment / absenteeism plus presenteeism), and Activity Impairment. The reported changes represent change from baseline at Cycle 7. The score range for the scales of the WPAI is between 0 (no effect) to 100% (max effect).

Time frame:
Baseline, Cycle 7 (Week 18)
Reported as:
Mean · units on a scale
Change From Baseline in Activity Impairment According to Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) Questionnaire Score
units on a scaleTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
% Activity Impairment at Baseline (n=312,334,321)32.9 (29.6 to 36.3)33.6 (30.2 to 37.0)32.7 (29.5 to 36.0)
Change in % Activity Impairment (n=227,222,234)4.5 (0.2 to 8.7)-5.3 (-9.5 to -1.1)-3.7 (-7.2 to -0.1)
SecondaryPercentage of Participants With a Best Overall Response of CR or PR According to IRF Assessment Among Those With High Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2) Messenger Ribonucleic Acid (mRNA) Levels

Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and short-axis reduction in pathological lymph nodes to \<10 mm. PR was defined as a ≥30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the Baseline sum. Response was determined using 2 consecutive tumor assessments at least 4 weeks apart. The percentage of participants with a best overall response of CR or PR (ie, the ORR) was calculated as \[number of participants meeting the respective criteria divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

Time frame:
Up to 46 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With a Best Overall Response of CR or PR According to IRF Assessment Among Those With High Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2) Messenger Ribonucleic Acid (mRNA) Levels
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Percentage of Participants With a Best Overall Response of CR or PR According to IRF Assessment Among Those With High Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2) Messenger Ribonucleic Acid (mRNA) Levels75.066.963.9
Statistical analysis
  • Trastuzumab + Taxane vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo · Odds ratio (or): 0.67 · 95% CI 0.40 to 1.15Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo vs Trastuzumab + Taxane
SecondaryPercentage of Participants With a Best Overall Response of CR or PR According to IRF Assessment Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels

Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and short-axis reduction in pathological lymph nodes to \<10 mm. PR was defined as a ≥30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the Baseline sum. Response was determined using 2 consecutive tumor assessments at least 4 weeks apart. The percentage of participants with a best overall response of CR or PR (ie, the ORR) was calculated as \[number of participants meeting the respective criteria divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

Time frame:
Up to 46 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With a Best Overall Response of CR or PR According to IRF Assessment Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Percentage of Participants With a Best Overall Response of CR or PR According to IRF Assessment Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels61.951.766.1
Statistical analysis
  • Trastuzumab + Taxane vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo · Odds ratio (or): 0.66 · 95% CI 0.41 to 1.07Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo vs Trastuzumab + Taxane
SecondaryPercentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression According to IRF Assessment Among Those With High HER2 mRNA Levels

Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and 5-mm increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). The percentage of participants with death or disease progression was calculated as \[number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

Time frame:
Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression According to IRF Assessment Among Those With High HER2 mRNA Levels
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Percentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression According to IRF Assessment Among Those With High HER2 mRNA Levels59.457.656.1
SecondaryPFS According to IRF Assessment Among Those With High HER2 mRNA Levels

Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. PFS was defined as the time from randomization to first documented disease progression or death from any cause. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and 5-mm increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). Median duration of PFS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis.

Time frame:
Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)
Reported as:
Median · months
PFS According to IRF Assessment Among Those With High HER2 mRNA Levels
monthsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
PFS According to IRF Assessment Among Those With High HER2 mRNA Levels15.9 (0.1 to 46.4)18.6 (0.1 to 46.0)18.7 (0.1 to 48.1)
Statistical analysis
  • Trastuzumab + Taxane vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo · Hazard ratio (hr): 0.90 · 97.5% CI 0.65 to 1.25Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo vs Trastuzumab + Taxane
SecondaryPercentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression According to IRF Assessment Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels

Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and 5-mm increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). The percentage of participants with death or disease progression was calculated as \[number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

Time frame:
Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression According to IRF Assessment Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Percentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression According to IRF Assessment Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels66.570.162.4
SecondaryPFS According to IRF Assessment Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels

Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. PFS was defined as the time from randomization to first documented disease progression or death from any cause. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and 5-mm increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). Median duration of PFS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis.

Time frame:
Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)
Reported as:
Median · months
PFS According to IRF Assessment Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels
monthsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
PFS According to IRF Assessment Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels12.4 (0.1 to 47.3)10.2 (0.1 to 43.6)14.5 (0.1 to 40.7)
Statistical analysis
  • Trastuzumab + Taxane vs Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo · Hazard ratio (hr): 1.00 · 97.5% CI 0.74 to 1.34Direction of comparison: Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo vs Trastuzumab + Taxane
SecondaryPercentage of Participants Who Died Prior to Clinical Cutoff Among Those With High HER2 mRNA Levels

The percentage of participants who died prior to clinical cutoff was calculated as \[number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

Time frame:
Up to 70 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 15-May-2016 (every 3 months until death, loss to follow-up, withdrawal, or study termination)
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants Who Died Prior to Clinical Cutoff Among Those With High HER2 mRNA Levels
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Percentage of Participants Who Died Prior to Clinical Cutoff Among Those With High HER2 mRNA Levels38.841.245.1
SecondaryOS at Clinical Cutoff Among Those With High HER2 mRNA Levels

OS was defined as the time from randomization to death from any cause. Median duration of OS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis.

Time frame:
Up to 70 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 15-May-2016 (every 3 months until death, loss to follow-up, withdrawal, or study termination)
Reported as:
Median · months
OS at Clinical Cutoff Among Those With High HER2 mRNA Levels
monthsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
OS at Clinical Cutoff Among Those With High HER2 mRNA LevelsNA (50.86 to NA)65.97 (54.54 to 67.98)55.39 (48.23 to NA)
SecondaryPercentage of Participants Who Died Prior to Clinical Cutoff Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels

The percentage of participants who died prior to clinical cutoff was calculated as \[number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed\] multiplied by 100.

Time frame:
Up to 70 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 15-May-2016 (every 3 months until death, loss to follow-up, withdrawal, or study termination)
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants Who Died Prior to Clinical Cutoff Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels
percentage of participantsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Percentage of Participants Who Died Prior to Clinical Cutoff Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels51.852.945.2
SecondaryOS at Clinical Cutoff Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels

OS was defined as the time from randomization to death from any cause. Median duration of OS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Reported upper bound of confidence interval for "Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo" and confidence interval values for "Trastuzumab + Taxane" and "Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab" are censored values.

Time frame:
Up to 70 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 15-May-2016 (every 3 months until death, loss to follow-up, withdrawal, or study termination)
Reported as:
Median · months
OS at Clinical Cutoff Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels
monthsTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
OS at Clinical Cutoff Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels43.96 (37.19 to 54.87)47.84 (42.09 to 53.85)53.29 (46.75 to NA)

Adverse events

Collected over Up to 70 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16 September 2016 (every 3 months until death, loss to follow-up, withdrawal, or study termination).. Non-serious events are listed at a 5% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Trastuzumab + Taxane—81/353 (22.9%)342/353 (96.9%)
Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo—86/361 (23.8%)352/361 (97.5%)
Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab—93/366 (25.4%)352/366 (96.2%)
Most frequent serious events
Showing 10 of 212
Most frequent serious events
EventTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
Febrile neutropeniaBlood and lymphatic system disorders13/3530/3610/366
Infusion related reactionInjury, poisoning and procedural complications1/3537/36113/366
AnaemiaBlood and lymphatic system disorders1/3535/3616/366
NeutropeniaBlood and lymphatic system disorders5/3530/3610/366
PyrexiaGeneral disorders2/3534/3615/366
PneumoniaInfections and infestations4/3533/3615/366
DiarrhoeaGastrointestinal disorders4/3530/3610/366
Pulmonary embolismRespiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders4/3532/3611/366
VomitingGastrointestinal disorders1/3530/3614/366
SepsisInfections and infestations1/3530/3614/366
Most frequent other events
Showing 10 of 81
Most frequent other events
EventTrastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab
AlopeciaSkin and subcutaneous tissue disorders212/35326/36133/366
NauseaGastrointestinal disorders131/353174/361192/366
DiarrhoeaGastrointestinal disorders173/35392/361178/366
FatigueGeneral disorders128/353120/361130/366
EpistaxisRespiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders53/353113/361127/366
HeadacheNervous system disorders80/353116/361120/366
PyrexiaGeneral disorders59/35396/361118/366
VomitingGastrointestinal disorders69/35380/361111/366
Neuropathy peripheralNervous system disorders99/35352/36169/366
Oedema peripheralGeneral disorders98/35337/36135/366

Baseline characteristics

Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: All participants randomized in the study.

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)Trastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + PertuzumabTotal
Mean54.2 ± 11.352.6 ± 11.452.2 ± 12.053.0 ± 11.6
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)Trastuzumab + TaxaneTrastuzumab Emtansine + PlaceboTrastuzumab Emtansine + PertuzumabTotal
Female3623653611088
Male3227
08

Study locations

257 sites
  • Uni of Arkansas For Medical Sciences; Arkansas Cancer Research Center
    Little Rock, Arkansas 72204, United States
  • Scripps Cancer Center
    La Jolla, California 92037, United States
  • University of California; Moores Cancer Center
    La Jolla, California 92093, United States
  • Clnc L Trials & Rsch Assoc-Inc
    Montebello, California 90640, United States
  • Southern California Kaiser Permanente
    San Diego, California 92108, United States
  • Breastlink Medical Group Inc
    Santa Ana, California 92705, United States
  • Kaiser Permanente; Oncology Clinical Trials
    Vallejo, California 94589, United States
  • Smilow Cancer Hospital at Yale New Haven
    New Haven, Connecticut 06510, United States
  • Innovative Medical Research of South Florida
    Aventura, Florida 33180, United States
  • Northwest Oncology/ Hematology Assoc.
    Coral Springs, Florida 33065-5701, United States
  • Florida Cancer Specialists; SCRI
    Fort Myers, Florida 33901, United States
  • Mayo Clinic-Jacksonville
    Jacksonville, Florida 32224, United States
  • Uni of Miami School of Medicine; Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center
    Miami, Florida 33136, United States
  • University Cancer & Blood Center, LLC; Research
    Athens, Georgia 30607, United States
  • Cancer Research Center of Hawaii; Clinical Sciences
    Honolulu, Hawaii 96813, United States
  • Mountain States Tumor Inst.
    Boise, Idaho 83712, United States
  • Uni of Chicago
    Chicago, Illinois 60637, United States
  • Decatur Memorial Hospital
    Decatur, Illinois 62526, United States
  • Ingalls Memorial Hospital
    Harvey, Illinois 60426, United States
  • Loyola University Med Center
    Maywood, Illinois 60153, United States
  • Illinois Cancer Care
    Peoria, Illinois 61615, United States
  • Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Cancer Center
    Indianapolis, Indiana 46202, United States
  • Horizon Oncology Research, Inc.
    Lafayette, Indiana 47905, United States
  • James Graham Brown Cancer Center, University of Louisville
    Louisville, Kentucky 40202, United States
  • New England Cancer Specialists
    Scarborough, Maine 04074, United States
  • Anne Arundel Health System Research Instit-Annapolis Oncology Ctr
    Annapolis, Maryland 21401, United States
  • Boston Medical Center
    Boston, Massachusetts 02118, United States
  • Spectrum Health Grand Rapids
    Grand Rapids, Michigan 49503, United States
  • University of Minnesota.
    Minneapolis, Minnesota 55454, United States
  • Mayo Clinic Rochester
    Rochester, Minnesota 55902, United States
  • St. John'S Mercy Medical Center; David C. Pratt Cancer Center
    Saint Louis, Missouri 63141, United States
  • Mercy Clinic Cancer & Hematology
    Springfield, Missouri 65804, United States
  • Dartmouth Hitchcock Med Center
    Lebanon, New Hampshire 03756, United States
  • Hackensack Uni Medical Center; Northern Nj Cancer Center
    Hackensack, New Jersey 07601, United States
  • Cancer Inst. of New Jersey
    New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901, United States
  • San Juan Oncology Associates
    Farmington, New Mexico 87401, United States
  • Queens Medical Associates
    Fresh Meadows, New York 11366, United States
  • Queens Hospital Center
    Jamaica, New York 11432, United States
  • Arena Oncology Associates
    Lake Success, New York 11042, United States
  • Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
    New York, New York 10029, United States
  • Weill Medical College of Cornell Uni
    New York, New York 10065, United States
  • Carolinas Hem-Oncology Assoc
    Charlotte, North Carolina 28203, United States
  • Carolina Oncology Specialists, PA - Hickory
    Hickory, North Carolina 28602, United States
  • Marion L. Shepard Cancer Center
    Washington, North Carolina 27889, United States
  • Sanford Roger Maris Cancer Center
    Fargo, North Dakota 58102, United States
  • Oncology Hematology Care - SCRI
    Cincinnati, Ohio 45242, United States
  • Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center
    Hershey, Pennsylvania 17033, United States
  • Charleston Oncology, P .A
    Charleston, South Carolina 29414, United States
  • Medical University of SC (MUSC)
    Charleston, South Carolina 29425, United States
  • South Carolina Oncology Associates - SCRI
    Columbia, South Carolina 29210, United States
  • Avera Cancer Institute
    Sioux Falls, South Dakota 57105, United States
  • SCRI Tennessee Oncology Chattanooga
    Chattanooga, Tennessee 37404, United States
  • West Clinic
    Germantown, Tennessee 38138, United States
  • Tennessee Onc., PLLC - SCRI
    Nashville, Tennessee 37203, United States
  • Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Ctr
    Nashville, Tennessee 37232, United States
  • The Don & Sybil Harrington Cancer Center; Department of Clinical Research
    Amarillo, Texas 79106, United States
  • Uni of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
    Dallas, Texas 75390-9063, United States
  • Uni of Texas - Md Anderson Cancer Center; Dept of Breast Medical Oncology
    Houston, Texas 77030, United States
  • Northern Utah Associates
    Ogden, Utah 84403, United States
  • The Providence Regional Medical Center Everett
    Everett, Washington 98201, United States
  • University of Washington
    Seattle, Washington 98195, United States
  • Northwest Medical Specialties
    Tacoma, Washington 98405, United States
  • Fundación Investigar
    Buenos Aires, 1025, Argentina
  • Centro Medico San Roque
    San Miguel de Tucuman, T4000IAK, Argentina
  • Mater Misericordiae Hospital; Chemotherapy Cottage
    Sydney, New South Wales 2060, Australia
  • Calvary Mater Newcastle; Medical Oncology
    Waratah, New South Wales 2298, Australia
  • Wesley Medical Centre; Clinic For Haematology and Oncology
    Auchenflower, Queensland 4066, Australia
  • Royal Adelaide Hospital; Oncology
    Adelaide, South Australia 5000, Australia
  • Peter Maccallum Cancer Institute; Medical Oncology
    Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia
  • Lkh Salzburg - Univ. Klinikum Salzburg; Iii. Medizinische Abt.
    Salzburg, 5020, Austria
  • Medizinische Universität Wien; Univ.Klinik für Innere Medizin I - Abt. für Onkologie
    Wien, 1090, Austria
  • Oncology Consultants Limited
    Nassau, 09311, Bahamas
  • Cliniques Universitaires St-Luc
    Bruxelles, 1200, Belgium
  • Clinique Ste-Elisabeth
    Namur, 5000, Belgium
  • Sint Augustinus Wilrijk
    Wilrijk, 2610, Belgium
  • University Clinical Centre of the Republic of Srpska
    Banja Luka, 78000, Bosnia and Herzegovina
  • Clinic of Oncology, University Clinical Center Sarajevo
    Sarajevo, 71000, Bosnia and Herzegovina
  • *X*Instituto Nacional do Cancer - INCA
    Rio de Janeiro, RJ 20560-120, Brazil
  • Liga Norte Riograndense Contra O Câncer
    Natal, RN 59040150, Brazil
  • Hospital Nossa Senhora da Conceicao
    Porto Alegre, RS 90040-373, Brazil
  • Clinica de Oncologia de Porto Alegre - CliniOnco
    Porto Alegre, RS 90430-090, Brazil
  • Hospital Sao Lucas - PUCRS
    Porto Alegre, RS 90610-000, Brazil
  • Clinica de Neoplasias Litoral
    Itajai, SC 88301-220, Brazil
  • Instituto do Cancer do Estado de Sao Paulo - ICESP
    Sao Paulo, SP 01246-000, Brazil
  • Hospital Perola Byington
    Sao Paulo, SP 01317-000, Brazil
  • Cross Cancer Institute; Clinical Trials
    Edmonton, Alberta T6G 1Z2, Canada
  • North York General Hospital
    Toronto, Ontario M2J 1V1, Canada
  • Cuse - Centre Universitaire De Sante; Site Fleurimont
    Sherbrooke, Quebec J1H 5N4, Canada
  • CHU de Québec ? Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement / ONCOLOGY
    Quebec, G1S 4L8, Canada
  • Clinica del Country
    Bogota, 11001, Colombia
  • Instituto Colombiano Para El Avance De La Medicina: Icamedic
    Bucaramanga, Colombia
  • Centro Medico Imbanaco
    Cali, Colombia
  • Instituto Cancerologico de Nariño
    Pasto, Colombia
  • Masarykuv onkologicky ustav
    Brno, 656 53, Czechia
  • Fakultni nemocnice Olomouc; Onkologicka klinika
    Olomouc, 779 00, Czechia
  • Fakultni Poliklinika Vseobecne Fakultni Niemocnice; Onkologicka Klinika
    Praha 2, 128 08, Czechia
  • Fakultni Nemocnice Na Bulovce; Ustav Radiacni Onkologie
    Praha, 180 00, Czechia
  • Vejle Sygehus; Onkologisk Afdeling
    Vejle, 7100, Denmark
  • HOPITAL JEAN MINJOZ; Oncologie
    Besancon, 25030, France
  • Centre Jean Perrin; Hopital De Jour
    Clermont Ferrand, 63011, France

Showing the first 100 of 257 sites across 38 countries. Choose a country and city above to see the rest.

09

References and documents

Publications

  • Perez EA, de Haas SL, Eiermann W, Barrios CH, Toi M, Im YH, Conte PF, Martin M, Pienkowski T, Pivot XB, Burris HA 3rd, Stanzel S, Patre M, Ellis PA. Relationship between tumor biomarkers and efficacy in MARIANNE, a phase III study of trastuzumab emtansine +/- pertuzumab versus trastuzumab plus taxane in HER2-positive advanced breast cancer. BMC Cancer. 2019 May 30;19(1):517. doi: 10.1186/s12885-019-5687-0. Erratum In: BMC Cancer. 2019 Jun 24;19(1):620. doi: 10.1186/s12885-019-5831-x. PubMed 31146717 ↗
  • Bighin C, Pronzato P, Del Mastro L. Trastuzumab emtansine in the treatment of HER-2-positive metastatic breast cancer patients. Future Oncol. 2013 Jul;9(7):955-7. doi: 10.2217/fon.13.74. PubMed 23837759 ↗
  • Scott AM, Wolchok JD, Old LJ. Antibody therapy of cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2012 Mar 22;12(4):278-87. doi: 10.1038/nrc3236. PubMed 22437872 ↗
10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Mar 4, 2024, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT01120184
Lead sponsor
Hoffmann-La Roche
Collaborators
Genentech, Inc.
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
May 10, 2010
Start date
Jul 31, 2010
Primary completion
Sep 30, 2014
Completion
Sep 16, 2016
Results posted
Feb 23, 2017
Last update
Mar 4, 2024

Study contacts

Clinical Trials
study director · Hoffmann-La Roche

Oversight

FDA-regulated drug
Yes
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Feb 2024. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Studies of the drugs tested here: Pertuzumab · Ado-Trastuzumab Emtansine

Start the discussion