Trial · NCT00038467
Registered outcomes28
Each outcome the trial registered, primary first, in ClinicalTrials.gov's words.
1 to 20 of 28
Download this page as JSON| List | Outcome | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Disease-Free Survival (DFS) at Month 36 Post-Randomization: Main Study | Baseline up to Month 36 | DFS defined as time from randomization to earliest documentation of breast cancer relapse or death from any cause. DFS at Month 36 post-randomization was defined as probability of participants alive and disease-free at 36 months after the randomization. Participants withdrawn from the study for any reason in the absence of relapse were censored at the date they were last seen. Relapse was categorized as follows: loco-regional: ipsilateral breast or axillary nodal relapse; distant: distant relapse, including supraclavicular nodes; second primary breast cancer: contralateral breast cancer, excluding ductal carcinoma in situ. |
| Secondary | Overall Survival (OS) at Month 36 Post-Randomization: Main Study | Baseline up to Month 120 | OS was defined as the duration from randomization to death (due to any cause). OS at Month 36 post-randomization was defined as probability of participants' survival at 36 months after the randomization. For participants who were alive, OS was censored at the last available assessment. Probability of OS at Month 36 post-randomization was reported using Kaplan-Meier estimates at Month 36 post-randomization based on 120-month follow-up data. |
| Secondary | Number of Events of Second Breast Cancer in Contralateral Breast: Main Study | Baseline up to Month 120 | Number of events of second primary breast cancer in contralateral breast (excluding ductal carcinoma in situ) were reported. |
| Secondary | Percent Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12, 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-study | Baseline, 6, 12, 24 months after randomization (on-treatment), 24 months post-treatment | BMD measurements for Lumbar spine (LS) and Proximal Femur (Total Hip \[TH\]) were performed using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) for participants who entered the bone-metabolism sub-study. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively. |
| Secondary | Percent Change From Baseline in Femoral Neck and Femoral Wards Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-study | Baseline, 6, 12, 24 months after randomization (on-treatment), 24 months post-treatment | BMD measurements for femoral neck (FN) and femoral wards (FW) were performed using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) for participants who entered the bone-metabolism sub-study. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively. |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Proximal Femur (Total Hip) Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-scores at 6, 12 and 24 Months On-treatment and 24 Months Post-treatment: Bone Metabolism Sub-study | Baseline, 6, 12, 24 months after randomization (on-treatment), 24 months post-treatment | BMD measurements for Lumbar spine (LS) and Proximal Femur (Total Hip \[TH\]) were performed using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) for participants who entered the bone-metabolism sub-study. Results were scored as T-score. T-score indicated how many standard deviations higher or lower participant's value was when compared to the young normal reference mean. Using the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria for osteoporosis, a T-score of greater than or equal to (\>=)-1.0 was classified as normal, a T-score of greater than -2.5 to less than -1.0 as osteopenic, and a T-score less than or equal to (\<=)-2.5 as osteoporotic. Here 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively. |
| Secondary | Percentage of Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study | Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30 months after randomization (on-treatment), 36 months after randomization (end of treatment), 12, 24 months post-treatment | Bone specific alkaline phosphatase (BAP) serum concentration analyzed using enzyme immuno assay (EIA) at post-baseline time points was expressed as percentage of baseline BAP serum concentration. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively. |
| Secondary | Percentage of C-Terminal Telopeptide (CTX) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study | Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30 months after randomization (on-treatment), 36 months after randomization (end of treatment), 12, 24 months post-treatment | C-terminal telopeptide (CTX) serum concentration analyzed using competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) at post-baseline time points was expressed as percentage of baseline CTX serum concentration. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively. |
| Secondary | Percentage of Osteocalcin (OC) and Procollagen T1 C-Peptide (PICP) Serum Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study | Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30 months after randomization (on-treatment), 36 months after randomization (end of treatment), 12, 24 months post-treatment | Osteocalcin (OC) serum concentration analyzed using ELISA and procollagen T1 c-peptide (PICP) serum concentration analyzed using sandwich EIA at post-baseline time points was expressed as percentage of baseline OC serum concentration and baseline PICP serum concentration, respectively. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points, for each group respectively. |
| Secondary | Percentage of Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study | Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30 months after randomization (on-treatment), 36 months after randomization (end of treatment), 12, 24 months post-treatment | Deoxy-pyridinoline (DPD) urine concentration (adjusted for urinary creatinine) analyzed using competitive EIA at post-baseline time points was expressed as percentage of baseline DPD urine concentration. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively. |
| Secondary | Percentage of N-telopeptide of Type 1 Collagen (NTX) Urine Concentration Relative to Baseline: Bone Metabolism Sub-study | Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30 months after randomization (on-treatment), 36 months after randomization (end of treatment), 12, 24 months post-treatment | N-telopeptide of Type 1 collagen (NTX) urine concentration (adjusted for urinary creatinine) analyzed using competitive inhibition EIA at post-baseline time points was expressed as percentage of baseline NTX urine concentration. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively. |
| Secondary | Number of Participants With Fracture: Bone Metabolism Sub-study | Baseline up to 24 months post-treatment | |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Treatment Outcome Index (TOI) at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-study | Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomization | The TOI was defined as the sum of 23 items based on following Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast version \[FACT-B\] subscales: Physical well-being (7 items), Functional well-being (7 items), Breast cancer subscale (9 items). Each item was scaled from 0='Not at all' to 4='Very much'. Total TOI score ranged from 0 to 92, where higher TOI score indicated better health-related quality of life (QoL). A change of five points in the TOI scores was considered clinically meaningful. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively. Results for 30, 36, 48, 60 months were not reported because data for these time points was only summarized as graphical presentation. |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Endocrine Subscale (FACT-ES) Total Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-study | Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomization | The FACT-ES assessed health-related QoL in participants with breast cancer. ES subscale comprised of 18 items (hot flushes,cold sweats,night sweats, vaginal discharge,vaginal irritation,vaginal bleeding,vaginal dryness,discomfort with intercourse,lost interest in sex,gained weight,light headed/dizzy,vomiting,had diarrhea,headaches,felt bloated,breast tenderness,mood swings, felt irritable).Participants indicated how true a statement was for them using a 5-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). For items that were negatively framed, the scores were reversed for the analysis so that higher scores equated to a good QoL. Total FACT-ES score was calculated as sum of all the 18 items and ranged from 0 to 72, where higher score indicated better QoL. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively. |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Total Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General Breast and Endocrine (FACT-GBE) Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-study | Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomization | FACT-GBE assessed health-related quality of life (QoL) in participants with breast cancer. It consisted of 56 items,summarized to 7 subscales(subscale 1 to 6 constituted total FACT-B and subscale 7 constituted total ES):physical well-being(7 items), social/family well-being(7 items),relationship with doctor (2 items),emotional well-being(6 items),functional well-being(7 items),breast cancer subscale(9 items),endocrine symptoms(18 items). Participants indicated how true a statement had been for them using 5-point scale from 0(not at all) to 4(very much). For items that were negatively framed,scores were reversed for analysis so that higher scores equated to good QoL. Total FACT-GBE score=sum of all 56 items(range 0 to 224, where higher score indicated better QoL. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively. |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Physical Well-Being (PWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-study | Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomization | The PWB subscale assessed physical well-being related QoL in participants with breast cancer. PWB subscale comprised of 7 items (energy lack, nausea, family needs, pain, side effects, felt ill, forced to stay in bed). Participants indicated how true a statement had been for them using a 5-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). For items that were negatively framed, the scores were reversed for the analysis so that higher scores equated to a good QoL. Total PWB score was calculated as the sum of all the 7 items and ranged from 0 to 28, where higher score indicated better physical well-being related QoL. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively. |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Social/Family Well-Being (SWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-study | Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomization | The SWB subscale assessed social/family well-being related QoL in participants with breast cancer. SWB subscale comprised of 7 items (distant from friends, emotional support, support from friends, family acceptance, family communication, close to main support, sexual satisfaction). Participants indicated how true a statement had been for them using a 5-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). For items that were negatively framed, the scores were reversed for the analysis so that higher scores equated to a good QoL. Total SWB score was calculated as the sum of all the 7 items and ranged from 0 to 28, where higher score indicated better social/family well-being related QoL. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively. |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Relationship With Doctor (RWD) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Substudy | Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomization | The RWD subscale assessed relationship with doctor in participants with breast cancer. RWD subscale comprised of 2 items (confidence in doctors, doctor answered questions). Participants indicated how true a statement had been for them using a 5-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). Total RWD score was calculated as the sum of the 2 items and ranged from 0 to 8, where higher score indicated better relationship with doctor. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively. |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Emotional Well-Being (EWB) Subscale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-study | Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomization | The EWB subscale assessed emotional well-being related QoL in participants with breast cancer. EWB subscale comprised of 6 items (felt sad, proud of coping, lost hope, felt nervous, worried about dying, worried about condition worsening). Participants indicated how true a statement had been for them using a 5-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). For items that were negatively framed, the scores were reversed for the analysis so that higher scores equate to a good QoL. Total EWB score was calculated as the sum of the 6 items and ranged from 0 to 24, where higher score indicated better emotional well-being related QoL. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively. |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Functional Well-Being (FWB) Sub-scale Score at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 Months: QoL Sub-study | Baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60 months after randomization | The FWB subscale assessed functional well-being related QoL in participants with breast cancer. FWB subscale comprised of 7 items (able to work, work fulfilled, able to enjoy life, acceptance of illness, sleeping well, enjoyed normal fun activities, contented with QoL). Participants indicated how true a statement had been for them using a 5-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). Total FWB score was calculated as the sum of the 7 items and ranged from 0 to 28, where higher score indicated better functional well-being related QoL. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively. |
Source ClinicalTrials.govtrials-2026-11-12-0.5.0
Sources 3
- ClinicalTrials.gov's posted results, through CTTI's AACTFreely available. Acknowledgement requested
- ClinicalTrials.govNo license stated
- NIH RePORTER's clinical studies and project filesPublic domain
Each source's terms
- ClinicalTrials.gov's posted results, through CTTI's AACTClinicalTrials.gov data via Aggregate Analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov (AACT), CTTI. CTTI makes its materials freely available and requests acknowledgement. https://aact.ctti-clinicaltrials.org/documentation/299
- ClinicalTrials.govnone stated
- NIH RePORTER's clinical studies and project filesPublic domain (NIH RePORTER)
ClinicalTrials.gov's data carry an international copyright outside the United States: https://clinicaltrials.gov/about-site/terms-conditions.
For software
Read this list from software.
Twenty rows a page, as JSON. No key.
GET https://conductscience.org/api/trials/v1/NCT00038467/registered