Completado

A Randomized, Multicenter, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, 2-Arm, Phase III Study of Oral GW572016 in Combination With Paclitaxel in Subjects Previously Untreated or Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer

0 criterios cumplidosConsulta de un vistazo cómo tu perfil cumple con cada criterio de elegibilidad.
Qué se está evaluando

Paclitaxel

+ GW572016 (Lapatinib)
Medicamento
Quiénes están siendo reclutados

Enfermedades de la Mama
+2

+ Neoplasias de la Mama
+ Neoplasias
A partir de 18 años
Ver todos los criterios de elegibilidad
Cómo está diseñado el estudio

Estudio de Tratamiento

Controlado con Placebo
Fase 3
Intervencional
Inicio del estudio: enero de 2004
Ver detalles del protocolo

Resumen

Patrocinador PrincipalGlaxoSmithKline
Última actualización: 13 de enero de 2026
Extraido de una base de datos validada por el gobierno.Reclamar como socio
Fecha de inicio: 1 de enero de 2004Fecha en la que se inscribió al primer participante.

The purpose of this study is to determine the efficacy and safety of an oral dual tyrosine kinase inhibitor (GW572016) in combination with paclitaxel compared to paclitaxel alone in first line advanced or metastatic breast cancer.

Título OficialA Randomized, Multicenter, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, 2-Arm, Phase III Study of Oral GW572016 in Combination With Paclitaxel in Subjects Previously Untreated or Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer 
NCT00085046NCT00075270
Patrocinador PrincipalGlaxoSmithKline
Última actualización: 13 de enero de 2026
Extraido de una base de datos validada por el gobierno.Reclamar como socio

Protocolo

Esta sección proporciona detalles del plan del estudio, incluyendo cómo está diseñado y qué se está evaluando.
Detalles del Diseño
Se reclutarán 580 pacientesNúmero total de participantes que el ensayo clínico espera reclutar.
Estudio de Tratamiento
Estos estudios prueban nuevas formas de tratar una enfermedad, condición o problema de salud. El objetivo es determinar si un nuevo medicamento, terapia o enfoque funciona mejor o tiene menos efectos secundarios que las opciones existentes.

Cómo se asignan los participantes a diferentes grupos/brazos
En este estudio clínico, los participantes se colocan en grupos de forma aleatoria, como si se lanzara una moneda. Esto garantiza que el estudio sea justo e imparcial, lo que hace que los resultados sean más confiables. Al asignar a los participantes al azar, los investigadores pueden comparar mejor los tratamientos sin influencias externas.

Otras formas de asignar participantes
Asignación no aleatoria: Los participantes se asignan en función de factores específicos, como su condición médica o la decisión de un médico.
Ninguna (ensayo de un solo brazo): Si el estudio tiene un solo grupo, todos los participantes reciben el mismo tratamiento y no se necesita asignación.

Cómo se administran los tratamientos a los participantes
Los participantes se dividen en diferentes grupos, y cada uno recibe un tratamiento específico al mismo tiempo. Esto ayuda a los investigadores a comparar la eficacia de los distintos tratamientos entre sí.

Otras formas de asignar tratamientos
Asignación a un solo grupo: Todos reciben el mismo tratamiento.
Asignación cruzada: Los participantes cambian de tratamiento durante el estudio.
Asignación factorial: Los participantes reciben diferentes combinaciones de tratamientos.
Asignación secuencial: Los participantes reciben tratamientos uno tras otro en un orden específico, posiblemente según su respuesta individual.
Otra asignación: La asignación de tratamientos no sigue un diseño estándar o predefinido.

Cómo se controla la efectividad del tratamiento
En un estudio controlado con placebo, algunos participantes reciben el tratamiento experimental, mientras que otros reciben una sustancia inerte (placebo) para comparar los resultados. Este método ayuda a aislar el efecto del tratamiento de los efectos psicológicos de recibir cualquier intervención.

Otras opciones
No controlado con placebo: No se utiliza placebo. Todos los participantes reciben el tratamiento real o intervenciones alternativas (a menudo el tratamiento estándar), y las comparaciones se realizan entre estos tratamientos.

Cómo se mantiene la confidencialidad de las intervenciones asignadas a los participantes
Ni los participantes ni los investigadores saben quién está recibiendo qué tratamiento. Esta es la forma más rigurosa de reducir el sesgo, asegurando que las expectativas no influyan en los resultados.

Otras formas de enmascarar la información
Abierto: Todos saben qué tratamiento se está administrando.
Simple ciego: Los participantes no saben qué tratamiento están recibiendo, pero los investigadores sí.
Triple ciego: Participantes, investigadores y evaluadores de resultados no saben qué tratamiento se está administrando.
Cuádruple ciego: Participantes, investigadores, evaluadores de resultados y personal de atención no saben qué tratamiento se está administrando.

Elegibilidad

Los investigadores buscan pacientes que cumplan ciertos criterios, conocidos como criterios de elegibilidad: estado general de salud o tratamientos previos.
Condiciones
Criterios
MujerSexo biológico de los participantes elegibles para inscribirse.
A partir de 18 añosRango de edades de los participantes que pueden unirse al estudio.
Voluntarios sanos no permitidosIndica si personas sanas, sin la condición que se estudia, pueden participar.
Condiciones
Patología
Enfermedades de la Mama
Neoplasias de la Mama
Neoplasias
Neoplasias por Sitio
Enfermedades de la Piel
Criterios

Inclusion criteria: * Signed Informed Consent * Able to swallow an oral medication * Cardiac ejection fraction within the institutional range of normal as measured by echocardiogram * Adequate kidney and liver function * Adequate bone marrow function * Tumor tissue available for testing * Prior adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy is permitted with an anthracycline or anthracenedione-containing regimen however, subjects must have had cumulative doses of less than 360 mg/m2 of doxorubicin, 720 mg/m2 of epirubicin, or 72 mg/m2 of mitoxantrone * No Her2/neu overexpression in tumor tissue tested or status unknown if tissue has never been tested Exclusion criteria: * Prior treatment regimens for advanced or metastatic breast cancer. * Pregnant or lactating * Conditions that would effect the absorption of an oral drug * Active infection * Brain metastases * Treatment with EGFR (Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor) inhibitor. * Known hypersensitivity to Taxol or excipients of Taxol * Peripheral neuropathy of Grade 2 or greater is not permitted * Severe Cardiovascular disease or cardiac disease requiring a device. * Serious medical or psychiatric disorder that would interfere with the patient's safety or informed consent.

Plan de Estudio

Conoce todos los tratamientos administrados en este estudio, su descripción detallada y en qué consisten.
Grupos de Tratamiento
Objetivos del Estudio
2 grupos de intervención 

están designados en este estudio

50% de probabilidad 

de ser asignado al grupo placebo

Grupos de Tratamiento
Grupo I
Experimental
Lapatinib 1500 mg, once daily and Paclitaxel 175 mg/m Intravenously over 3 hours ever 3 weeks

Active Comparator

Oral GW572016 Lapatinib
Grupo II
Placebo
Paclitaxel 175 mg/m Intravenously over 3 hours ever 3 weeks and Placebo

Active Comparator
Objetivos del Estudio
Objetivos Primarios

Time to progression (TTP) is defined as the interval between the date of randomization and the earliest date of progression of disease (PD) or death due to breast cancer. The investigator assessed PD based on radiological PD (imaging data) and clinical symptomatic progress (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors \[RECIST\] Criteria: target lesion (TL), at least a 20% increase in the sum of largest diameter (LD) of TLs or the appearance of one or more new lesions; non-TL (NTL), the appearance of one or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing NTLs). TTP was assessed in participants who died due to breast cancer or progressed, as assessed by the investigator, as well as in those who were censored and completed follow-up and those who were censored but are still being followed. For censored participants (those without a documented date of disease progression/death due to breast cancer), the date of the last radiographic assessment was used.

Time to progression is defined as the interval between the date of randomization and the earliest date of progression of disease (PD) or death due to breast cancer. The IRC assessed PD based on radiological PD (imaging data) and clinical symptomatic progress (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors \[RECIST\] Criteria: target lesion (TL), at least a 20% increase in the sum of largest diameter (LD) of TLs or the appearance of one or more new lesions; non-TL (NTL), the appearance of one or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing NTLs). TTP was assessed in participants who died due to breast cancer or progressed, as assessed by the independent reviewer, as well as in those who were censored and completed follow-up and those who were censored but are still being followed. For censored participants (those without a documented date of disease progression/death due to breast cancer), the date of the last radiographic assessment was used.
Objetivos Secundarios

The percentage of participants with tumor response is defined as those participants with measurable disease who achieved either a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR). The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) was used to evaluate the measurability of tumor lesions, to determine target lesion (TLs) and non-target lesion (NTLs). CR (TLs and NTLs): the disappearance of all TLs and NTLs; PR (for TLs): at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the largest diameter (LD) of TLs, taking as a reference the Baseline sum LD; PR (for NTLs): persistence of one or more lesions.

The percentage of participants with tumor response is defined as those participants with measurable disease who achieved either a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR). The RECIST criteria was used to evaluate the measurability of tumor lesions, to determine target lesion (TLs) and non-target lesion (NTLs). CR (TLs and NTLs): the disappearance of all TLs and NTLs; PR (for TLs): at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the largest diameter (LD) of TLs, taking as a reference the Baseline sum LD; PR (for NTLs): persistence of one or more lesions.

Percentage of participants. with CB is defined as the percentage of participants with evidence of CR (disappearance of all TLs and NTLs), PR (TLs: a \>=30% decrease in the sum of the LD, taking as a reference the Baseline sum LD; NTLs: persistence of \>=1 lesion), or stable disease (neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD) for \>=6 months based on RECIST criteria. PD for TL: a \>=20% increase in the sum of the LD of TLs or the appearance of \>=1 new lesion. PD for NTLs: the appearance of \>=1 new lesion and/or unequivocal progression of existing NTLs.

Time to response (TTR) is defined as the time from randomization until the first documented evidence of CR (disappearance of all TLs and NTLs) or PR (for TLs: a \>=30% decrease in the sum of the LD of TLs, taking as a reference the Baseline sum LD; for NTLs: the persistence of \>=1 lesion) (whichever status was recorded first). TTR data are displayed as the number of participants achieving a CR or PR by the indicated week. The investigator evaluated the TTR, and the analysis was based on responses confirmed at a repeat assessment, with the TTR taken as the first time the response was observed.

The investigator evaluated the DOR for the subset of participants who showed a CR (disappearance of all TLs and NTLs) or PR (TLs: a \>=30% decrease in the sum of the LD of TLs, taking as a reference the Baseline sum LD; NTLs: persistence of \>=1 lesion). DOR is defined as the time from the first documented evidence of PR or CR until the first documented sign of PD (TL: a \>=20% increase in the sum of the LD of TLs or the appearance of \>=1 new lesion; NTL: the appearance of \>=1 new lesion and/or unequivocal progression of existing NTLs) or death due to breast cancer, if sooner.

PFS is defined as the interval between the date of randomization and the earliest date of progression disease (PD) or death due to any cause, if sooner. For TLs, progressive disease is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the LD of TLs or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions. For NTLs, progressive disease is defined as the appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing NTLs. par., participants.

The severity of adverse events was graded per the National Cancer Institute-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI-CTCAE), Version 3. Grades 1 through 5 have unique clinical descriptions of severity for each AE based on the following general guideline: Grade 1, Mild AE; Grade 2, Moderate AE; Grade 3, Severe AE; Grade 4, Life-threatening or disabling AE; Grade 5, death related to AE.

PFS is defined as the interval between the date of randomization and the earliest date of disease progression or death due to any cause, if sooner. Six months PFS is defined as PFS at six months from the time of randomization. Raw data for 6 months PFS are not available; thus, data are presented as the number of participants who progressed or died at or prior to 6 months. For TLs, progressive disease is defined asat least a 20% increase in the sum of the LD of TLs or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions. For NTLs, progressive disease is defined as the appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing NTLs. PFS was assessed in participants who died or progressed, as well as in those who were censored and completed follow-up and those who were censored but are still being followed. For censored participants (those without a documented date of disease progression/death due to breast cancer), the date of the last radiographic assessment was used.

Overall survival is defined as the time from randomization until death due to any cause.

The FACT-B questionnaire was designed to measure multidimensional quality of life (QOL) in participants with breast cancer. The physical and functional well-being subscale scores range from 0 to 28, based on 7 questions (each scored from 0 \[not at all\] to 4 \[very much\] for all subscales); the emotional and social/family well-being (1 question optional) subscale scores range from 0 to 24 (based on 6 questions), and the additional concerns subscale score ranges from 0 to 40, based on 10 questions. The FACT-B Total Score (0 \[better QOL\] to 144 \[worse QOL\]) is the sum of the subscale scores.

The FACT-G questionnaire was designed to measure multidimensional QOL in participants with cancer and includes subscales for physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being. The physical, social/family, and functional well-being subscale scores range from 0 to 28, based on responses to 7 questions (each question scored from 0 \[not at all\] to 4 \[very much\]); the emotional well-being subscale score ranges from 0 to 24, based on responses to 6 questions. The FACT-G Total Score (ranging from 0 \[better QOL\] to 108 \[worse QOL\]) is the sum of the subscale scores.

The TOI questionnaire was designed to measure multidimensional QOL in participants with cancer and includes subscales for physical, functional well-being, and additional cancer concerns. The physical and functional well-being subscale scores range from 0 to 28, based on 7 questions (each question scored from 0 \[not at all\] to 4 \[very much\]); the breast cancer unweighted subscale scores range from 0 to 36, based on 9 questions. The total TOI score (ranging from 0 \[better QOL\] to 92 \[worse QOL\]) is the sum of the TOI subscale scores.

The Press Laboratory collected tumor tissues of participants for ErbB2 testing. ErbB2 testing is done to detect breast cancer and predict its likely outcome. All samples were analyzed by the Press Laboratory. Participants were categorized as ErbB2 positive (overexpression of the ErbB2 gene), ErbB2 negative, and assay not done (which included participants with no available samples and those with inconclusive results). ErbB2 status is determined by immunohistochemistry (ICH) assay and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) testing. Negative ErbB2 status is defined as 0 or 1+ by IHC, or as 2+ by IHC and FISH.

The Press Laboratory collected tumor tissues of participants for biomarker testing. All samples were analyzed by the Press Laboratory. The ratio of ErbB2 gene signals to chromosome 17 signals, which indicates the progression of breast cancer, was calculated. Low levels of amplification (few copies) may have a ratio of 2-5, whereas high levels of amplification may have a ratio \>10.

The Press Laboratory tested tumor tissue samples (taken at Screening, prior to randomization to study treatment) to determine intra-tumoral expression levels of ErbB1, ErbB2, and other analytes associated with these pathways by IHC, the process of detecting antigens (e.g., proteins) in cells of a tissue section. The IHC assessment is expressed as: 0, no staining (no cancer cells); 1+, faint staining; 2+, weak to moderate complete staining; 3+, strong complete staining (many cancer cells). A status of "Assay not done" was assigned to participants with no available samples and to those with inconclusive results. If strong staining is observed, breast cancer that has high levels of HER2 expression (overexpression) is indicated. If moderate/weak staining is observed (IHC=2+), breast cancer that has low/moderate expression levels is indicated. When no staining is observed (IHC=0), breast cancer HER2 expression may be below the level of detection of the assay.

The Press Laboratory tested participants who were 2+ (weak to moderate complete staining) or 3+ (strong complete staining) for ErbB2 overexpression by IHC for ErbB2 gene amplification using the FISH assay. The results of the FISH assay can be ErbB2 gene "amplification" (increased number of copies of the ErbB2 gene) or "non-amplification" (not many copies of the ErbB2 gene). A status of "Assay not done" was assigned to those participants with no available samples and to those with inconclusive results (e.g., due to hybridization or staining problems).

The Quest Laboratory collected blood samples for quantitative determination of serum ErbB1. The results of serum monitoring were used to compare tumor response rates following randomized therapy.

The Quest Laboratory collected blood samples for quantitative determination of serum ErbB2. The results of serum monitoring were used to compare tumor response rates following randomized therapy.

Centros del Estudio

Estos son los hospitales, clínicas o centros de investigación donde se lleva a cabo el estudio. Puedes encontrar la ubicación más cercana a ti y su estado de reclutamiento.
Este estudio tiene 177 ubicaciones
Suspendido
GSK Investigational SiteTucson, United StatesVer ubicación
Suspendido
GSK Investigational SiteHot Springs, United States
Suspendido
GSK Investigational SiteJonesboro, United States
Suspendido
GSK Investigational SiteFountain Valley, United States
Completado177 Centros de Estudio