This is the classic website, which will be retired eventually. Please visit the modernized ClinicalTrials.gov instead.
Working…
ClinicalTrials.gov
ClinicalTrials.gov Menu

ARCHER 1009 : A Study Of Dacomitinib (PF-00299804) Vs. Erlotinib In The Treatment Of Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (ARCHER 1009)

The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our disclaimer for details.
 
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01360554
Recruitment Status : Completed
First Posted : May 25, 2011
Results First Posted : May 24, 2017
Last Update Posted : May 24, 2017
Sponsor:
Information provided by (Responsible Party):
Pfizer

Study Description
Go to 
Top of Page Study Description Study Design Arms and Interventions Outcome Measures Eligibility Criteria Contacts and Locations More Information
Brief Summary:
This is a multinational, multicenter, randomized,double-blinded, Phase 3 study comparing the efficacy and safety of treatment with PF-00299804 to treatment with erlotinib in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer, previously treated with at least one prior regimen. Analyses of primary objective (Progression Free Survival) will be done in two co-primary populations as defined in the protocol.

Condition or disease Intervention/treatment Phase
Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Drug: Dacomitinib (PF-00299804) Drug: Active Comparator (erlotinib) Drug: Placebo erlotinib Drug: Placebo PF00299804 Phase 3

Study Design
Go to 
Top of Page Study Description Study Design Arms and Interventions Outcome Measures Eligibility Criteria Contacts and Locations More Information

Layout table for study information
Study Type : Interventional  (Clinical Trial)
Actual Enrollment : 878 participants
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Quadruple (Participant, Care Provider, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)
Primary Purpose: Treatment
Official Title: Archer 1009:a Randomized, Double Blind Phase 3 Efficacy And Safety Study Of Pf-00299804 (Dacomitinib) Versus Erlotinib For The Treatment Of Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Following Progression After, Or Intolerance To, At Least One Prior Chemotherapy
Study Start Date : June 16, 2011
Actual Primary Completion Date : September 30, 2013
Actual Study Completion Date : September 14, 2015

Resource links provided by the National Library of Medicine

MedlinePlus related topics: Lung Cancer

Arms and Interventions
Go to 
Top of Page Study Description Study Design Arms and Interventions Outcome Measures Eligibility Criteria Contacts and Locations More Information

Arm Intervention/treatment
Experimental: A
Blinded active PF-00299804 + blinded placebo comparator (erlotinib)
 Drug: Dacomitinib (PF-00299804)
Dacomitinib (PF-00299804) is provided as 45 mg tablets, continuous oral daily dosing

Drug: Placebo erlotinib
placebo erlotinib, provided as 150 mg tablet, continuous oral daily dosing.
Active Comparator: B
Blinded active comparator (erlotinib) + blinded placebo PF-00299804
 Drug: Active Comparator (erlotinib)
Active comparator (erlotinib) provided as 150 mg tablet, continuous oral daily dosing

Drug: Placebo PF00299804
placebo PF-00299804, provide as 45 mg tablet, continuous oral daily dosing


Outcome Measures
Go to 
Top of Page Study Description Study Design Arms and Interventions Outcome Measures Eligibility Criteria Contacts and Locations More Information

Primary Outcome Measures :
  1. Progression-Free Survival (PFS) Per Independent Radiologic Review. [ Time Frame: From date of randomization until the date of first documented progression or date of death from any cause, whichever came first, participants were followed up until progressive disease regardless of start of subsequent cancer therapy. ]
    PFS was defined as the time from randomization to the date of disease progression as by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor (RECIST) v1.1 per Independent Radiologic Review or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. Objective progression was defined as a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target measurable lesions above the smallest sum observed (over baseline if no decrease in the sum is observed during therapy), with a minimum absolute increase of 5 mm or unequivocal progression of pre-existing non-target lesions, or the appearance of any new unequivocal malignant lesions.

  2. Progression-Free Survival (PFS) Per Independent Radiologic Review in KRAS Wild-type (WT) Participants. [ Time Frame: From date of randomization until the date of first documented progression or date of death from any cause, whichever came first, participants were followed up until progressive disease regardless of start of subsequent cancer therapy. ]
    PFS was defined as the time from randomization to the date of disease progression as by RECIST v1.1 per Independent Radiologic Review or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. Objective progression was defined as a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target measurable lesions above the smallest sum observed (over baseline if no decrease in the sum is observed during therapy), with a minimum absolute increase of 5 mm or unequivocal progression of pre-existing non-target lesions, or the appearance of any new unequivocal malignant lesions. Tumor tissue from participants' original diagnostic biopsies or recently obtained biopsies were analyzed to determine KRAS status.


Secondary Outcome Measures :
  1. PFS Based on Investigator Review. [ Time Frame: From date of randomization until the date of first documented progression or date of death from any cause, whichever came first, participants were followed up until progressive disease regardless of start of subsequent cancer therapy. ]
    PFS was defined as the time from randomization to the date of disease progression as by RECIST v1.1 per Investigator's Review or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. Objective progression was defined as a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target measurable lesions above the smallest sum observed (over baseline if no decrease in the sum is observed during therapy), with a minimum absolute increase of 5 mm or unequivocal progression of pre-existing non-target lesions, or the appearance of any new unequivocal malignant lesions.

  2. PFS Based on Investigator Review in KRAS-WT Participants. [ Time Frame: From date of randomization until the date of first documented progression or date of death from any cause, whichever came first, participants were followed up until progressive disease regardless of start of subsequent cancer therapy. ]
    PFS was defined as the time from randomization to the date of disease progression as by RECIST v1.1 per Investigator's Review or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. Objective progression was defined as a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target measurable lesions above the smallest sum observed (over baseline if no decrease in the sum is observed during therapy), with a minimum absolute increase of 5 mm or unequivocal progression of pre-existing non-target lesions, or the appearance of any new unequivocal malignant lesions. Tumor tissue from participants' original diagnostic biopsies or recently obtained biopsies were analyzed to determine KRAS status.

  3. Overall Survival (OS). [ Time Frame: From date of randomization until the date of death from any cause or last date known to be alive, participants were followed up regardless of the reason for discontinuation from study treatment at intervals of no longer than every 2 months. ]
    OS was defined as the time from randomization to the date of death for any cause. In the absence of confirmation of death, survival time was censored at the last date the patient was known to be alive (ie, at their last known alive date from long term follow-up).

  4. OS in KRAS-WT Participants. [ Time Frame: From date of randomization until the date of death from any cause or last date known to be alive, participants were followed up regardless of the reason for discontinuation from study treatment at intervals of no longer than every 2 months. ]
    OS was defined as the time from randomization to the date of death for any cause. In the absence of confirmation of death, survival time was censored at the last date the patient was known to be alive (ie, at their last known alive date from long term follow-up). Tumor tissue from participants' original diagnostic biopsies or recently obtained biopsies were analyzed to determine KRAS status.

  5. Best Overall Response (BOR) Per Independent Radiologic Review. [ Time Frame: From date of randomization until progression or initiation of new anti-cancer therapy or death. Participants were followed up until progressive disease regardless of start of subsequent cancer therapy. ]
    The BOR was the best response per RECIST (version 1.1) criteria as assessed by independent assessment recorded from randomization until disease progression. Per RECIST version 1.1: Complete Response (CR): disappearance of all pre-existing lesions except nodal disease, with all nodal lesions decreased to normal size (short axis<10 mm) and no appearance of new unequivocal malignant lesions; Partial Response (PR): >=30% decrease from baseline sum of diameters of all target lesions with no unequivocal progression of pre-existing non-target lesions or appearance of new unequivocal malignant lesions; Progressive Disease (PD): >=20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions above the smallest sum observed, with a minimum absolute increase of 5 mm, or unequivocal progression of pre-existing non-target lesions or appearance of any new unequivocal malignant lesions.

  6. BOR Per Investigator Review. [ Time Frame: From date of randomization until progression or initiation of new anti-cancer therapy or death. Participants were followed up until progressive disease regardless of start of subsequent cancer therapy. ]
    The BOR was the best response per RECIST (version 1.1) criteria as assessed by investigator assessment recorded from randomization until disease progression. Per RECIST version 1.1: CR: disappearance of all pre-existing lesions except nodal disease, with all nodal lesions decreased to normal size (short axis<10 mm) and no appearance of new unequivocal malignant lesions; PR: >=30% decrease from baseline sum of diameters of all target lesions with no unequivocal progression of pre-existing non-target lesions or appearance of new unequivocal malignant lesions; PD: >=20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions above the smallest sum observed, with a minimum absolute increase of 5 mm, or unequivocal progression of pre-existing non-target lesions or appearance of any new unequivocal malignant lesions.

  7. Duration of Response (DR) Based on Independent Radiologic Review. [ Time Frame: From date of randomization until progression or death due to any cause. Participants were followed up until progressive disease regardless of start of subsequent cancer therapy. ]
    DR was defined as the time from first documentation of response assessed by independent review (CR or PR whichever occurred first) to date of progression or death due to any cause, whichever occurs first. Per RECIST version 1.1: CR: disappearance of all pre-existing lesions except nodal disease, with all nodal lesions decreased to normal size (short axis<10 mm) and no appearance of new unequivocal malignant lesions; PR: >=30% decrease from baseline sum of diameters of all target lesions with no unequivocal progression of pre-existing non-target lesions or appearance of new unequivocal malignant lesions; PD: >=20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions above the smallest sum observed, with a minimum absolute increase of 5 mm, or unequivocal progression of pre-existing non-target lesions or appearance of any new unequivocal malignant lesions.

  8. DR Based on Investigator Review. [ Time Frame: From date of randomization until progression or death due to any cause. Participants were followed up until progressive disease regardless of start of subsequent cancer therapy. ]
    DR was defined as the time from first documentation of response assessed by investigator review (CR or PR whichever occurred first) to date of progression or death due to any cause, whichever occurs first. Per RECIST version 1.1: CR: disappearance of all pre-existing lesions except nodal disease, with all nodal lesions decreased to normal size (short axis<10 mm) and no appearance of new unequivocal malignant lesions; PR: >=30% decrease from baseline sum of diameters of all target lesions with no unequivocal progression of pre-existing non-target lesions or appearance of new unequivocal malignant lesions; PD: >=20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions above the smallest sum observed, with a minimum absolute increase of 5 mm, or unequivocal progression of pre-existing non-target lesions or appearance of any new unequivocal malignant lesions.

  9. Trough Concentrations (Ctrough) of Dacomitinib. [ Time Frame: Baseline up to Cycle 5 Day 1 ]
    Mean Ctrough values of dacomitinib observed from Cycle 2 through 5, Day 1 for dose compliant participants.

  10. Trough Concentrations (Ctrough) of PF-05199265. [ Time Frame: Baseline up to Cycle 5 Day 1 ]
    Mean Ctrough values of PF-05199265 observed from Cycle 2 through 5, Day 1 for dose compliant participants.

  11. Time to Deterioration (TTD) in Pain, Dyspnea, Fatigue or Cough Patient Reported Disease Symptoms. [ Time Frame: Data taken from Cycle 1 day 1 to the end of treatment or withdrawal. ]
    TTD defined as the time from first dose (baseline) to the first time a patient's score in pain, dyspnea, fatigue or cough from the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-LC13) increased by ≥10 points. A ≥10 point increase in score had to be maintained for ≥2 consecutive cycles for the symptom to be considered deteriorated. Participants were censored at the last time when they completed an assessment for pain, dyspnea, fatigue or cough if they had not deteriorated. A 10 point or higher change in the score is perceived by participants as clinically significant.

  12. Mean and Difference in Mean in Functioning and Global Quality of Life (QOL) as Assessed by the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC-QLQ-C30) [ Time Frame: Data taken from Cycle 1 day 1 to the end of treatment or withdrawal, averaged (mean) to provide overall scores. ]
    EORTC QLQ-C30: included functional scales (physical, role, cognitive, emotional, and social), global health status, symptom scales (fatigue, pain, nausea/vomiting) and single items (dyspnoea, appetite loss, insomnia, constipation/diarrhea and financial difficulties). Scores ranged from 0-100 where a higher score indicated a better level of quality of life. Overall scores present the mean score for that scale from all time-point data.

  13. Mean and Difference in Mean in QLQ-C30 Symptoms as Assessed by the EORTC-QLQ-C30. [ Time Frame: Data taken from Cycle 1 day 1 to the end of treatment or withdrawal, averaged (mean) to provide overall scores. ]
    EORTC QLQ-C30: included functional scales (physical, role, cognitive, emotional, and social), global health status, symptom scales (fatigue, pain, nausea/vomiting) and single items (dyspnoea, appetite loss, insomnia, constipation/diarrhea and financial difficulties). Scores ranged from 0-100 where a higher score indicated a greater degree of symptoms/problems. Overall scores present the mean score for that scale from all time-point data.

  14. Mean and Difference in Mean in Lung Cancer Symptom Scores as Assessed by the EORTC QLQ- LC13. [ Time Frame: Data taken from Cycle 1 day 1 to the end of treatment or withdrawal, averaged (mean) to provide overall scores. ]
    The QLQ-LC13 included questions specific to the disease associated symptoms (dyspnea, cough, haemoptysis, and site specific pain), treatment-related symptoms (sore mouth, dysphagia, neuropathy, and alopecia), and analgesic use of lung cancer patients. Scores range from 0-100 and a higher score indicates greater degree of symptoms/problems. Overall scores present the mean score for that scale from all time-point data.

  15. Mean and Difference in Mean of the EuroQoL-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Score [ Time Frame: Data taken from Cycle 1 day 1 to the end of treatment or withdrawal, averaged (mean) to provide overall scores. ]
    The EQ-5D is a validated and reliable self-report preference-based measure developed by the EuroQoL Group to assess health-related quality of life. It consists of the EQ-5D descriptive system and a visual analogue scale-the EQ VAS. The EQ-5D descriptive system measures a participants' health state on 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels, reflecting "no health problems," "moderate health problems," and "extreme health problems." The EQ VAS records the respondent's self-rated health on a scale from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state).


Eligibility Criteria
Go to 
Top of Page Study Description Study Design Arms and Interventions Outcome Measures Eligibility Criteria Contacts and Locations More Information

Information from the National Library of Medicine

Choosing to participate in a study is an important personal decision. Talk with your doctor and family members or friends about deciding to join a study. To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the contacts provided below. For general information, Learn About Clinical Studies.


Layout table for eligibility information
Ages Eligible for Study:   18 Years and older   (Adult, Older Adult)
Sexes Eligible for Study:   All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers:   No
Criteria

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Evidence of pathologically confirmed, advanced NSCLC (with known histology).
  • Prior treatment with at least one and no more than two systemic therapy regimens (at least one must be standard chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC).
  • Adequate tissue sample must be submitted prior to randomization for tumor biomarker analyses.
  • Adequate renal, hematologic, liver function.
  • ECOG PS of 0-2.
  • Radiologically measurable disease.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Small cell histology.
  • Symptomatic brain mets or known leptomeningeal mets.
  • Prior therapy with agent known or proposed to be active by action on EGFR tyrosine kinase or other HER family proteins.
  • Uncontrolled medical disorders.
Contacts and Locations
Go to 
Top of Page Study Description Study Design Arms and Interventions Outcome Measures Eligibility Criteria Contacts and Locations More Information

Information from the National Library of Medicine

To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the contact information provided by the sponsor.

Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT01360554


Locations
Show Show 224 study locations
Sponsors and Collaborators
Pfizer
Investigators
Layout table for investigator information
Study Director: Pfizer CT.gov Call Center Pfizer
More Information
Go to 
Top of Page Study Description Study Design Arms and Interventions Outcome Measures Eligibility Criteria Contacts and Locations More Information
Additional Information:

Publications automatically indexed to this study by ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT Number):

Layout table for additonal information
Responsible Party: Pfizer
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01360554    
Other Study ID Numbers: A7471009
2010-022656-22 ( EudraCT Number )
First Posted: May 25, 2011    Key Record Dates
Results First Posted: May 24, 2017
Last Update Posted: May 24, 2017
Last Verified: April 2017
Keywords provided by Pfizer:
comparative study of PF-00299804 and Erlotinib
Double-Blind Phase 3 trial of TKI
Additional relevant MeSH terms:
Layout table for MeSH terms
Lung Neoplasms
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung
Respiratory Tract Neoplasms
Thoracic Neoplasms
Neoplasms by Site
Neoplasms
Lung Diseases
Respiratory Tract Diseases
Carcinoma, Bronchogenic
 Bronchial Neoplasms
Erlotinib Hydrochloride
Dacomitinib
Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors
Protein Kinase Inhibitors
Enzyme Inhibitors
Molecular Mechanisms of Pharmacological Action
Antineoplastic Agents