Table 2.
Treatment combinations in the 133 patients analysed
| Number of patients | |
|---|---|
| (N = 133) | |
| Number of treatment combinations, n (%) | |
| 1 | 115 (86.0) |
| 2 | 12 (9.0) |
| 3 | 5 (3.8) |
| 5 | 1 (0.8) |
| Number of treatment combinations | |
| (N = 159) | |
| Targeted agent combined with lanreotide, n (%) | |
| Everolimus | 73 (45.9) |
| Sunitinib | 61 (38.4) |
| Treatment discontinuation, n (%)a | 84 (52.8) |
| Everolimus | n = 73 |
| All discontinuations | 39 (53.4) |
| Disease progression | 23 (31.5) |
| Adverse event | 10 (13.7) |
| Other | 6 (8.2) |
| Ongoing | 34 (46.6) |
| Sunitinib | n = 61 |
| All discontinuations | 27 (44.3) |
| Disease progression | 15 (24.6) |
| Adverse event | 10 (16.4) |
| Other | 2 (3.3) |
| Ongoing | 34 (55.7) |
aThe denominator is the number of treatment combinations with a each targeted agent