Skip to main content
. 2017 Jul 16;2(3):e000166. doi: 10.1136/esmoopen-2017-000166

Table 1.

FT of the ESMO-MCBS for the treatment of neuroendocrine tumours at the Medical University of Vienna

Analysed treatment Setting Primary EP PFS control PFS gain PFS HR OS control OS gain OS HR Adjustment/ Remark MCBS MCBS-
FT
Lanreotide versus placebo
(CLARINET)
Caplin et al, NEJM8
Ki-67<10%
GI or unknown origin
(non-functioning)
PFS 18 months +32% at 2 year 0.47
(0.30–0.73)
No improvement in QOL, downgrade 1 point 2
Octreotide versus placebo
(PROMID)
Rinke et al, JCO9
Midgut, unknown
(non-functioning and functioning)
TTP 6 months 8.3 months 0.34
(0.20–0.59)
No improvement in QOL, downgrade 1 point 2
Everolimus versus placebo
(RADIANT-4)
Yao et al, Lancet10
Progressive disease lung or GI
(non-functioning)
PFS 3.9 months 7.1 months 0.48
(0.35–0.67)
3
Everolimus versus placebo
(RADIANT-3)
Yao et al, NEJM11
Yao et al, JCO12
Progressive disease pancreatic NET PFS 4.6 months 6.4 months 0.35
(0.27–0.45)
37.7m 6.3m Non-significant 3
Octreotide ± everolimus
(RADIANT-2)
Pavel et al, Lancet13
Progressive disease lung, GI, unknown
(functioning)
PFS 11.3 months 5.1 months Non-significant NA
Sunitinib versus placebo
Raymond et al, NEJM14
Faivre et al, JCO15
Progressive pancreatic NET PFS 5.5 months 5.9 months 0.42
(0.26–0.66)
29.1m 9.5m Non-significant No improvement in QOL, downgrade 1 point 2

EP, endpoint; ESMO, European Society for Medical Oncology; FT, field testing; GI, gastrointestinal; MCBS, Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Score; NA, not applicable; NET, neuroendocrine tumour; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival; QOL, quality of life; TTP, time to progression.