Skip to main content

Table 3 Rates of patients’ preferencea (mITT/ITT/PP population)

From: Final results from IMPROVE: a randomized, controlled, open-label, two-arm, cross-over phase IV study to determine patients’ preference for everolimus in combination with exemestane or capecitabine in combination with bevacizumab in advanced HR-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer

mITT

Arm A (N = 5)

Arm B (N = 8)

Total (N = 13)

n (%)

95%-CI

n (%)

95%-CI

n (%)

95%-CI

Cap+Bev

2 (40.0%)

[5.3, 85.3]

6 (75.0%)

[34.9, 96.8]

8 (61.5%)

[31.6, 86.1]

Eve+Exe

1 (20.0%)

[0.5, 71.6]

1 (12.5%)

[0.3, 52.7]

2 (15.4%)

[1.9, 45.4]

I cannot decide

2 (40.0%)

[5.3, 85.3]

1 (12.5%)

[0.3, 52.7]

3 (23.1%)

[5.0, 53.8]

p-value (Chi-square)

    

0.1653

 

ITT

Arm A (N = 39)

Arm B (N = 38)

Total (N = 77)

n (%)

95%-CI

n (%)

95%-CI

n (%)

95%-CI

Cap+Bev

3 (7.7%)

[1.6, 20.9]

10 (26.3%)

[13.4, 43.1]

13 (16.9%)

[9.3, 27.1]

Eve+Exe

5 (12.8%)

[4.3, 27.4]

2 (5.3%)

[0.6, 17.7]

7 (9.1%)

[3.7, 17.8]

I cannot decide

3 (7.7%)

[1.6, 20.9]

4 (10.5%)

[2.9, 24.8]

7 (9.1%)

[3.7, 17.8]

Not evaluable

2 (5.1%)

[0.6, 17.3]

2 (5.3%)

[0.6, 17.7]

4 (5.2%)

[1.4, 12.8]

Item / questionnaire not answered

4 (10.3%)

[2.9, 24.2]

1 (2.6%)

[0.1, 13.8]

5 (6.5%)

[2.1, 14.5]

No second-line therapy

22 (56.4%)

[39.6, 72.2]

19 (50.0%)

[33.4, 66.6]

41 (53.2%)

[41.5, 64.7]

PP

Arm A (N = 13)

Arm B (N = 18)

Total (N = 31)

n (%)

95%-CI

n (%)

95%-CI

n (%)

95%-CI

Cap+Bev

3 (23.1%)

[5.0, 53.8]

10 (55.6%)

[30.8, 78.5]

13 (41.9%)

[24.5, 60.9]

Eve+Exe

5 (38.5%)

[13.9, 68.4]

2 (11.1%)

[1.4, 34.7]

7 (22.6%)

[9.6, 41.1]

I cannot decide

3 (23.1%)

[5.0, 53.8]

4 (22.2%)

[6.4, 47.6]

7 (22.6%)

[9.6, 41.1]

Not evaluable

2 (15.4%)

[1.9, 45.4]

2 (11.1%)

[1.4, 34.7]

4 (12.9%)

[3.6, 29.8]

  1. aPatient’s treatment preference was evaluated after 12 weeks of second-line treatment, assessed by the Patient Preference Questionnaire. Confidence interval was calculated using the Clopper-Pearson formula. Due to small n, the p-value of the asymptotic chi-square test may not be valid. The p-value of the corresponding exact test was 0.1666. Not evaluable: Patients selected more than one possible answer. mITT = modified ITT; ITT = intent-to-treat; PP = per-protocol; CI = confidence interval