NCT02422615 · CITED IN SOURCE DOCUMENTS

Study of Efficacy and Safety of LEE011 in Men and Postmenopausal Women With Advanced Breast Cancer.

An NCI or FDA source cites this study. A citation does not establish that it applies to an individual diagnosis.

Phase: PHASE3
Status at capture: COMPLETED
Registry last update: 2023-11-30

The main aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding ribociclib to fulvestrant in men and postmenopausal women with hormone receptor positive (HR+), HER2-negative advanced breast cancer.

Open the original ClinicalTrials.gov record → · Download preserved record

What did the study report?

Outcomes, safety and baseline populations are separate source sections. Quality-of-life measures appear under their original outcome titles.

flow

Participant flow

→

baseline

Baseline characteristics

→

outcome · POSTED

Progression Free Survival (PFS) Per Investigator Assessment

→

outcome · POSTED

Overall Survival (OS)

→

outcome · POSTED

Progression Free Survival (PFS) Per Blinded Independent Review Committee (BIRC)

→

outcome · POSTED

Overall Response Rate (ORR) Per Investigator Assessment

→

outcome · POSTED

Clinical Benefit Rate (CBR) Per Investigator Assessment

→

outcome · POSTED

Time to Response (TTR) Per Investigator Assessment

→

outcome · POSTED

Duration of Response (DOR) Per Investigator Assessment

→

outcome · POSTED

Time to Definitive Deterioration of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) in One Score Category

→

outcome · POSTED

Time to Definitive 10% Deterioration in the Global Health Status/Quality of Life (GHS/QoL) Scale Score of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer's Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30)

→

outcome · POSTED

Change From Baseline in the GHS/QoL Scale Score of the EORTC QLQ-C30

→

outcome · POSTED

Ribociclib Plasma Concentrations

→

outcome · POSTED

LEQ803 Plasma Concentrations

→

outcome · POSTED

All Collected Deaths

→

adverse events

Adverse events

→

more info

Limitations, agreements, and source contact

→

Who could take part

eligibility Criteria: Key Inclusion Criteria: 1. Patients were adults, both male and female, aged ≥ 18 years at the time of providing informed consent. Female patients were required to be postmenopausal. Informed consent was obtained prior to any trial-related activities, following local guidelines. 2. Patients had a confirmed diagnosis of estrogen-receptor positive and/or progesterone receptor positive breast cancer, determined through histological and/or cytological examination by a local laboratory. Patients also had HER2-negative breast cancer. 3. Patients had either measurable disease as per RECIST 1.1 criteria or at least one predominantly lytic bone lesion. 4. Patients had advanced breast cancer, which included locoregionally recurrent disease not amenable to curative therapies (such as surgery or radiotherapy) or metastatic breast cancer. Patients fell into one of the following categories: * Newly diagnosed with advanced/metastatic breast cancer and treatment-naïve. * Relapsed with documented evidence of relapse more than 12 months after completing (neo)adjuvant endocrine therapy, without any prior treatment for advanced/metastatic disease. * Relapsed with documented evidence of relapse on or within 12 months from completing (neo)adjuvant endocrine therapy, without any prior treatment for advanced/metastatic disease. * Relapsed with documented evidence of relapse more than 12 months after completing adjuvant endocrine therapy and subsequently progressed after receiving one line of endocrine therapy (antiestrogen or aromatase inhibitor) for advanced/metastatic disease. * Newly diagnosed with advanced/metastatic breast cancer at diagnosis and progressed after receiving one line of endocrine therapy (antiestrogen or aromatase inhibitor), with documented evidence of progression. 5. Patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1. 6. Patients had adequate bone marrow and organ function. Key Exclusion Criteria: Patients with symptomatic visceral disease or disease burden that rendered them ineligible for endocrine therapy, based on the investigator's judgment. 2\. Patients who had received prior treatment with chemotherapy (except for neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy), fulvestrant, or any CDK4/6 inhibitor. 3\. Patients with inflammatory breast cancer at the screening stage. 4. Patients with central nervous system (CNS) involvement, unless they were at least 4 weeks from completing prior therapy before initiating the study treatment and had a stable CNS tumor at the time of screening. They were also required not to be receiving steroids and/or enzyme-inducing anti-epileptic medications for brain metastases. 5\. Patients with clinically significant, uncontrolled heart disease and/or cardiac repolarization abnormality. 6\. Patients who were currently receiving any of the following substances, which could not be discontinued 7 days prior to initiating treatment: * Known strong inducers or inhibitors of CYP3A4/5. * Substances with a known risk of prolonging the QT interval or inducing Torsades de Pointes. * Substances with a narrow therapeutic window and predominantly metabolized through CYP3A4/5. * Herbal preparations/medications, dietary supplements.
healthy Volunteers: false
minimum Age: 18 Years
sex: ALL
std Ages: ADULT
OLDER_ADULT

Treatment arms and interventions

arm Groups

description
Ribociclib was administered orally at a daily dose of 600mg for 21 consecutive days within a 28-day cycle. This treatment was combined with fulvestrant, which was administered via intramuscular injections of 500mg every 28 days starting on Day 1 of each cycle. Additionally, an extra dose of fulvestrant was given on Day 15 of Cycle 1. For participants who did not tolerate the protocol-specified dosing schedule, dose adjustments were permitted in order to allow the patient to continue the study treatment.
intervention Names
Drug: Ribociclib
Drug: Fulvestrant
label
Ribociclib + fulvestrant
type
EXPERIMENTAL
description
Placebo was administered orally for 21 consecutive days within a 28-day cycle. This treatment was combined with fulvestrant, which was administered via intramuscular injections of 500mg every 28 days starting on Day 1 of each cycle. Additionally, an extra dose of fulvestrant was given on Day 15 of Cycle 1. For participants who did not tolerate the protocol-specified dosing schedule, dose adjustments were permitted in order to allow the patient to continue the study treatment. Participants were unblinded after the implementation of protocol amendment 4 (29-Jan-20) and were given the option to crossover to treatment with ribociclib and fulvestrant.
intervention Names
Drug: Fulvestrant
Drug: Placebo
label
Placebo + fulvestrant
type
PLACEBO_COMPARATOR

interventions

arm Group Labels
Ribociclib + fulvestrant
description
Ribociclib capsules were administered orally at a daily dose of 600mg for 21 consecutive days within a 28-day cycle.
name
Ribociclib
other Names
LEE011
type
DRUG
arm Group Labels
Placebo + fulvestrant
Ribociclib + fulvestrant
description
Fulvestrant was administered via intramuscular injections at a dose of 500mg every 28 days, starting on Day 1 of each cycle. In Cycle 1, an additional dose of Fulvestrant was given on Day 15.
name
Fulvestrant
type
DRUG
arm Group Labels
Placebo + fulvestrant
description
Placebo capsules were administered orally for 21 consecutive days within a 28-day cycle.
name
Placebo
type
DRUG

Study design

allocation

RANDOMIZED

intervention Model

PARALLEL

intervention Model Description

Following protocol amendment 4 (29-Jan-2020), study participants were unblinded, with an opportunity for those patients still in the study in the arm of placebo + fulvestrant to transition to the treatment of ribociclib + fulvestrant.

masking Info

masking: QUADRUPLE
who Masked: PARTICIPANT
CARE_PROVIDER
INVESTIGATOR
OUTCOMES_ASSESSOR

primary Purpose

TREATMENT

Enrollment

count: 726
type: ACTUAL

Registered outcome plans (not posted results)

primary Outcomes

description
PFS was defined as the period starting from the date of randomization to the date of the first documented progression or death caused by any reason. In cases where patients did not experience an event, the PFS was censored at the date of the last adequate tumor assessment. Clinical deterioration without objective radiological evidence was not considered as documented disease progression. PFS was assessed via local radiology assessment according to RECIST 1.1. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate PFS, and the median PFS, along with 95% confidence intervals, was reported for each treatment group. The distribution of PFS between the two arms was compared using a stratified log-rank test at a one-sided 2.5% level of significance. The PFS hazard ratio with two-sided 95% confidence interval was derived from the stratified Cox proportional hazards model.
measure
Progression Free Survival (PFS) Per Investigator Assessment
time Frame
From randomization to first documented progression or death, assessed up to approximately 26 months

secondary Outcomes

description
OS was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of death from any cause. In cases where the patient's death was not recorded, the OS value was censored at the date of the last known patient's survival status. As per protocol, the final OS analysis was conducted after approximately 351 deaths were documented. OS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The median OS, along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), was reported for each treatment group. The distribution of OS between the two treatment arms was compared using a log-rank test at one-sided cumulative 2.5% level of significance. A stratified Cox regression was used to estimate the OS hazard ratio and the associated 95% CI.
measure
Overall Survival (OS)
time Frame
From randomization to death, assessed up to approximately 46 months
description
PFS was defined as the period starting from the date of randomization to the date of the first documented progression or death caused by any reason. In cases where patients did not experience an event, the PFS was censored at the date of the last adequate tumor assessment. Clinical deterioration without objective radiological evidence was not considered as documented disease progression. PFS was assessed via BIRC assessment according to RECIST 1.1. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate PFS, and the median PFS, along with 95% confidence intervals, was reported for each treatment group.
measure
Progression Free Survival (PFS) Per Blinded Independent Review Committee (BIRC)
time Frame
From randomization to first documented progression or death, assessed up to approximately 26 months
description
ORR was defined as the percentage of participants with the best overall response of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to RECIST 1.1 as per investigator assessment. CR: Disappearance of all lesions with lymph nodes measuring \< 10 mm. PR: At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameter of all target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum of diameters.
measure
Overall Response Rate (ORR) Per Investigator Assessment
time Frame
Up to approximately 26 months
description
CBR was defined as the percentage of participants with a best overall response of CR or PR or stable disease (SD) lasting 24 weeks or longer as defined in RECIST 1.1 as per investigator assessment. CR: Disappearance of all lesions with lymph nodes measuring \< 10 mm. PR: At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameter of all target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum of diameters. SD: Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR or CR nor an increase in lesions which would qualify for progressive disease.
measure
Clinical Benefit Rate (CBR) Per Investigator Assessment
time Frame
Up to approximately 26 months
description
TTR was defined as the time from randomization to the first documented and confirmed response (CR or PR) as defined by RECIST 1.1 per investigator assessment. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate TTR, and the median TTR, along with 95% confidence intervals, was reported for each treatment group. Participants who did not achieve a confirmed response were censored at the maximum follow-up time for patients who had a PFS event (i.e. either progressed or died due to any cause) or at the date of last adequate tumor assessment otherwise. CR: Disappearance of all lesions with lymph nodes measuring \< 10 mm. PR: At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameter of all target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum of diameters.
measure
Time to Response (TTR) Per Investigator Assessment
time Frame
From randomization to first response, assessed up to approximately 26 months
description
DOR was defined as the time from the first documented response (CR or PR) to the first documented progression or death due to underlying cancer as defined in RECIST 1.1 per investigator assessment. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate DOR, and the median DOR, along with 95% confidence intervals, was reported for each treatment group. If a participant had not had an event, duration was censored at the date of last adequate tumor assessment. CR: Disappearance of all lesions with lymph nodes measuring \< 10 mm. PR: At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameter of all target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum of diameters.
measure
Duration of Response (DOR) Per Investigator Assessment
time Frame
From first documented response to progression or death, assessed up to approximately 26 months
description
ECOG PS categorized patients based on their ability to perform daily activities and self-care, with scores ranging from 0 to 5. A score of 0 indicated no restrictions in activity, while higher scores indicated increasing limitations. Time to definitive deterioration was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of the event, defined as experiencing an increase in ECOG PS by at least one category from the baseline or death. A deterioration was considered definitive if no improvements in the ECOG PS were observed at a subsequent time. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the distribution, and the median time to definitive deterioration, along with 95% confidence intervals, was reported for each treatment group. Patients receiving any further therapy prior to definitive worsening were censored at their date of last assessment prior to start of therapy. Patients that had not worsened at the data cutoff point were censored at the date of last assessment.
measure
Time to Definitive Deterioration of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) in One Score Category
time Frame
Up to approximately 26 months
description
The EORTC QLQ-C30 is a questionnaire that includes 5 functional scales, 3 symptom scales, a GHS/QoL scale, and 6 single items. GHS/QoL scale scores range between 0 and 100. A high score for GHS/QoL represents better functioning or QoL. The time to definitive 10% deterioration is defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of event, which is defined as at least 10% relative to baseline worsening of the QoL score (without further improvement above the threshold) or death due to any cause. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the distribution, and the median time to definitive 10% deterioration, along with 95% confidence intervals, was reported for each treatment group. If a patient had not had an event, time to deterioration was censored at the date of the last adequate QoL evaluation.
measure
Time to Definitive 10% Deterioration in the Global Health Status/Quality of Life (GHS/QoL) Scale Score of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer's Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30)
time Frame
Up to approximately 26 months
description
The EORTC QLQ-C30 is a questionnaire that includes 5 functional scales, 3 symptom scales, a GHS/QoL scale, and 6 single items. GHS/QoL scale scores range between 0 and 100. A high score for GHS/QoL represents better functioning or QoL. The change from baseline in the GHS/QoL score was assessed. A positive change from baseline indicates improvement. For subjects who discontinued treatment without disease progression, post-treatment efficacy visits occurred every 8 weeks during the initial 18 months since start of treatment, followed by visits every 12 weeks until disease progression.
measure
Change From Baseline in the GHS/QoL Scale Score of the EORTC QLQ-C30
time Frame
Baseline, every 8 weeks after randomization during 18 months, then every 12 weeks up to end of treatment; end of treatment; and every 8 or 12 weeks post-treatment until progression (post-treatment efficacy visits), assessed up to approximately 26 months
description
Blood samples were collected to assess the concentration by time point for ribociclib. Participants were classified into the following dose groups at each timepoint: 1) ribociclib 600 mg: consisted of all participants who provided evaluable concentrations after receiving at least 10 consecutive daily ribociclib doses of 600 mg immediately prior to the blood collection without a dose change or interruption. 2) ribociclib 400 mg: consisted of all participants who provided evaluable concentrations after receiving at least 10 consecutive daily ribociclib doses of 400 mg immediately prior to the blood collection without a dose change or interruption. 3) ribociclib 200 mg: consisted of all participants who provided evaluable concentrations after receiving at least 10 consecutive daily ribociclib doses of 200 mg immediately prior to the blood collection without a dose change or interruption.
measure
Ribociclib Plasma Concentrations
time Frame
Cycle 1 and Cycle 2 at Day 15 pre-dose and at 2, 4, and 6 hours post-dose. Cycle=28 days
description
Blood samples were collected to assess the concentration by time point for LEQ803, a metabolite of ribociclib. Participants were classified into the following dose groups at each timepoint: 1) ribociclib 600 mg: consisted of all participants who provided evaluable concentrations after receiving at least 10 consecutive daily ribociclib doses of 600 mg immediately prior to the blood collection without a dose change or interruption. 2) ribociclib 400 mg: consisted of all participants who provided evaluable concentrations after receiving at least 10 consecutive daily ribociclib doses of 400 mg immediately prior to the blood collection without a dose change or interruption. 3) ribociclib 200 mg: consisted of all participants who provided evaluable concentrations after receiving at least 10 consecutive daily ribociclib doses of 200 mg immediately prior to the blood collection without a dose change or interruption.
measure
LEQ803 Plasma Concentrations
time Frame
Cycle 1 and Cycle 2 at Day 15 pre-dose and at 2, 4, and 6 hours post-dose. Cycle = 28 days

Full study description

brief Summary: The main aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding ribociclib to fulvestrant in men and postmenopausal women with hormone receptor positive (HR+), HER2-negative advanced breast cancer.
detailed Description: This study was a randomized, phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled international trial aimed at determining the efficacy and safety of treatment with fulvestrant in combination with ribociclib compared to fulvestrant with placebo in men and postmenopausal women diagnosed with HR+, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. The study comprised four phases: screening (up to 28 days), randomized treatment, post-treatment disease progression follow-up, and post-treatment survival follow-up. Enrolled participants were randomly assigned to receive either fulvestrant+ribociclib or fulvestrant+placebo in a ratio of 2:1. The randomization process was stratified based on the presence of liver and/or lung metastases (yes versus no) and prior endocrine therapy. Treatment was administered until disease progression, occurrence of unacceptable toxicity, or discontinuation from the study treatment for other reasons. Participants who discontinued treatment due to reasons other than disease progression or withdrawal of consent for efficacy follow-up continued to be monitored until disease progression, death, withdrawal of consent, loss to follow-up, or subject/guardian decision. All participants who discontinued treatment were followed for survival until the predetermined number of overall survival (OS) events was reached. A protocol amendment 4 (dated 29-Jan-2020) allowed for unblinding of study participants, and those still receiving placebo had the option to switch to the ribociclib arm. The decision for crossover was made at the investigator's discretion and required patient consent.

Source references

references

citation
Ji Y, Wang C, Combes FP, Ho YY, Fasching PA, Untch M, Zarate JP, Crown J. Quantitative Pharmacology Justifying Ribociclib Dose in Early Breast Cancer. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2026 Aug;65(8):1217-1228. doi: 10.1007/s40262-026-01643-3. Epub 2026 Jun 23.
pmid
42334791
type
DERIVED
citation
Hart LL, Im SA, Tolaney SM, Campone M, Pluard T, Sousa B, Freyer G, Decker T, Kalinsky K, Sopher G, Gao M, Hu H, Kuemmel S. Efficacy, safety, and patient-reported outcomes across young to older age groups of patients with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer treated with ribociclib plus endocrine therapy in the randomized MONALEESA-2, -3, and -7 trials. Eur J Cancer. 2025 Feb 25;217:115225. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2025.115225. Epub 2025 Jan 8.
pmid
39826197
type
DERIVED
citation
Andre F, Su F, Solovieff N, Hortobagyi G, Chia S, Neven P, Bardia A, Tripathy D, Lu YS, Lteif A, Taran T, Babbar N, Slamon D, Arteaga CL. Pooled ctDNA analysis of MONALEESA phase III advanced breast cancer trials. Ann Oncol. 2023 Nov;34(11):1003-1014. doi: 10.1016/j.annonc.2023.08.011. Epub 2023 Sep 5.
pmid
37673211
type
DERIVED
citation
Neven P, Fasching PA, Chia S, Jerusalem G, De Laurentiis M, Im SA, Petrakova K, Bianchi GV, Martin M, Nusch A, Sonke GS, De la Cruz-Merino L, Beck JT, Zarate JP, Wang Y, Chakravartty A, Wang C, Slamon DJ. Updated overall survival from the MONALEESA-3 trial in postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer receiving first-line ribociclib plus fulvestrant. Breast Cancer Res. 2023 Aug 31;25(1):103. doi: 10.1186/s13058-023-01701-9.
pmid
37653397
type
DERIVED
citation
Ji Y, Yartsev V, Quinlan M, Serra P, Wang Y, Chakraborty A, Miller M. Justifying Ribociclib Dose in Patients with Advanced Breast Cancer with Renal Impairment Based on PK, Safety, and Efficacy Data: An Innovative Approach Integrating Data from a Dedicated Renal Impairment Study and Oncology Clinical Trials. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2023 Mar;62(3):493-504. doi: 10.1007/s40262-022-01206-2. Epub 2023 Feb 17.
pmid
36800111
type
DERIVED
citation
Burris HA, Chan A, Bardia A, Thaddeus Beck J, Sohn J, Neven P, Tripathy D, Im SA, Chia S, Esteva FJ, Hart L, Zarate JP, Ridolfi A, Lorenc KR, Yardley DA. Safety and impact of dose reductions on efficacy in the randomised MONALEESA-2, -3 and -7 trials in hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2021 Aug;125(5):679-686. doi: 10.1038/s41416-021-01415-9. Epub 2021 Jun 22.
pmid
34158598
type
DERIVED
citation
Slamon DJ, Neven P, Chia S, Jerusalem G, De Laurentiis M, Im S, Petrakova K, Valeria Bianchi G, Martin M, Nusch A, Sonke GS, De la Cruz-Merino L, Beck JT, Ji Y, Wang C, Deore U, Chakravartty A, Zarate JP, Taran T, Fasching PA. Ribociclib plus fulvestrant for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer in the phase III randomized MONALEESA-3 trial: updated overall survival. Ann Oncol. 2021 Aug;32(8):1015-1024. doi: 10.1016/j.annonc.2021.05.353. Epub 2021 Jun 5.
pmid
34102253
type
DERIVED
citation
Prat A, Chaudhury A, Solovieff N, Pare L, Martinez D, Chic N, Martinez-Saez O, Braso-Maristany F, Lteif A, Taran T, Babbar N, Su F. Correlative Biomarker Analysis of Intrinsic Subtypes and Efficacy Across the MONALEESA Phase III Studies. J Clin Oncol. 2021 May 1;39(13):1458-1467. doi: 10.1200/JCO.20.02977. Epub 2021 Mar 26.
pmid
33769862
type
DERIVED
citation
Slamon DJ, Neven P, Chia S, Fasching PA, De Laurentiis M, Im SA, Petrakova K, Bianchi GV, Esteva FJ, Martin M, Nusch A, Sonke GS, De la Cruz-Merino L, Beck JT, Pivot X, Sondhi M, Wang Y, Chakravartty A, Rodriguez-Lorenc K, Taran T, Jerusalem G. Overall Survival with Ribociclib plus Fulvestrant in Advanced Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2020 Feb 6;382(6):514-524. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1911149. Epub 2019 Dec 11.
pmid
31826360
type
DERIVED
citation
Yardley DA. MONALEESA clinical program: a review of ribociclib use in different clinical settings. Future Oncol. 2019 Aug;15(23):2673-2686. doi: 10.2217/fon-2019-0130. Epub 2019 Jul 15.
pmid
31305131
type
DERIVED
citation
Slamon DJ, Neven P, Chia S, Fasching PA, De Laurentiis M, Im SA, Petrakova K, Bianchi GV, Esteva FJ, Martin M, Nusch A, Sonke GS, De la Cruz-Merino L, Beck JT, Pivot X, Vidam G, Wang Y, Rodriguez Lorenc K, Miller M, Taran T, Jerusalem G. Phase III Randomized Study of Ribociclib and Fulvestrant in Hormone Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Advanced Breast Cancer: MONALEESA-3. J Clin Oncol. 2018 Aug 20;36(24):2465-2472. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2018.78.9909. Epub 2018 Jun 3.
pmid
29860922
type
DERIVED

Source notices and limitations

Discovery and provenance

release id
ctgov-registry-7ad944f6deaf1f5cd6122126
edge id
nct-edge-6c23c0bcccec944003a1
requested nct id
NCT02422615
primary nct id
NCT02422615
source kind
nci_explicit_reference_or_link
source url
https://www.cancer.gov/types/breast/hp/breast-treatment-pdq
source record id
Source null
source file sha256
862f78faa9e4cbedc19f9ffcaeba97e029ba51b72bb3b81fc67aa8b6adf96904
payload sha256
2d9b15108e3ebb2a90c10e7e07b3b697ed28f5b7579317f006c55fccc102df04
payload
clinical indication matching status
not_inferred
end exclusive
true
id
nct-edge-6c23c0bcccec944003a1
link basis
explicit_NCT_identifier_in_acquired_source
nct id
NCT02422615
occurrences
context exact
fulvestrant in postmenopausal patients with HER2-negative hormone receptor–positive, recurrent or metastatic breast cancer. The <a href="/clinicaltrials/NCT02422615">MONALEESA-3</a> trial (NCT02422615) included patients receiving first-line or second-line therapy. This phase III, placebo-controlled trial randomly assigned
end
555900
exact text
NCT02422615
start
555889
context exact
ts with HER2-negative hormone receptor–positive, recurrent or metastatic breast cancer. The <a href="/clinicaltrials/NCT02422615">MONALEESA-3</a> trial (NCT02422615) included patients receiving first-line or second-line therapy. This phase III, placebo-controlled trial randomly assigned 726 patients in a 2:1 ratio to recei
end
555936
exact text
NCT02422615
start
555925
offset unit
unicode_code_points
source file
/tmp/cancer-full-research/nci/raw/29bf1e5a1d739974ed.html
source file sha256
862f78faa9e4cbedc19f9ffcaeba97e029ba51b72bb3b81fc67aa8b6adf96904
source json pointer
Source null
source kind
nci_explicit_reference_or_link
source record id
Source null
source retrieved at
2026-09-09T23:21:35.419733+00:00
source string basis
UTF-8_text_with_universal_newline_translation
source string sha256
536430925e3b0008edd3fb69a869d5645bd6b6dc5c84c21ddf1b3e24f089874c
source title
Breast Cancer Treatment (PDQ®)–Health Professional Version
source update dates
context
Updated: April 25, 2025
datetime
2025-04-25T12:00:00Z
display
April 25, 2025
source url
https://www.cancer.gov/types/breast/hp/breast-treatment-pdq

Preserved source evidence · Not medical advice