TriangleNCT03735121 · OUTCOME
Part 2: Percentage of Health Care Professionals (HCPs) by Their Response to Question 2 of HCP SC Versus IV Perspective Questionnaire
Results reported by the registry submitting party. Population, time horizon, units and missing values must be read together.
- Measure
- NUMBER
- Unit
- percentage of HCPs
- Interval / dispersion
- Not reported
- Time frame
- After HCP has completed administering at least 3 doses of atezolizumab SC and IV across all participants in Part 2 (Up to approximately 48 months)
What was measured
The HCP SC versus IV Perspective Questionnaire consisted of five items evaluating the number of atezolizumab SC and IV administrations done, convenience, potential time savings, and overall satisfaction with atezolizumab SC and atezolizumab IV, as well as reasons for HCP-reported satisfaction or dissatisfaction. HCPs who administered at least three doses of atezolizumab as an IV infusion and as a SC injection across all participants in Part 2 of this study responded to this questionnaire, of which question 2 is being reported here: Question 2: Which formulation of atezolizumab (SC or IV) do you think is more convenient for you? Responses to this question are reported in the data table. HCPs were allowed to complete the questionnaire until the last participant completed their assessments (duration between the 'first participant in \[FPI\]' date to 'last participant last visit \[LPLV\]' for Part 2).
Analysis population: Overall number analyzed included HCPs who completed Question 2 of the questionnaire.
Groups in this outcome
Part 2: Atezolizumab IV/Atezolizumab SC
Participants received atezolizumab, 1200 mg, as an IV infusion, Q3W, or atezolizumab, 1875 mg, co-formulated with rHuPH20, as SC injection, on Day 1 of each cycle (1 cycle=21 days) until PD, loss of clinical benefit, or unacceptable toxicity. HCPs who administered the IV or SC formulations completed the HCP SC versus IV Perspective Questionnaire.
| Group | Source count |
|---|---|
| Part 2: Atezolizumab IV/Atezolizumab SC | 50 |
Reported measurements
Atezolizumab SC is much more convenient
| Group | Value | Spread | Lower | Upper | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Part 2: Atezolizumab IV/Atezolizumab SC | 24.0 | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported |
Atezolizumab SC is a little more convenient
| Group | Value | Spread | Lower | Upper | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Part 2: Atezolizumab IV/Atezolizumab SC | 16.0 | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported |
Both formulations are equally convenient
| Group | Value | Spread | Lower | Upper | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Part 2: Atezolizumab IV/Atezolizumab SC | 26.0 | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported |
Atezolizumab IV is a little more convenient
| Group | Value | Spread | Lower | Upper | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Part 2: Atezolizumab IV/Atezolizumab SC | 12.0 | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported |
Atezolizumab IV is much more convenient
| Group | Value | Spread | Lower | Upper | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Part 2: Atezolizumab IV/Atezolizumab SC | 22.0 | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported |
Complete source fields
- classes
- categories
- measurements
- group Id
- OG000
- value
- 24.0
- title
- Atezolizumab SC is much more convenient
- categories
- measurements
- group Id
- OG000
- value
- 16.0
- title
- Atezolizumab SC is a little more convenient
- categories
- measurements
- group Id
- OG000
- value
- 26.0
- title
- Both formulations are equally convenient
- categories
- measurements
- group Id
- OG000
- value
- 12.0
- title
- Atezolizumab IV is a little more convenient
- categories
- measurements
- group Id
- OG000
- value
- 22.0
- title
- Atezolizumab IV is much more convenient
- denoms
- counts
- group Id
- OG000
- value
- 50
- units
- Participants
- description
- The HCP SC versus IV Perspective Questionnaire consisted of five items evaluating the number of atezolizumab SC and IV administrations done, convenience, potential time savings, and overall satisfaction with atezolizumab SC and atezolizumab IV, as well as reasons for HCP-reported satisfaction or dissatisfaction. HCPs who administered at least three doses of atezolizumab as an IV infusion and as a SC injection across all participants in Part 2 of this study responded to this questionnaire, of which question 2 is being reported here: Question 2: Which formulation of atezolizumab (SC or IV) do you think is more convenient for you? Responses to this question are reported in the data table. HCPs were allowed to complete the questionnaire until the last participant completed their assessments (duration between the 'first participant in \[FPI\]' date to 'last participant last visit \[LPLV\]' for Part 2).
- groups
- description
- Participants received atezolizumab, 1200 mg, as an IV infusion, Q3W, or atezolizumab, 1875 mg, co-formulated with rHuPH20, as SC injection, on Day 1 of each cycle (1 cycle=21 days) until PD, loss of clinical benefit, or unacceptable toxicity. HCPs who administered the IV or SC formulations completed the HCP SC versus IV Perspective Questionnaire.
- id
- OG000
- title
- Part 2: Atezolizumab IV/Atezolizumab SC
- param Type
- NUMBER
- population Description
- Overall number analyzed included HCPs who completed Question 2 of the questionnaire.
- reporting Status
- POSTED
- time Frame
- After HCP has completed administering at least 3 doses of atezolizumab SC and IV across all participants in Part 2 (Up to approximately 48 months)
- title
- Part 2: Percentage of Health Care Professionals (HCPs) by Their Response to Question 2 of HCP SC Versus IV Perspective Questionnaire
- type
- SECONDARY
- unit Of Measure
- percentage of HCPs
Download exact source JSON → · Snapshot ctgov-results-191f4516d4760045304b24a0
Preserved source evidence · Not medical advice