In refractory carcinoid symptoms, control occurred in 20.9% with pasireotide LAR versus 26.7% with octreotide LAR (P=0.53).
In plain wordsIn refractory carcinoid symptoms, control was numerically lower with pasireotide LAR than octreotide LAR, without a significant difference.
- Peptide
- Pasireotide
- Outcome
- DecreaseCarcinoid symptom control
- Study
n = 88
- Comparator
- Octreotide LAR 40 mg every 28 days
- Analysis
- Primary
- Outcome group
- Disease Signs And Symptoms · Cancer
- Studied dose
- 60 mg every 28 daysAs given in this study (human).
Measurements
- Symptom control
- 20.9%
- pasireotide LAR; n = 43
- Symptom control
- 26.7%
- octreotide LAR; n = 45
- Odds ratio
- 0.73
- pasireotide LAR vs octreotide LAR
- 95% CI of odds ratio
- 0.27 to 1.97
- pasireotide LAR vs octreotide LAR
- P value
- 0.53
- pasireotide LAR vs octreotide LAR
Source sentences
because of a low predictive probability of showing superiority of pasireotide over octreotide for symptom control (n=43 pasireotide LAR, 20.9%; n=45 octreotide LAR, 26.7%; odds ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27-1.97; P=0.53).
2 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
In a randomized, double-blind, Phase III study, we compared pasireotide long-acting release (pasireotide LAR) with octreotide long-acting repeatable (octreotide LAR) in managing carcinoid symptoms refractory to first-generation somatostatin analogues.
Adults with carcinoid tumors of the digestive tract were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive pasireotide LAR (60 mg) or octreotide LAR (40 mg) every 28 days.