First-line Esophageal Carcinoma Study With Pembrolizumab Plus Chemo vs. Chemo (MK-3475-590/KEYNOTE-590)

ORR was defined as the percentage of participants in the analysis population who had a Complete Response (CR: disappearance of all target lesions) or a Partial Response (PR: ≥30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions) per RECIST 1.1. as assessed by the investigator. The sponsor allowed a maximum of 10 target lesions in total and 5 per organ on this study. Per protocol, the percentage of participants who experienced CR or PR is reported here as the ORR for all participants of the ITT population (all randomized).

ORR was defined as the percentage of participants in the analysis population who had a Complete Response (CR: disappearance of all target lesions) or a Partial Response (PR: ≥30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions) per RECIST 1.1. as assessed by the investigator. The sponsor allowed a maximum of 10 target lesions in total and 5 per organ on this study. Per protocol, the percentage of participants who experienced CR or PR is reported here as the ORR for all participants of the ITT population (all randomized) who had ESCC and who were PD-L1 CPS ≥10.

ORR was defined as the percentage of participants in the analysis population who had a Complete Response (CR: disappearance of all target lesions) or a Partial Response (PR: ≥30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions) per RECIST 1.1. as assessed by the investigator. The sponsor allowed a maximum of 10 target lesions in total and 5 per organ on this study. Per protocol, the percentage of participants who experienced CR or PR is reported here as the ORR for all participants of the ITT population (all randomized) who had ESCC.

ORR was defined as the percentage of participants in the analysis population who had a Complete Response (CR: disappearance of all target lesions) or a Partial Response (PR: ≥30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions) per RECIST 1.1. as assessed by the investigator. The sponsor allowed a maximum of 10 target lesions in total and 5 per organ on this study. Per protocol, the percentage of participants who experienced CR or PR is reported here as the ORR for all participants of the ITT population (all randomized) who were PD-L1 CPS ≥10.

For participants who demonstrated a confirmed CR (disappearance of all target lesions) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions) per RECIST 1.1 as assessed by the investigator, DOR was defined as the time from first documented evidence of confirmed CR or PR until PD or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. DOR for participants who had not progressed or died at the time of analysis was censored at the date of their last tumor assessment. Per RECIST 1.1, PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions. In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum had to demonstrate an absolute increase of ≥5 mm. The appearance of one or more new lesions was also considered PD. Per protocol, DOR is reported here for all participants of the ITT population (all randomized) who had CR or PR.

For participants who demonstrated a confirmed CR (disappearance of all target lesions) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions) per RECIST 1.1 as assessed by the investigator, DOR was defined as the time from first documented evidence of confirmed CR or PR until PD or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. DOR for participants who had not progressed or died at the time of analysis was censored at the date of their last tumor assessment. Per RECIST 1.1, PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions. In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum had to demonstrate an absolute increase of ≥5 mm. The appearance of one or more new lesions was also considered PD. Per protocol, DOR is reported here for all participants of the ITT population (all randomized) who had CR or PR, and who had ESCC and were PD-L1 CPS ≥10.

For participants who demonstrated a confirmed CR (disappearance of all target lesions) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions) per RECIST 1.1 as assessed by the investigator, DOR was defined as the time from first documented evidence of confirmed CR or PR until PD or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. DOR for participants who had not progressed or died at the time of analysis was censored at the date of their last tumor assessment. Per RECIST 1.1, PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions. In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum had to demonstrate an absolute increase of ≥5 mm. The appearance of one or more new lesions was also considered PD. Per protocol, DOR is reported here for all participants of the ITT population (all randomized) who had CR or PR, and who had ESCC.

For participants who demonstrated a confirmed CR (disappearance of all target lesions) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions) per RECIST 1.1 as assessed by the investigator, DOR was defined as the time from first documented evidence of confirmed CR or PR until PD or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. DOR for participants who had not progressed or died at the time of analysis was censored at the date of their last tumor assessment. Per RECIST 1.1, PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions. In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum had to demonstrate an absolute increase of ≥5 mm. The appearance of one or more new lesions was also considered PD. Per protocol, DOR is reported here for all participants of the ITT population (all randomized) who had CR or PR, and were PD-L1 CPS ≥10.

An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which did not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE could therefore be any unfavourable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product or protocol-specified procedure, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product or protocol-specified procedure. Any worsening of a pre-existing condition that was temporally associated with the use of the Sponsor's product was also an AE. The number of participants that experienced at least one AE was reported for each treatment arm.

An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which did not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE could therefore be any unfavourable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product or protocol-specified procedure, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product or protocol-specified procedure. Any worsening of a pre-existing condition that was temporally associated with the use of the Sponsor's product was also an AE. The number of participants that discontinued any study drug due to an AE was reported for each treatment arm.

The EORTC-QLQ-C30 is a 30-item questionnaire developed to assess the quality of life of cancer patients. Participant responses to the Global Health Status (GHS) question "How would you rate your overall health during the past week?" (Item 29) and the Quality of Life (QoL) question "How would you rate your overall quality of life during the past week?" (Item 30) were scored on a 7-point scale (1=Very Poor to 7=Excellent). Using linear transformation, raw scores were standardized so that scores ranged from 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating a better overall outcome. Per protocol, change from baseline to Week 18 in the GHS/QoL combined score was reported by treatment arm as a pre-specified secondary analysis for all participants.

The EORTC-QLQ-C30 is a 30-item questionnaire developed to assess the quality of life of cancer patients. Participant responses to the Global Health Status (GHS) question "How would you rate your overall health during the past week?" (Item 29) and the Quality of Life (QoL) question "How would you rate your overall quality of life during the past week?" (Item 30) were scored on a 7-point scale (1=Very Poor to 7=Excellent). Using linear transformation, raw scores were standardized so that scores ranged from 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating a better overall outcome. Per protocol, change from baseline to Week 18 in the GHS/QoL combined score was reported by treatment arm as a pre-specified secondary analysis for all participants who had ESCC and who were PD-L1 CPS ≥10.

The EORTC-QLQ-C30 is a 30-item questionnaire developed to assess the quality of life of cancer patients. Participant responses to the Global Health Status (GHS) question "How would you rate your overall health during the past week?" (Item 29) and the Quality of Life (QoL) question "How would you rate your overall quality of life during the past week?" (Item 30) were scored on a 7-point scale (1=Very Poor to 7=Excellent). Using linear transformation, raw scores were standardized so that scores ranged from 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating a better overall outcome. Per protocol, change from baseline to Week 18 in the GHS/QoL combined score was reported by treatment arm as a pre-specified secondary analysis for all participants who had ESCC.

The EORTC-QLQ-C30 is a 30-item questionnaire developed to assess the quality of life of cancer patients. Participant responses to the Global Health Status (GHS) question "How would you rate your overall health during the past week?" (Item 29) and the Quality of Life (QoL) question "How would you rate your overall quality of life during the past week?" (Item 30) were scored on a 7-point scale (1=Very Poor to 7=Excellent). Using linear transformation, raw scores were standardized so that scores ranged from 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating a better overall outcome. Per protocol, change from baseline to Week 18 in the GHS/QoL combined score was reported by treatment arm as a pre-specified secondary analysis for all participants who were PD-L1 CPS ≥10.

The EORTC QLQ-OES18 is a disease-specific questionnaire developed and validated to address measurements specific to esophageal cancer and contains 18 items assessing symptoms of dysphagia, pain, reflux symptoms, eating restrictions, anxiety, dry mouth, taste, body image, and hair loss. For the purposes of this study, the Dysphagia subscale (three items), Pain subscale (three items), and Reflux subscale (two items) were evaluated. All subscale items were scored using a four-point Likert scale with the following response choices: 1=not at all, 2=a little, 3=quite a bit, 4=very much. Raw scores for the subscales were standardized into a range of 0 to 100 by linear transformation, with higher symptom scores represent a higher ("worse") level of symptoms. Per protocol, change from baseline to Week 18 in the Dysphagia, Pain, and Reflux subscales was reported for all participants in each treatment arm. Negative changes from baseline indicate a decrease in symptom severity.

The EORTC QLQ-OES18 is a disease-specific questionnaire developed and validated to address measurements specific to esophageal cancer and contains 18 items assessing symptoms of dysphagia, pain, reflux symptoms, eating restrictions, anxiety, dry mouth, taste, body image, and hair loss. For the purposes of this study, the Dysphagia subscale (three items), Pain subscale (three items), and Reflux subscale (two items) were evaluated. All subscale items were scored using a four-point Likert scale with the following response choices: 1=not at all, 2=a little, 3=quite a bit, 4=very much. Raw scores for the subscales were standardized into a range of 0 to 100 by linear transformation, with higher symptom scores representing a higher ("worse") level of symptoms. Change from baseline to Week 18 in the Dysphagia, Pain, and Reflux subscales was reported for participants with ESCC who were PD-L1 CPS≥10 in each treatment arm. Negative changes from baseline indicate a decrease in symptom severity.

The EORTC QLQ-OES18 is a disease-specific questionnaire developed and validated to address measurements specific to esophageal cancer and contains 18 items assessing symptoms of dysphagia, pain, reflux symptoms, eating restrictions, anxiety, dry mouth, taste, body image, and hair loss. For the purposes of this study, the Dysphagia subscale (three items), Pain subscale (three items), and Reflux subscale (two items) were evaluated. All subscale items were scored using a four-point Likert scale with the following response choices: 1=not at all, 2=a little, 3=quite a bit, 4=very much. Raw scores for the subscales were standardized into a range of 0 to 100 by linear transformation, with higher symptom scores representing a higher ("worse") level of symptoms. Change from baseline to Week 18 in the Dysphagia, Pain, and Reflux subscales was reported for participants with ESCC in each treatment arm. Negative changes from baseline indicate a decrease in symptom severity.

The EORTC QLQ-OES18 is a disease-specific questionnaire developed and validated to address measurements specific to esophageal cancer and contains 18 items assessing symptoms of dysphagia, pain, reflux symptoms, eating restrictions, anxiety, dry mouth, taste, body image, and hair loss. For the purposes of this study, the Dysphagia subscale (three items), Pain subscale (three items), and Reflux subscale (two items) were evaluated. All subscale items were scored using a four-point Likert scale with the following response choices: 1=not at all, 2=a little, 3=quite a bit, 4=very much. Raw scores for the subscales were standardized into a range of 0 to 100 by linear transformation, with higher symptom scores representing a higher ("worse") level of symptoms. Change from baseline to Week 18 in the Dysphagia, Pain, and Reflux subscales was reported for participants who were PD-L1 CPS≥10 in each treatment arm. Negative changes from baseline indicate a decrease in symptom severity.