Cancer patient decision making related to clinical trial participation: an integrative review with implications for patients’ relational autonomy

2015 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 1169-1196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer A. H. Bell ◽  
Lynda G. Balneaves
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Cancer Patient ◽  
Integrative Review ◽  
Trial Participation ◽  
Relational Autonomy ◽  
Clinical Trial Participation ◽  
Patient Decision Making ◽  
Patient Decision

“When offered to participate”: A systematic review and meta-analysis of patient agreement to participate in cancer clinical trials.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (29_suppl) ◽  
pp. 92-92
Author(s):  
Joseph M. Unger ◽  
Dawn L. Hershman ◽  
Cathee Till ◽  
Lori M. Minasian ◽  
Raymond U Osarogiagbon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Trial Participation ◽  
Participation Rates ◽  
Patient Decision Making ◽  
Asian Patients ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
Black Patients

92 Background: Patient participation in clinical trials (CTs) is vital for knowledge advancement and outcomes improvement. The rate of CT participation for adult cancer patients is between 5%-8%; many CTs fail due to poor accrual. Although patient decision-making is a common focus of studies examining barriers to CT participation, the rate of trial participation for patients actually offered a CT is unknown. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis using PubMed, Web of Science, and Ovid Medline search engines to identify studies over 20 years (1/1/2000-1/1/2020) that examined CT participation. Studies must have been conducted in the United States and specified the number of patients offered a CT and the number enrolled. We conducted a meta-analysis of single proportions using random effects. Rates were examined for both treatment trials and cancer control (CC) studies. We also compared the rates of enrollment between Black, Hispanic, and Asian patients versus White patients. Clinical care setting (academic vs community) was examined as a potential moderator. Results: We screened 3,241 unique citations and identified 35 (30 treatment and 5 CC) studies among which n = 9,759 patients were offered CT participation. Overall, 55.0% (95% CI: 49.4%-60.5%) of patients offered a CT agreed to enroll. Trial participation rates did not differ between treatment (55.0%, 95% CI: 48.9%-60.9%) and CC trials (55.3%, 95% CI: 38.9%-71.1%, p = .98); however, participation rates were significantly higher at academic centers (58.4%, 95% CI: 52.2%-64.5%) versus community centers (45.0%, 95% CI: 34.5%-55.7%, p = .04). In common studies, Black patients agreed to participate at similar rates (58.4%, 95% CI: 46.8%-69.7%) compared to White patients (55.1%, 95% CI: 44.3%-65.6%, p = .88). Results were also similar comparing White versus Hispanic or Asian patients. The main reasons for non-participation were treatment choice or lack of interest. Conclusions: More than half of all cancer patients who are offered CTs do participate; results were consistent between major race/ethnicity groups. This finding upends several conventional beliefs about cancer clinical trial participation, including that Black patients are less likely to agree to participate and that patient decision-making is the primary barrier to participation. Policies and interventions to improve CT participation should focus more on modifiable systemic structural and clinical barriers, such as improving access to existing trials and broadening trial eligibility.

scholarly journals Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery (TEMS) for Rectal Cancer: Patient Decision-making, Postoperative Experience and Quality of Life

In Vivo ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 1235-1245
Author(s):  
ALEXANDRA KORELI ◽  
GEORGE BRIASSOULIS ◽  
MICHAIL SIDERIS ◽  
ANASTAS PHILALITHIS ◽  
SAVVAS PAPAGRIGORIADIS
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patient ◽  
Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery ◽  
Rectal Cancer Patient ◽  
Patient Decision Making ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
Endoscopic Microsurgery

Patterns of decision making about cancer clinical trial participation among the online cancer treatment community: A collaboration between SWOG and NexCura.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. CRA6009-CRA6009
Author(s):  
Joseph M Unger ◽  
Dawn L. Hershman ◽  
Kenda Burg ◽  
Carol Moinpour ◽  
Kathy S. Albain ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Annual Meeting ◽  
Clinical Oncology ◽  
Trial Participation ◽  
Clinical Trial Participation ◽  
Daily News ◽  
Online Supplement ◽  
Final Text

CRA6009 The full, final text of this abstract will be available at abstract.asco.org at 12:01 AM (EDT) on Sunday, June 3, 2012, and in the Annual Meeting Proceedings online supplement to the June 20, 2012, issue of Journal of Clinical Oncology. Onsite at the Meeting, this abstract will be printed in the Sunday edition of ASCO Daily News

Decision Making in Cancer Prevention and Control

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin M. Ellis ◽  
Rebecca A. Ferrer
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Trial Participation ◽  
Clinical Trial Participation ◽  
High Stakes ◽  
Life And Death ◽  
Fundamental Knowledge ◽  
And Control

Being diagnosed with cancer introduces the need to make many high-stakes decisions about treatments, clinical trial participation, palliative care, advanced care planning, and (sometimes) end-of-life preferences. These decisions can be intensely emotional themselves, and occur within the affectively laden context of cancer-related issues, such as symptom management, interpersonal concerns, and existential questions about life and death. This chapter outlines how affect/emotion influences several decisions faced by cancer patients, and how emotions are relevant to the interpersonal context in which these decisions occur. Emotion has pervasive and predictable—sometimes deleterious and sometimes advantageous—influences on decision making. Fundamental knowledge regarding how affect influences cancer-related decision making could be leveraged to develop interventions to optimize decisions about treatment, clinical trial participation, and palliative care among cancer patients and survivors, thereby improving cancer-related outcomes.

scholarly journals Decision-Making Issues for Randomized Clinical Trial Participation among Hispanics

2003 ◽  
Vol 10 (5_suppl) ◽  
pp. 84-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lee Ellington ◽  
Stephanie Wahab ◽  
Shadi Sahami ◽  
Rosemary Field ◽  
Kathi Mooney
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trial ◽  
Trial Participation ◽  
Clinical Trial Participation
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document