PATIENT ACCRUAL TO CLINICAL TRIALS

2006 ◽  
pp. 415-426
Author(s):  
SUSAN QUELLA
1994 ◽  
Vol 12 (9) ◽  
pp. 1796-1805 ◽  
Author(s):  
K M Taylor ◽  
M L Feldstein ◽  
R T Skeel ◽  
K J Pandya ◽  
P Ng ◽  
...  

PURPOSE We studied oncologists' attitudes and behavior with regard to their participation in randomized clinical trials. METHODS We surveyed the 1,737 physician members of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) using the Physician Orientation Profile (POP), a self-administered mailed questionnaire. A response rate of 86% was achieved (1,485 of 1,737); each physician's actual patient accrual was recorded. RESULTS All respondents indicated that they had a systematic pattern of patient preselection for entry onto trials beyond the formal inclusion/exclusion trial criteria. Eighty-nine percent stated that improving patient quality of life rather than prolonging survival was more personally satisfying. Sixty-two percent did not enter a single patient during the 12-month period following the survey, while 10% entered 80% of all patients during that time. Physicians overestimated their accrual rate by a factor of 6. Eighty-three percent defined randomization and adherence to trial protocol as a serious challenge to their ability to make individualized treatment decisions. CONCLUSION This study raises questions regarding the following: (1) the perceived generalizability of trial findings, (2) the role of end points other than survival for clinical trials, (3) the consequences of physician overestimation of patient accrual, and (4) the impact of randomized trials on the behavior of clinicians. Further investigation into these critical issues will provide meaningful recommendations to enhance the future design, implementation, and conduct of randomized clinical trials in cancer.


2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (14_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6017-6017 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. M. Wujcik ◽  
C. Ikpeazu ◽  
W. Chinratanalab ◽  
S. N. Wolff ◽  
C. Kinnard ◽  
...  

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6577-6577 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. B. Wiener ◽  
H. M. Newman ◽  
E. A. Spradley

6577 Background: In the US, adult oncology patient enrollment in clinical trials is estimated at 4% (Cancer 2006; 106(2):426–33). This is a major bottleneck in the development of new cancer treatments, especially for rare indications, like stage IV pancreatic cancer in treatment-naive patients. To overcome the challenge of low enrollment in clinical trials, Pharmatech developed the Just-In-Time (JIT) approach. JIT expands the potential patient population and allows research sites to pre-identify patients using standard of care information prior to site activation. This differs from a traditional approach where sites are activated prior to screening for patients. We postulated the JIT approach would impact patient accrual. Methods: With the JIT approach, a central IRB-approved protocol was presented to 38 research-ready sites but only 8 sites with a potential patient obtained IRB-site approval over a 6 month period. Within 5–10 business days after identifying a potential patient, sites obtained IRB approval, investigators at the site were trained, received study materials, and dosed the first patient. We compared traditional site activation conducted by the sponsor to JIT approach in this study. Results: Traditional approach vs JIT approach: No.of patients enrolled: 42 vs 18; No.of months open: 19 vs 6; No. of sites open: 13 vs 8; No. of non-enrolling sites: 2 vs 0; Patient accrual rate (pts/mo/site): 0.17 vs 0.38. Sites participating in the JIT approach accrued subjects at >2x the rate of traditionally activated sites. The JIT approach eliminated non-enrolling sites, increasing sites’ and sponsor's satisfaction with enrollment. JIT also enhanced patient options by providing access to a novel treatment alternative for this rare indication even at smaller research sites. Conclusions: With JIT, patient accrual rate, enrollment success and trial-related cost in a pancreatic cancer study were markedly better than with the traditional approach. Expanding JIT to other rare indications and to trials requiring specific genetic tumor-profiles will show whether these results are reproducible and whether JIT is a viable approach for trials with challenging eligibility criteria. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9610-9610 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. S. Soori ◽  
M. B. Wilwerding ◽  
M. Carlson ◽  
J. Verdirame ◽  
P. Townley ◽  
...  

1996 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. 372-386 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Hjorth ◽  
Erik Holmberg ◽  
Stig Rödjer ◽  
Adam Taube ◽  
Jan Westin

2012 ◽  
Vol 187 (4S) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Bolla ◽  
S. Joniau ◽  
L.H. Pylkkanen ◽  
V. Pouillon ◽  
P. Maingon ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document