Prostate cancer clinical trial completion: The role of geography

2021 ◽  
pp. 106600
Author(s):  
KristianD. Stensland ◽  
Samuel D. Kaffenberger ◽  
Arvin K. George ◽  
Todd M. Morgan ◽  
David C. Miller ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. e124-e131
Author(s):  
Lauren M. Hamel ◽  
David W. Dougherty ◽  
Terrance L. Albrecht ◽  
Mark Wojda ◽  
Alice Jordan ◽  
...  

PURPOSE: Cancer clinical trial accrual rates are low, and information about contributing factors is needed. We examined video-recorded clinical interactions to identify circumstances under which patients potentially eligible for a trial at a major cancer center were offered a trial. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative directed content analysis of 62 recorded interactions with physicians (n = 13) and patients with intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer (n = 43). Patients were screened and potentially eligible for a trial. We observed and coded the interactions in 3 steps: (1) classification of all interactions as explicit offer, offer pending, trial discussed/not offered, or trial not discussed; (2) in interactions with no explicit offer, classification of whether the cancer had progressed; (3) in interactions classified as progression but no trial offered, identification of factors discussed that may explain the lack of an offer. RESULTS: Of the 62 interactions, 29% were classified as explicit offer, 12% as offer pending, 18% as trial discussed/not offered, and 39% as trial not discussed. Of those with no offer, 57% included information that the cancer had not progressed. In 68% of the remaining interactions with patients whose cancer had progressed but did not receive an offer, reasons for the lack of offer were identified, but in 32%, no explanation was provided. CONCLUSION: Even in optimal circumstances, few patients were offered a trial, often because their cancer had not progressed. Findings support professional recommendations to broaden trial inclusion criteria. Findings suggest accrual rates should reflect the proportion of eligible patients who enroll.


Author(s):  
Joseph M. Unger ◽  
Elise Cook ◽  
Eric Tai ◽  
Archie Bleyer

Fewer than one in 20 adult patients with cancer enroll in cancer clinical trials. Although barriers to trial participation have been the subject of frequent study, the rate of trial participation has not changed substantially over time. Barriers to trial participation are structural, clinical, and attitudinal, and they differ according to demographic and socioeconomic factors. In this article, we characterize the nature of cancer clinical trial barriers, and we consider global and local strategies for reducing barriers. We also consider the specific case of adolescents with cancer and show that the low rate of trial enrollment in this age group strongly correlates with limited improvements in cancer population outcomes compared with other age groups. Our analysis suggests that a clinical trial system that enrolls patients at a higher rate produces treatment advances at a faster rate and corresponding improvements in cancer population outcomes. Viewed in this light, the issue of clinical trial enrollment is foundational, lying at the heart of the cancer clinical trial endeavor. Fewer barriers to trial participation would enable trials to be completed more quickly and would improve the generalizability of trial results. Moreover, increased accrual to trials is important for patients, because trials provide patients the opportunity to receive the newest treatments. In an era of increasing emphasis on a treatment decision-making process that incorporates the patient perspective, the opportunity for patients to choose trial participation for their care is vital.


2018 ◽  
Vol 57 (8) ◽  
pp. 688-704 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily B. Peterson ◽  
Wen-Ying Sylvia Chou ◽  
Angela Falisi ◽  
Rebecca Ferrer ◽  
Michelle A. Mollica

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document