Thoracic Radiation Oncology Clinical Trial Accrual and Reasons for Nonenrollment: Results of a Large, Prospective, Multiyear Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 107 (5) ◽  
pp. 897-908
Author(s):  
Shane Mesko ◽  
Matthew S. Ning ◽  
David Lakomy ◽  
Vivek Verma ◽  
Joe Y. Chang ◽  
...  
2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e13039-e13039
Author(s):  
J. R. Eckardt ◽  
A. W. DeMaggio ◽  
O. Peracha ◽  
A. Nemeth ◽  
S. Sarvepalli ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18131-e18131
Author(s):  
Andrew R. Wong ◽  
Arti Hurria ◽  
Virginia Sun ◽  
Daneng Li ◽  
Kevin George ◽  
...  

e18131 Background: Multiple studies have described the barriers and facilitators to oncology clinical trial accrual in academic practices. However, few studies have been done in community settings, even though the majority of patients with cancer receive their care in the community. We examined and compared community and academic oncologists’ perceptions of the barriers and facilitators to cancer clinical trial accrual. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted from March to June 2018 with 44 medical oncologists at City of Hope (24 in academia; 20 in community sites). Purposive sampling was used to ensure participant diversity. Primary measures were oncologists’ self-reported perceptions of the barriers and facilitators to clinical trial accrual. Responses were recorded digitally, transcribed, and de-identified. Data was managed using NVivo v12. Two analysts coded the interview data using thematic content analysis (kappa = 0.74). A third analyst adjudicated discrepancies. Results: Of the 44 participants, 36% were women, and 68% had > 10 years of experience. Compared to academic oncologists, community oncologists more often cited barriers due to the lack of protocols suitable for community patients’ histology and stage (13% vs. 6%) and insufficient trial personnel support (13% vs. 9%). Compared to community oncologists, academic oncologists more often cited barriers due to limited time (14% vs. 8%) and overly stringent eligibility criteria (14% vs. 9%). Community oncologists more commonly reported extrinsic facilitators (e.g. reminders of available protocols from trial support staff) (91% vs. 76%) while academic oncologists more commonly reported intrinsic facilitators for offering clinical trials (e.g. self-motivation to prioritize clinical trials) (24% vs. 9%). Conclusions: Community oncologists more often reported facing barriers to accrual due to limited suitable trials and insufficient personnel support compared to academic oncologists. Additionally, community oncologists cite the need for more infrastructure to support accrual. Interventions to increase trial accrual must be tailored to address the unique needs of both community and academic practices.


2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18759-e18759
Author(s):  
Alyssa M Asaro ◽  
Nitin Ohri ◽  
Madhur Garg ◽  
Shalom Kalnicki

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefanie Corradini ◽  
Maximilian Niyazi ◽  
Dirk Verellen ◽  
Vincenzo Valentini ◽  
Seán Walsh ◽  
...  

AbstractFuture radiation oncology encompasses a broad spectrum of topics ranging from modern clinical trial design to treatment and imaging technology and biology. In more detail, the application of hybrid MRI devices in modern image-guided radiotherapy; the emerging field of radiomics; the role of molecular imaging using positron emission tomography and its integration into clinical routine; radiation biology with its future perspectives, the role of molecular signatures in prognostic modelling; as well as special treatment modalities such as brachytherapy or proton beam therapy are areas of rapid development. More clinically, radiation oncology will certainly find an important role in the management of oligometastasis. The treatment spectrum will also be widened by the rational integration of modern systemic targeted or immune therapies into multimodal treatment strategies. All these developments will require a concise rethinking of clinical trial design. This article reviews the current status and the potential developments in the field of radiation oncology as discussed by a panel of European and international experts sharing their vision during the “X-Change” symposium, held in July 2019 in Munich (Germany).


2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 2024-2024 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eudocia Quant Lee ◽  
Ugonma Nnenna Chukwueke ◽  
Shawn L. Hervey-Jumper ◽  
John Frederick De Groot ◽  
Jose Pablo Leone ◽  
...  

2024 Background: A major impediment to improving neuro-oncology outcomes is poor clinical trial accrual. Methods: We convened a multi-stakeholder group including Society for Neuro-Oncology, Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology, patient advocacy groups, clinical trial cooperative groups, and other partners to determine how we can improve trial accrual. Results: We describe selected factors contributing to poor trial accrual and possible solutions. Conclusions: We will implement strategies with the intent to double trial accrual over the next 5 years. [Table: see text]


2006 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 593-599 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles G. Wood ◽  
S Jack Wei ◽  
Margaret K. Hampshire ◽  
Pamela A. Devine ◽  
James M. Metz

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document