Barriers to participation in breast cancer trials

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6593-6593
Author(s):  
O. Herasme ◽  
J. Goldberg ◽  
R. Sandoval ◽  
C. Harris ◽  
Y. Ortiz-Pride ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Child Care ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Demographic Factors ◽  
Trial Participation ◽  
Barriers To Participation ◽  
Cancer Trials

6593 Background: Clinical cancer trials allow investigators to test the effectiveness and safety of new cancer drugs and treatments. Historically, fewer that 5% of cancer patients have participated in clinical trials. The purpose of this study was to assess attitudes, beliefs, and practical barriers to clinical trial recruitment. Methods: Women were recruited in the Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center while waiting for routine breast screening or for oncology care in connection with a diagnosis of breast cancer. The 29-item survey questionnaire covered demographic factors, prior cancer diagnosis or risk factors, past experience with clinical trials if any, willingness to participate in different types of trials, and attitudinal and practical barriers to participation. Results: Of 329 respondents, 48.9% were non- Hispanic white, 10.9% non-Hispanic black, 34.9% Hispanic, and 5.30% other/unknown. The mean age of participants was 52.5 (SD=12.1). Of 131 (39.8%) participants reporting that they had been asked to participate in clinical trial, 82 were white, 17 black and 32 Hispanic. Of those who enrolled, 64 were white, 14 were black, and 19 Hispanic. Of those asked to participate 56/63 breast cancer patients (88.9%) and 44/68 others (64.7%) enrolled (P=0.002). Of 48 who reported that they had child care responsibilities, 33 enrolled (68.8) compared to 67/83 (80.7%) of those without such responsibilities (P=0.07). Of the total sample, 88/220 (40.0%) of those without childcare responsibilities but only 32/109 (29.4) said they would be willing to participate in a placebo-controlled trial. Respondents were twice as likely to say they would participate in a trial comparing two active agents as a placebo-controlled trial. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that being asked to participate in a clinical trial may be associated with demographic factors, and that specific circumstances, such as child care responsibilities, may also affect trial participation. Awareness of these barriers may help investigators to develop effective strategies for overcoming them and for improving trial participation overall. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Changes in clinical trial participation among adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer patients from 2006 to 2013 in the United States.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18037-e18037 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theresa Keegan ◽  
Dolly Penn ◽  
Qian Li ◽  
Brad Pollock ◽  
Marcio H. Malogolowkin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Hodgkin Lymphoma ◽  
The United States ◽  
Trial Participation ◽  
Clinical Trial Participation ◽  
Racial Ethnic ◽  
Over Time

e18037 Background: Stagnant outcomes for AYAs (15 to 39 years) with cancer are partly attributed to poor enrollment onto clinical trials. Initiatives have focused on increasing accrual, but changes at the population-level are unknown. We examined patterns of clinical trial participation over time in AYA cancer patients. Methods: We utilized medical record data from AYAs in two National Cancer Institute Patterns of Care Studies identified through the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program. Among 1,358 AYAs diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), germ cell cancer, and sarcoma in 2006 and 3,560 AYAs diagnosed with NHL, HL, ALL, sarcoma, and breast cancer in 2012/2013, we used unconditional logistic regression to evaluate patient and provider characteristics associated with enrollment by year of diagnosis. Analyses were weighted to reflect the SEER populations and associations are summarized as adjusted odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: From 2006 to 2012/2013, clinical trial participation increased from 14.8% to 17.9% among AYAs diagnosed with NHL, HL, ALL and sarcoma (p < 0.0001), primarily due to increased participation among ALL patients (2006: 37.4%; 2012/2013: 42.3%). In 2012/2013, participation varied by type of cancer, with the highest among those with ALL and sarcoma (31.2%), followed by HL (9.4%), NHL (6.9%) and breast cancer (4.3%). In both study years, multivariate analyses demonstrated that younger patients and those treated by pediatric oncologists (OR = 3.5; CI: 2.6-4.7) were more likely to enroll onto clinical trials. Uninsured AYAs were less likely to enroll in 2006 but no association was observed in 2012/2013. Hispanic (OR = 0.5; CI: 0.4-0.6), Black (OR = 0.6; CI: 0.5-0.9) and Asian (OR = 0.4; CI: 0.3-0.6) AYAs were less likely to enroll in 2012/2013 but not 2006. Conclusions: Our study identified increasing overall clinical trial participation over time. Disparities in likelihood of participating for racial/ethnic minority groups increased suggesting the need to improve access to clinical trials for all racial/ethnic groups to improve care and outcomes.

Telephone-based nursing intervention improves the effectiveness of the informed consent process in cancer clinical trials.

1996 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 984-996 ◽  
Author(s):  
N K Aaronson ◽  
E Visser-Pol ◽  
G H Leenhouts ◽  
M J Muller ◽  
A C van der Schot ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Informed Consent ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Nursing Intervention ◽  
Informed Consent Process ◽  
Consent Process ◽  
Trial Participation ◽  
Oncology Nurse

PURPOSE Here we report the results of a randomized study undertaken to test the efficacy of a supplementary, telephone-based nursing intervention in increasing patients' awareness and understanding of the clinical trials in which they are asked to participate. METHODS During a 12-month period, 180 cancer patients who were approached to participate in a phase II or III clinical trial were randomized to undergo either of the following: (1) standard informed consent procedures based on verbal explanations from the treating physician plus written information (controls); or (2) standard informed consent procedures plus a supplementary, telephone-based contact with an oncology nurse (intervention). For purposes of evaluation, face-to-face interviews were conducted with all patients approximately 1 week after the informed consent process had been completed. RESULTS The two groups were comparable with regard to sociodemographic and clinical variables. Both groups had a high level of awareness of the diagnosis and of the nature and objectives of the proposed treatments. The intervention group was significantly (P < .01) better informed about the following: (1) the risks and side effects of treatment; (2) the clinical trial context of the treatment; (3) the objectives of the clinical trial; (4) where relevant, the use of randomization in allocating treatment; (5) the availability of alternative treatments; (6) the voluntary nature of participation; and (7) the right to withdraw from the clinical trial. The intervention did not have any significant effect on patients' anxiety levels or on rates of clinical trial participation. Patients reported high levels of satisfaction with the intervention. CONCLUSION The use of a supplementary, telephone-based nursing intervention is a feasible and effective means to increase cancer patients' awareness and understanding of the salient issues that surround the clinical trials in which they are asked to participate.

Increasing participation in breast cancer research: (INSPIRE-BrC).

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (26_suppl) ◽  
pp. 53-53
Author(s):  
Brandi Robinson ◽  
Sandra M. Swain
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Primary Outcome Measure ◽  
Test Method ◽  
Trial Participation ◽  
Lower Survival Rate ◽  
Black Patients ◽  
Clinical Trial Enrollment ◽  
The Impact

53 Background: Increasing black patients’ participation in cancer clinical trials is particularly important because of the population’s lower survival rate. Accrual to clinical trials remains low among the general population (1 to 3%), with recruitment of blacks the lowest of all groups at 0.5 to 1.5%. Clinical trials are key to developing new methods to prevent, detect, and treat cancer. INSPIRE-BrC aims to increase trial participation rates among black patients with breast cancer and examine the relationship between the intervention and attitudes/beliefs on the decision to participate. Methods: A sample size of 123 black patients with breast cancer at five MedStar sites will view a 15 minute, culturally tailored video about clinical trials, which targets six cultural and attitudinal barriers to participation. A pre-test/post-test method is used to determine the impact of the video on three variables — likely participation in therapeutic clinical trials; attitudes toward therapeutic clinical trials (assessed based on the 6 barriers); and actual trial enrollment. Expected Findings: We hypothesize that the intervention will increase clinical trial enrollment compared to our 2012 clinical trial enrollment baseline rate of 6% (22/384) for black patients with breast cancer in five MedStar hospitals. The primary outcome measure is the proportion of black patients with breast cancer who agree to participate in a therapeutic clinical trial among those who sign consent to INSPIRE-BrC. Study findings have the potential to increase patient recruitment as a promising tool for rapid dissemination of a theory-driven, evidence-based model to enhance clinical trial accrual among black patients with cancer. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Are cancer patients better off if they participate in clinical trials? A mixed methods study

BMC Cancer ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zandra Engelbak Nielsen ◽  
Stefan Eriksson ◽  
Laurine Bente Schram Harsløf ◽  
Suzanne Petri ◽  
Gert Helgesson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Standard Care ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
Trial Participation ◽  
Clinical Trial Participation ◽  
Positive Effects

Abstract Background Research and cancer care are closely intertwined; however, it is not clear whether physicians and nurses believe that clinical trials offer the best treatment for patients and, if so, whether this belief is justified. The aim of this study was therefore: (i) to explore how physicians and nurses perceive the benefits of clinical trial participation compared with standard care and (ii) whether it is justified to claim that clinical trial participation improves outcomes for cancer patients. Methods A mixed methods approach was used employing semi-structured interviews with 57 physicians and nurses in oncology and haematology and a literature review of the evidence for trial superiority, i.e. the idea that receiving treatment in a clinical trial leads to a better outcome compared with standard care. Inductive thematic analysis was used to examine the interview data. A literature review comprising nine articles was conducted according to a conceptual framework developed by Peppercorn et al. and evaluated recent evidence on trial superiority. Results Our findings show that many physicians and nurses make claims supporting trial superiority, however very little evidence is available in the literature comparing outcomes for trial participants and non-participants that supports their assertions. Conclusions Despite the recent rapid development and use of targeted therapy and immunotherapy, we find no support for trial participation to provide better outcomes for cancer patients than standard care. Hence, our present results are in line with previous results from Peppercorn et al. A weaker version of the superiority claim is that even if a trial does not bring about a direct positive effect, it brings about indirect positive effects. However, as the value of such indirect effects is dependent on the individual’s specific circumstances and preferences, their existence cannot establish the general claim that treatment in trials is superior. Belief in trial superiority is therefore unfounded. Hence, if such beliefs are communicated to patients in a trial recruitment context, it would provide misleading information. Instead emphasis should be on patients volunteering to give an altruistic contribution to the furthering of knowledge and to the potential benefit of future patients.

scholarly journals Barriers to participation in clinical trials: a physician survey

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 119 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Mahmud ◽  
O. Zalay ◽  
A. Springer ◽  
K. Arts ◽  
E. Eisenhauer
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Work ◽  
Trial Participation ◽  
Years Of Experience ◽  
Barriers To Participation ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
Trial Protocols ◽  
Physician Engagement ◽  
Academic Credits

Background Clinical trials are vital for evidence-based cancer care. Oncologist engagement in clinical trials has an effect on patient recruitment, which in turn can affect trial success. Identifying barriers to clinical trial participation might enable interventions that could help to increase physician participation.Methods To assess factors affecting physician engagement in oncology trials, a national survey was conducted using the online SurveyMonkey tool (SurveyMonkey, San Mateo, CA, U.S.A.; http://www.surveymonkey.com). Physicians associated with the Canadian Cancer Clinical Trials Network and the Canadian Cancer Trials Group were asked about their specialty, years of experience, barriers to participation, and motivating interventions, which included an open-ended question inviting survey takers to suggest interventions.Results The survey collected 207 anonymous responses. Respondents were predominantly medical oncologists (46.4%), followed by radiation oncologists (24.6%). Almost 70% of the respondents had more than 10 years of experience. Significant time constraints included extra paperwork (77%), patient education (54%), and extended follow-up or clinic visits (53%). Timing of events within trials was also a barrier to participation (55%). Most respondents favoured clinical work credits (72%), academic credits (67%), a clinical trial alert system (75%), a regular meeting to review trial protocols (65%), and a screening log to aid in patient accrual (67%) as motivational strategies. Suggested interventions included increased support staff, streamlined regulatory burden, and provision of greater funding for trials and easier access to ancillary services.Conclusions The present study confirms that Canadian oncologists are willing to participate in clinical research, but face multiple barriers to trial participation. Those barriers could be mitigated by the implementation of several interventions identified in the study.

scholarly journals Enrollment of Older Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients in First Line Clinical Trials: 9-Year Experience of the Large-Scale Real-Life Multicenter French ESME Cohort

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Bringuier ◽  
Matthieu Carton ◽  
christelle Levy ◽  
Anne Patsouris ◽  
David Pasquier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
First Line

Abstract Purpose: Older cancer patients are underrepresented in clinical trials. We aimed to understand barriers to clinical trial recruitment in women aged 70 years old (yo) or over with metastatic breast cancer (MBC).Methods: We used the national Epidemio-Strategy and Medical Economics MBC Data Platform, a French multi-center real life database. We selected MBC women over 70yo, without central nervous system metastases, with at least one line of systemic treatment, between January 1st, 2008 and December 31st, 2016, and had no other cancer in the 5 years before MBC. The primary objective was to evaluate the proportion of patients enrolled in clinical trials according to their age. Secondary objective was to identify variables associated with enrollment.Results: 5552 women were aged ≥ 70 (median 74yo; IQR72-77). 14611 were less than 70. Of the older ones, 239 (4%) were enrolled in a clinical trial during first line of treatment, compared with 1529 (10.5%) for younger ones. Multivariable analysis of variables predicting for enrollment during first line of treatment in older patients were younger age (OR 0.50 [95%CI; 0.33-0.76] for the 80-85yo class; OR 0.17 [95%CI; 0.06-0.39] for the 85yo and more class), good ECOG Performance Status (PS 0-1) (OR 0.15 [95%CI; 0.08-0.27] for the PS 2-4 class), HER2+ disease (OR 1.78 [95%CI; 1.27-2.48]), type of treatment (chemotherapy/targeted therapy/immunotherapy OR 5.01 [95%CI; 3.13-8.18]), and period (OR 1.65 [95%CI; 1.22–2.26] for 2012-2016, compared to 2008-2011).Conclusions: In this large database, few older MBC patients were enrolled in a trial compared with younger ones.

The effects of clinical trials on improving breast cancer care at a single institution.

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (27_suppl) ◽  
pp. 198-198
Author(s):  
W. C. Dooley ◽  
J. Parker ◽  
J. Bong
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Tissue Banking ◽  
Breast Conservation ◽  
High Volume ◽  
Trial Participation ◽  
Single Institution ◽  
Clinical Trial Enrollment ◽  
Trial Participants

198 Background: We reported in 2011 at the Society of Surgical Oncology a 19 year retrospective at a single academic institution which identified practice differences between surgical oncologists and general surgeons which were associated with a significant survival advantage. Clinical trial participation was much higher amongst patients treated by a surgical oncologist. Methods: This is an IRB approved, retrospective review of all breast cancer patients receiving primary treatment at a single institution from 1/1/2001 to 12/31/2008. Details of pathology, surgical therapy, chemotherapy, hormonal therapy and radiation therapy were compared between patients participating in clinical trials and those not participating. The specific trials were segregated as to type (tissue banking, therapeutic, prevention, etc.) to understand differential effects if any between type of trial participation. Results: During the time period, there were 1220 patients who received primary breast cancer treatment at this institution. The mean age was 55.6 and mean follow-up >40 months. Stage distribution was stage 0 - 16.8%, Stage 1 - 26.6%, Stage 2 - 33.1%, Stage 3 - 15.9%, and Stage 4 - 6.1%. Patients participating in any clinical trial numbered 468 and 752 participated in no clinical trials. Overall survival (clinical trial 98.8% vs. not in clinical trial 75.7%; p<0.0001). Overall the use of breast conservation was more likely in clinical trial participants (54.3% vs. 44.4%; p<0.0001). The completion of chemotherapy was more likely in clinical trial participants (52.4% vs. 49.5%; p=0.02).The successful completion of systemic therapies (chemo and hormonal) was more likely also (71.4% vs. 64.0%; p=0.009). The type of trial (tissue banking vs. therapeutic) had no effect on improved outcomes. Overall the best predictor of better outcomes was to be treated by a high volume clinical trial enrolling physician. Conclusions: High volume clinical trial enrollment is associated with the best overall treatment outcomes in breast cancer whether trials are directly related to therapeutic changes or not. Each individual in the breast center treating team can have dramatic effect on outcomes by improving their clinical trial enrollment and participation.

Breast cancer patients' willingness to travel to participate in a clinical trial.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e14031-e14031 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Zdenkowski ◽  
James F. Lynam ◽  
Laura Wall ◽  
Scott Brown ◽  
Kathryn Wells ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Travel Time ◽  
Past History ◽  
Trial Participation ◽  
Clinical Trial Participation ◽  
Oncology Patients ◽  
Early Stage Disease ◽  
National Breast

e14031 Background: The option of clinical trial participation is an important component of high quality care for oncology patients. Despite a recognised need for generalizable research results to guide future practice, and the desire of current oncology patients to participate in trials, only 2-5% of oncology patients in developed nations enroll in a clinical trial. We aimed to determine the willingness of patients to travel, change location and/or clinician to participate in a clinical trial. Methods: Members of a national breast cancer consumer organization were invited by email to respond to an online cross-sectional survey. Questions included demographics, remoteness of residence, prior involvement in clinical trials and location of usual care. This was followed by a Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) comprising an introduction and 10 hypothetical scenarios to test the effect of variation in travel time, clinician, treating centre, travel cost and type of trial. Results: Between July and August 2016, 288 responses were received, mean age 58. 86% had early stage disease, 51% were currently receiving treatment, 21% had prior clinical trial involvement. Ninety percent were willing to participate in a clinical trial in at least one scenario. Factors that decreased the likelihood of interest in clinical trial participation were increasing travel time, change in oncologist and out of pocket expenses. Type of trial (randomised placebo controlled; randomised open label; single arm) did not influence the decision. If the oncologist remained the same and there were no costs, respondents were willing to travel a mean extra 127 minutes, however if the oncologist changed and there were additional costs, they were willing to travel a mean of 30 minutes. If the oncologist changed and there was no cost, they were willing to travel a mean of 82 minutes. Conclusions: This group of respondents with a past history of breast cancer expressed interest in clinical trial participation, however willingness to travel in the most likely scenario (change oncologist and pay no additional cost) was 82 minutes. To facilitate optimal access to clinical trials, clinicians should consider referral within and between institutions.

Barriers to Clinical Trial Participation as Perceived by Oncologists and Patients

2007 ◽  
Vol 5 (8) ◽  
pp. 753-762 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neal J. Meropol ◽  
Joanne S. Buzaglo ◽  
Jennifer Millard ◽  
Nevena Damjanov ◽  
Suzanne M. Miller ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Background Information ◽  
Trial Participation ◽  
Clinical Trial Participation ◽  
Clinical Trial Research ◽  
Psychosocial Barriers ◽  
Medical Oncologists

Although clinical trial research is required for the development of improved treatment strategies, very few cancer patients participate in these studies. The purpose of this study was to describe psychosocial barriers to clinical trial participation among oncologists and their cancer patients. A survey was distributed to all medical oncologists in Pennsylvania and a subset of their patients. Relevant background information and assessment of practical and psychosocial barriers to clinical trial participation were assessed. Among 137 oncologists and 170 patients who completed the surveys, 84% of patients were aware of clinical trials, and oncologists and patients generally agreed that clinical trials are important to improving cancer treatment. However, oncologists and patients were more likely to consider clinical trials in advanced or refractory disease. When considering 7 potential barriers to clinical trials, random assignment and fear of receiving a placebo were ranked highly by both patients and oncologists. Patients identified fear of side effects as the greatest barrier to clinical trial participation, whereas oncologists ranked this psychosocial barrier as least important to their patients. Overall, the study found that although oncologists and patients are aware of clinical trials and have favorable attitudes toward them, psychosocial barriers exist for patients that may impact participation in clinical trials. Furthermore, important discrepancies exist between the perceptions of oncologists and those of patients regarding what the psychosocial barriers are. We concluded that characterizing oncologist and patient perceived barriers can help improve communication and decision making about clinical trials, such that participation may be optimized.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document