scholarly journals Struggling With Extensive Informed Consent Procedures for Cancer Trails – Is There Even a Benefit for the Patients?

Author(s):  
Marie-Kristin Tilch ◽  
Alice Moringlane ◽  
Melanie Schranz ◽  
Matthias Theobald ◽  
Georg Hess

Abstract PurposeInformed consent procedures in clinical trials often differ in length and complexity to those in clinical routine care. Little is known about the benefit of extensive procedures as intended in clinical trials compared to procedures in routine cancer treatment. MethodsIn two different clinical studies performed at a comprehensive cancer center, we compared patients’ comprehension and satisfaction of current informed consent procedures in routine clinical care with the level of comprehension and satisfaction of patients treated within clinical trials. Patients with a new cancer diagnosis and recent informed consent received a questionnaire about satisfaction, comprehension, time management and physician-patient relationship of the informed consent process. Patients in cohort 1 consented to cancer treatment within a clinical trial and were additionally interviewed in a structured way; patients in cohort 2 consented to “standard” chemotherapy and received a follow-up questionnaire after 6 months. ResultsIn cohort 1, 82 patients completed the questionnaire and had an additional structured interview. They were treated in 41 different trials, receiving up to 40 pages of educational material. In cohort 2, 89 patients completed the first and 52 completed the follow-up questionnaire after receiving a standard informed consent form of 6 pages. Subjective understanding and satisfaction with the information provided was equally very high. However, deficits in objective understanding were observed in both cohorts. ConclusionExtensive informed consent procedures for clinical cancer trials have not been associated with a higher level of satisfaction or measurable objective understanding, therefore the benefit seems to be limited.

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. ii22-ii22
Author(s):  
Kyle Walsh

Abstract BACKGROUND Preliminary evidence indicates that glioma patients are at higher risk for COVID-19 complications due to systemic immunosuppression. Interruptions in cancer care may exacerbate patient and caregiver anxiety, but surveying patients/caregivers about their COVID-19 experiences is often limited by attainable sample sizes and over-reliance upon single-institution experiences. METHODS To explore how COVID-19 is impacting brain tumor patients/caregivers across the U.S., we performed semi-structured interviews with brain tumor patient navigators employed by two different 501(c)3 nonprofit organizations. A semi-structured interview guide was used, utilizing prompts and open-ended questions to facilitate dialogue. A core set of COVID-19 topics were covered, including: financial issues, coping strategies, geographic variability, variability by tumor grade/histology, disruptions in care continuity, accessing clinical trials, psychosocial issues, and end-of-life care. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and organized by discussion topic to identify emerging themes. Inductive sub-coding was completed using the constant comparison method, within and between transcripts. RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS Ten patient navigators were interviewed between April 15th and May 8th, with interviews lasting approximately one hour (range 38-77minutes). Navigators reported having contact with 183 unique brain tumor families during the pandemic (range 7–38 families per navigator). High concordance emerged across narratives, revealing important considerations for the neuro-oncology workforce. The most prominent theme was increased caregiver burden, attributed to maintaining social distancing by reducing visits from home-health aides and friends/family. A related theme that applied to both patients and caregivers was increased social isolation due to social distancing, suspension of in-person support groups, and church/temple closures. Accessing clinical trials was a recurrent issue, exacerbated by patients’ increasing unwillingness to travel. Glioblastoma patients, especially those with recurrent tumors, expressed greater reluctance to travel. Access to standard-of-care treatment was rarely interrupted, but reduced access to supportive services – especially physical and occupational therapy – was identified as an emerging COVID-related deficiency in clinical care.


Author(s):  
J. Frikkel ◽  
M. Beckmann ◽  
N. De Lazzari ◽  
M. Götte ◽  
S. Kasper ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose Physical activity (PA) is recommended to improve advanced cancer patients’ (ACP) physical functioning, fatigue, and quality of life. Yet, little is known about ACPs’ attitude towards PA and its influence on fatigue and depressiveness over a longer period. This prospective, non-interventional cohort study examined ACPs’ fatigue, depression, motivation, and barriers towards PA before and after 12 months of treatment among ACP Methods Outpatients with incurable cancer receiving treatment at a German Comprehensive Cancer Center reporting moderate/severe weakness/tiredness during self-assessment via MIDOS II were enrolled. Fatigue (FACT-F), depression (PHQ-8), cancer-related parameters, self-assessed PA behavior, motivation for and barriers against PA were evaluated (T0). Follow-up data was acquired after 12 months (T1) using the same questionnaire. Results At follow-up, fatigue (p=0.017) and depressiveness (p=0.015) had increased in clinical relevant extent. Physically active ACP did not show significant progress of FACT-F (p=0.836) or PHQ-8 (p=0.799). Patient-reported barriers towards PA remained stable. Logistic regression analyses identified motivation as a positive predictor for PA at both time points (T0, β=2.152, p=0.017; T1, β =2.264, p=0.009). Clinically relevant depression was a negative predictor for PA at T0 and T1 (T0, β=−3.187, p=0.044; T1, β=−3.521, p=0.041). Conclusion Our findings emphasize the importance of psychological conditions in physical activity behavior of ACP. Since psychological conditions seem to worsen over time, early integration of treatment is necessary. By combining therapy approaches of cognitive behavioral therapy and exercise in interdisciplinary care programs, the two treatment options might reinforce each other and sustainably improve ACPs’ fatigue, physical functioning, and QoL. Trial registration German Register of Clinical Trials, DRKS00012514, registration date: 30.05.2017


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 317-317
Author(s):  
Jhalak Dholakia ◽  
Maria Pisu ◽  
Warner King Huh ◽  
Margaret Irene Liang

317 Background: Although approximately half of patients with gynecologic malignancy experience financial hardship (FH) during treatment, best practices to identify and assist patients with FH are lacking. To develop such practices, we assessed oncology provider and staff perspectives about FH screening and provision of assistance. Methods: An anonymous survey was conducted electronically within the Gynecologic Oncology outpatient office at a Comprehensive Cancer Center. Potential barriers to patient FH screening and follow-up were assessed within 2 domains: 1) logistic barriers to incorporating FH screening and follow-up into outpatient workflow and 2) perceived patient barriers to FH screening. Responses were elicited on a 5-point Likert scale from ‘very’ to ‘not at all’ significant and dichotomized into significant and not significant barriers. Results: Of 43 providers approached, 37 responded (86% response rate) of which 14 were physicians (MD)/nurse practitioners (NP) and 23 were other staff members (i.e., clinical and research nurses, social workers, pharmacists, care coordinators, lay navigators, and financial counselors). Altogether, 38% worked in their current position for >5 years (n=14), 11% for 3-5 years (n=4), and 51% for <3 years (n=19). For logistic barriers to implementing FH screening and follow-up, the most frequently reported significant barriers included lack of personnel training (69%) and lack of available staff (62%), training regarding follow-up (72%), and case tracking infrastructure (67%). The most frequent significant perceived patient barriers were lack of knowledge of whom to contact (72%), concerns about impact on treatment if FH needs were identified (72%), and lack of patient readiness to discuss financial needs (62%.) Compared to MD/NP, staff members more often indicated the following as significant barriers: difficulty incorporating FH screening into initial visit workflow (31 % vs. 57%, p=0.03), overstretched personnel (29% vs 73%, p=0.005), and patient concerns about influence on treatment (62% vs 86%, p=0.01). Conclusions: Care team members identified barriers to patient FH screening across logistic and patient-centered domains, although MD/NP less so than other staff possibly reflecting different exposures to patient financial needs during clinical encounters or burden of workflow. Implementation of universal FH screening, dedicated personnel, convenient tracking mechanisms, and multi-disciplinary provider and staff training may improve recognition of patient FH and facilitate its integration into oncology care plans.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 2178-2178
Author(s):  
Ang Li ◽  
Catlin Goodfriend ◽  
John Sokol ◽  
Rebecca Kruse-Jarres

Introduction: Emicizumab is a subcutaneously administered, humanized bispecific monoclonal antibody that is recently approved for hemostatic prophylaxis in people with hemophilia A (PWH) with or without factor VIII inhibitors. We hypothesize that the new route and frequency of administration would lead to better treatment adherence compared to factor or bypass products in PWH outside of clinical trials. We performed the current study to test the hypothesis and to examine potential predictors of non-adherence associated with emicizumab treatment. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study at the Washington Center for Bleeding Disorders. Inclusion criteria included PWH with moderate to severe hereditary hemophilia (FVIII <5%), clinician recommendation for routine prophylaxis, receipt of clinical care and medication from a hemophilia treatment center (HTC), at least 12 months of prior exposure to factor or bypass products, and at least 3 months of emicizumab treatment. For patients who were previously enrolled in emicizumab clinical trials, adherence data were collected from the time of first commercial product administration. Adherence percentage (%) was estimated as days of drug dispensed / days elapsed x 100 and non-adherence % was determined as 100 - adherence %. Relevant patient, condition, treatment, and socioeconomic variable data were collected from review of medical records. To assess the difference in drug adherence, we compared the adherence % of emicizumab versus that of factor or bypass product in the same patients using the paired t test. To assess predictors of non-adherence %, we used a generalized linear model (GLM) with log link and gamma distribution to account for the right skewed distribution of the outcome. A multivariable GLM was built to incorporate the most significant predictors of non-adherence. Results: We identified 56 PWH that initiated commercial emicizumab from 1/2018 to 5/2019 at our HTC. Five patients were excluded for fewer than 3 months of follow-up on treatment and 3 patients were excluded for not having prior exposure to factor therapy. The remaining 48 patients had a median duration on emicizumab of 7 months (IQR 5-9) at the time of study. The most common dosing frequency was weekly administration (77%). The median age at treatment index date was 17 years (IQR 9-36), 65% were Caucasian, and 46% had Medicaid or Medicare insurance. The majority of patients had a diagnosis of severe hemophilia (90%), 42% had a history of inhibitor (15% active inhibitor), and 25% were previously enrolled in an emicizumab interventional trial. Prior to emicizumab initiation, 46% of patients had 5 or more self-reported annualized bleeds. The most common reason for emicizumab initiation was patient preference (35%), followed by breakthrough bleeding (33%), difficult venipuncture (21%), and shortened factor half-life (10%). Among 12 patients who previously received only on demand treatment, their adherence on emicizumab was 89%. Among 36 patients who previously received routine prophylaxis, their adherence was significantly higher on emicizumab (98%) than factor/bypass products (89%) (p=0.002). Specifically, 18 out of 48 patients (38%) had factor/bypass adherence <75% (or refused prophylaxis) and 2 out of 48 patients (4%) had emicizumab adherence <75%. Various factors were associated with increased emicizumab non-adherence (Table 1). Age group had the strongest association where young and older adult PWH had more non-adherence % than children and adolescents (Figure 1). On multivariable analysis, age group, active inhibitor, and prior factor/bypass agent non-adherence (episodic or <75% usage) were significantly associated with increased emicizumab non-adherence. Conclusions: In the current study, we found that PWH requiring routine prophylaxis were more likely to be adherent to emicizumab than previous factor or bypass agents. Age group (young adult), active inhibitor, and prior non-adherence to factor product were significant predictors for decreased emicizumab adherence but the differences were small. Given the long half-life of the drug, the significance of non-perfect adherence on bleeding outcomes needs to be studied prospectively with longer clinical follow-up. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. e64-e74
Author(s):  
Simon J. Craddock Lee ◽  
Torsten Reimer ◽  
Sandra Garcia ◽  
Erin L. Williams ◽  
Mary West ◽  
...  

PURPOSE: Effective enrollment and treatment of patients in cancer clinical trials require definition and coordination of roles and responsibilities among clinic and research personnel. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed a survey that incorporated modified components of the Survey of Physician Attitudes Regarding the Care of Cancer Survivors. Surveys were administered to clinic nursing staff and research personnel at a National Cancer Institute–designated comprehensive cancer center. Results were analyzed using χ2-tests, t tests, and analyses of variance. RESULTS: Surveys were completed by 105 staff members (n = 50 research staff, n = 55 clinic staff; 61% response rate). Research staff were more likely to feel that they had the skills to answer questions, convey information, and provide education for patients on trials (all P < .05). Both clinic and research staff reported receipt of communication about responsibilities in fewer than 30% of cases, although research staff reported provision of such information in more than 60% of cases. Among 20 tasks related to care of patients in trials, no single preferred model of responsibility assignment was selected by the majority of clinic staff for nine tasks (45%) or by research staff for three tasks (15%). Uncertainty about which team coordinates care was reported by three times as many clinic staff as research staff ( P = .01). There was also substantial variation in the preferred model for delivery of care to patients in trials ( P < .05). CONCLUSION: Knowledge, attitudes, and perception of care and responsibilities for patients on clinical trials differ between and among clinic and research personnel. Additional research about how these findings affect efficiency and quality of care on clinical trials is needed.


2002 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 545-556 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathyrn Roche ◽  
Nancy Paul ◽  
Bobbi Smuck ◽  
Marlo Whitehead ◽  
Benny Zee ◽  
...  

PURPOSE: Increasingly, cancer treatment centers need to be able to estimate specific costs and resources associated with clinical trials. Because the time requirements of trial coordination and data collection are not well known, the Clinical Research Associates (CRA) Committee of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group carried out a multicenter study to measure trials’ task times and evaluate the effects of certain factors. METHODS: A data collection instrument was designed and validated before its implementation in the study. Eighty-three CRAs from 24 cancer treatment institutions across Canada collected timing observations of 41 tasks (156 subtasks). Information from all stages of trials activity (protocol management, eligibility and entry, treatment, and follow-up and final stage) was obtained, from initial negotiations to follow-up after study closure. RESULTS: After controlling for stage, phase and sponsor were found to be significant independent factors. Analysis within the stages showed similar patterns. New drug inclusion as a factor was confounded with phase. Industry-sponsored studies had significantly higher overall mean times than did local and cooperative group studies. Early-phase studies required more time than did phase III trials. External sponsorship of any kind increased CRA time more than that necessary for locally coordinated studies, except during the protocol management stage. The burden of a phase I study increased to greater than average once underway and accruing patients. CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrated that sponsor and study phase are important factors to be taken into consideration when estimating clinical trial costs and resource use.


2003 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 528-531 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. C. Ulutin ◽  
R. C. Zellars ◽  
D. Frassica

The purpose of this study is to report clinical aspects and treatment results of patients seen at Johns Hopkins. A search of the tumor registry of the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center found 453 patients with malignancies of the vulva registered between 1977 and 1997. Patient and tumor characteristics, treatment methods, and follow-up were obtained from charts. Seven patients were identified with sarcoma of the vulva. Of these, one was removed from analysis due to histology. Three patients had leiomyosarcoma, two had fibrosarcoma, and one had epithelioid sarcoma. The mean age was 41. Mean time to diagnosis was 6 months. All but one of the tumors was located on the labia majora. Median tumor size was 3.5 cm. Surgery varied from wide local excision to radical vulvectomy with inguinal lymph node dissection. Surgical margins were microscopically negative in five of the six cases. Two patients had received adjuvant external beam radiation. One of them had a tumor greater than 5 cm and close surgical margins and the other had high-grade tumor, which recurred after previous surgery. Mean follow-up was 127.8 months. There have been no recurrences to date.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document