Barriers to Clinical Trial Enrollment in Racial and Ethnic Minority Patients With Cancer

Exploring the characteristics and potential disparities of non-migrant and migrant colorectal cancer patients regarding their satisfaction and subjective perception of care - a cross-sectional study

Background

Although a fifth of the German population has a migration background, health research regarding this population is scarce. The few existing studies on migrant health show that migrants are faced with restrictions regarding health care due to communication problems, a lack of information and distinct health literacy. Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common tumor disease in Germany. The aim of the study is to explore the potential differences in patient characteristics between migrants and non-migrants with CRC and identify possible disparities between migrants and non-migrants regarding their satisfaction and perception with health care.

Methods

A validated questionnaire was modified for CRC, supplemented with items regarding migration background, translated additionally into Arabic, Turkish and Russian and sent out to 1.694 CRC patients. The outcome indicator was ‘health care satisfaction and experience’ concerning ‘medical consultation’, ‘medical treatment (therapy)’ and ‘hospital stay’ measured on 10-point Likert-scales; explanatory variables were migration background, age, gender, mother tongue, occupation, follow-up care, current discomfort and current treatment. Following descriptive statistics, factor analysis was conducted to compute the outcome variables. Differences between migrants and non-migrants were analyzed using Mann-Whitney-U test and regression analyses.

Results

A total of 522 completed questionnaires – 30.8% response rate – were used for analysis. Patients with a migration background attended less often follow up care than non-migrant patients (74.7% vs. 88.6%; p = 0.001). Mean scores regarding satisfaction and experience with consultation, medical treatment (therapy) and hospital stay were 7.86, 7.11 and 7.51 for migrants and 7.84, 7.19 and 7.33 for non-migrants, measured on a 1 to 10 scale with 10 being most satisfied. Migrants were less satisfied with their own involvement in decision making (p = 0.029) and the aspect “responsiveness to patient’s questions” (p = 0.048) than non-migrants.

Conclusions

Migrants showed less compliance with regard to follow-up care than non-migrants. Furthermore, migrants were more often dissatisfied with communication with the medical staff than non-migrants. This shows the importance of (cross-cultural) communication skills on the part of physicians and nurses.

Practice-Based Research Networks and the Mandate for Real-World Evidence

The 21^st Century Cures Act encourages the Food and Drug Administration to consider "real-world evidence" in its regulation of the safety and efficacy of drugs and devices. Many have interpreted this mandate to focus on non-randomized observational research. However, we suggest that regulatory science must also move from rarefied academic hospitals to community-based settings, where the vast majority of patients in fact receive care in the fragmented U.S. healthcare system. This move is especially important if innovations are to reach, and be validated in, more diverse populations. A solution can be found in the 183 Practiced-Based Research Networks ("PBRN"), i.e., groups of primary care clinicians and practices in all 50 states working to improve clinical care and translate research findings into practice. This symposium contribution seeks to (1) describe some of the common shortcomings of clinical trials, (2) explore the opportunities and challenges posed by use of real-world evidence as a basis for drug and device regulation, (3) briefly describe the history and evolution of PBRNs, and (4) articulate the challenges and opportunities for using PBRNs to fulfill the 21^st Century Cures Act mandate for real-world evidence.

Recruitment practices for U.S. minority and underserved populations in NRG oncology: Results of an online survey

Introduction

Cancer clinical trials (CCT) provide much of the evidence for clinical guidelines and standards of care. But low levels of CCT participation are well documented, especially for minorities.

Methods and materials

We conducted an online survey of 556 recruitment practices across the NRG Oncology network. Survey aims were 1) to learn how sites recruit minority/underserved populations; 2) to better understand the catchment areas of the NRG institutions; and 3) to aid in planning education programs for accrual of minority/underserved populations.

Results

The survey response rate was 34.9%. The most effective methods reported for recruiting minority/underserved participants were patient navigators (44.4%) and translators (38.9%). All institutions reported using a mechanism for eligibility screening and 71% of institutions reported using a screening/enrollment tracking system. CCT training was required at 78.1% and cultural competency training was required at 47.5% of responding institutions. Only 19.9% of sites used community partners to assist with minority recruitment and just 37.1% of respondents reported a defined catchment area. Sites reported very little race and ethnicity data.

Conclusion

This NRG Oncology online survey provides useful data for improvements in trial enrollment and training to recruit minority/underserved populations to CCT. Areas for further investigation include web-based methods for recruitment and tracking, cultural competency training, definition of catchment areas, use of patient navigators, and community partnerships. The survey results will guide recruitment training programs.

Best strategies to recruit and enroll elderly Blacks into clinical and biomedical research

Background

Historically, Blacks have been disproportionately underrepresented in clinical trials. Outcomes associated with low Blacks’ participation in research include poor understanding of the predictors and treatment of the disease, increasing health disparities, poor health equity, and suboptimal wellness of the nation as a whole. To address this gap in research participation, we analyzed our recruitment data to identify the most effective strategies for enrolling older Blacks in clinical trials.

Methods

Data used in these analyses were obtained from 3,266 potential volunteers, ages 50 or older, who completed a Mini-Mental State Exam as part of recruitment and screening for various clinical studies on Alzheimer’s disease. In order to determine the most effective strategies for engaging Blacks in clinical research, we used tests of proportion to assess significant differences in recruitment sources, counts, and percentages for optimal recruitment strategies by gender. Finally, we employed regression analyses to confirm our findings.

Results

Of the total 3,266 screened, 2,830 Black volunteers were identified for further analysis. Overall, more women than men (73.8% vs 26.2%) participated in our recruitment activities. However, a significantly higher proportion of men than women were engaged through family (3.86% vs 1.30%, p=0.0004) and referral sources (5.89% vs 2.59%, p=0.0005). Compared to other sources for recruitment, we encountered a higher proportion of volunteers at health fairs (42.95%), and through advertisements (14.97%). In our sample, years of education and age did not appear to influence the likelihood of an encounter, screening, and potential participation.

Conclusion

Our findings indicate Black men and women in our sample were predominantly recruited from health fairs and through advertisements tailored to their health needs and interests. Conversely, we mostly engaged Black men through family referrals and persons known to them, indicating a need for trust in their decision to engage study personnel and/or participate in clinical trials.

Partnering around cancer clinical trials (PACCT): study protocol for a randomized trial of a patient and physician communication intervention to increase minority accrual to prostate cancer clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Cancer clinical trials are essential for testing new treatments and represent state-of-the-art cancer treatment, but only a small percentage of patients ever enroll in a trial. Under-enrollment is an even greater problem among minorities, particularly African Americans, representing a racial/ethnic disparity in cancer care. One understudied cause is patient-physician communication, which is often of poor quality during clinical interactions between African-American patients and non-African-American physicians. Partnering Around Cancer Clinical Trials (PACCT) involves a transdisciplinary theoretical model proposing that patient and physician individual attitudes and beliefs and their interpersonal communication during racially discordant clinical interactions influence outcomes related to patients' decisions to participate in a trial. The overall goal of the study is to test a multilevel intervention designed to increase rates at which African-American and White men with prostate cancer make an informed decision to participate in a clinical trial.

METHODS/DESIGN

Data collection will occur at two NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers. Participants include physicians who treat men with prostate cancer and their African-American and White patients who are potentially eligible for a clinical trial. The study uses two distinct research designs to evaluate the effects of two behavioral interventions, one focused on patients and the other on physicians. The primary goal is to increase the number of patients who decide to enroll in a trial; secondary goals include increasing rates of physician trial offers, improving the quality of patient-physician communication during video recorded clinical interactions in which trials may be discussed, improving patients' understanding of trials offered, and increasing the number of patients who actually enroll. Aims are to 1) determine the independent and combined effects of the two interventions on outcomes; 2) compare the effects of the interventions on African-American versus White men; and 3) examine the extent to which patient-physician communication mediates the effect of the interventions on the outcomes.

DISCUSSION

PACCT has the potential to identify ways to increase clinical trial rates in a diverse patient population. The research can also improve access to high quality clinical care for African American men bearing the disproportionate burden of disparities in prostate and other cancers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials.gov registration number: NCT02906241 (September 8, 2016).

Lower trial participation by culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) cancer patients is largely due to language barriers

AIM

Clinical trials play a critical role in advancing cancer care, but international research shows that few cancer patients, particularly culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) patients, participate in trials. This limits generalizability of trial results and increases health disparities. This study aimed to establish rates and correlates of trial participation among CALD patients in South Western Sydney Local Health District (SWSLHD), a highly culturally diverse area.

METHODS

Data from all cancer patients diagnosed and/or treated in SWSLHD from January 2006 to July 2016 were analyzed retrospectively. The primary outcome was trial enrolment among patients born in non-English speaking countries (CALD) versus English speaking countries (non-CALD). Multivariable logistic regression evaluated CALD status as a predictor of trial participation. Moderators of trial participation by the different CALD groups, namely those whose preferred language was English (CALD-PLE) or was not English (CALD-PLNE), were examined by testing interactions between CALD status and other demographic and clinical variables.

RESULTS

A total of 19 453 patients were analyzed (54.9% non-CALD, 16.5% CALD-PLE, 18.5% CALD-PLNE). Overall, 7.4% of patients were enrolled in a trial. Trial participation was significantly lower in CALD patients than non-CALD patients (5.7% vs 8.4%; odds ratio [OR] = 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69-0.91; P = 0.001). CALD-PLNE patients were less likely to participate in trials than non-CALD (OR = 0.45; 95% CI, 0.36-0.56; P < 0.0001) and CALD-PLE patients (OR = 0.53; 95% CI, 0.67-0.41; P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Limited English proficiency seems particularly unfavorable to trial participation. Development and evaluation of strategies to overcome language barriers (e.g. simplified and translated multimedia participant information materials) is needed.

Racial and ethnic disparities in hematologic malignancies

Racial and ethnic disparities in patients with solid malignancies have been well documented. Less is known about these disparities in patients with hematologic malignancies. With the advent of novel chemotherapeutics and targeted molecular, cellular, and immunologic therapies, it is important to identify differences in care that may lead to disparate outcomes. This review provides a critical appraisal of the empirical research on racial and ethnic disparities in incidence, survival, and outcomes in patients with hematologic malignancies. The review focuses on patients with acute myeloid leukemia, acute lymphocytic leukemia, multiple myeloma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, Hodgkin lymphoma, myeloproliferative neoplasms, and myelodysplastic syndrome. The review discusses possible causes of racial and ethnic disparities and also considers future directions for studies to help decrease disparities.

Video intervention increases participation of black breast cancer patients in therapeutic trials

There is a striking racial and ethnic disparity in incidence and mortality of cancer yet minorities remain markedly underrepresented in clinical trials. This pilot study set out to determine the impact of a 15-min culturally tailored educational video on three outcomes relating to clinical trials: likely participation, attitudes (assessed based on six barriers), and actual enrollment. Breast cancer patients with Stage I-III, if diagnosed within previous 6 months, or metastatic disease who self-identified as black or African American were invited to participate. The primary outcome measure was the decision to participate in a therapeutic clinical trial after the intervention. Patients’ intention to enroll on a therapeutic clinical trial and the change in attitudes toward clinical trials were measured by the previously developed Attitudes and Intention to Enroll in Therapeutic Clinical Trials (AIET) questionnaire. Of the 200 patients that participated, 39 (19.5%) patients signed consent to participate in a therapeutic clinical trial; 27 (13.5%) patients enrolled, resulting in a 7.5% increase from our baseline comparison of 6% clinical trial enrollment rate in black cancer patients (p < .001). Pre-test versus post-test assessment demonstrated the proportion of patients expressing likelihood to enroll in a therapeutic trial following the intervention increased by 14% (p < .001). Among 31 AIET items, 25 (81%) showed statistically significant and positive change post-intervention. The findings suggest the promising utility of a culturally tailored video intervention for improving black patients’ attitudes regarding clinical trial participation and resultant enrollment. Future efforts should continue to target facilitators of population-specific recruitment, enrollment, and retention in therapeutic and non-therapeutic clinical trials.

A culturally tailored educational video can boost participation among black patients in clinical trials of new breast cancer treatments. A US team led by Sandra Swain from Georgetown University Medical Center in Washington, DC, created a 15-min video designed to address six of the concerns commonly cited by blacks about human subjects research. The researchers showed the video to 200 black patients, and saw a large bump in the number of women willing to sign up for a therapeutic trial. On average, only 6% of black cancer patients typically enroll in clinical trials. But in the video intervention study, 19.5% agreed to participate and then 13.5% went ahead with a trial. Video watchers also reported a positive change in their attitude toward clinical research. The study points to the need for population-specific recruitment efforts.

CRISPR/Cas9 Genetic Modification of CYP3A5 *3 in HuH-7 Human Hepatocyte Cell Line Leads to Cell Lines with Increased Midazolam and Tacrolimus Metabolism

Clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)/Cas9 engineering of the CYP3A5 *3 locus (rs776746) in human liver cell line HuH-7 (CYP3A5 *3/*3) has led to three CYP3A5 *1 cell lines by deletion of the exon 3B splice junction or point mutation. Cell lines CYP3A5 *1/*3 sd (single deletion), CYP3A5 *1/*1 dd (double deletion), or CYP3A5 *1/*3 pm (point mutation) expressed the CYP3A5 *1 mRNA and had elevated CYP3A5 mRNA (P < 0.0005 for all engineered cell lines) and protein expression compared with HuH-7. In metabolism assays, HuH-7 had less tacrolimus (all P < 0.05) or midazolam (MDZ) (all P < 0.005) disappearance than all engineered cell lines. HuH-7 had less 1-OH MDZ (all P < 0.0005) or 4-OH (all P < 0.005) production in metabolism assays than all bioengineered cell lines. We confirmed CYP3A5 metabolic activity with the CYP3A4 selective inhibitor CYP3CIDE. This is the first report of genomic CYP3A5 bioengineering in human cell lines with drug metabolism analysis.

Eligibility for phase 3 clinical trials of systemic therapy in real-world patients with metastatic renal cell cancer managed in a rural region

Previous research has identified disparities between urban and rural cancer care, including clinical trial access. Therefore, we addressed three different questions in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer managed according to national guidelines in a rural Norwegian standard practice setting. (1) How many patients would have been eligible for three recent landmark randomized clinical trials? (2) Is survival different between eligible and non-eligible patients receiving first-line systemic therapy? (3) Is survival different between eligible patients and published trial results? We performed a retrospective analysis of 101 consecutive patients (2006-2016). Only 52% of the patients were eligible for the first-line study of pazopanib versus sunitinib. The main reasons for violating inclusion or exclusion criteria were presence of brain metastases, absence of clear cell histology, and poor performance status. Even fewer patients were eligible for trials of nivolumab and cabozantinib in pre-treated patients. Eligible patients had significantly better survival than non-eligible patients, median 29.2 versus 8.5 months (p = 0.0001). These results confirm that many patients from rural practices do not fulfill all mandatory trial eligibility criteria. However, eligible patients managed according to national guidelines had survival outcomes in line with published first-line trial results.

Primary care physicians' attitudes and beliefs about cancer clinical trials

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Cancer clinical trials give patients access to state-of-the-art treatments and facilitate the translation of findings into mainstream clinical care. However, patients from racial and ethnic minority groups remain underrepresented in clinical trials. Primary care physicians are a trusted source of information for patients, yet their role in decision-making about cancer treatment and referrals to trial participation has received little attention. The aim of this study was to determine physicians' knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about cancer clinical trials, their experience with trials, and their interest in appropriate training about trials.

METHODS

A total of 613 physicians in the New York City area primarily serving patients from ethnic and racial minority groups were invited via email to participate in a 20-min online survey. Physicians were asked about their patient population, trial knowledge and attitudes, interest in training, and personal demographics. Using calculated scale variables, we used descriptive statistical analyses to better understand physicians' knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about trials.

RESULTS

A total of 127 physicians completed the survey. Overall, they had low knowledge about and little experience with trials. However, they generally had positive attitudes toward trials, with 41.4% indicating a strong interest in learning more about their role in trials, and 35.7% indicating that they might be interested. Results suggest that Black and Latino physicians and those with more positive attitudes and beliefs were more likely to be interested in future training opportunities.

CONCLUSION

Primary care physicians may be an important group to target in trying to improve cancer clinical trial participation among minority patients. Future work should explore methods of educational intervention for such interested providers.

Value-Based Calculators in Cancer: Current State and Challenges

The ASCO Value Framework, National Comprehensive Cancer Network Evidence Blocks, Memorial Sloan Kettering's DrugAbacus, and Institute for Clinical and Economic Review incremental cost-effectiveness ratio calculator are value-based methodologies that attempt to address the disproportionate increase in cancer care spending. These calculators can be used as an initial step for discussing cost versus value, but they fall short in recognizing the importance of the cancer journey because they do not fully factor the patient's perspective or the global cost of care. This timely review highlights both the limitations and the advantages of each value calculator and suggests opportunities for refinement. Practicing oncologists, payers, and manufacturers should be familiar with value-based calculators because the role these tools play in cost containment is likely to be hotly debated.