The impact of the physician on the accrual to randomized clinical trials in patients with primary operable breast cancer

Development, acceptability, appropriateness and appeal of a cancer clinical trials implementation intervention for rural- and minority-serving urology practices

Background

Few community urologists offer cancer patients the opportunity to participate in cancer clinical trials, despite national guidelines that recommend it, depriving an estimated 260,000 urological cancer patients of guideline-concordant care each year. Existing strategies to increase urologists’ offer of clinical trials are designed for resource-rich environments and are not feasible for many community urologists. We sought to design an implementation intervention for dissemination in under-resourced community urology practices and to compare its acceptability, appropriateness and adoption appeal among trial-naïve and trial-experienced urologists.

Methods

We used a design-for-dissemination approach, informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework and Behavior Change Wheel, to match determinants of the clinical trial offer to theoretically informed implementation strategies. We described the implementation intervention in evaluation workshops offered at urology professional society meetings. We surveyed participants to assess the implementation intervention’s acceptability and appropriateness using validated instruments. We also measured adoption appeal, intention to adopt and previous trial offer.

Results

Our design process resulted in a multi-modal implementation intervention, comprised of multiple implementation strategies designed to address six domains from the Theoretical Domains Framework. Evaluation workshops delivered at four meetings, convened five separate professional societies. Sixty-one percent of those offered an opportunity to participate in the implementation intervention indicated intention to adopt. Average implementation intervention acceptability and appropriateness ratings were 4.4 and 4.4 (out of 5), respectively. Acceptability scores were statistically significantly higher among those offering trials compared to those not (p = 0.03). Appropriateness scores did not differ between those offering trials and those not (p = 0.24). After urologists ranked their top three innovation attributes, 43% of urologists included practice reputation in their top three reasons for offering clinical trials; 30% listed practice differentiation among their top three reasons. No statistically significant differences were found between those who offered trials and those who did not among any of the innovation attributes.

Conclusions

LEARN|INFORM|RECRUIT is a promising implementation intervention to address low accrual to clinical trials, poised for implementation and effectiveness testing. The implementation intervention is appealing to its target audience and may have equal uptake among trial-naïve and trial-experienced practices.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3658-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Progress Through Collaboration: An ASCO and U.S. Food and Drug Administration Workshop to Improve the Evidence Base for Treating Older Adults With Cancer

Older adults represent the majority of patients diagnosed with cancer, yet the evidence base used to guide therapy for this growing segment of the population is limited compared with data available for younger adults. Information is particularly limited for adults commonly seen in practice, including those over age 75 and those with comorbidity or frailty. Efforts have been underway to raise awareness of this substantial gap in evidence and identify strategies to build an evidence base for older adults. Recently, the ASCO and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration convened a public workshop to address this issue. There is a need for innovative trial design to test the efficacy and tolerability of therapies among generalizable older adult populations. Incorporation of endpoints such as functional independence and quality of life as well as investigation of geriatric assessment-based treatment allocation strategies will be needed to individualize care planning. Strategies to increase trial enrollment need to be emphasized, including modernizing eligibility criteria, addressing patient and provider barriers to clinical trial enrollment, and consideration of incentives for patients, providers, and sponsors. Finally, investigation of real-world data and incorporation of patient-reported outcomes into the drug-development process may provide opportunities to build evidence related to treatment benefit and tolerance with an emphasis on the patient experience among older adults in diverse treatment settings.

Searching for cures: Inner-city and rural patients' awareness and perceptions of cancer clinical trials

Fewer than 5% of cancer patients participate in clinical trials, making it challenging to test new therapies or interventions for cancer. Even within that small number, patients living in inner-city and rural areas are underrepresented in clinical trials. This study explores cancer patients' awareness and perceptions of cancer clinical trials, as well as their perceptions of patient-provider interactions related to discussing cancer clinical trials in order to improve accrual in cancer clinical trials. Interviews with 66 former and current in inner-city and rural cancer patients revealed a lack of awareness and understanding about clinical trials, as well as misconceptions about what clinical trials entail. Findings also revealed that commercials and television shows play a prominent role in forming inner-city and rural patients' attitudes and/or misconceptions about clinical trials. However, rural patients were more likely to hold unfavorable views about clinical trials than inner-city patients. Patient-provider discussions emerged as being crucial for increasing awareness of clinical trials among patients and recruiting them to trials. Findings from this study will inform communication strategies to enhance recruitment to cancer clinical trials by increasing awareness and countering misconceptions about clinical trials.

Can the referring surgeon enhance accrual of breast cancer patients to medical and radiation oncology trials? The ENHANCE study

INTRODUCTION

The accrual rate to clinical trials in oncology remains low. In this exploratory pilot study, we prospectively assessed the role that engaging a referring surgeon plays in enhancing nonsurgical oncologic clinical trial accrual.

METHODS

Newly diagnosed breast cancer patients were seen by a surgeon who actively introduced specific patient-and physician-centred strategies to increase clinical trial accrual. Patient-centred strategies included providing patients, before their oncology appointment, with information about specific clinical trials for which they might be eligible, as evaluated by the surgeon. The attitudes of the patients about clinical trials and the interventions used to improve accrual were assessed at the end of the study. The primary outcome was the clinical trial accrual rate during the study period.

RESULTS

Overall clinical trial enrolment during the study period among the 34 participating patients was 15% (5 of 34), which is greater than the institution's historical average of 7%. All patients found the information delivered by the surgeon before the oncology appointment to be very helpful. Almost three quarters of the patients (73%) were informed about clinical trials by their oncologist. The top reasons for nonparticipation reported by the patients who did not participate in clinical trials included lack of interest (35%), failure of the oncologist to mention clinical trials (33%), and inconvenience (19%).

CONCLUSIONS

Accrual of patients to clinical trials is a complex multistep process with multiple potential barriers. The findings of this exploratory pilot study demonstrate a potential role for the referring surgeon in enhancing nonsurgical clinical trial accrual.

Comparing attitudes of younger and older patients towards cancer clinical trials

OBJECTIVES

To determine the attitudes of patients towards cancer clinical trials (CCTs) and assess the differences between older and younger patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with cancer, receiving treatment or in follow-up in University Hospital Waterford, Ireland were eligible. Patients completed a self-administered questionnaire. To determine attitudes towards CCTs, patients indicated their preference if offered participation in three hypothetical studies (cancer prevention/screening trial; CCT comparing standard to new treatment; a trial of new drug where no standard exists). Patients' reasons to or not to participate in CCTs were explored.

RESULTS

From May 2014 to March 2015, 219 patients were accrued, 119 <65years and 100 ≥65years. Twenty-two (18%) younger and 4 (4%) older patients had been/were actively enrolled on a CCT (p=0.0012). No older patient and 5 (4%) of younger patients had enquired about CCT availability. For the CCT questions, 85 (71%) younger vs 57 (57%) older patients would participate in a prevention/screening CCT (p=0.033); 60 (50%) vs 44 (44%) for standard vs new drug (p=0.415), and 83 (69%) vs 78 (78%) for a CCT where no standard exists (p=0.218). The most common reason to participate in a CCT was a recommendation from the oncologist -98% <65years vs 87% ≥65years (p=0.001), with health problems being the leading reason not to participate, 86% vs 72% (p=0.01), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Older and younger patients in this study gave similar importance to reasons for and against participation in CCTs. Most patients did not actively seek out a CCT, which may reflect a lack of awareness and a need for better education.

Exploring research participation among cancer patients: analysis of a national survey and an in-depth interview study

Background

Inequalities in cancer research participation are thought to exist with certain groups under-represented in research populations; however, much of the evidence is based on small-scale studies. The aim of this study was to explore data from in-depth interviews with cancer patients and a large national survey to investigate variation in who is asked to participate in research and who takes part.

Methods

Factors associated with research discussion and participation were explored in National Cancer Patient Experience Survey data using multivariate logistic regression and during in-depth interviews with 25 breast cancer patients.

Results

Survey data were available for 66,953 cancer patients; 30.4 % reported having discussions about, and 18.9 % took part in, research. Barriers to participation at staff, patient and trust level were evident; for example, staff were less likely to discuss research with older patients, Asian and black patients were less likely to take part and patients treated at specialist or teaching trusts had higher levels of discussion and participation. Interviews showed that patients’ willingness to participate changed over time and was not synonymous with participation as some were ineligible.

Conclusion

Some patient groups were less likely to have discussions about or participate in research. Analysis of this variation vis-à-vis the composition of the patient population may be useful to ensure that there is equity regarding the potential benefits of research participation and that research findings are applicable to target populations in the translational model.

A systematic review of strategies used to increase recruitment of people with cancer or organ failure into clinical trials: implications for palliative care research

CONTEXT

The challenges of palliative care clinical trial recruitment are well documented.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to review tested strategies to improve recruitment to trials of people with a range of conditions who may access palliative care services but are not explicitly stated to be "palliative."

METHODS

This was a systematic review with narrative description. The Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, PsycINFO, and CINAHL electronic databases were searched (English; January 2002 to February 2014) for quasi-experimental and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing the effect of recruitment strategies on accrual to clinical trials of people with organ failure and cancer. Titles, abstracts, and retrieved articles were screened by two researchers and categorized by recruitment challenge: 1) patients with reduced cognition, 2) those requiring emergency treatment, and 3) willingness of patients and clinical staff to contribute to trials.

RESULTS

Of 549 articles identified, 15 were included. Thirteen reported RCTs and two papers reported three quasi-experimental studies. Five were cluster RCTs of recruiting sites/institutions. One was a randomized cluster, crossover, feasibility study. Seven studies recruited patients with cancer. Others included patients with dementia, stroke, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, frail elderly, and bereaved carers. Some interventions improved recruitment: memory aid, contact before arrival, cluster consent, "opt out" consent. Others either reduced recruitment (formal mental capacity assessment) or made no difference (advance research directive; a variety of educational, supportive, and advertising interventions).

CONCLUSION

Successful strategies from other disciplines could be considered by palliative care researchers. Tailored, efficient, evidence-based strategies must be developed, acknowledging that strategies with face validity are not necessarily the most effective.

Effect of medical oncologists' attitudes on accrual to clinical trials in a community setting

PURPOSE

Oncology clinical trials (OCTs) are crucial in evaluating new cancer treatments, but only 2% to 3% of US adult patients with cancer enter OCTs. This study assessed barriers to participation in clinical trials among oncologists in a large integrated health care delivery system with an active clinical trials program. Although many studies have identified major physician barriers to enrollment, few have examined how these barriers affect actual trial accrual.

METHODS

Using information from a mailed survey, we examined the effect of oncologists' attitudes, beliefs, experiences, sociodemographic factors, and practice characteristics on clinical trial accrual in the 2 years following the survey. We identified relationships between these variables and subsequent clinical trial accrual using correlations and mixed effects models.

RESULTS

A construct combining questions that assessed oncologist attitudes, beliefs, and experiences substantially influenced OCT enrollment (r = .51; P < .0001). This construct included awareness of open clinical trials and specific eligible patients, as well as the practice of initiating a discussion about OCTs with most eligible patients. This broad concept of awareness had the greatest correlation with enrollment and mediated the effect on enrollment of other values and beliefs, such as welcoming a patient's initiation of a trial discussion and valuing the support of research nurses and coordinators.

CONCLUSION

Even in a health care setting with an active clinical trials program, substantial research personnel, infrastructure support, and widespread access to trials among oncologists and patients, oncologists' participation remains quite variable. Oncologist values, beliefs, and awareness of clinical trials play an important role in OCT accrual.

Clinicians' attitudes towards clinical trials of cancer therapy

Background:

Patient accrual into cancer clinical trials remains at low levels. This survey elicited attitudes and practices of cancer clinicians towards clinical trials.

Method:

The 43-item Clinicians Attitudes to Clinical Trials Questionnaire was completed by participants in an intervention study aimed at improving multi-disciplinary involvement in randomised trials. Responses from 13 items were summed to form a research-orientation score.

Results:

Eighty-seven clinicians (78%) returned questionnaires. Physicians, more often than surgeons, chose to prioritise prolonging a patient's life, recruited ⩾50% of patients into trials and attended more research-focussed conferences. Clinicians at specialist centres were more positive about trials with no-treatment arms than those at district general hospitals, more likely to believe clinician, rather than patient reluctance to participate was the greater obstacle to trial accrual, and preferred national and international to local recognition. Clinicians belonging to breast and colorectal teams were less disappointed about not enrolling patients in trials and more accepting of no-treatment arm trials. Research orientation was higher in physicians than surgeons and higher in specialist centres than district hospitals.

Conclusions:

This study provides greater understanding of clinicians’ attitudes to trials. Results have been used to inform training interventions for clinicians targeting the problem of low and selective accrual.

Cancer patients' awareness of clinical trials, perceptions on the benefit and willingness to participate: Korean perspectives

To understand patients' perceptions of clinical trials (CTs) is the principal step in the enrolment of patients to CTs. However, these perceptions in eastern countries are very rare. From 12 February 2007 to 13 April 2007, we consecutively distributed the questionnaire to 842 cancer patients who initiated a first cycle of chemotherapy regardless of each treatment step in the Seoul National University Hospital. Younger age, higher educational degree, higher economic status, and possession of private cancer insurance were related with significantly higher awareness of CTs (P=0.001, P=0.006, P=0.002, and P=0.009, respectively). However, unlike awareness, perceptions on benefits of CTs were not changed according to age, educational degree, and economic status (P=0.709, P=0.920, and P=0.847, respectively). Willingness was also not changed according to age, educational degree, economic status, and private cancer insurance (P=0.381, P=0.775, P=0.887, and P=0.392, respectively). Instead, males and heavily treated patients had more positive perceptions on benefits (P=0.002 and P=0.001, respectively) and more willingness to participate in CTs (OR=1.17, 1.14–2.75: OR=1.59, 1.01–2.51, respectively). In summary, cancer patients' awareness of CTs, perceptions on the benefit in CTs, and willingness to participate are differently influenced by diverse medical and social conditions. This information would be very helpful for investigators to properly conduct CTs in eastern cancer patients.

Recruiting low-income healthy women to research: an exploratory study

OBJECTIVE

The study goals were (1) to assess the feasibility of using an existing telephone health information and referral service for low-income, ethnically diverse women to recruit women for research participation; (2) to assess the feasibility of recruiting low-income, African American and Latino men into health research through the women callers to the telephone service; and (3) to describe the challenges women face and the strategies they use when talking to men about the men's health and research participation.

DESIGN

We recruited women for individual semi-structured qualitative interviews via the Every Woman Counts (EWC) telephone information and referral service, a California Department of Health Services Cancer Detection Program. This paper describes our eligibility and recruitment assessment, and our qualitative data from 23 interviews with low-income African American and Latino women who called EWC.

RESULTS

We found that it was feasible to recruit women, but not to recruit men through women who call this telephone service. Almost 50% (113) of women demographically eligible for recruitment, completed our screening questionnaire, despite calling EWC for a different purpose. Some 48% (54) of those women were eligible for an interview. Of interview-eligible women, 58% (10) of African Americans and 35% (13) of Latinos completed an interview. Only 17% (4) of women referred a man for participation in an interview for our study. Several themes emerged from our analysis of interview data: (1) women's role in men's health can be significant but is often uneasy; (2) challenges when talking to men about their health include health access, gender dynamics, and men's fear of health care; (3) women's understanding of research may be limited; (4) women use a range of strategies to address and overcome men's resistance to taking care of their health and participating in research.

CONCLUSIONS

The challenges women face when talking with men about their health affect their ability to effectively speak to men about research participation. However, EWC and similar telephone health services may be an effective means for recruiting low-income women to chemoprevention and other studies requiring healthy participants.

How to improve accrual to clinical trials of symptom control 1: recruitment strategies

Inadequate patient accrual remains the primary problem for clinical trials of integrative therapies for symptom control. Many difficulties can be predicted and avoided if a careful, evidence-based approach to trial design is taken: trialists should attempt to get as many data as possible on the study population by querying institutional databases, examining case notes, following inpatient rounds, and conducting "dry runs" by asking doctors for referrals. Trials require aggressive recruitment strategies, including advertising, writing to patients at home, scanning clinic lists, and identifying critical points during clinical care at which patients can be approached. The information given to patients during any initial contact should be as simple and general as possible: presenting too much information too soon can be overwhelming and off-putting.

Transdisciplinary studies of surgical oncology trial accrual

BACKGROUND

A key objective of the National Institutes of Health Roadmap Initiative during the past 2 years has been to address scientific problems and issues through innovative research collaborations that cut across disciplines, traditions, and agendas.

METHODS

Recognizing an opportunity to focus on the growing problem of low accrual to cancer surgical trials, the authors organized a multidisciplinary network of 21 clinical researchers and social/behavioral scientists to meet, review the issues, and organize working groups to study the problem. The authors, as representatives of the Karmanos Cancer Institute (Detroit, MI) and the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group, were awarded a Roadmap-affiliated grant from the National Cancer Institute under the "Meetings and Networks for Methodological Development in Interdisciplinary Research" funding mechanism.

RESULTS

The overarching objective that guided the methodological developments of this network was to apply state-of-the-science methodologies and analytical strategies to examine the biobehavioral and interpersonal factors that facilitate or impede patients' treatment decision-making.

CONCLUSIONS

In this brief report, the authors describe the objectives of their multidisciplinary network and their progress to date.