Patient and family member perspectives on searching for cancer clinical trials: A qualitative interview study

Implementing an educational resource for patients participating in cancer clinical trials during the pandemic

This research is centred in the specialty of early phase cancer research - the branch of clinical research that focuses on phase one and phase two clinical trials. The aim was to gain an understanding of the complexity of work involved in implementing an educational intervention within the clinical pathway for newly referred early phase cancer clinical trial patients. The May and Finch Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) was used to understand, develop and evaluate the process of embedding an educational resource at referral hospital sites. Elements emerged from the evaluation that provide insights into the complexity of the implementation work that took place. The main elements were: pandemic-related challenges, change management, leadership, shared purpose, teamwork, workforce capacity and patient outcomes. The findings shed light on the barriers to or facilitators of the implementation of the educational resource.

Overcoming Black Americans' Psychological and Cognitive Barriers to Clinical Trial Participation: Effects of News Framing and Exemplars

This study examines how news features (framing and the use of exemplars) can help overcome two common barriers (psychological and cognitive) impeding Black American participation in clinical trials. In an online experiment, Black participants (N = 390) viewed social media news posts varying in framing (focus on psychological vs. cognitive barriers) and use of an exemplar (present vs. absent and White vs. Black) and then responded to outcome measures including perceived message effectiveness, message attitudes, and intention to participate in clinical trials. The findings illustrate that including a racially matched (i.e. Black) exemplar improves attitudes toward clinical trial messages. Most notably, featuring a race-matched exemplar increases intention to participate in a trial when the messages discuss psychological barriers. These findings enhance our understanding of how messages can be better designed to increase Black American participation in clinical trials, thereby contributing to reducing health inequities and improving health outcomes.

Facilitators and Barriers to Older Adult Participation in Cancer Trials: A Qualitative Study Exploring Patient-Caregiver Dyad Congruence

PURPOSE

Family caregivers play an integral role in caring for older adults with cancer. Few studies have examined older adults with cancer and their family caregivers as a unit in a relationship or a dyad. Dyad congruence, or consistency in perspective, is relevant to numerous aspects of living with cancer, including the decision to enroll in a cancer clinical trial.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews of 32 older women (age ≥ 70 years) with breast cancer and their family caregivers (16 dyads) were conducted at both academic and community settings from December 2019 to March 2021 to explore perceived facilitators and barriers to cancer trials. Dyad congruence was defined as aligned (matching) perspectives, and incongruence was defined as misaligned (nonmatching) perspectives.

RESULTS

Five (31%) of 16 patients were age ≥80 years, 11 (69%) had nonmetastatic breast cancer, and 14 (88%) were treated in an academic setting. Six (38%) of 16 caregivers were in the 50-59 age group, 10 (63%) were female, and seven (44%) were daughters. Dyad congruence centered on the clinical benefit of trials and physician recommendation. However, compared with caregivers, patients were more motivated to contribute to science. Patients and caregivers also differed on the perceived extent to which the caregiver influenced enrollment.

CONCLUSION

Older patients with cancer and their caregivers generally agree about the facilitators and barriers to cancer trial enrollment, but some perceptions are misaligned. Further research is needed to understand whether misaligned perspectives between patients and caregivers influence clinical trial participation of older adults with cancer.

Effects of Communication Source and Racial Representation in Clinical Trial Recruitment Flyers

The current study was designed to examine effective message strategies that can be employed in designing mediated communication messages to improve clinical trial research participation. In the study, a total of 300 participants completed an online experiment in which they responded to five different clinical trial recruitment advertisements whose information sources varied in their credentials and race. Overall, peer-featured ads in which previous clinical trial participants communicated their prior experience in clinical trial participation, compared to expert-featured ads in which medical doctors communicated information about clinical trials, led to higher message and topic relevance, higher message credibility, more favorable attitudes toward clinical trials, and higher intentions to participate in future clinical trials. Further, there was a statistically significant interaction among source credentials, racial match (between source and participant), and participant's race on message and topic relevance such that both White and Black participants rated ads from racially mismatched peers highly effective (greater message and topic relevance); however, for doctor featured ads, White participants reported higher message and topic relevance for racially matched (White doctor) ads, and Black participants reported higher message and topic relevance for racially mismatched (White doctor) ads. We discuss theoretical and practical implications.

Improving rural White men's attitudes toward clinical trial messaging and participation: effects of framing, exemplars and trust

This study examined whether framing, exemplar presence and exemplar race in social media news posts influence rural White men's perceptions, attitudes and behavioral intentions toward clinical trial participation, and if so, how individual trust in doctors moderates the effects of these three factors. An experiment with a 2 within (framing: cognitive versus psychological barriers) × 2 within (exemplar: present versus absent) × 2 between (exemplar race: White versus Black) subjects mixed factorial design was conducted among rural White men (N = 208). Twelve social media news posts about clinical trial participation were created for the experiment. Results revealed that respondents had greater behavioral intentions to participate in clinical trials after seeing posts with exemplars present (versus absent). When news posts addressed cognitive barriers (e.g. lacking knowledge about the value of clinical trials), the presence of exemplars enhanced perceived self-efficacy to participate in clinical trials. Participants with lower trust in doctors reported more favorable attitudes to posts with exemplars, and the posts with Black exemplars were perceived as more effective (approaching statistical significance). When communicating about clinical trials to rural White men, health professionals should consider including exemplars and addressing cognitive barriers to participation.

The use and meaning of the parachute metaphor in biomedicine: a citation analysis of a systematic review and a randomized trial of the parachute for freefall

Background: Numerous authors have used the 'parachute' analogy to comment on the importance of and need for randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) in the hierarchy of medical evidence. Methods: The authors completed a retrospective literature analysis examining publications citing the 2003 parachute paper by Smith and Pell and a 2018 RCT of a parachute by Yeh et al. For all of the articles that directly analogized a medical intervention to a parachute, the authors identified the desired outcome of the practice and searched PubMed for relevant RCTs. Results: Authors citing the parachute analogy are often critical of RCTs and often draw comparisons to interventions that are not parachutes.

Understanding Willingness to Participate in Cancer Clinical Trials Among Patients and Caregivers Attending a Minority-Serving Academic Cancer Center

Advances in cancer treatment are impeded by low accrual rates of patients to cancer clinical trials (CCTs). The national rates of recruitment of underserved groups, including racial/ethnic minorities, are limiting the generalizability of research findings and are likely to enhance inequities in cancer outcomes. The goal of this study was to examine willingness to participate (WTP) in CCTs and factors associated with this willingness among patients and caregivers attending a minority-serving university cancer center in the Southwest. A cross-sectional survey design was utilized (n = 236, 135 patients and 101 caregivers). Fear was the strongest predictor of WTP in CCTs. The only ethnic differences observed related to Spanish-speaking patients exhibiting increased WTP in CCTs, and Spanish-speaking caregivers' decreased WTP, compared to others. These results underscore the importance of future interventions to reduce CCT-related fear among patients and caregivers, with particular need for family-focused tailored interventions designed to meet the needs of Spanish-speaking patients and caregivers.

Accelerating Cancer Patient Recruitment Through a Mobile Application (Clinical Trial Finder)

OBJECTIVE

Participant recruitment is a challenge for any clinical trial but is especially complex in cancer specifically due to the need to initiate treatment urgently. Most participants enrolled in oncology clinical trials are identified as potential participants by the oncologist or other referring provider. Optimal clinical care for patients with cancer includes consideration of participation in a clinical trial. However, the process of finding a clinical trial that is appropriate the patient can be cumbersome and time consuming.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The University of Kansas Cancer Center has developed a mobile application (app) which streamlines the clinical trial search process for physicians, patients, and caregivers by cohesively integrating all clinical trials currently recruiting in the center and making them easy to browse.

RESULTS

Key aspects of the app include simple filtering options, the ability to search for trials by name, easily accessible assistance, and in-app referral by phone or email. Initial feedback on the app has been very positive, with several suggestions already being implemented in future development. The app was designed to be used both by physicians to find trials, as well as patients in collaboration with their physicians.

CONCLUSION

While long-term results will be crucial to understanding how the app can best serve our patient population, our initial results suggest that health system specific clinical trial apps can address a currently unmet need in the clinical trial recruitment process.

Transparency, trust and minimizing burden to increase recruitment and retention in trials: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To describe patient perspectives on recruitment and retention in clinical trials.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Systematic review of qualitative studies that reported the perspective of adult patients with any health condition who accepted or declined to participate in clinical trials.

RESULTS

Sixty-three articles involving 1681 adult patients were included. Six themes were identified. Four themes reflected barriers: ambiguity of context and benefit - patients were unaware of the research question and felt pressured in making decisions; lacking awareness of opportunities - some believed health professionals obscured trials opportunities, or felt confused because of language barriers; wary of added burden - patients were without capacity because of sickness or competing priorities; and skepticism, fear and mistrust - patients feared loss of privacy, were suspicious of doctor's motivation, afraid of being a guinea pig, and disengaged from not knowing outcomes. Two themes captured facilitators: building confidence - patients hoped for better treatment, were supported from family members and trusted medical staff; and social gains and belonging to the community - altruism, a sense of belonging and peer encouragement motivated participation in trials.

CONCLUSION

Improving the visibility and transparency of trials, supporting informed decision making, minimizing burden, and ensuring confidence and trust may improve patient participation in trials.

Deciding to Enrol in a Cancer Trial: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies

Background

Clinical trials are essential for the advancement of cancer treatments; however, participation by patients is suboptimal. Currently, there is a lack of synthesized qualitative review evidence on the patient experience of trial entry from which to further develop decision support. The aim of this review is to synthesise literature reporting experiences of participants when deciding to enrol in a cancer clinical trial in order to inform practice.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies were conducted to describe the experiences of adult cancer patients who decided to enrol in a clinical trial of an anti-cancer treatment.

Results

Forty studies met eligibility criteria for inclusion. Three themes were identified representing the overarching domains of experience when deciding to enrol in a cancer trial: 1) need for trial information; (2) trepidation towards participation; and (3) justifying the decision. The process of deciding to enrol in a clinical trial is one marked by uncertainty, emotional distress and driven by the search for a cure.

Conclusion

Findings from this review show that decision support modelled by shared decision-making and the quality of a shared decision needs to be accompanied by tailored or personalised psychosocial and supportive care. Although the decision process bears similarities to theoretical processes outlined in decision-making frameworks, there are a lack of supportive interventions for cancer patients that are adapted to the clinical trial context. Theory-based interventions are urgently required to support the specific needs of patients deciding whether to participate in cancer trials.

Factors that impact on recruitment to randomised trials in health care: a qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Randomised trials (also referred to as 'randomised controlled trials' or 'trials') are the optimal way to minimise bias in evaluating the effects of competing treatments, therapies and innovations in health care. It is important to achieve the required sample size for a trial, otherwise trialists may not be able to draw conclusive results leading to research waste and raising ethical questions about trial participation. The reasons why potential participants may accept or decline participation are multifaceted. Yet, the evidence of effectiveness of interventions to improve recruitment to trials is not substantial and fails to recognise these individual decision-making processes. It is important to synthesise the experiences and perceptions of those invited to participate in randomised trials to better inform recruitment strategies.

OBJECTIVES

To explore potential trial participants' views and experiences of the recruitment process for participation. The specific objectives are to describe potential participants' perceptions and experiences of accepting or declining to participate in trials, to explore barriers and facilitators to trial participation, and to explore to what extent barriers and facilitators identified are addressed by strategies to improve recruitment evaluated in previous reviews of the effects of interventions including a Cochrane Methodology Review.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Epistemonikos, LILACS, PsycINFO, ORRCA, and grey literature sources. We ran the most recent set of searches for which the results were incorporated into the review in July 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included qualitative and mixed-methods studies (with an identifiable qualitative component) that explored potential trial participants' experiences and perceptions of being invited to participate in a trial. We excluded studies that focused only on recruiters' perspectives, and trials solely involving children under 18 years, or adults who were assessed as having impaired mental capacity.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Five review authors independently assessed the titles, abstracts and full texts identified by the search. We used the CART (completeness, accuracy, relevance, timeliness) criteria to exclude studies that had limited focus on the phenomenon of interest. We used QSR NVivo to extract and manage the data. We assessed methodological limitations using the Critical Skills Appraisal Programme (CASP) tool. We used thematic synthesis to analyse and synthesise the evidence. This provided analytical themes and a conceptual model. We used the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach to assess our confidence in each finding. Our findings were integrated with two previous intervention effectiveness reviews by juxtaposing the quantitative and qualitative findings in a matrix.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 29 studies (published in 30 papers) in our synthesis. Twenty-two key findings were produced under three broad themes (with six subthemes) to capture the experience of being invited to participate in a trial and making the decision whether to participate. Most of these findings had moderate to high confidence. We identified factors from the trial itself that influenced participation. These included how trial information was communicated, and elements of the trial such as the time commitment that might be considered burdensome. The second theme related to personal factors such as how other people can influence the individual's decision; and how a personal understanding of potential harms and benefits could impact on the decision. Finally, the potential benefits of participation were found to be key to the decision to participate, namely personal benefits such as access to new treatments, but also the chance to make a difference and help others. The conceptual model we developed presents the decision-making process as a gauge and the factors that influence whether the person will, or will not, take part.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This qualitative evidence synthesis has provided comprehensive insight into the complexity of factors that influence a person's decision whether to participate in a trial. We developed key questions that trialists can ask when developing their recruitment strategy. In addition, our conceptual model emphasises the need for participant-centred approaches to recruitment. We demonstrated moderate to high level confidence in our findings, which in some way can be attributed to the large volume of highly relevant studies in this field. We recommend that these insights be used to direct or influence or underpin future recruitment strategies that are developed in a participant-driven way that ultimately improves trial conduct and reduces research waste.

"Ultimately, mom has the call": Viewing clinical trial decision making among patients with ovarian cancer through the lens of relational autonomy

OBJECTIVE

This study employs the concept of relational autonomy to understand how relational encounters with family members (FMs) and care providers may shape decisions around ovarian cancer patients' clinical trial (CT) participation. The study also offers unique insights into how FMs view patients' decision making.

METHODS

In-depth interviews were conducted with 33 patients with ovarian cancer who had been offered a CT and 39 FMs. Data were inductively analysed using a thematic approach and deductively informed by constructs derived from the theory of relational autonomy (RA).

RESULTS

Patients' relationships, experiences and social status were significant resources that shaped their decisions. Patients did not give equal weight to all relationships and created boundaries around whom to include in decision making. Doctors' recommendations and perceived enthusiasm were described as influential in CT decisions. Both patients with ovarian cancer and their FMs maintained that patients have the "final say," indicating an individualistic autonomy. However, maintaining the "final say" in the decision-making process is constitutive of patients' relationships, emphasizing a relational approach to autonomy. FMs support patients' autonomy and they do so particularly when they believe the patient is capable of making the right choices.

CONCLUSIONS

Although ethical principles underlying informed consent for CT participation emphasize individual autonomy, greater attention to relational autonomy is warranted for a more comprehensive understanding of CT decision making.