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

Addressing Barriers and Facilitators to African Americans' and Hispanics' Participation in Clinical and Genomic Research Through a Bioethical Sensitive Video

Research advances on effective methods to prevent, diagnose, and treat cancer continue to emerge through clinical and genomic research. Most clinical trial and genomic research participants identify as White which limits the generalizability of research findings to non-White populations. With the development and access to technology, digital delivery of salient and tailored health education may provide innovative pathways to increase representation of African Americans (AA) and Hispanics in research. This project focused on the creation of a bioethical sensitive education video aimed at increasing participation in clinical trials and genomic research by bringing together experts from the community, healthcare, biomedical research, and public health. The goal was to utilize existing educational resources to create a tailored message to address AA/Hispanics' beliefs, values, and bioethical concerns related to participation in clinical and genomic research. Models of behavior change and communication theories were leveraged to frame key components of the message, which then informed the framework for the animated video. Development of the video consisted of six iterative phases: 1) writing sessions; 2) storyboarding; 3) animating; 4) screening/revisions; 5) acceptability testing; 6) finalization. The final animated video is approximately 5 min in length and covers several topics including the goal of clinical research, disparities in research participation, bioethical concerns, and genomic research regulations. Increasing AA and Hispanic participation in clinical and genomic research is imperative to achieving health equity. Tailored messages via short videos may assist in addressing the barriers and facilitators towards research participation and increase intentions to enroll in trials.

Digital Health Interventions for Cancer Prevention Among Racial and Ethnic Minority Groups in the United States: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

The COVID-19 pandemic abruptly accelerated the use of digital health for cancer care. Previously, researchers identified a variety of digital health interventions for cancer prevention. The purpose of the present scoping review was to identify digital health interventions for cancer prevention designed for racial/ethnic minority groups.

METHODS

The scoping review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews and was guided by the Arksey and O'Malley methodological framework. A search of PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, and CINAHL for peer-reviewed research articles published from database inception to August 21, 2023, was conducted. Peer-reviewed studies published in English that employed digital health interventions for cancer prevention, that were conducted among racial/ethnic minority groups, and that were conducted in the United States were included. Also included were cancer prevention interventions for people who did not have cancer, people who did have cancer, and cancer survivors. Excluded were interventions that included non-Hispanic White individuals, interventions performed outside the United States, interventions that combined face-to-face methods with digital strategies, and interventions that did not clearly include digital health. Articles that focused on technologies for collecting and transmitting health data (e.g., remote patient monitoring) without an explicit tie-in to cancer prevention intervention outcomes were also excluded.

RESULTS

Following screening, eight articles met the eligibility criteria. Six of the articles were published prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, and two were published during it. The digital health interventions for cancer prevention in racial/ethnic minority groups included screening (n = 5), emotional support and education (n = 1), human papillomavirus vaccination (n = 1), and education and treatment (n = 1). A consistently measured outcome was intervention efficacy. Four authors explicitly stated that theories or theoretical constructs were employed to guide intervention development. Also, no interventions were created using novel devices such as emerging technologies.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified several notable gaps regarding digital health for cancer prevention among racial/ethnic minority groups. Addressing these gaps may help guide continued innovation in the use of digital health for cancer prevention among racial/ethnic minority groups.

Opportunities to Increase Science of Diversity and Inclusion in Clinical Trials: Equity and a Lack of a Control

The United States witnessed a nearly 4-fold increase in personal health care expenditures between 1980 and 2010. Despite innovations and obvious benefits to health, participants enrolled in clinical trials still do not accurately represent the racial and ethnic composition of patients nationally or globally. This lack of diversity in cohorts limits the generalizability and significance of results among all populations and has deep repercussions for patient equity. To advance diversity in clinical trials, robust evidence for the most effective strategies for recruitment of diverse participants is needed. A major limitation of previous literature on clinical trial diversity is the lack of control or comparator groups for different strategies. To date, interventions have focused primarily on (1) community-based interventions, (2) institutional practices, and (3) digital health systems. This review article outlines prior intervention strategies across these 3 categories and considers health policy and ethical incentives for substantiation before US Food and Drug Administration approval. There are no current studies that comprehensively compare these interventions against one another. The American Heart Association Strategically Focused Research Network on the Science of Diversity in Clinical Trials represents a multicenter, collaborative network between Stanford School of Medicine and Morehouse School of Medicine created to understand the barriers to diversity in clinical trials by contemporaneous head-to-head interventional strategies accessing digital, institutional, and community-based recruitment strategies to produce informed recruitment strategies targeted to improve underrepresented patient representation in clinical trials.

Insufficient Reporting of Race and Ethnicity in Breast Cancer Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

Reporting race and ethnicity in clinical trial publications is critical for determining the generalizability and effectiveness of new treatments. This is particularly important for breast cancer, in which Black women have been shown to have between 40 and 100% higher mortality rate yet are underrepresented in trials. Our objective was to describe changes over time in the reporting of race/ethnicity in breast trial publications.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We searched ClinicalTrials.gov to identify the primary publication linked to trials with results posted from May 2010-2022. Statistical analysis included summed frequencies and a linear regression model of the proportion of articles reporting race/ethnicity and the proportion of non-White enrollees over time.

RESULTS

A proportion of 72 of the 98 (73.4%) studies that met inclusion criteria reported race/ethnicity. In a linear regression model of the proportion of studies reporting race/ethnicity as a function of time, there was no statistically significant change, although we detected a signal toward a decreasing trend (coefficient for quarter = -2.2, p = 0.2). Among all studies reporting race and ethnicity over the study period, the overall percentage of non-White enrollees during the study period was 21.9%, [standard error (s.e.) 1.8, 95% confidence interval (CI) 18.4, 25.5] with a signal towards a decreasing trend in Non-White enrollment [coefficient for year-quarter = -0.8 (p = 0.2)].

CONCLUSION

Our data demonstrate that both race reporting and overall representation of minority groups in breast cancer clinical trials did not improve over the last 12 years and may have, in fact, decreased. Increased reporting of race and ethnicity data forces the medical community to confront disparities in access to clinical trials. This may improve efforts to recruit and retain members of minority groups in clinical trials, and over time, reduce racial disparities in oncologic outcomes.

What's in it for me?: A value assessment of gynecologic cancer clinical trials for Black women

OBJECTIVE

Underrepresented groups may be dissuaded from clinical trial participation without perceived value. We therefore comprehensively assessed gynecologic cancer clinical trial protocols for the inclusion of items of value most important to Black individuals.

METHODS

ClinicalTrials.gov was queried for NCI-sponsored gynecologic cancer clinical trials in the US between Jan.1994 and Nov.2021. Pre-specified return of value (ROV) items were abstracted from each protocol. Inclusion proportions were calculated for each ROV item and temporal changes assessed with chi-square tests. Temporality of proportional trends was further assessed by slope and departure from linearity calculations.

RESULTS

279 gynecologic cancer clinical trials were included. Most commonly trials had first accrual in 2001-2007 (37%) and involved ovarian cancer (48%), phase II studies (53%), and chemotherapy (60%) or targeted therapy (34%). Trials often included ROV items in basic information (99%), medical record information (99%), and imaging (82%). 41% of trials included ROV items in biomarker testing, 20% genetic testing, and 20% in patient-reported outcome questionnaires. Over time, there were significant increases in the proportion of trials that included genetic (3% to 51%; p < 0.001) and biomarker testing (14 to 78%, p < 0.001). Information on lifestyle risk factors was rare (1%). No trials included ROV items in ancestry, how to connect with other participants, or remuneration.

CONCLUSIONS

Gynecologic cancer clinical trials include few design elements that provide high value to Black individuals like lifestyle risk factors, ancestry, and remuneration. In any multi-pronged effort to improve diversity in clinical trial enrollment, inclusion of items valued by Black individuals should be considered.

Oncologist-Reported Barriers and Facilitators to Enrolling Patients in Optimization Trials That Test Less Intense Cancer Treatment

PURPOSE

As outcomes improve in early-stage breast cancer, clinical trials are undergoing a paradigm shift from intensification trials (more therapy) to improve survival to optimization trials, which assess the potential for using less toxic therapy while preserving survival outcomes. However, little is known about physician perspectives in community and academic settings about possible barriers and facilitators that could affect accrual to optimization clinical trials and the generalizability of future findings.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study with semistructured interviews of medical oncologists from different academic and community practices to assess their perspectives on optimization trials. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Three independent coders used a content analysis approach to analyze transcripts using NVivo. Major themes and exemplary quotes were extracted.

RESULTS

All 39 physicians reported that they would enroll patients in optimization clinical trials. Oncologists highlighted specific reasons to consider optimization trials. These included quality-of-life improvement by reducing toxicity, reduction in financial toxicity, fertility preservation, ability to avoid chemotherapy, minimization of overtreatment in patients with comorbid conditions, personalized treatment, opportunities to test novel therapies, and leveraging the availability of targeted therapies. Oncologists also identified accrual barriers, such as tumor-specific biology, individual (host) factors, prognostic markers of risk, access to therapies, provider experience, and system constraints. They voiced recommendations regarding preliminary data, trial design, and tools to support enrollment in optimization trials.

CONCLUSION

Although oncologists are generally willing to enroll patients on optimization clinical trials, barriers affect their acceptance. A scientific focus on overcoming these barriers is needed to support future enrollment on trials tailoring therapy on the basis of risk and potential benefit to allow true personalization of treatment.

Interventions to increase racial and ethnic minority accrual into cancer clinical trials: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Racial and ethnic minorities (REMs) continue to be underrepresented in clinical trials despite the 1993 National Institutes of Health's Revitalization Act mandating the representation of women and underrepresented minority groups in clinical trials. Although Blacks represent 15% and Hispanics 13% of the cancer population, their clinical trial enrollment rates are disproportionately low at 4% to 6% and 3% to 6%, respectively. A systematic review exploring interventions aimed at improving cancer clinical trial (CCT) enrollment for REMs was conducted.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Ovid PsycINFO was conducted for English-language studies since 1993. Inclusion criteria included peer-reviewed, US-based studies with interventions aimed to recruit underrepresented minority adult patients into cancer clinical trials. REM groups were defined as Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian, and Native Hawaiian/other Pacific Islander.

RESULTS

The systematic search identified 3123 studies, of which nine met inclusion criteria. Interventions included patient navigation/coaching (n = 4), a clinical trial educational video (n = 2), institutional research infrastructure changes (n = 1), a relationship building and social marketing recruitment model (n = 1), and cultural competency training for providers (n = 1). A statistically significant improvement in accrual was shown in three of the patient navigation interventions, one of the clinical trial educational videos and an institutional research infrastructure change.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review illustrates several potential mechanisms by which to increase CCT recruitment for patients of REM backgrounds in various clinical settings. More randomized controlled trials are needed to further explore the benefits of these interventions for REMs.

A Scoping Review of Strategies to Increase Black Enrollment and Retention in Cancer Clinical Trials

To address health disparities faced by Black patients with cancer, it is critical that researchers conducting cancer clinical trials (CCTs) equitably recruit and retain Black participants, develop strategies toward this aim, and document associated outcomes. This narrative scoping literature review, as part of a larger study, aimed to identify, describe, and categorize strategies and interventions intended to improve the recruitment and retention of Black participants with breast, lung, prostate, colorectal, or multiple myeloma cancer into CCTs. We conducted comprehensive searches in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, PsycInfo, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science with three main concepts: Black persons, neoplasms, and clinical trial recruitment. The search resulted in 1,506 articles, of which 15 met inclusion criteria. Five main categories of recruitment and retention strategies and interventions were identified based on their specific population focus and type of approach: (1) participant identification, (2) provider awareness/resources, (3) focused research staff interventions, (4) patient and community–focused awareness strategies, and (5) participant-directed resources. Thirteen studies had recruitment acceptance rates of over 30%. Eight studies with acceptance rates of ≥ 50% reported implementing ≥ 5 strategies, with an average use of seven strategies across multiple categories. Five studies with acceptance rates ≥ 50% implemented strategies in ≥ 3 categories. Four studies reported retention rates ≥ 74%. Three studies with reported retention rates ≥ 74% used strategies in ≥ 3 categories, and all included strategies aimed at meeting participant needs beyond the study. Our results show that many efforts that aim to increase the recruitment and retention of Black participants into CCTs have great potential, but the most promising strategies use a multiprong approach.

Increasing Racial and Ethnic Diversity in Cancer Clinical Trials: An American Society of Clinical Oncology and Association of Community Cancer Centers Joint Research Statement

A concerted commitment across research stakeholders is necessary to increase equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) and address barriers to cancer clinical trial recruitment and participation. Racial and ethnic diversity among trial participants is key to understanding intrinsic and extrinsic factors that may affect patient response to cancer treatments. This ASCO and Association of Community Cancer Centers (ACCC) Research Statement presents specific recommendations and strategies for the research community to improve EDI in cancer clinical trials. There are six overarching recommendations: (1) clinical trials are an integral component of high-quality cancer care, and every person with cancer should have the opportunity to participate; (2) trial sponsors and investigators should design and implement trials with a focus on reducing barriers and enhancing EDI, and work with sites to conduct trials in ways that increase participation of under-represented populations; (3) trial sponsors, researchers, and sites should form long-standing partnerships with patients, patient advocacy groups, and community leaders and groups; (4) anyone designing or conducting trials should complete recurring education, training, and evaluation to demonstrate and maintain cross-cultural competencies, mitigation of bias, effective communication, and a commitment to achieving EDI; (5) research stakeholders should invest in programs and policies that increase EDI in trials and in the research workforce; and (6) research stakeholders should collect and publish aggregate data on racial and ethnic diversity of trial participants when reporting results of trials, programs, and interventions to increase EDI. The recommendations are intended to serve as a guide for the research community to improve participation rates among people from racial and ethnic minority populations historically under-represented in cancer clinical trials. ASCO and ACCC will work at all levels to advance the recommendations in this publication.

Pilot Feasibility Study of a Video Intervention to Educate Patients with Breast Cancer About Clinical Trials

The purpose of this project was to develop and test the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a video about cancer clinical trials (CCTs) developed for breast cancer patients. We developed 2 brief 7-min videos that focused on breast cancer patients describing their experiences participating in CCTs, supplemented with doctors and research staff explaining key research concepts. One video was culturally tailored to Black patients and the other to White patients. To assess feasibility study, participants and their care providers completed a survey to evaluate their satisfaction with the video. Eligibility criteria for the study included ≥ 21 years of age, English-speaking, no prior experience participating in a CCT, and being potentially eligible for breast CCT enrollment. Preliminary efficacy was evaluated with a pretest-posttest design using a single item asking about intent to enroll in a clinical trial. The mean age of the patient sample (n = 50) was 53.0 years, and 50.0% were Black. Participants reported that the video was in the right length, useful, and easy to understand. Providers' evaluation (n = 5) revealed that viewing the video helped prepare patients for further CCT discussion. Preliminary efficacy showed no statistically significant difference in participant interest in CCT enrollment pre- and post-video. Changes in patients' intent in enrollment were associated with age and education. Culturally adapted video interventions can be helpful in supporting both patients and providers throughout the CCT education process but additional work is needed to improve enrollment into clinical trials.

Increasing Ancestral Diversity in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Clinical Studies

Non-White people are more likely to develop systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) yet are underrepresented in SLE clinical trials. The efficacy and safety of drugs may be influenced by ancestry, and ancestrally diverse study populations are necessary to optimize treatments across the full spectrum of patients. However, barriers to entry into clinical trials are amplified in non-White populations. To address these issues, a conference was held in Bethesda, Maryland, from October 15-16, 2019, entitled "Increasing Ancestral Diversity in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Clinical Studies: Overcoming the Barriers." Conference participants included people with lupus, lupus physicians, lupus clinical trialists, treatment developers from biotechnology, social scientists, patient advocacy groups, and US government representatives (The Office of Minority Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institutes of Health, and the Food and Drug Administration). For all these groups, the organizers of the conference purposefully included people of non-White ancestry. Decreased participation of non-White SLE patients in clinical research was evaluated through historical, societal, experiential, and pragmatic perspectives, and several interventional programs to increase non-White patient participation in SLE and non-SLE research were described and discussed. The presentations and discussions highlighted the need for changes at the societal, institutional, research team, referring physician, and patient education levels to achieve equitable ancestral representation in SLE clinical studies.

Health Disparities in Recruitment and Enrollment in Research

Despite advances in thoracic oncology research, the benefits of new discoveries are not universally experienced. A lack of representation of racial/ethnic minorities and individuals of low socioeconomic status in clinical trials and thoracic research contributes to persistent health care disparities. It is critical that improved racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic diversity is achieved in our trials and research, if we are to attain generalizability of findings and reduction of health care disparities. Culturally tailored and community-based approaches can help improve recruitment and enrollment of marginalized groups in thoracic research, which is an essential step toward achieving health equity and advancing medical science.

African American participation in cancer clinical trials

Background

According to the Food and Drug Administration, African Americans (AAs) have been habitually underrepresented in cancer clinical trials (CCTs). This under-enrolment has contributed to cancer disparities despite the implementation of policies to improve AA accrual. This systematic review aimed to determine (1) Why AAs are participating in CCT at lower rates compared to other ethnic/racial groups and (2) Are there any tools that have definitively improved AA participation or addressed the barriers associated with their lack of participation.

Methods

Searches were carried out in PubMed, Project MUSE and EBSCO which were confined to four databases (BASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and MEDLINE). Literature published between 2010 and 2020 were filtered with the inclusion and exclusion criteria and then a mixed methods appraisal tool was used to check the quality of the articles. Studies were separated into two categories to extract and synthesise data based on the emerging themes.

Results

Frequent reasons for a lack of participation involved provider related issues, family concerns, health literacy and trust among others. Interventions cited as successful in improving AA participation or addressing a barrier often revolved around community-based participatory research and educational CCT videos/tools.

Recommendations/Conclusion

Educating AA patients about the biomedical research process, addressing concerns about CCTs, building trust with community members and improving communication with healthcare providers could improve AA participation in CCTs. Future interventions should consider the effect of diversified healthcare teams in addressing trust deficit in CCTs among AAs. Healthcare practitioners seeking to consent AA into CCTs and biomedical research could consider incorporating cultural competence into their practice for effective interaction with this population and to address their questions about biomedical research.

Landmark Cancer Clinical Trials and Real-World Patient Populations: Examining Race and Age Reporting

Simple Summary

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) drug approvals from July 2007 to June 2019 were reviewed to identify oncology approvals, and trials with age details were reviewed for the study. We hypothesized that the clinical trials that do not report race are likely to suffer from a higher degree of age disparity. The study demonstrated that a significant number of clinical trials leading to cancer drug approvals suffer from racial and age disparity when compared to real-world populations and that the two factors may be interrelated. Age discrepancy between the clinical trial population and the real-world population was higher for studies that did not report race (mean difference −8.8 years (95% CI −12.6 to −5.0 years)) vs. studies that did report it. We recommend continued efforts to recruit diverse populations in clinical trials and make concerted efforts to implement national strategies in order to realize healthcare equity. In the meantime, detailed reporting of patient demographic characteristics in publications should be considered standard.

Abstract

Background: Concern exists that the clinical trial populations differ from respective cancer populations in terms of their age distribution affecting the generalizability of the results, especially in underrepresented minorities. We hypothesized that the clinical trials that do not report race are likely to suffer from a higher degree of age disparity. Methods: Food and Drug Administration (FDA) drug approvals from July 2007 to June 2019 were reviewed to identify oncology approvals, and trials with age details were selected. The outcomes studied were the weighted mean difference in age between the clinical trial population and real-world population for various cancers, the prevalence of race reporting and association of age and race reporting with each other. Results: Of the 261 trials, race was reported in 223 (85.4%) of the trials, while 38 trials (14.6%) had no mention of race. Race reporting improved minimally over time: 29 (85.3%) in 2007–2010 vs. 49 (80.3%) in 2011–2014 vs. 145 (85.4%) during the period 2015–2019 (p-value = 0.41). Age discrepancy between the clinical trial population and the real-world population was higher for studies that did not report race (mean difference −8.8 years (95% CI −12.6 to −5.0 years)) vs. studies that did report it (mean difference −5.1 years, (95% CI −6.4 to −3.7 years), p-value = 0.04). Conclusion: The study demonstrates that a significant number of clinical trials leading to cancer drug approvals suffer from racial and age disparity when compared to real-world populations, and that the two factors may be interrelated. We recommend continued efforts to recruit diverse populations.

Use of Video Education Interventions to Increase Racial and Ethnic Diversity in Cancer Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Less than 5% of eligible adult cancer survivors participate in cancer clinical trials. Survivors identifying as Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) are less likely to participate in clinical trials compared to those identifying as non-Hispanic White. Common barriers to BIPOC participation are lack of knowledge, lack of access, and mistrust. These barriers are all factors in the disparities observed in BIPOC cancer-related morbidity and mortality. Clinical trials need adequate BIPOC representation to garner generalizable findings that can reduce or eliminate cancer disparities associated with the social construct of race.

AIM

This systematic review examined the use of video education interventions to impact BIPOC survivor participation in clinical trials.

METHODS

Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, PsycInfo, and CINAHL databases were queried for articles that described or tested video interventions aimed at increasing adult, BIPOC survivor clinical trial participation. Two authors independently screened articles for inclusion, appraised quality, and abstracted relevant data. All authors synthesized the data into themes through discussion and consensus.

RESULTS

The search yielded 2,512 articles. Seven selected articles described six distinct interventions. Although the six interventions reduced barriers to participation in clinical trials, their findings varied on Black and Hispanic survivors' readiness to enroll and participate in trials. Four themes emerged: (a) cultural sensitivity is needed in video development and delivery; (b) video content should be aimed to educate and change attitudes about clinical trials; (c) video interventions are feasible and acceptable; and (d) video interventions affect outcomes on intention or actual enrollment.

LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION

Video interventions are well-received by BIPOC survivors and may improve representation in clinical trials. Yet, video interventions are underutilized. More studies are needed to establish best practices for video interventions aimed at diversifying clinical trial participation as widening cancer disparities and rapidly changing cancer care continue to emerge.

A pilot study of a culturally-appropriate, educational intervention to increase participation in cancer clinical trials among African Americans and Latinos

AIM

Culturally-appropriate, educational programs are recommended to improve cancer clinical trial participation among African Americans and Latinos. This study investigated the effect of a culturally-appropriate, educational program on knowledge, trust in medical researchers, and intent for clinical trial participation among African Americans and Latinos in Middle Tennessee.

METHOD

Trained community health educators delivered a 30-min presentation with video testimonials to 198 participants in 13 town halls. A pre-post survey design was used to evaluate the intervention among 102 participants who completed both pre- and post-surveys one to two weeks after the session.

RESULTS

Paired-sample t-test showed significant increases in unadjusted mean scores for knowledge (p < 0.001), trust in medical researchers (p < 0.001), and willingness to participate in clinical trials (p = 0.003) after the town halls in the overall sample. After adjusting for gender and education, all three outcomes remained significant for the overall sample (knowledge: p < 0.001; trust in medical researchers: p < 0.001; willingness: p = 0.001) and for African Americans (knowledge: p < 0.001; trust in medical researchers: p = 0.007; willingness: p = 0.005). However, willingness to participate was no longer significant for Latinos (knowledge: p < 0.001; trust in medical researchers: p = 0.034; willingness: p = 0.084).

CONCLUSIONS

The culturally-appropriate, educational program showed promising results for short-term, clinical trial outcomes. Further studies should examine efficacy to improve research participation outcomes.