Characteristics and outcomes of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer who declined to participate in randomised clinical chemotherapy trials

A systematic review of the barriers and facilitators impacting patient enrolment in clinical trials for lung cancer

PURPOSE

Clinical research trials are needed to enhance the medical care and treatment for lung cancer, which remains the leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. While clinical trials allow for the development of novel therapies to treat cancer, the recruitment of lung cancer patients to trials is low. This review aimed to identify and synthesise the available literature concerning barriers and facilitators affecting lung cancer patients' decisions to enrol in clinical trials to guide future cancer research efforts.

METHODS

Four databases were systematically searched: Academic Search Complete, CINHAL, PubMed, and PsycINFO in August 2023. A supplemental grey literature search was also conducted alongside this. Articles were quality appraised using CASP and JMI checklists, and results were narratively synthesised.

RESULTS

Eighteen articles of varied design met the inclusion criteria, and results were mapped onto the Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation Behaviour (COM-B) Model to help structure and conceptualise review findings. Evidence suggests that the decision to enrol in a trial is multifaceted and informed by: when and how study information is presented, travel and trial eligibility, and altruistic hopes and fears.

CONCLUSIONS

There is need to address the many different concerns that lung cancer patients have about participating in a clinical trial through the supply of accessible and timely trial information, and via the reduction of travel, expansion of study eligibility criteria, and recognition of a person's altruistic wishes, hopes, fears, and family-oriented concerns. Future research should aim to work alongside lung cancer patients, clinicians, and other stakeholders to increase research accessibility.

Knowledge and Attitudes Regarding Clinical Trial Participation: A Cross-Sectional Study in the Eastern Province, Saudi Arabia

Objective This study aims to assess the knowledge and attitudes toward clinical trial (CT) participation among the adult population in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia. Material and methods This cross-sectional study was conducted among the population of the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia. A self-administered questionnaire was distributed among the general population using an online survey. Results A total of 334 participants completed the questionnaire. Participants' ages ranged from 18 to 65 years, with a mean age of 31.2 ± 13.9 years, 56.6% of whom were males, 42.2% were employed, 29.6% were students, and 23.1% were unemployed. Surprisingly, only a small percentage of respondents (7.5%) were requested to participate in a randomized controlled trial (RCT), of which the majority did partake. Additionally, 25.4% of participants believe CTs are used to evaluate new drugs; others believe that CTs are used to understand diseases and human behavior. The data show that most participants believe that CTs improve patient care, welfare, and society. Also, participants were more likely to take part if they were aware of the study's purpose and findings and were given more time to consider their options. Conclusion Participants believed that the biggest obstacle was a lack of knowledge of CTs. It is crucial to educate patients more about CTs. Multimodal strategies such as improved patient-provider communication and online information for trial information sharing may be effective in boosting knowledge and CT recruitment.

Research imperative

There is a note of caution expressed when clinical care providers enroll their own patients into investigational trials, a concern expressed in the called dual-role consent. There is concern that this circumstance may create a conflict of interest for the physician-investigator, lead to loss of patient voluntarism, and promote the therapeutic misconceptions. In this opinion paper, I review the circumstances surrounding participation in clinical research and the conduct of standard patient care. I propose that when a patient is eligible for an institutional review board-approved clinical trial, instead of representing a potential ethical lapse, soliciting enrollment by the clinician-researcher may represent optimal care for the patient.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients enrolled in clinical trials compared with those of patients outside clinical trials in advanced gastric cancer

AIMS

Participating in clinical trials could give cancer patients potential benefits such as experimental treatment, meticulous follow-up, and management of toxicities. We hypothesized that patients participating in clinical trials would achieve better survival outcomes than those not enrolled in trials. We assessed whether the trial effect can improve survival for patients with advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled metastatic or recurrent gastric cancer patients who received palliative chemotherapy from January 2010 to December 2012. All patients in this study received fluoropyrimidine and platinum as the first-line palliative chemotherapy. Patients participating in clinical trials were matched 1:1 with patients not enrolled in trial based on propensity-score.

RESULTS

A total of 229 patients were identified, 83 (36.2%) among them participated in 14 clinical trials for advanced gastric cancer. The number of patients enrolled in phase I, II and III trials were 10, 54 and 19, respectively. The median overall survival of the total study patients was 13.0 months (95% confidence interval, 10.7-15.3 months). In the propensity-score matched population, a total of 78 matched pairs of patients were generated. The median overall survival of the 78 patients who participated in the clinical trials was 6 months longer than that of patients not enrolled in trials, although this benefit was marginally significant (15 months vs 9 months, hazard ratio, 0.709; p = 0.068). Participation in clinical trials was a significant factor to predict better overall survival in multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 0.533, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Trial effect may contribute to prolongation of overall survival in patients who participate in clinical trials for advanced gastric cancer. Physicians may discuss trial effect to encourage participation in clinical trials.

Limitations of the interpretation and extrapolation of clinical trial data in kidney transplant recipients

OBJECTIVE

The risks and benefits of the participation of kidney transplant recipients in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating new immunosuppressive therapies are unknown.

DESIGN AND SETTING

We included patients from 12 prospective phase II/III RCTs randomized to the experimental (G1, n=319) or standard-of-care internal control group (G2, n=118). We constructed two additional external control groups with (G3, n=319) or without (G4, n=319) matching inclusion/exclusion criteria based on transplant date. The primary outcome analysis was the composite clinical efficacy failure, defined as biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR), graft loss, death, or loss to follow-up 12 months after kidney transplantation.

RESULTS

Survival free of composite clinical efficacy failure was higher among participants in RCT, without difference between experimental or standard-of-care therapy (80∙3 vs 78∙0 vs 69∙9 vs 66∙1%, P<.001), respectively. Patient (98.1 vs 99.2 vs 96.9 vs 91.8 P<.001) and graft (94.0 vs 98.3 vs 90.9 vs 82.4) survivals were also higher in G1 compared to G4, but no differences in survival free of BPAR were observed (85.3 vs 78.8 vs 82.8 vs 81.2 P>.05), respectively.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggested that new treatments investigated in kidney transplant recipients are not associated with detectable harm compared to standard of care.

Barriers to Cancer Clinical Trial Participation Among Saudi Nationals: A Cross-Sectional Study

This study aims to determine the factors that act as barriers to Saudi cancer patients in participating in a clinical trial (CT). A total of 244 patients from two different tertiary level hospitals (King Khalid University Hospital and King Fahad Medical City Hospital) in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, participated in this cross-sectional study. The participants were interviewed by a trained researcher between September and November 2015. All respondents answered a three-part questionnaire which includes demographics, clinical information, and questions related to awareness of CTs, willingness to participate, and factors affecting participation in CTs. The mean age of the participants was 50.83, and 57 % of the participants were females. Most of the participants (63.5 %) were currently being treated for cancer, and 28 % were diagnosed with breast cancer followed by colorectal cancer. Health status or quality of life was self-reported as acceptable by 27.9 % of the participants, and 25 % of the participants at stage II of cancer. The factors that act as barriers to Saudi cancer patients in participating in a CT can be categorized into patient- and physician-related factors. Patient factors include lack of awareness, misconception and fear in participating in CTs; physician-related factors comprise of lack of encouragement from physician to patients in participating in a CT. The study identified few major barriers to participation in CTs. Increased patient awareness and recruitment strategies are required to increase accrual of patients including training for physicians and disseminating easy-to-read tools to the public.

A Model of Cancer Clinical Trial Decision-making Informed by African-American Cancer Patients

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials are critical to advancing cancer treatment. Minority populations are underrepresented among trial participants, and there is limited understanding of their decision-making process and key determinants of decision outcomes regarding trial participation.

METHODS

To understand research decision-making among clinical trial-eligible African-American cancer patients at Johns Hopkins, we conducted seven focus groups (n=32) with trial-offered patients ≥ 18 years diagnosed with lung, breast, prostate, or colorectal cancer ≤ 5 years. Three "acceptor" and four "decliner" focus groups were conducted. Questions addressed: attitudes towards clinical trials, reasons for accepting or declining participation, and recommendations to improve minority recruitment and enrollment. Data were transcribed and analyzed using traditional approaches to content and thematic analysis in NVivo 9.0. Data coding resulted in themes that supported model construction.

RESULTS

Participant experiences revealed the following themes when describing the decision-making process: Information gathering, Intrapersonal perspectives, and Interpersonal influences. Decision outcomes included the presence or absence of decision regret and satisfaction. From these themes, we generated a Model of Cancer Clinical Trial Decision-making.

CONCLUSION

Our model should be tested in hypothesis-driven research to elucidate factors and processes influencing decision balance and outcomes of trial-related decision-making. The model should also be tested in other disparities populations and for diagnoses other than cancer.

Why take part in personalised cancer research? Patients' genetic misconception, genetic responsibility and incomprehension of stratification-an empirical-ethical examination

Therapeutic misconception is a well-known challenge for informed decision-making for cancer research participants. What is still missing, is a detailed understanding of the impact of "personalised" treatment research (e.g. biomarkers for stratification) on research participants. For this, we conducted the first longitudinal empirical-ethical study based on semi-structured interviews with colorectal cancer patients (n = 40) enrolled in a biomarker trial for (neo)adjuvant treatment, analysing the patients' understanding of and perspectives on research and treatment with qualitative methods. In addition to therapeutic misconception based on patients' confusion of research and treatment, and here triggered by misled motivation, information paternalism or incomprehension, we identified genetic misconception and genetic responsibility as new problematic issues. Patients mainly were not aware of the major research aim of future stratification into responders and non-responders nor did they fully acknowledge this as the aim for personalised cancer research. Thus, ethical and practical reflection on informed decision-making in cancer treatment and research should take into account the complexity of lay interpretations of modern personalised medicine. Instead of very formalistic, liability-oriented informed consent procedures, we suggest a more personalised communication approach to inform and motivate patients for cancer research.

Patient Navigation As a Model to Increase Participation of African Americans in Cancer Clinical Trials

PURPOSE

Less than 10% of patients enrolled in clinical trials are minorities. The patient navigation model has been used to improve access to medical care but has not been evaluated as a tool to increase the participation of minorities in clinical trials. The Increasing Minority Participation in Clinical Trials project used patient navigators (PNs) to enhance the recruitment of African Americans for and their retention in therapeutic cancer clinical trials in a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center.

METHODS

Lay individuals were hired and trained to serve as PNs for clinical trials. African American patients potentially eligible for clinical trials were identified through chart review or referrals by clinic nurses, physicians, and social workers. PNs provided two levels of services: education about clinical trials and tailored support for patients who enrolled in clinical trials.

RESULTS

Between 2007 and 2014, 424 African American patients with cancer were referred to the Increasing Minority Participation in Clinical Trials project. Of those eligible for a clinical trial (N = 378), 304 (80.4%) enrolled in a trial and 272 (72%) consented to receive patient navigation support. Of those receiving patient navigation support, 74.5% completed the trial, compared with 37.5% of those not receiving patient navigation support. The difference in retention rates between the two groups was statistically significant (P < .001). Participation of African Americans in therapeutic cancer clinical trials increased from 9% to 16%.

CONCLUSION

Patient navigation for clinical trials successfully retained African Americans in therapeutic trials compared with non-patient navigation trial participation. The model holds promise as a strategy to reduce disparities in cancer clinical trial participation. Future studies should evaluate it with racial/ethnic minorities across cancer centers.

Knowledge, Attitudes and Perceptions of Saudis towards Participating in Clinical Trials

Aim

To assess the knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of Saudis towards participating in clinical trials (CTs).

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted on 232 Saudi adult patients and their companions visiting adult outpatient clinics at King Fahad Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Data were collected using a self-administered questionnaire based on information obtained from the literature. The questionnaire was divided into four sections, one covering the respondents’ demographics, and the other three assessing knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions towards participating in CTs.

Results

A total of 148 (63.8%) respondents were males, and 52 (22.4%) participants had been invited to participate in a CT previously. Of those, 39 (75%) participated. Knowledge about the essential elements of informed consent ranged from 55.7% (number of participants needed) to 85.7% (confidentiality of personal information). The majority (163, 73.8%) of respondents was willing to participate in a CT after consulting their family physician and 130 (58.0%) respondents would be motivated to participate in a CT if they were healthy. Only 36.8% of the respondents believed that patients who participated in a CT received the best care. Moreover, 110 (48.7%) respondents believed that research was conducted in a responsible and ethical manner.

Conclusions

The present study assessed the current understanding of CTs among Saudi participants. Although the majority of participants had an acceptable level of knowledge about CTs, they exhibited conditional attitudes and misperceptions towards participating in a CT. Increased patient awareness may improve patients’ attitudes towards ethical conduct of CTs.

Is there a "Trial Effect" on Outcome of Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with Sunitinib?

Purpose

Studies suggested the existence of a ‘trial effect', in which for a given treatment, participation in a clinical trial is associated with a better outcome. Sunitinib is a standard treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). We aimed to study the effect of clinical trial participation on the outcome of mRCC patients treated with sunitinib, which at present, is poorly defined.

Materials and Methods

The records of mRCC patients treated with sunitinib between 2004-2013 in 7 centers across 2 countries were reviewed. We compared the response rate (RR), progression free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS), between clinical trial participants (n=49) and a matched cohort of non-participants (n=49) who received standard therapy. Each clinical trial participant was individually matched with a non-participant by clinicopathologic factors. PFS and OS were determined by Cox regression.

Results

The groups were matched by age (median 64), gender (male 67%), Heng risk (favorable 25%, intermediate 59%, poor 16%), prior nephrectomy (92%), RCC histology (clear cell 86%), pre-treatment NLR (>3 in 55%, n=27), sunitinib induced hypertension (45%), and sunitinib dose reduction/treatment interruption (41%). In clinical trial participants versus non-participants, RR was partial response/stable disease 80% (n=39) versus 74% (n=36), and progressive disease 20% (n=10) versus 26% (n=13) (p=0.63, OR 1.2). The median PFS was 10 versus 11 months (HR=0.96, p=0.84), and the median OS 23 versus 24 months (HR=0.97, p=0.89).

Conclusions

In mRCC patients treated with sunitinib, the outcome of clinical trial participants was similar to that of non-participants who received standard therapy.

Outcomes for patients with the same disease treated inside and outside of randomized trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether participation in a randomized controlled trial (RCT), irrespective of assigned treatment, is harmful or beneficial to participants. We compared outcomes for patients with the same diagnoses who did ("insiders") and did not ("outsiders") enter RCTs, without regard to the specific therapies received for their respective diagnoses.

METHODS

By searching the MEDLINE (1966-2010), Embase (1980-2010), CENTRAL (1960-2010) and PsycINFO (1880-2010) databases, we identified 147 studies that reported the health outcomes of "insiders" and a group of parallel or consecutive "outsiders" within the same time period. We prepared a narrative review and, as appropriate, meta-analyses of patients' outcomes.

RESULTS

We found no clinically or statistically significant differences in outcomes between "insiders" and "outsiders" in the 23 studies in which the experimental intervention was ineffective (standard mean difference in continuous outcomes -0.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.1 to 0.04) or in the 7 studies in which the experimental intervention was effective and was received by both "insiders" and "outsiders" (mean difference 0.04, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.13). However, in 9 studies in which an effective intervention was received only by "insiders," the "outsiders" experienced significantly worse health outcomes (mean difference -0.36, 95% CI -0.61 to -0.12).

INTERPRETATION

We found no evidence to support clinically important overall harm or benefit arising from participation in RCTs. This conclusion refutes earlier claims that trial participants are at increased risk of harm.

Prospective cohort study: whether or not patients benefit from participation itself in randomized-controlled trials (SELECT BC ECO)

The randomized-controlled trial is widely accepted as a clinical trial to decide a standard therapy. It remains to be concluded whether or not patients benefit from participation itself in a randomized-controlled trial. This study was aimed at comparing prognoses between trial participants and participation-refusers. Concerned randomized trials are 'selection of effective chemotherapy for breast cancer' (SELECT BC) and its successor trial, SELECT BC-CONFIRM. Study subjects are all of metastatic breast cancer patients who are requested by their doctors to participate in these two trials. This trial is a hitherto exceptional prospective study and is suitable to clarify the effects of participation per se in such a trial on prognosis when compared with previous two studies.

Enrollment of patients with lung and colorectal cancers onto clinical trials

PURPOSE

Only 2% to 5% of adult patients with cancer enroll onto clinical trials. We assessed simultaneously characteristics of patients and their physicians that may be independently associated with participation.

METHODS

CanCORS, a National Cancer Institute (NCI) -funded population-based observational cohort study of newly diagnosed patients with lung and colorectal cancers, sampled patients across five geographic areas, five health care delivery systems, and 15 Veterans Administration hospitals. We linked patient survey and medical record data with physician survey data to examine correlates of trial enrollment.

RESULTS

Among 9,901 patients, 5.3% enrolled onto trials. Of the 9,901 patients, we linked 6,506 patients to one medical oncologist, surgeon, or radiation oncologist (physicians, N = 1,325) who responded to the physician survey and was considered their primary cancer clinician decision maker. Patient age, race, disease stage, geographic region, and health insurance were independently associated with trial enrollment. Physician factors independently associated with patient trial enrollment were being a medical oncologist, practicing at an NCI-designated cancer center, taking the lead in discussing trials with patients, and receiving increased income from trial enrollment. After simultaneously adjusting for patient and physician characteristics, only being a physician practicing at an NCI-designated cancer center (odds ratio [OR], 1.65; 95% CI, 1.19 to 2.27) and patient female sex (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.68), age > 70 versus < 50 years (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.48), and advanced disease (OR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.45 to 2.37) remained independently associated with trial enrollment.

CONCLUSION

Both practice environment and patient clinical and demographic characteristics are associated with cancer clinical trial enrollment; simultaneous intervention may be required when trying to increase enrollment rates.

Characteristics and outcomes of patients with advanced gastric cancer who declined to participate in a randomized clinical chemotherapy trial

PURPOSE

There is insufficient data to verify whether participation in clinical trials in itself can lead to better clinical outcomes. We have analyzed the characteristics and outcomes of patients who declined to participate in a randomized trial in comparison with those who participated in the trial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A randomized trial for naive advanced gastric cancer was offered to 286 patients. The trial investigated the superiority of irinotecan plus cisplatin and the noninferiority of S-1 compared with continuous fluorouracil infusion. We retrospectively reviewed the characteristics and outcomes for both participants and nonparticipants in this trial.

RESULTS

Of the 286 patients, 98 (34%) declined to participate in the trial. The rate of declining was significantly higher among younger patients (P = .003), and it varied significantly between attending physicians (range, 23% to 58%; P = .004). There were no other significant correlations between rate of declining and patient characteristics. No significant differences were observed in the clinical outcomes between the participants and nonparticipants, for whom the median survival times were 367 versus 347 days, respectively. The hazard ratio for overall survival, adjusted for other confounding variables, was 1.21 (95% CI, 0.91 to 1.60). No interaction was observed between participation and the various regimens.

CONCLUSION

There was no difference in clinical outcomes between participants and nonparticipants. However, the patient's age and the doctor-patient relationship may have an effect on patient accrual to randomized trials.

The effect of clinical trial participation versus non-participation on overall survival in men receiving first-line docetaxel-containing chemotherapy for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Previous studies have reported better outcomes in cancer patients that enrolled in clinical trials, suggesting that trial participation in itself might be beneficial. We investigated the potential positive effect of clinical trial participation on survival outcomes of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who were treated with first-line docetaxel-containing chemotherapy. After accounting for potential baseline inequalities, participation in a clinical trial itself was associated with significantly longer overall survival in these patients.

OBJECTIVE

• To study differences in baseline characteristics and outcomes of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) receiving first-line docetaxel-containing chemotherapy on prospective clinical studies (trial participants) versus those receiving this therapy outside of a clinical study (non-participants).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

• Records from 247 consecutive chemotherapy-naive patients who were treated with docetaxel-containing chemotherapy for mCRPC at a single high-volume centre from 1998 to 2010 were reviewed. • All patients received docetaxel either as clinical trial participants (n= 142; 11 separate studies) or as non-participants (n= 105). • Univariable and multivariable Cox regression models predicted overall survival after chemotherapy initiation.

RESULTS

• There was no significant difference between trial participation and non-participation with respect to patient age, type of primary treatment, tumour grade or clinical stage. • Multivariable analyses showed a significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 0.567; P= 0.027) among trial participants vs non-participants.

CONCLUSIONS

• Patients that were treated with docetaxel for mCRPC showed a significantly longer overall survival when enrolled in a clinical trial. • Improved survival in trial participants may reflect the better medical oversight typically seen in patients enrolled in trials, more regimented follow-up schedules, or a positive effect on caregivers' attitudes because of greater contact with medical services. • With the retrospective nature of this analysis and the small study population, prospective studies are needed to validate the present findings and to further investigate the relationship between clinical trial participation and outcomes.