Does increased patient awareness improve accrual into cancer-related clinical trials?

Exploring the Prevalence and Factors Influencing Clinical Trial Awareness in US Adults with Self-Reported Depression and Anxiety

OBJECTIVE

Lack of clinical trial awareness is a crucial barrier to clinical trial enrollment. The objective of this study was to examine the prevalence and factors associated with clinical trial awareness among US adults with self-reported depression and anxiety.

METHODS

Data were collected from 896 adults who self-reported depression and anxiety from the 2020 Health Information National Trends Survey. Multinomial logistic regression was utilized to assess predictors of clinical trial awareness, particularly socio-demographic, health-related, and technological variables. Odds ratios (OR) for the associations were reported.

RESULTS

About 60.4% of adults with self-reported depression or anxiety reported being aware of clinical trials. In the multivariable regression, education level, health-related social media use, and having access to a regular provider were all significantly associated with greater odds of clinical trial awareness among individuals with depression and/or anxiety. Specifically, individuals with at least some college education (OR 2.07, 95% confidence interval (CI); 1.28-3.34; p ​= ​0.004) were more likely to report awareness of clinical trials than those with less than a college education. Similarly, compared to those without access to health providers, individuals with depression and/or anxiety who had a regular provider had greater odds of clinical trial awareness (OR 2.23, 95% CI; 1.16-4.31; p ​= ​0.017). Additionally, those who reported two or more health-related uses of social media were significantly more likely to report clinical trial awareness than their counterparts who reported no health-related social media use (OR 3.17, 95% CI; 1.48-6.80; p ​= ​0.004).

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that about six in 10 adults with depression and anxiety in the United States were aware of clinical trials. However, some sub-groups of patients, particularly those without access to a regular health provider, those with a lower education level, and those with limited use of social media for health purposes, remain inadequately informed and may lack awareness of available clinical trials. These findings are crucial and identify subgroups of people with mental disorders that may benefit from targeted interventions to improve clinical trial awareness.

Transparency and public accessibility of clinical trial information in Croatia: how it affects patient participation in clinical trials

Introduction

Despite increased visibility of clinical trials through international trial registries, patients often remain uninformed of their existence, especially if they do not have access to adequate information about clinical research, including the language of the information. The aim of this study was to describe the context for transparency of clinical trials in Croatia in relation to countries in Central and Eastern Europe, and to assess how informed Croatian patients are about clinical trials and their accessibility.

Materials and methods

We assessed the transparency of clinical trials from the data available in the public domain. We also conducted an anonymous survey on a convenience sample of 257 patients visiting two family medicine offices or an oncology department in south Croatia, and members of national patients’ associations.

Results

Despite legal provisions for transparency of clinical trials in Croatia, they are still not sufficiently visible in the public domain. Among countries from Central and Eastern Europe, Croatia has the fewest number of registered trials in the EU Clinical Trials Registry. 66% of the patients in the survey were aware of the existence of clinical trials but only 15% were informed about possibilities of participating in a trial. Although 58% of the respondents were willing to try new treatments, only 6% actually participated in a clinical trial. Only 2% of the respondents were aware of publicly available trial registries.

Conclusions

Our study demonstrates that there is low transparency of clinical trials in Croatia, and that Croatian patients are not fully aware of clinical trials and the possibilities of participating in them, despite reported availability of Internet resources and good communication with their physicians. There is a need for active policy measures to increase the awareness of and access to clinical trials to patients in Croatia, particularly in their own language.

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.

Clinical trial awareness: Changes over time and sociodemographic disparities

BACKGROUND OR AIMS

Lack of clinical trial awareness is a known obstacle to clinical trial enrollment. We sought to define the prevalence of clinical trial awareness in the US population, determine characteristics associated with increased trial awareness, and explore potential disparities in trial awareness.

METHODS

We utilized data from the Health Information National Trends Survey from 2008 and 2012. Logistic regression was utilized to assess predictors of clinical trial awareness, particularly sociodemographic variables and information-seeking preferences. Trial awareness and information-seeking preferences were compared in patient subgroups and between the two time periods.

RESULTS

Clinical trial awareness increased from 68% to 74% between 2008 and 2012. In the 2012 dataset, higher education level (odds ratio: 3.52, 95% confidence interval: 2.16-5.74), higher yearly income category (odds ratio: 1.84, 95% confidence interval: 1.17-2.89), and Internet use (odds ratio: 2.13, 95% confidence interval: 1.52-3.00) were significantly associated with clinical trial awareness. Hispanic ethnicity (odds ratio: 0.41, 95% confidence interval: 0.25-0.68) was significantly associated with decreased awareness. Clinical trial awareness increased in African-American/Blacks (Δ10.6%) and Hispanics (Δ10.7%) between 2008 and 2012, as did Internet use in both subgroups (Δ14.2%, Δ18.1%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Overall clinical trial awareness has increased between 2008 and 2012, although a large subset of the population still lacks general awareness of clinical trials. Racial and ethnic disparities in trial awareness exist, although disparities may be decreasing among the Black population. These findings may help target educational efforts and inform approaches to increasing trial awareness.

The National Cancer Institute-American Society of Clinical Oncology Cancer Trial Accrual Symposium: summary and recommendations

INTRODUCTION

Many challenges to clinical trial accrual exist, resulting in studies with inadequate enrollment and potentially delaying answers to important scientific and clinical questions.

METHODS

The National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) cosponsored the Cancer Trial Accrual Symposium: Science and Solutions on April 29-30, 2010 to examine the state of accrual science related to patient/community, physician/provider, and site/organizational influences, and identify new interventions to facilitate clinical trial enrollment. The symposium featured breakout sessions, plenary sessions, and a poster session including 100 abstracts. Among the 358 attendees were clinical investigators, researchers of accrual strategies, research administrators, nurses, research coordinators, patient advocates, and educators. A bibliography of the accrual literature in these three major areas was provided to participants in advance of the meeting. After the symposium, the literature in these areas was revisited to determine if the symposium recommendations remained relevant within the context of the current literature.

RESULTS

Few rigorously conducted studies have tested interventions to address challenges to clinical trials accrual. Attendees developed recommendations for improving accrual and identified priority areas for future accrual research at the patient/community, physician/provider, and site/organizational levels. Current literature continues to support the symposium recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

A combination of approaches addressing both the multifactorial nature of accrual challenges and the characteristics of the target population may be needed to improve accrual to cancer clinical trials. Recommendations for best practices and for future research developed from the symposium are provided.

A comparison of patient knowledge of clinical trials and trialist priorities

BACKGROUND

Recruitment to clinical trials remains poor, and patient knowledge of clinical trials is one barrier to recruitment. To identify knowledge deficits, we conducted and compared surveys measuring actual patient knowledge and clinical trialist priorities for patient knowledge.

METHODS

Consenting patients at a tertiary cancer centre answered a survey that included 2 opinion questions about their own knowledge and willingness to join a trial, and22 knowledge questions. Clinical researchers at the centre were asked 13 questions about the importance of various trials factors.

RESULTS

Of 126 patients surveyed, 16% had joined a clinical trial, and 42% had a secondary school education or less. The mean correct response rate on the knowledge questions was 58%. Higher rates of correct responses were associated with lower age (p = 0.05), greater education (p = 0.006), prior trial participation (p < 0.001), agreement or strong agreement with perceived understanding of trials (p < 0.001), and willingness to join a clinical trial (p = 0.002). Trialists valued an understanding of the rationale for clinical trials and of randomization, placebo, and patient protection, but those particular topics were poorly understood by patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient knowledge about clinical trials is poor, including knowledge of several concepts ranked important by clinical trialists. The findings suggest that when developing education interventions, emphasis should be placed on the topics most directly related to patient care, and factors such as age and education level should be considered.

Removing barriers to participation in clinical trials, a conceptual framework and retrospective chart review study

BACKGROUND

Enrollment in interventional therapeutic clinical trials is a small fraction of all patients who might participate given reasonable access.

METHODS

A hierarchical approach is utilized in measuring staged participation from trial availability to patient enrollment. Our framework suggests that concern for justice comes in the design and eligibility criteria for clinical trials; attention to beneficence is given in the eligibility and physician triage stages. The remaining four stages rely on respect for persons. An example is given where reasons for nonparticipation or barriers to participation in prostate cancer clinical trials are examined within the framework. In addition, medical oncology patients with an initial six month consultation are tracked from one stage to the next by race using the framework to assess participation comparability.

RESULTS

We illustrated seven transitions from being a patient to enrollment in a clinical trial in a small study of prostate cancer cases who consulted SKCCC Medical Oncology Department in early 2010. Pilot data suggest transition probabilities as follows: 65% availability, 84% eligibility, 92% patient triage, 89% trials discussed, 45% patient interested, 63% patient consented, and 92% patient enrolled. The average transition probability was 77.7%. The average transition probability, patient-trial-fit was 50%; opportunity was 51%, and acceptance was 66.7%. Trial availability, patient interest and patient consented were three transitions that were below the average; none were statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The framework may serve to streamline comprehensive reporting of clinical trial participation to the benefit of patients and the ethical conduct of clinical trials.