What men want: Results from a national survey on decision making for prostate cancer treatment and research participation

Influences on clinical trial participation: Enhancing recruitment through a gender lens - A scoping review

Background

Suboptimal clinical trial recruitment contributes to research waste. Evidence suggests there may be gender-based differences in willingness to participate in clinical research. Identifying gender-based differences impacting the willingness of trial participation may assist trial recruitment.

Objectives

To examine factors that influence the willingness of men and women to participate in clinical trials and to identify modifiable factors that may be targeted to optimise trial participation.

Material and methods

Electronic databases were searched with key words relating to 'gender', 'willingness to participate' and 'trial'. Included studies were English language and reported gender-based differences in willingness to participate in clinical trials, or factors that influence a single gender to participate in clinical trials. Studies were excluded if they described the demographic factors of trial participants or if the majority of participants were pregnant. Extracted data were coded, categorized, analysed thematically and interpreted using Arksey and O'Malley's framework.

Results

Sixty-three studies were included. Two main themes were identified: trial characteristics and participant characteristics. A number of gender-based differences moderating willingness to participate were observed although only one, 'concern for self' was found to influence actual trial participation rates between genders.

Conclusion

The relationship between factors influencing willingness to participate in clinical trials is complex. The influence of gender on willingness to participate, while important, may be moderated by other factors including socioeconomic status, ethnicity and health condition. Exploring factors that influence willingness to participate specific to a study cohort likely offers the most promise to optimise trial recruitment of that cohort.

Prostate volume, baseline urinary function, and their association with treatment choice and post-treatment urinary function in men treated for localized prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Benign prostatic hyperplasia, lower urinary tract symptoms, and prostate cancer often co-occur. Their effect on urinary function is an important consideration regarding prostate cancer treatment choices. While prostate volume (PV) and urinary symptoms are commonly used in treatment choice decision making, their association with post-treatment urinary function is unknown. We evaluated the associations between PV and baseline urinary function with treatment choice and post-treatment urinary function among men with localized prostate cancer.

METHODS

We identified 1647 patients from CEASAR, a multicenter population-based, prospective cohort study of men with localized prostate cancer, for analysis. Primary outcomes were treatment choice and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) assessed by the 26-item Expanded Prostate Index Composite (EPIC-26) at pre-specified intervals up to 5 years. Multivariable analysis was performed, controlling for demographic and clinicopathologic features.

RESULTS

Median baseline PV was 36 mL (IQR 27-48), and baseline urinary irritative/obstructive domain score was 87 (IQR 75-100). There was no observed clinically meaningful association between PV and treatment choice or post-treatment urinary function. Among patients with poor baseline urinary function, treatment with radiation or surgery was associated with statistically and clinically significant improvement in urinary function at 6 months which was durable through 5 years (improvement from baseline at 5 years: radiation 20.4 points, surgery 24.5 points).

CONCLUSIONS

PV was not found to be associated with treatment modality or post-treatment urinary irritative/obstructive function among men treated for localized prostate cancer. Men with poor baseline urinary irritative/obstructive function improve after treatment with surgery or radiation therapy.

Understanding what matters to metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients when considering treatment options: A US patient preference survey

BACKGROUND

Understanding how patients perceive the efficacy, safety, and administrative burden of treatments for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) can facilitate shared-decision making for optimal management. This study sought to elicit patient preferences for mCRPC treatments in the US.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey using the discrete-choice experiment method. Participants were asked to state their choices over successive sets of treatment alternatives, defined by varying levels of treatment attributes: overall survival (OS), months until patients develop a fracture or bone metastasis, likelihood of requiring radiation to control bone pain, fatigue, nausea, and administration (i.e., oral/IV injection/IV infusion). Using mixed logit models, we determined the value (i.e., preference weights) that respondents placed on each attribute. Relative attribute importance (RAI) and marginal rates of substitution (MRS) were calculated to understand patients' willingness to make tradeoffs among different attributes.

RESULTS

The final data set numbered 160 participants, with a mean age of 71.6 years old and a mean of 8.96 years since prostate cancer diagnosis. Participants' treatment preferences were as follows: OS (RAI: 31%), bone pain control (23%), nausea (16%), delaying fracture or bone metastasis (15%), fatigue (11%), and administration (3%). The MRS demonstrated that respondents were willing to trade 1.9 months of OS to eliminate moderate nausea and 3.3 months of OS for a reduction in fatigue from severe to mild.

CONCLUSIONS

Improving OS is the highest priority for patients with mCRPC, but they are willing to trade some survival to reduce the risk of requiring radiation to control bone pain, delay a fracture or bone metastasis, and experience less severe nausea and fatigue.