Measurement of factors influencing the participation of patients with prostate cancer in clinical trials: a Canadian perspective

Exploring the Motivational Drivers of Young Adults with Diabetes for Participation in Kidney Research

Understanding motivational drivers and barriers to patient participation in diabetes research are important to ensure research is relevant and valuable. Young adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) completed a 31-question qualitative survey evaluating participant experience, understanding, and motivators and barriers to research involvement. A total of 35 participants, 19–28 years of age, 60% female, completed the survey. Motivating factors included personal benefit, relationship with the study team, curiosity, financial compensation, altruism, and nostalgia. Older participants (>22 years) reported higher levels of trust in the study team (p = 0.02) and their relationship with the study team positively influenced their decision to participate (p = 0.03). Financial compensation was a strong motivator for participants with higher education (p = 0.02). Age, sex, education level, and trust in the study team influenced participants’ understanding. Barriers included logistics and lack of familial support. Important motivational drivers and barriers to participation in research by young adults with T1D must be considered to increase research engagement and facilitate the discovery of new knowledge.

Factors affecting patient participation in clinical trials in Ireland: A narrative review

Objective

Clinical trials have long been considered the ‘gold standard’ of research generated evidence in health care. Patient recruitment is an important determinant in the success of the trials, yet little focus is placed on the decision making process of patients towards recruitment. Our objective was to identify the key factors pertaining to patient participation in clinical trials, to better understand the identified low participation rate of patients in one clinical research facility within Ireland.

Design

Narrative literature review of studies focussing on factors which may act to facilitate or deter patient participation in clinical trials. Studies were identified from Medline, PubMed, Cochrane Library and CINAHL.

Results

Sixty-one studies were included in the narrative review: Forty-eight of these papers focused specifically on the patient's perspective of participating in clinical trials. The remaining thirteen related to carers, family and health care professional perspectives of participation. The primary factor influencing participation in clinical trials amongst patients was related to personal factors and these were collectively associated with obtaining a form of personal gain through participation. Cancer was identified as the leading disease entity included in clinical trials followed by HIV and cardiovascular disease.

Conclusion

The vast majority of literature relating to participation in clinical trials emanates predominantly from high income countries, with 63% originating from the USA. No studies for inclusion in this review were identified from low income or developing countries and therefore limits the generalizability of the influencing factors.

Impact of a clinical trial initiative on clinical trial enrollment in a multidisciplinary prostate cancer clinic

Clinical oncology trials are hampered by low accrual rates, with fewer than 5% of adult patients with cancer treated on study. Clinical trial enrollment was evaluated at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center's Multidisciplinary Prostate Cancer Clinic (MPCC) to assess whether a clinical trial initiative, introduced in 2006, impacted enrollment. The trial initiative included posting trial-specific information in clinic, educating patients about appropriate clinical trial options during the treatment recommendation discussion, and providing patients with trial-specific educational information. The investigators evaluated the frequency of clinical trial enrollment for men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer seen in the MPCC from 2004 to 2008. Logistic regression evaluated the impact of patient characteristics and the clinical trial initiative on trial enrollment. The median age of the 1370 men was 64 years; 32% had low-risk, 49% had intermediate-risk, and 19% had high-risk disease. Overall, 74% enrolled in at least one trial and 29% enrolled in more than one trial. Trial enrollment increased from 39% before the initiative (127/326) to 84% (880/1044) after the trial initiative. Patient enrollment increased in laboratory studies (from 25% to 80%), quality-of-life studies (from 10% to 26%), and studies evaluating investigational treatments and systemic agents (from 6% to 15%) after the trial initiative. In multivariate analysis, younger men (P<.001) and men seen after implementation of the clinical trial initiative (P<.001) were more likely to enroll in trials. Clinical trial enrollment in the MPCC was substantially higher than that seen nationally in adult patients with cancer, and enrollment rates increased after the introduction of a clinical trial initiative.

Cancer patient decision making related to clinical trial participation: an integrative review with implications for patients' relational autonomy

PURPOSE

Oncology clinical trials are necessary for the improvement of patient care as they have the ability to confirm the efficacy and safety of novel cancer treatments and in so doing, contribute to a solid evidence base on which practitioners and patients can make informed treatment decisions. However, only 3-5 % of adult cancer patients enroll in clinical trials. Lack of participation compromises the success of clinical trials and squanders an opportunity for improving patient outcomes. This literature review summarizes the factors and contexts that influence cancer patient decision making related to clinical trial participation.

METHODS

An integrative review was undertaken within PubMed, CINAHL, and EMBASE databases for articles written between 1995 and 2012 and archived under relevant keywords. Articles selected were data-based, written in English, and limited to adult cancer patients.

RESULTS

In the 51 articles reviewed, three main types of factors were identified that influence cancer patients' decision making about participation in clinical trials: personal, social, and system factors. Subthemes included patients' trust in their physician and the research process, undue influence within the patient-physician relationship, and systemic social inequalities. How these factors interact and influence patients' decision-making process and relational autonomy, however, is insufficiently understood.

CONCLUSIONS

Future research is needed to further elucidate the sociopolitical barriers and facilitators of clinical trial participation and to enhance ethical practice within clinical trial enrolment. This research will inform targeted education and support interventions to foster patients' relational autonomy in the decision-making process and potentially improve clinical trial participation rates.

A randomized controlled trial of a self-management psychosocial intervention for men with prostate cancer and their partners: a study protocol

BACKGROUND

Little is known about interventions to help men and their partners cope with the after effects of prostate cancer treatment. The lack of in-depth descriptions of the intervention content is hindering the identification of which intervention (or component of an intervention) works.

AIM

To describe the development and evaluation of the content of a self-management psychosocial intervention for men with prostate cancer and their partners.

DESIGN

A feasibility randomized controlled trial including structure, process, and outcome analysis.

METHODS

This 9-week intervention commences on completion of treatment and consists of three group and two telephone sessions. The intervention focuses on symptom management, sexual dysfunction, uncertainty management, positive thinking and couple communication. Forty-eight couples will be assigned to either the intervention or a control group receiving usual care. Participants will be assessed at baseline, immediately postintervention and at 1 and 6 months postintervention. Outcome measures for patients and caregivers include self-efficacy, quality of life, symptom distress, uncertainty, benefits of illness, health behaviour, and measures of couple communication and support. An additional caregiver assessment will be completed by the partner.

DISCUSSION

The main purpose of this feasibility study is to investigate the acceptability of the CONNECT programme to men with prostate cancer and their partners and to gain feedback from the participants and facilitators to make changes to and enhance the programme. Reasons why men do not want to participate will be collated to enhance recruitment in the future. We will also test recruitment strategies, randomization procedures, and the acceptability of the questionnaires. Ethical approval granted December 2010.

Incremental costs of prostate cancer trials: Are clinical trials really a burden on a public payer system?

INTRODUCTION

Clinical trials are a critical component of improving cancer prevention and treatment strategies. However, the perception that patients enrolled in trials consume more resources than those receiving the standard-of-care (SOC) has contributed to an increasingly research-averse environment. Current economic data pertaining to the per-patient costs of prostate cancer trials relative to SOC treatment are limited.

METHODS

A retrospective observational cohort study was conducted to compare costs incurred by 59 prostate cancer patients participating in a mix of industry and non-industry sponsored clinical trials with costs incurred by an equal number of eligible non-participants who received SOC over a year. Resource utilization was tracked and quantified to standardized price templates.

RESULTS

No difference in overall resource utilization was seen between trial and SOC patients (two-tailed t-test, n = 118, p = 0.99). Variability in the types of resources used by each group indicated that, while trial patients may take up significantly more clinic time (p = 0.001) and undergo more tests and procedures (p = 0.001), SOC patients are more likely to receive other costly interventions, such as radiation therapy (p < 0.001). Other variables (e.g., pathology, diagnostic imaging, prescribed therapies) were statistically indistinguishable between groups.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed differences in the cost distribution of patients enrolled in clinical trials versus those receiving SOC, which could be used to improve resource allocation. The lack of evidence for a difference in overall cost provides an argument for payers to more fully support clinical research without fear of adverse financial consequences. Further analysis is required.

Motivations of patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension to participate in randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

There is substantial need to rigorously evaluate existing and new therapies for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and other severe and relatively rare conditions affecting younger patients. However, the ability to conduct meaningful randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in such contexts often is limited by difficulties obtaining adequate patient enrollment.

PURPOSE

To understand the motivations of patients with PAH for participating in RCTs so as to facilitate enrollment in future trials among patients with similar diseases.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews of a diverse sample of patients with World Health Organization (WHO) Group I PAH. We purposefully recruited a diverse sample of participants until theoretical saturation was reached. We randomly assigned patients to review hypothetical RCTs that did or did not allow continuation of background PAH therapies and elicited their reasons for or against enrolling. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using constant comparison techniques to code and sort data into discrete themes.

RESULTS

The 26 PAH patients enrolled before theoretical saturation was reached identified 24 factors that would influence their RCT enrollment decisions. These factors grouped naturally into four themes: (1) personal medical benefits, (2) personal medical risks/harms, (3) nonmedical benefits, and (4) nonmedical burdens. Personal benefits were cited as commonly as altruistic motives. One third of the patients (9/26) suggested that they would defer enrollment decisions to their treating clinicians. Seventy-nine percent of patients (11/14) assigned to consider trials without background therapies expressed concerns about clinical deterioration (vs. 17% (2/12) among patients assigned to consider trials allowing background therapies).

LIMITATIONS

The sample was recruited from a single academic center. Furthermore, the use of hypothetical trials may not elicit identical decision-making processes as may be used among patients contemplating actual trial participation.

CONCLUSION

For PAH patients considering RCT enrollment, the potentials for personal benefit and risk are at least as important as altruistic motives. Minimizing the time demands of participating, financial remuneration, and allowing participants to continue current therapies are factors, which might enhance enrollment to trials in similar disease areas.

Ethical issues in consenting vulnerable patients for neuroscience research

Many subjects cannot give fully informed consent to take part in research by virtue of age or mental capacity. However, it is unacceptable to deny these patients involvement in research by virtue of a lack of capacity to consent to such research. Further, this would hinder the advancement of medical science and technologies that might ultimately benefit these patients. Conversely, it is as unacceptable to discriminate against these patients and their condition as it is to exploit them or expose them to undue risk. Neuroscientific research raises a number of specific ethical issues in this patient population, in particular issues of consent, potential benefits of research, management of incidental findings and the assignment of appropriate controls. This paper examines the dilemmas that surround such ethical issues, and demonstrates that various procedures including informed consent, deferred consent and consent by proxy can be used to consent patients in both the standard medical and research arenas. Researchers, clinicians and regulatory authorities must work together to understand the benefits, limitations, risks and obligations of any research study involving these patients in order to advance medical care.