Barriers to therapeutic clinical trials enrollment: differences between African-American and white cancer patients identified at the time of eligibility assessment

Demographic Differences in Emergency Room Epistaxis Treatment Patterns and Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

Investigate the association between demographic characteristics and emergency department (ED) epistaxis management and outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

TriNetX US collaborative database.

METHODS

Adults presenting to the ED for epistaxis were retrospectively followed for 7 days. Spanish-speaking patients were propensity score matched to English-speaking patients by demographics and medical history. Outcomes included use of nasal decongestant, nasal packing or cautery, diagnostic nasal endoscopy, endoscopic control of hemorrhage, hospital admission, and mortality. The analysis was also performed with stratification by race and ethnicity.

RESULTS

Spanish-speaking patients were less likely to receive nasal packing or cautery [odds ratio, OR: 0.78; 95% confidence interval, CI: (0.68; 0.90)] or diagnostic nasal endoscopy [OR: 0.72; 95% CI: (0.52; 0.98)] compared to English-speaking patients. Black patients were more likely to receive treatment with a nasal decongestant spray [OR: 1.31; 95% CI: (1.27, 1.36)], but less likely to receive any other treatment compared to White patients. Asian patients were less likely to undergo nasal packing or cautery [OR: 0.90; 95% CI: (0.82; 0.99)], but had more ED visits [(1.37; 1.32) P < .01] compared to White patients. Hispanic patients were less likely to be admitted [OR: 0.93; 95% CI: (0.87; 0.98)], and averaged fewer ED visits [(1.27; 1.30) P = <.0001] compared to non-Hispanic patients.

CONCLUSION

While demographic trends in ED epistaxis management are nuanced, our results suggest that Spanish-speaking, Black, Asian, and Hispanic patients are less likely to receive diagnostic and epistaxis control procedures. Additional research is needed to determine the etiology of these differences.

Breast cancer clinical trial participation among diverse patients at a comprehensive cancer center

This study was designed to determine the enrollment patterns in breast cancer clinical trials (CCTs) of patients with diverse backgrounds in an equal access setting and to evaluate the factors contributing to low rates of clinical trial accrual in patients of low socioeconomic status (SES). We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of new patients seen at the Dan L. Duncan Comprehensive Cancer Center dating from 5/2015 to 9/2021, which included 3043 patients screened for breast CCTs. We compared the rate of CCT availability, eligibility, and enrollment between two patient populations: Smith Clinic, where most patients are of low SES and uninsured, and Baylor St. Luke's Medical Center (BSLMC) with mostly predominantly insured, higher income patients. We performed logistic regression to evaluate whether differences in age, clinic, race, trial type, and primary language may be underlying the differences in CCT enrollment. More patients were eligible for CCTs at Smith Clinic (53.7% vs 44.7%, p < 0.001). However, Smith Clinic patients were more likely to decline CCT enrollment compared to BSLMC (61.3% declined vs 39.4%, p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, Black patients had a significantly higher rate of CCT refusal overall (OR = 0.26, 95% CI 0.12-0.56, p < 0.001) and BSLMC only (OR = 0.20, 95% CI 0.060-0.60, p = 0.006). Our data shows that it is likely an oversimplification to assume that equal access will lead to the elimination of CCT disparities. Efforts to diversify CCTs must include consideration of structural and institutional inequities as well as social needs.

Race and ethnicity reporting and representation in hemophilia clinical trials

ABSTRACT

Racial and ethnic representativeness in clinical trials is crucial to mitigate disparities in outcomes; however, diversity among hemophilia trials is unknown. The aim of this study is to examine the reporting and representation of race and ethnicity in trials of people with hemophilia (PwH). In this cross-sectional study, the ClinicalTrials.gov database was queried in April 2023 for interventional clinical trials involving PwH between 2007 and 2022. The distribution of participants (observed) was compared with expected proportions based on US Hemophilia Treatment Center (HTC) and country-specific census data with observed-to-expected ratios (OERs). Of 129 trials included, 94.6% were industry sponsored, with a mean of 62 participants and mean age of 26.8 years. Overall, 52.0% (n = 66) of trials reported data on race and ethnicity, increasing from 13.9% in 2007-2012 to 22.5% in 2013-2016 to 100% in 2017-2022 (P = .001). Among these 66 trials, 65.8%, 22.8%, 5.1%, 3.9% of participants were White, Asian, Hispanic, and Black, respectively. OERs were 10% to 20% lower for White participants vs US HTC, and US, UK, and Canadian census populations and ∼75% lower for Black or Hispanic participants when compared with US HTC and US census population. OERs for Asian participants were 1.6 to 3 times higher than Canada, US, and UK census populations. The reporting of race and ethnicity in hemophilia trials has drastically improved; however, Black and Hispanic PwH remain especially underrepresented. To address these disparities, stakeholders across the clinical trial enterprise need to implement strategies to ensure equitable participation.

Dental evaluation and clearance prior to allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation

INTRODUCTION

Dental examination and stabilization are performed prior to allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation to decrease infection risk during neutropenia. Burden of dental disease and treatment need is not well characterized in this population.

OBJECTIVES

This report describes the dental status of a cohort of patients within the Chronic Graft-versus-Host Disease Consortium and treatment rendered prior to transplant.

METHODS

The cohort included 486 subjects (Fred Hutchinson: n = 245; Dana-Farber: n = 241). Both centers have institutional-based dental clearance programs. Data were retrospectively abstracted from medical records by calibrated oral health specialists.

RESULTS

The median age at transplant was 55.9 years, 62.1% were male, and 88% were white. Thirteen patients were edentulous (2.7%). The mean teeth among dentate patients before clearance was 26.0 (SD, 4.6). Dental findings included untreated caries (31.2%), restorations (91.6%), endodontically treated teeth (48.1%), and dental implants (5.7%). Pretransplant procedures during clearance included endodontic therapy (3.6%; mean = 0.1 teeth), restorations (25.1%; mean = 0.7), dental prophylaxis (59.2%), scaling/root planing (5.1%), and extraction (13.2%; mean = 0.3). The mean teeth after clearance was 25.6 (SD, 5.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Retrospective analysis of pre-AlloHCT dental data in subjects at two large transplant centers identified low levels of dental need. Findings suggest high access to care.

Defining interventions and metrics to improve diversity in CNS clinical trial participation: A SNO and RANO effort

Despite major strides in cancer research and therapy, these advances have not been equitable across race and ethnicity. Historically marginalized groups (HMG) are more likely to have inadequate preventive screening, increased delays in diagnosis, and poor representation in clinical trials. Notably, Black, Hispanic, and Indigenous people represent 30% of the population but only 9% of oncology clinical trial participants. As a result, HMGs lack equitable access to novel therapies, contradicting the principle of distributive justice, as enshrined in the Belmont report, which demands the equitable selection of subjects in research involving human subjects. The lack of clinical trial diversity also leads to low generalizability and potentially harmful medical practices. Specifically, patients with brain cancer face unique barriers to clinical trial enrollment and completion due to disease-specific neurologic and treatment-induced conditions. Collectively, the intersection of these disease-specific conditions with social determinants of health fosters a lack of diversity in clinical trials. To ameliorate this disparity in neuro-oncology clinical trial participation, we present interventions focused on improving engagement of HMGs. Proposals range from inclusive trial design, decreasing barriers to care, expanding trial eligibility, access to tumor profiling for personalized medical trials, setting reasonable metrics and goals for accrual, working with patient community stakeholders, diversifying the neuro-oncology workforce, and development of tools to overcome biases with options to incentivize equity. The diversification of participation amongst neuro-oncology clinical trials is imperative. Equitable access and inclusion of HMG patients with brain tumors will not only enhance research discoveries but will also improve patient care.

TBCRC 057: Survey about willingness to participate in cancer clinical trials during the pandemic

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer patients experienced heightened anxiety during the pandemic. Also, modifications to clinical trial activities allowing for virtual platforms, local assessments, and greater flexibility were introduced to facilitate participation. We sought to evaluate the association between pandemic-related anxiety and willingness to participate in trials and how pandemic-era modifications to trial activities affect the decision to participate.

METHODS

We conducted an online survey from August to September, 2021 of patients with breast cancer assessing pandemic-related anxiety; clinical trials knowledge and attitudes; willingness to participate during and before the pandemic; and how each modification affects the decision to participate. Fisher's exact tests evaluated differences in proportions and two-sample t-tests evaluated differences in means. The association of pandemic-related anxiety with a decline in willingness to participate during compared to prior to the pandemic was modeled using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among 385 respondents who completed the survey, 81% reported moderate-severe pandemic-related anxiety. Mean willingness to participate in a trial was lower during the pandemic than prior [2.97 (SD 1.17) vs. 3.10 (SD 1.09), (p < 0.001)]. Severe anxiety was associated with higher odds of diminished willingness to participate during the pandemic compared to prior (OR 5.07). Each of the modifications, with the exception of opting out of research-only blood tests, were endorsed by >50% of respondents as strategies that would increase their likelihood of deciding to participate.

CONCLUSIONS

While pandemic-related anxiety was associated with diminished willingness to participate in trials, the leading reasons for reluctance to consider trial participation were unrelated to the pandemic but included worries about not getting the best treatment, side effects, and delaying care. Patients view trial modifications favorably, supporting continuation of these modifications, as endorsed by the National Cancer Institute and others.

Clinical research nurses' perceptions of the unique needs of people of color for successful recruitment to cancer clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials (CTs) test new medical products for safety and effectiveness. Despite federal policy aimed at generating greater inclusivity of people of color (POC) in CTs, disparity in (CT) enrollment persists. Non-Hispanic White patients comprise the majority of CT participants while Black and Hispanic patient participation has declined over the past decade. The scope of Clinical Research Nurses (CRNs) includes recruitment of participants for CTs. The aim of this phenomenological study was to describe adult oncology CRNs' lived experiences of recruiting POC cancer patients to participate in CTs. The first paper for this study identified three major themes regarding how CRNs view their role in caring for POC considering or enrolling onto cancer clinical trials (CCTs): CRNs act as advocates, care coordinators and educators. This paper focuses on two additional major themes regarding how CRNs view the unique needs of POC in clinical research: establishing and maintaining trusting relationships and recruitment infrastructure.

METHODS

Nineteen nurses participated in semi-structured one-to-one interviews and data analysis was based on Colaizzi's method.

RESULTS

CRNs described a history of past research injustices, disparate access to care, inadequate cultural training, a physician-driven recruitment structure and provider-based implicit biases that hinder POC enrollment in CTs.

CONCLUSION

Diversity in CCT enrollment requires CRNs to establish trust with POC, advocate for POC when implicit biases are observed and become competent practitioners of culturally sensitive care. Further, meaningful policy change at both federal and organizational levels must occur to ensure equitable access to novel cancer therapies.

Enrollment of Racial and Ethnic Minoritized Groups in Gynecologic Oncology Clinical Trials: A Review of the Scope of the Problem, Contributing Factors, and Strategies to Improve Inclusion

Racial inequities are well-documented across the gynecologic oncology care continuum, including the representation of racial and ethnic minoritized groups (REMGs) in gynecologic oncology clinical trials. We specifically reviewed the scope of REMG disparities, contributing factors, and strategies to improve inclusion. We found systematic and progressively worsening under-enrollment of REMGs, particularly of Black and Latinx populations. In addition, race/ethnicity data reporting is poor, yet a prerequisite for accountability to recruitment goals. Trial participation barriers are multifactorial, and successful remediation likely requires multi-level strategies. More rigorous, transparent data on trial participants and effectiveness studies on REMG recruitment strategies are needed to improve enrollment.

Sarcoidosis: Updates on therapeutic drug trials and novel treatment approaches

Sarcoidosis is a systemic granulomatous inflammatory disease of unknown etiology. It affects the lungs in over 90% of patients yet extra-pulmonary and multi-organ involvement is common. Spontaneous remission of disease occurs commonly, nonetheless, over 50% of patients will require treatment and up to 30% of patients will develop a chronic progressive non-remitting disease with marked pulmonary fibrosis leading to significant morbidity and death. Guidelines outlining an immunosuppressive treatment approach to sarcoidosis were recently published, however, the strength of evidence behind many of the guideline recommended drugs is weak. None of the drugs currently used for the treatment of sarcoidosis have been rigorously studied and prescription of these drugs is often based on off-label” indications informed by experience with other diseases. Indeed, only two medications [prednisone and repository corticotropin (RCI) injection] currently used in the treatment of sarcoidosis are approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration. This situation results in significant reimbursement challenges especially for the more advanced (and often more effective) drugs that are favored for severe and refractory forms of disease causing an over-reliance on corticosteroids known to be associated with significant dose and duration dependent toxicities. This past decade has seen a renewed interest in developing new drugs and exploring novel therapeutic pathways for the treatment of sarcoidosis. Several of these trials are active randomized controlled trials (RCTs) designed to recruit relatively large numbers of patients with a goal to determine the safety, efficacy, and tolerability of these new molecules and therapeutic approaches. While it is an exciting time, it is also necessary to exercise caution. Resources including research dollars and most importantly, patient populations available for trials are limited and thus necessitate that several of the challenges facing drug trials and drug development in sarcoidosis are addressed. This will ensure that currently available resources are judiciously utilized. Our paper reviews the ongoing and anticipated drug trials in sarcoidosis and addresses the challenges facing these and future trials. We also review several recently completed trials and draw lessons that should be applied in future.

A nationwide analysis of clinical trial participation for common hepato-pancreato-biliary malignancies demonstrates survival advantages for subsets of trial patients but disparities in and infrequency of enrollment

BACKGROUND

We describe factors associated with trial enrollment for patients with hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) malignancies. We analyzed the association and effect of trial enrollment on overall survival (OS).

METHODS

The National Cancer Database (2004-2017) was queried for common HPB malignancies (pancreatic adenocarcinoma [PDAC] & neuroendocrine tumors, hepatocellular carcinoma [HCC], biliary tract cancers [BTC]). Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with trial enrollment. OS was analyzed by multivariable Cox regression. Inverse-probability-weighted Cox regression was utilized to determine the effect of trial enrollment on OS.

RESULTS

A total of 1573 (0.3%) of 511,639 patients were enrolled in trials; pancreatic malignancy: 1214 (0.4%); HCC: 217 (0.14%); BTC: 106 (0.15%). HCC and BTC were associated with lower likelihood of enrollment compared with pancreatic malignancy. Black and Hispanic patients were less likely to be enrolled compared to White patients. Treatment at academic facilities and metastatic disease were associated with higher likelihood of enrollment. Enrollment was associated with higher OS for PDAC, metastatic HCC, and metastatic BTC. Trial enrollment exhibited an OS advantage for PDAC and metastatic HCC.

CONCLUSION

Nationally, fewer than 1% of patients with HPB malignancies were enrolled in clinical trials. There are racial, sociodemographic, and facility-based disparities in trial enrollment.

Eligibility Criteria Perpetuate Disparities in Enrollment and Participation of Black Patients in Pancreatic Cancer Clinical Trials

PURPOSE

Clinical trials determine safety and efficacy of cancer therapeutics and establish standards of care. Minority patient participation in cancer clinical trials is dismal. We aimed to determine the impact of eligibility criteria on disparities in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) clinical trial candidacy.

METHODS

Traditional PDAC trial eligibility criteria were obtained from ClinicalTrials.gov. Patients with PDAC who sought care at Virginia Commonwealth University Health from 2010 to 2019 were included. Clinical data were obtained from billing codes and discrete values in the electronic medical record. Eligibility criteria differences between racial groups were determined using chi-squared tests and unconditional maximum likelihood-based odds ratios.

RESULTS

Among 676 patients, most identified as Black or White race (42.5% and 51.6%, respectively). Using traditional criteria, Black patients were more likely to be ineligible for participation compared with White patients (42.4% v 33.2%, P = .023) secondary to hypoalbuminemia (14.1% v 7.9%, P = .023), HIV (3.1% v 0.3%, P = .010), hepatitis B (1.7% v 0%, P = .043), and hepatitis C (9.1% v 3.4%, P = .005). Black patients were also numerically more likely to be ineligible because of renal dysfunction, recent coronary stenting, and uncontrolled diabetes mellitus. Prior cancer treatment excluded fewer Black than White patients (9.1% v 14.0%, P = .072), most attributable to lower rates of neoadjuvant chemotherapy received. Strategic eligibility criteria revisions could equalize ineligibility rates between Black and White patients (26.8% v 24.8%, P = .581).

CONCLUSION

Traditional eligibility criteria differentially exclude Black patients from participating in PDAC clinical trials. These criteria perpetuate disparities, limit generalizability, and are often not medically justifiable. Revised criteria may improve participant diversity, without compromising safety or study results.

Clinical trials-related knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors among Black and Latina women: A randomized controlled trial of the Women United: Clinical Trials and the Fight Against Breast Cancer Program

Black and Latino adult cancer patients are underrepresented in cancer clinical trials, which limits generalizability of findings and amplifies disparities in healthcare access and outcomes. Community-level education programs designed to address barriers to participation could improve representation in cancer clinical trials. Through a community-campus partner framework, this study evaluated the Women United: Clinical Trials and the Fight Against Breast Cancer Program in Spanish and English. Participants were 422 women (141 Black, 140 Latina Spanish preference, 141 Latina English preference) who were randomized to view either the intervention (n = 215) or a control (n = 207) program. Assessments of clinical trials knowledge and barriers to clinical trials participation were taken before and after viewing. Results suggested that clinical trials knowledge increased and perceived barriers to participation decreased for those who viewed the educational program. More specifically, those in the intervention condition perceived fewer barriers related to personal benefits, mistrust, and familiarity of clinical trials. As expected, there were no differences in perceived barriers related to community support for either condition. Participants in both conditions were equally likely to join a subsequent study or a clinical trials community ambassador program. There were no differences in any of the outcomes across ethnicity or language, suggesting the program works equivalently across groups. This program is easy to administer and can be recommended for use among Black and Latina women to address factors related to clinical trials participation.

Ethical Considerations in Clinical Trials for Disorders of Consciousness

As the clinical trial landscape for patients with disorders of consciousness (DoC) expands, consideration of associated ethical challenges and opportunities is of ever-increasing importance. Responsible conduct of research in the vulnerable population of persons with DoC, including those with coma, vegetative state/unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (VS/UWS), minimally conscious state (MCS), covert cortical processing (CCP), and cognitive motor dissociation (CMD), demands proactive deliberation of unique ethical issues that may arise and the adoption of robust protections to safeguard patients, surrogates, and other key stakeholders. Here we identify and critically evaluate four central categories of ethical considerations in clinical trials involving participants with DoC: (1) autonomy, respect for persons and informed consent of individuals with liminal consciousness; (2) balancing unknown benefits and risks, especially considering the epistemological gap between behavior and consciousness that complicates ordinary ascription of subjective states; (3) disclosure to surrogates and clinical teams of investigational results pertaining to consciousness; and (4) justice considerations, including equitable access to clinical trial enrollment across communities and geographies. We outline guiding principles and research opportunities for clinicians, neuroethicists, and researchers engaged in DoC clinical trials to advance ethical study design and deployment in this complex yet crucial area of investigation.

Understanding Willingness to Participate in Cancer Clinical Trials Among Patients and Caregivers Attending a Minority-Serving Academic Cancer Center

Advances in cancer treatment are impeded by low accrual rates of patients to cancer clinical trials (CCTs). The national rates of recruitment of underserved groups, including racial/ethnic minorities, are limiting the generalizability of research findings and are likely to enhance inequities in cancer outcomes. The goal of this study was to examine willingness to participate (WTP) in CCTs and factors associated with this willingness among patients and caregivers attending a minority-serving university cancer center in the Southwest. A cross-sectional survey design was utilized (n = 236, 135 patients and 101 caregivers). Fear was the strongest predictor of WTP in CCTs. The only ethnic differences observed related to Spanish-speaking patients exhibiting increased WTP in CCTs, and Spanish-speaking caregivers' decreased WTP, compared to others. These results underscore the importance of future interventions to reduce CCT-related fear among patients and caregivers, with particular need for family-focused tailored interventions designed to meet the needs of Spanish-speaking patients and caregivers.

Review and Implications of Intergenerational Communication and Social Support in Chronic Disease Care and Participation in Health Research of Low-Income, Minority Older Adults in the United States

Background: Health disparities disproportionally affect Black and Hispanic older US adults. Health research is needed to understand and eliminate these disparities; however, older adults, and particularly Black and Hispanic/Latino older adults are underrepresented in health research. Adult children have influenced health behavior and health outcomes of their older parents in several demographics in the US. Analysis of these studies can lead to a model for the development of interventions aimed at improving health and healthcare participation of older Black and Hispanic US adults. Objectives: To review the role of intergenerational communication and social support in health behavior, health research, and health outcomes for older adults and to apply these findings toward a model for health interventions for Black and Hispanic US older adults. Methods: An analytical narrative review and application toward an intervention model. Results: Key topic areas were reviewed and analyzed by examining studies that applied forms of intergenerational communication and/or intergenerational social support with the goal of either improving health, disease management and/or participation in health research in populations world-wide. Next, a model for providing health interventions in older Black and Hispanic US adults was developed using strategies gleaned from the findings. Conclusion: A model for health intervention for Black and Hispanic/Latino US older adults was presented based on an analytical review and intergenerational communication and/or social support. Qualitative data are necessary to understand the enablers and barriers of intergenerational communication and social support to improve health outcomes in these populations.

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.

"When Offered to Participate": A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Patient Agreement to Participate in Cancer Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

Patient participation in clinical trials is vital for knowledge advancement and outcomes improvement. Few adult cancer patients participate in trials. Although patient.

decision-making about trial participation has been frequently examined, the participation rate for patients actually offered a trial is unknown.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis using 3 major search engines was undertaken. We identified studies from January 1, 2000, to January 1, 2020, that examined clinical trial participation in the United States. Studies must have specified the numbers of patients offered a trial and the number enrolled. A random effects model of proportions was used. All statistical tests were 2-sided.

RESULTS

We identified 35 studies (30 about treatment trials and 5 about cancer control trials) among which 9759 patients were offered trial participation. Overall, 55.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 49.4% to 60.5%) of patients agreed to enroll. Participation rates did not differ between treatment (55.0%, 95% CI = 48.9% to 60.9%) and cancer control trials (55.3%, 95% CI = 38.9% to 71.1%; P = .98). Black patients participated at similar rates (58.4%, 95% CI = 46.8% to 69.7%) compared with White patients (55.1%, 95% CI = 44.3% to 65.6%; P = .88). The main reasons for nonparticipation were treatment choice or lack of interest.

CONCLUSIONS

More than half of all cancer patients offered a clinical trial do participate. These findings upend several conventional beliefs about cancer clinical trial participation, including that Black patients are less likely to agree to participate and that patient decision-making is the primary barrier to participation. Policies and interventions to improve clinical trial participation should focus more on modifiable systemic structural and clinical barriers, such as improving access to available trials and broadening eligibility criteria.

Older adult participation in cancer clinical trials: A systematic review of barriers and interventions

Cancer is a disease of aging and, as the world's population ages, the number of older persons with cancer is increasing and will make up a growing share of the oncology population in virtually every country. Despite this, older patients remain vastly underrepresented in research that sets the standards for cancer treatments. Consequently, most of what we know about cancer therapeutics is based on clinical trials conducted in younger, healthier patients, and effective strategies to improve clinical trial participation of older adults with cancer remain sparse. For this systematic review, the authors evaluated published studies regarding barriers to participation and interventions to improve participation of older adults in cancer trials. The quality of the available evidence was low and, despite a literature describing multifaceted barriers, only one intervention study aimed to increase enrollment of older adults in trials. The findings starkly amplify the paucity of evidence-based, effective strategies to improve participation of this underrepresented population in cancer trials. Within these limitations, the authors provide their opinion on how the current cancer research infrastructure must be modified to accommodate the needs of older patients. Several underused solutions are offered to expand clinical trials to include older adults with cancer. However, as currently constructed, these recommendations alone will not solve the evidence gap in geriatric oncology, and efforts are needed to meet older and frail adults where they are by expanding clinical trials designed specifically for this population and leveraging real-world data.

Development of a Plain Language Decision Support Tool for Cancer Clinical Trials: Blending Health Literacy, Academic Research, and Minority Patient Perspectives

Despite the promise of clinical trials for improving cancer care, less than 5% of all cancer patients participate. Racial/ethnic minorities continue to be underrepresented in cancer clinical trials (CCTs). To address this gap, we developed a plain language, web-based decision support tool (CHOICES DST) in English and Spanish to support decision-making about CCTs among Blacks and Hispanics. In phase 1 (information collection), we conducted qualitative interviews with 45 cancer patients, completed a thorough literature review, and reviewed results from a telephone survey of 1100 cancer patients. In phase 2 (content generation), we created the first iteration of the CHOICES DST. In phase 3 (usability testing), we gathered user experience and acceptability data from a small sample of cancer survivors (n = 9). The Knowledge, Empowerment, and Values Clarification (KEV) model of decision-making was developed based on data from phase 1. The KEV model and other phase 1 data allowed us to create the CHOICES DST platform. Usability testing of the CHOICES DST showed highly favorable responses from users, satisfaction with content, ease of navigation, and a desire to use the tool. Qualitative results identified addressable points that would benefit from content and navigation-related alterations. The final version of the CHOICES DST was well received and understood by Black and Hispanic participants, and adheres to the mandates for plain language communication. This research provides preliminary data that CHOICES DST holds promise for improving knowledge of CCTs and potentially improving informed decision-making about participation in trials.

Discordant attitudes and beliefs about cancer clinical trial participation between physicians, research staff, and cancer patients

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Essential to bringing innovative cancer treatments to patients is voluntary participation in clinical trials but approximately 8% of American cancer patients are enrolled onto a trial. We used a domain-oriented framework to assess barriers to cancer clinical trial enrollment.

METHODS

Physicians (MD, DO, fellows, residents) and research staff (physician assistants, nurse practitioners, staff and research nurses, clinical assistants, and program coordinators) involved in clinical research at a comprehensive cancer center completed an online survey in 2017; adult cancer patients not currently enrolled in a trial were interviewed in 2018. To inform the construct of our physician/staff and patient surveys and to assess barriers to clinical trial enrollment, we first conducted in-depth interviews among 14 key informants representing medical, hematologic, gynecologic, neurologic, radiation oncology, as well as members of the clinical research team (one clinical research coordinator, one research nurse practitioner). Perceived structural, provider- and patient-level barriers to clinical trial enrollment were assessed. Differences in perceptions, attitudes, and beliefs toward clinical trial enrollment between (1) physicians and staff, (2) patients by ethnicity, and (3) physicians/staff and patients were examined.

RESULTS

In total, 120 physicians/staff involved in clinical research (39.2% physicians, 60.8% staff; 48.0% overall response rate) and 150 cancer patients completed surveys. Nearly three-quarters of physician/staff respondents reported difficulty in keeping track of the eligibility criteria for open studies but was more often cited by physicians than staff (84.4% vs 64.3%, p = 0.02). Physicians more often reported lack of time to present clinical trial information than did staff(p < 0.001); 44.0% of staff versus 18.2% of physicians reported patient family interaction as a clinical trial enrollment barrier (p = 0.007). Hispanic patients more often stated they would join a trial, even if standard therapy was an option compared to non-Hispanic patients (47.7% vs 20.8%, p = 0.002). Comparing the beliefs and perceptions of physicians/staff to those of patients, patients more often reported negative beliefs about clinical trial enrollment (e.g. being in a trial does not help patients personally, 32.9% vs 1.8%, p < 0.001) but less often felt they had no other options when agreeing to join (38.1% vs 85.6%, p < 0.001), and less often refused clinical trial enrollment due to lack of understanding (9.1% vs 63.3%, p = 0.001) than reported by physicians/staff.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate a wide gap between physician/staff and patient attitudes and beliefs about clinical trial enrollment and highlight the importance of focusing future initiatives to raise awareness of this incongruency. Reconciling these differences will require tailored education to reduce implicit biases and dispel misperceptions. Strategies to improve the quality of patient-provider communication and address infrastructure and resource issues are also needed to improve patient enrollment onto cancer clinical trials.

Racial Disparities in Hepatitis C Treatment Eligibility

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C (HCV) is more prevalent in African Americans than in any other racial group in the United States. However, African Americans are more likely to be deemed ineligible for HCV treatment than non-African Americans. There has been limited research into the origins of racial disparities in HCV treatment eligibility.

AIM

The purpose of this study was to compare medical and non-medical characteristics commonly assessed in clinical practice that could potentially contribute to HCV treatment ineligibility disparities between African American and non-African American patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients with confirmed HCV RNA considering treatment (n = 309) were recruited from university-affiliated and VA liver and infectious disease clinics.

RESULTS

African Americans and non-African Americans did not differ in prevalence of lifetime and current psychiatric disorders and risky behaviors, and HCV knowledge. HCV clinical characteristics were similar between both groups in terms of HCV exposure history, number of months aware of HCV diagnosis, stage of fibrosis, and HCV virologic levels. African Americans did have higher proportions of diabetes, renal disease, and bleeding ulcer.

CONCLUSIONS

No clinical evidence was found to indicate that African Americans should be more often deemed ineligible for HCV treatment than other racial groups. Diabetes and renal disease do not fully explain the HCV treatment ineligibility racial disparity, because HCV patients with these conditions are priority patients for HCV treatment because of their greater risk for cirrhosis, steatosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma. The findings suggest that an underlying contributor to the HCV treatment eligibility disparity disfavoring African Americans could be racial discrimination.

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

There is a striking racial and ethnic disparity in incidence and mortality of cancer yet minorities remain markedly underrepresented in clinical trials. This pilot study set out to determine the impact of a 15-min culturally tailored educational video on three outcomes relating to clinical trials: likely participation, attitudes (assessed based on six barriers), and actual enrollment. Breast cancer patients with Stage I-III, if diagnosed within previous 6 months, or metastatic disease who self-identified as black or African American were invited to participate. The primary outcome measure was the decision to participate in a therapeutic clinical trial after the intervention. Patients’ intention to enroll on a therapeutic clinical trial and the change in attitudes toward clinical trials were measured by the previously developed Attitudes and Intention to Enroll in Therapeutic Clinical Trials (AIET) questionnaire. Of the 200 patients that participated, 39 (19.5%) patients signed consent to participate in a therapeutic clinical trial; 27 (13.5%) patients enrolled, resulting in a 7.5% increase from our baseline comparison of 6% clinical trial enrollment rate in black cancer patients (p < .001). Pre-test versus post-test assessment demonstrated the proportion of patients expressing likelihood to enroll in a therapeutic trial following the intervention increased by 14% (p < .001). Among 31 AIET items, 25 (81%) showed statistically significant and positive change post-intervention. The findings suggest the promising utility of a culturally tailored video intervention for improving black patients’ attitudes regarding clinical trial participation and resultant enrollment. Future efforts should continue to target facilitators of population-specific recruitment, enrollment, and retention in therapeutic and non-therapeutic clinical trials.

A culturally tailored educational video can boost participation among black patients in clinical trials of new breast cancer treatments. A US team led by Sandra Swain from Georgetown University Medical Center in Washington, DC, created a 15-min video designed to address six of the concerns commonly cited by blacks about human subjects research. The researchers showed the video to 200 black patients, and saw a large bump in the number of women willing to sign up for a therapeutic trial. On average, only 6% of black cancer patients typically enroll in clinical trials. But in the video intervention study, 19.5% agreed to participate and then 13.5% went ahead with a trial. Video watchers also reported a positive change in their attitude toward clinical research. The study points to the need for population-specific recruitment efforts.

Analysis of Common Eligibility Criteria of Randomized Controlled Trials in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Patients and Extrapolating Outcomes

BACKGROUND

The performance of multiple myeloma (MM) therapies in a general patient population and specific eligibility criteria that might limit enrollment into randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have not been evaluated in depth. This study aimed to determine if improvements seen with MM therapies in RCTs are reflected in the general patient population and to identify eligibility criteria that can be modified to increase enrollment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The Connect MM Registry is a prospective observational cohort study of patients with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) in the United States. Using common RCT exclusion criteria collected from 16 published studies, patients in the registry were categorized according to their eligibility for inclusion in RCTs.

RESULTS

On the basis of common criteria, 563 of 1406 of registry patients (40.0%) are ineligible for RCTs. Criteria leading to exclusion included M-protein ≤ 1.0 g/dL (25.2%), creatinine > 2.5 mg/dL (13.9%), low absolute neutrophil count (10.0%), and low hemoglobin (9.6%). Significantly more RCT-ineligible versus RCT-eligible patients had hypercalcemia (11.0% vs. 5.5%), elevated creatinine levels (38.9% vs. 6.2%), low hemoglobin levels (59.5% vs. 39.5%), or International Staging System stage III disease (40.1% vs. 22.1%; P < .001 for all comparisons). RCT-ineligible patients had a lower 3-year survival rate than RCT-eligible patients (63% vs. 70%). The incidence of serious adverse events was similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

Of patients with NDMM enrolled in the Connect MM Registry, 40% are ineligible for RCTs. This study provides insight into potential modifications of standard eligibility criteria that can lead to improved RCT design and accelerated enrollment.

Academic Cancer Center Phase I Program Development

This commentary assesses the factors necessary for the effectiveness of academic phase I cancer programs. The metrics presented here may be useful as a rubric for new and established programs.

Multiple factors critical to the effectiveness of academic phase I cancer programs were assessed among 16 academic centers in the U.S. Successful cancer centers were defined as having broad phase I and I/II clinical trial portfolios, multiple investigator‐initiated studies, and correlative science. The most significant elements were institutional philanthropic support, experienced clinical research managers, robust institutional basic research, institutional administrative efforts to reduce bureaucratic regulatory delays, phase I navigators to inform patients and physicians of new studies, and a large cancer center patient base. New programs may benefit from a separate stand‐alone operation, but mature phase I programs work well when many of the activities are transferred to disease‐oriented teams. The metrics may be useful as a rubric for new and established academic phase I programs.

Recruitment and Baseline Characteristics of Participants in the Lifestyle Improvement Through Food and Exercise (LIFE) Study

African Americans experience poorer diabetes outcomes than non-Hispanic Whites. Few clinical trials of diabetes self-management interventions specifically target African Americans, perhaps due to well-documented barriers to recruitment in this population. This paper describes strategies used to successfully recruit 211 low-income African Americans from community clinics of a large, urban public hospital system to a randomized clinical trial of an 18-month diabetes self-management intervention. Diabetes-related physiological, psychosocial, and behavioral characteristics of the sample are reported. The sample was 77% female, mean age = 55, mean A1C = 8.5%, 39% low health literacy, 28.4% moderate/severe depression, and 48.3% low adherence. Participants ate a high-fat diet with low vegetable consumption. Relative to males, females had higher BMI, depression, and stress, and better glycemic control, less physical activity, and less alcohol consumption. Males consumed more daily calories, but females consumed a greater proportion of carbohydrates. Gender-specific diabetes self-management strategies may be warranted in this population.

African-American patients with cancer Talking About Clinical Trials (TACT) with oncologists during consultations: evaluating the efficacy of tailored health messages in a randomised controlled trial-the TACT study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Low rates of accrual of African-American (AA) patients with cancer to therapeutic clinical trials (CTs) represent a serious and modifiable racial disparity in healthcare that impedes the development of promising cancer therapies. Suboptimal physician-patient consultation communication is a barrier to the accrual of patients with cancer of any race, but communication difficulties are compounded with AA patients. Providing tailored health messages (THM) to AA patients and their physician about CTs has the potential to improve communication, lower barriers to accrual and ameliorate health disparities.

OBJECTIVE

(1) Demonstrate the efficacy of THM to increase patient activation as measured by direct observation. (2) Demonstrate the efficacy of THM to improve patient outcomes associated with barriers to AA participation. (3) Explore associations among preconsultation levels of: (A) trust in medical researchers, (B) knowledge and attitudes towards CTs, (C) patient-family member congruence in decision-making, and (D) involvement/information preferences, and group assignment.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

First, using established methods, we will develop THM materials. Second, the efficacy of the intervention is determined in a 2 by 2 factorial randomised controlled trial to test the effectiveness of (1) providing 357 AA patients with cancer with THM with 2 different 'depths' of tailoring and (2) either providing feedback to oncologists about the patients' trial THM or not. The primary analysis compares patient engaged communication in 4 groups preconsultation and postconsultation.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was approved by the Virginia Commonwealth University Institutional Review Board. To facilitate use of the THM intervention in diverse settings, we will convene 'user groups' at 3 major US cancer centres. To facilitate dissemination, we will post all materials and the implementation guide in publicly available locations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02356549.

Examining Differences in Opportunity and Eligibility for Cancer Clinical Trial Participation Based on Sociodemographic and Disease Characteristics

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

To examine differences in opportunity and eligibility for cancer clinical trial (CCT) participation based on sociodemographic and disease characteristics.
.

DESIGN

A matched cross-sectional study including a prospective oral questionnaire and retrospective electronic medical record (EMR) review.
.

SETTING

A single hospital in a large academic National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
.

SAMPLE

44 Black or Hispanic and 44 Non-Hispanic White newly diagnosed individuals matched on cancer type and age (plus or minus five years).
.

METHODS

Participants answered a questionnaire to capture self-reported opportunity for CCT participation, sociodemographic information, and cancer type. With consent, the authors completed a retrospective review of the EMR to assess eligibility and collect cancer stage and performance status.
.

MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES

Opportunity and eligibility for CCT participation.
.

FINDINGS

Most participants (78%) had no opportunity for participation and were ineligible for all available trials. No differences were noted in opportunity for participation or eligibility based on race or ethnicity. Participants with late-stage disease were more likely to have opportunity and be eligible for CCT participation (p = 0.001). Those with private insurance were less likely to have opportunity for participation (p = 0.05).
.

CONCLUSIONS

Limited trial availability and ineligibility negatively influenced opportunity for CCT participation for all populations. Levels of under-representation for CCT participation likely vary within and across sociodemographic and disease characteristics, as well as across healthcare settings.
.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING

The unique roles of nurse navigators and advanced practice nurses can be leveraged to increase opportunities for CCT participation for all populations.

Will they participate? Predicting patients' response to clinical trial invitations in a pediatric emergency department

Objective (1) To develop an automated algorithm to predict a patient’s response (ie, if the patient agrees or declines) before he/she is approached for a clinical trial invitation; (2) to assess the algorithm performance and the predictors on real-world patient recruitment data for a diverse set of clinical trials in a pediatric emergency department; and (3) to identify directions for future studies in predicting patients’ participation response.

Materials and Methods We collected 3345 patients’ response to trial invitations on 18 clinical trials at one center that were actively enrolling patients between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2012. In parallel, we retrospectively extracted demographic, socioeconomic, and clinical predictors from multiple sources to represent the patients’ profiles. Leveraging machine learning methodology, the automated algorithms predicted participation response for individual patients and identified influential features associated with their decision-making. The performance was validated on the collection of actual patient response, where precision, recall, F-measure, and area under the ROC curve were assessed.

Results Compared to the random response predictor that simulated the current practice, the machine learning algorithms achieved significantly better performance (Precision/Recall/F-measure/area under the ROC curve: 70.82%/92.02%/80.04%/72.78% on 10-fold cross validation and 71.52%/92.68%/80.74%/75.74% on the test set). By analyzing the significant features output by the algorithms, the study confirmed several literature findings and identified challenges that could be mitigated to optimize recruitment.

Conclusion By exploiting predictive variables from multiple sources, we demonstrated that machine learning algorithms have great potential in improving the effectiveness of the recruitment process by automatically predicting patients’ participation response to trial invitations.

Enrollment and Racial Disparities in Cancer Treatment Clinical Trials in North Carolina

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials provide access to innovative, high-quality cancer treatment. Simultaneously, broad access helps to ensure that trials include heterogeneous patient populations, which improves the generalizability of findings and the development of interventions that are effective for diverse populations. We provide updated data describing enrollment into cancer treatment trials in North Carolina.

METHODS

For the period 1996-2009, person-level data regarding cancer clinical trial enrollment and cancer incidence were obtained from the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry and the National Cancer Institute (NCI). Enrollment rates were estimated as the ratio of trial enrollment to cancer incidence for race, sex, and year for each county, Area Health Education Center region, and the state overall. Enrollment rates for common cancers are presented.

RESULTS

From 1996 to 2009, North Carolina NCI treatment trial enrollment rates were 2.4% and 2.2% for white patients and minority patients, respectively. From 2007 to 2009, rates were 3.8% for white women, 3.5% for minority women, 1.3% for white men, and 1.0% for minority men; there was greater enrollment among more urban populations (2.4%) than among the most rural populations (1.5%).

LIMITATIONS

This study is limited to NCI-sponsored treatment trials in North Carolina. Policies governing collection of original data necessitate a delay in data availability.

CONCLUSIONS

Effort is needed to ensure trial access and enrollment among all North Carolina populations. Specifically, we identified racial and sex disparities, particularly for certain cancers (eg, breast cancer). Programs in North Carolina and across the nation can use the methods we employed to assess their success in broadening clinical trial enrollment to include diverse populations.

Recruitment and retention strategies in clinical studies with low-income and minority populations: Progress from 2004-2014

More than 20years have passed since the NIH 1993 Act was initiated, and while progress has been made toward better representation of minorities and women in clinical research studies, as this review will show, there is still tremendous room for improvement. The purpose of this review was to identify the current state of literature on recruitment and retention strategies in clinical studies of low-income and minority populations. We identified 165 studies published in English between 2004 and 2014. Data extracted included information on the study type (descriptive or analytical), study design, study focus (recruitment, retention, both recruitment and retention), health outcome, specific minority group, special population or age group, if specific recruitment/retention techniques were tested, and key research findings. Particular attention was given to articles that statistically analyzed the effectiveness of recruitment and retention strategies on enrollment/retention rates. Effective recruitment and retention strategies for low-income and minority groups, differential effectiveness across groups, and implications for future research are discussed.

Lymphoma incidence, survival and prevalence 2004-2014: sub-type analyses from the UK's Haematological Malignancy Research Network

BACKGROUND

Population-based information about cancer occurrence and survival are required to inform clinical practice and research; but for most lymphomas data are lacking.

METHODS

Set within a socio-demographically representative UK population of nearly 4 million, lymphoma data (N=5796) are from an established patient cohort.

RESULTS

Incidence, survival (overall and relative) and prevalence estimates for >20 subtypes are presented. With few exceptions, males tended to be diagnosed at younger ages and have significantly (P<0.05) higher incidence rates. Differences were greatest at younger ages: the <15 year male/female rate ratio for all subtypes combined being 2.2 (95% CI 1.3-3.4). These gender differences impacted on prevalence; most subtype estimates being significantly (P<0.05) higher in males than females. Outcome varied widely by subtype; survival of patients with nodular lymphocyte predominant Hodgkin lymphoma approached that of the general population, whereas less than a third of those with other B-cell (e.g., mantle cell) or T-cell (e.g., peripheral-T) lymphomas survived for ≥5 years. No males/female survival differences were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Major strengths of our study include completeness of ascertainment, world-class diagnostics and generalisability. The marked variations demonstrated confirm the requirement for 'real-world' data to inform aetiological hypotheses, health-care planning and the future monitoring of therapeutic changes.

Using registries to recruit subjects for clinical trials

AIM

We studied the use of patient/disease registries to recruit potential subjects for prospective clinical trials - describing the number, types and major benefits of using this approach.

METHODS

In December 2013, we conducted a focused database search in PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science for studies (English language only) that used registries to recruit subjects for clinical trials published in 2004-2013. Of the 233 unique citations identified, 21 used registries to recruit subjects - 10 papers and 11 abstracts. Pearling and search for subsequent full papers of the abstracts identified 4 more papers.

RESULTS

Our analysis, based on these 25 citations, showed that 14 are related to cancer, 3 to diabetes mellitus, 1 each to stroke, asthma, and celiac disease and 5 are disease neutral. Many types of registries (population-based cancer, quality improvement, disease-specific, web-based disease-neutral registries, local general practice registers, and national health database) are used to recruit subjects for clinical trials and uncover new knowledge. Overall, 16 registries are in the US, 4 in UK, 1 each in Canada, Spain, and Australia and 1 involved in many countries. Registries can identify very large number of subjects for screening for eligibility for clinical trials, especially in very large trials, rare disease trials, and trials involving minority patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Registries can retrospectively identify very large numbers of potential subjects for screening for eligibility and enrollment in prospective clinical trials. This matching can lead to more timely recruitment and help solve a major problem in conducting clinical trials.

Designing therapeutic clinical trials for older and frail adults with cancer: U13 conference recommendations

A majority of cancer diagnoses and deaths occur in patients age ≥ 65 years. With the aging of the US population, the number of older adults with cancer will grow. Although the coming wave of older patients with cancer was anticipated in the early 1980s, when the need for more research on the cancer-aging interface was recognized, many knowledge gaps remain when it comes to treating older and/or frailer patients with cancer. Relatively little is known about the best way to balance the risks and benefits of existing cancer therapies in older patients; however, these patients continue to be underrepresented in clinical trials. Furthermore, the available clinical trials often do not include end points pertinent to the older adult population, such as preservation of function, cognition, and independence. As part of its ongoing effort to advance research in the field of geriatric oncology, the Cancer and Aging Research Group held a conference in November 2012 in collaboration with the National Cancer Institute, the National Institute on Aging, and the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology. The goal was to develop recommendations and establish research guidelines for the design and implementation of therapeutic clinical trials for older and/or frail adults. The conference sought to identify knowledge gaps in cancer clinical trials for older adults and propose clinical trial designs to fill these gaps. The ultimate goal of this conference series is to develop research that will lead to evidence-based care for older and/or frail adults with cancer.

ACT2 peer-driven intervention increases enrollment into HIV/AIDS medical studies among African Americans/Blacks and Hispanics: A cluster randomized controlled trial

African American/Black and Hispanic persons living with HIV/AIDS ("AABH-PLHA") are under-represented in HIV/AIDS medical studies (HAMS). This paper evaluates the efficacy of a social/behavioral intervention to increase rates of screening for and enrollment into HAMS in these populations. Participants (N = 540) were enrolled into a cluster randomized controlled trial of an intervention designed to overcome multi-level barriers to HAMS. Primary endpoints were rates of screening for and enrollment into therapeutic/treatment-oriented and observational studies. Intervention arm participants were 30 times more likely to be screened than controls (49.3 % vs. 3.7 %; p < .001). Half (55.5 %) of those screened were eligible for HAMS, primarily observational studies. Nine out of ten found eligible enrolled (91.7 %), almost all into observational studies (95.2 %), compared to no enrollments among controls. Achieving appropriate representation of AABH-PLHA in HAMS necessitates modification of study inclusion criteria to increase the proportion found eligible for therapeutic HAMS, in addition to social/behavioral interventions.

Randomization is not associated with socio-economic and demographic factors in a multi-center clinical trial of children with sickle cell anemia

BACKGROUND

Few studies have investigated factors influencing participation rates for minority children with a chronic disease in clinical trials. The Silent Cerebral Infarct Multi-Center Clinical (SIT) Trial provides an opportunity to study the impact of demographic and socio-economic factors on randomization in a clinical trial among Black children. Our primary objective was to characterize the factors associated with successful randomization of children with sickle cell disease (SCD) and silent cerebral infarct (SCI) in the SIT Trial after initial consent.

PROCEDURE

Differences in socio-economic and demographic variables, family history and disease-related variables were determined between eligible participants who were successfully randomized and those who were not randomized following initial consent. Head of household educational level and family income were examined separately for US versus non-US sites.

RESULTS

Of 1,176 children enrolled in the SIT Trial, 1,016 (86%) completed screening. Of 208 (20%) children with qualifying SCI on pre-randomization MRI, 196 (94%) were successfully randomized. There were no differences in socio-economic, demographic, or disease-related variables between children who were or were not randomized. Participants from non-US sites were more likely to be randomized (22% vs. 12%, P = 0.011); although, randomization by country was associated with neither head of household education nor family income.

CONCLUSION

In the SIT Trial, acceptance of random allocation was not associated with socio-economic or demographic factors. Although these factors may represent barriers for some participants, they should not bias investigators caring for children with SCD in their approach to recruitment for clinical trial participation.

Strategies addressing barriers to clinical trial enrollment of underrepresented populations: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Underrepresentation of racial and ethnic minorities in clinical trials remains a reality while they have disproportionately higher rates of health disparities.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to identify successful community-engaged interventions that included health care providers as a key strategy in addressing barriers to clinical trial enrollment of underrepresented patients.

DESIGN

A systematic review of the literature on interventions addressing enrollment barriers to clinical trials for racial and ethnic minorities was performed in Ovid MEDLINE, EBSCO Megafile, and EBSCO CINAHL. The systematic review identified 360 studies, and 20 were selected using the inclusion criteria. An iterative process extracted information from the eligible studies.

RESULTS

The 20 selected studies were analyzed and then grouped by first author, nature of the clinical research initiative, priority populations, key strategies, and study outcomes. Nine of the studies addressed cancer clinical trials and 11 related to chronic medical conditions, including diabetes, hypertension management, and chronic kidney disease. The key strategies employed were categorized according to their presumed impact on barriers incurred at distinct steps in study recruitment: clinical trial awareness, opportunity to participate, and acceptance of enrollment. The strategies were further categorized by whether they would address barriers associated with minority perceptions of the research process and barriers related to how studies were designed and implemented.

CONCLUSION

Multiple and flexible strategies targeting providers and participants at provider sites and within communities might be needed to enroll underrepresented populations into clinical trials.

Patients' rationale for declining participation in a cancer-associated weight loss study

BACKGROUND

Fewer than 5 % of cancer patients participate in clinical research. Although this paltry rate has led to extensive research on this topic, previous studies have not sought verbatim comments in a real-time, comprehensive manner to understand why patients decline.

METHODS

This study used a low-risk, non-interventional parent study that focused on cancer-associated weight loss to understand patients' reasons for declining research participation. A research assistant wrote down the name and verbatim reason of all patients who declined to participate. These comments with accompanying patient demographic data are the subject of this report.

RESULTS

Of the 334 patients, 51 (15 %) declined parent study enrollment; three comment-related themes emerged: (1) a repelling sense of too much institutional research, (2) overwhelming personal health issues, and (3) a low likelihood of returning to the institution. In univariate and multivariate analyses, only age (older) and gender (female) were associated with non-enrollment. Interestingly, 41 patients with fatigue scores of 7 or worse and 26 with pain scores of 7 or worse were enrolled.

CONCLUSIONS

Although many factors were associated with declining to participate in research, symptom severity was not. Upfront education might help cancer patients better prioritize their participation in research, particularly as some patients felt overwhelmed by too much research in the institution; and for now, investigators should continue to keep asking patients for their participation.

Twenty years post-NIH Revitalization Act: enhancing minority participation in clinical trials (EMPaCT): laying the groundwork for improving minority clinical trial accrual: renewing the case for enhancing minority participation in cancer clinical trials

BACKGROUND

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Revitalization Act of 1993 mandated the appropriate inclusion of minorities in all NIH-funded research. Twenty years after this act, the proportion of minority patients enrolled in cancer clinical trials remains persistently low. Clinical trials are vehicles for the development and evaluation of therapeutic and preventive agents under scientifically rigorous conditions. Without representation in trials, it is projected that disparities in the cancer burden for minorities will increase.

METHODS

For this review article, the authors counted the frequency with which minorities were the primary focus of National Cancer Institute-sponsored clinical trials, examined citations from the PubMed database focusing on the search terms "NIH Revitalization Act of 1993" and "enhancing minority accrual to cancer clinical trials," and supplemented the review with their expertise in NIH-funded research related to minority accrual in cancer clinical trials.

RESULTS

The reporting and analyses of data based on minorities in clinical trials remain inadequate. Less than 2% of the National Cancer Institute's clinical trials focus on any racial/minority population as their primary emphasis. The current review of the literature indicated that the percentage of authors who reported their study sample by race/ethnicity ranged from 1.5% to 58%, and only 20% of the randomized controlled studies published in a high-impact oncology journal reported analyzing results by race/ethnicity. Proportionately greater population increases in minorities, accompanied by their persistent and disproportionate cancer burden, reinforce the need for their greater representation in clinical trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Renewing the emphasis for minority participation in clinical trials is warranted. Policy changes are recommended.

Participating in research: attitudes within the African American church

We assessed associations between pastor and congregant characteristics and congregant attitudes about research participation among African American churches. Respondents shared their attitudes regarding how willing, ready, and confident they were about research participation. The outcome measure, the index of research preparedness, summed responses across the domains of willingness, readiness, and confidence. Pastor age and pastor educational attainment were independently associated with a congregants' higher index of research preparedness. Young and educated pastors were significantly associated with congregant attitudes about participation preparedness, a finding that highlights the importance of the pastor regarding congregant research participation decisions.

Twenty years post-NIH Revitalization Act: enhancing minority participation in clinical trials (EMPaCT): laying the groundwork for improving minority clinical trial accrual: renewing the case for enhancing minority participation in cancer clinical trials

BACKGROUND

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Revitalization Act of 1993 mandated the appropriate inclusion of minorities in all NIH-funded research. Twenty years after this act, the proportion of minority patients enrolled in cancer clinical trials remains persistently low. Clinical trials are vehicles for the development and evaluation of therapeutic and preventive agents under scientifically rigorous conditions. Without representation in trials, it is projected that disparities in the cancer burden for minorities will increase.

METHODS

For this review article, the authors counted the frequency with which minorities were the primary focus of National Cancer Institute-sponsored clinical trials, examined citations from the PubMed database focusing on the search terms "NIH Revitalization Act of 1993" and "enhancing minority accrual to cancer clinical trials," and supplemented the review with their expertise in NIH-funded research related to minority accrual in cancer clinical trials.

RESULTS

The reporting and analyses of data based on minorities in clinical trials remain inadequate. Less than 2% of the National Cancer Institute's clinical trials focus on any racial/minority population as their primary emphasis. The current review of the literature indicated that the percentage of authors who reported their study sample by race/ethnicity ranged from 1.5% to 58%, and only 20% of the randomized controlled studies published in a high-impact oncology journal reported analyzing results by race/ethnicity. Proportionately greater population increases in minorities, accompanied by their persistent and disproportionate cancer burden, reinforce the need for their greater representation in clinical trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Renewing the emphasis for minority participation in clinical trials is warranted. Policy changes are recommended.

Automated determination of metastases in unstructured radiology reports for eligibility screening in oncology clinical trials

Enrolling adequate numbers of patients that meet protocol eligibility criteria in a timely manner is critical, yet clinical trial accrual continues to be problematic. One approach to meet these accrual challenges is to utilize technology to automatically screen patients for clinical trial eligibility. This manuscript reports on the evaluation of different automated approaches to determine the metastatic status from unstructured radiology reports using the Clinical Trials Eligibility Database Integrated System (CTED). The study sample included all patients (N = 5,523) with radiologic diagnostic studies (N = 10,492) completed in a two-week period. Eight search algorithms (queries) within CTED were developed and applied to radiology reports. The performance of each algorithm was compared to a reference standard which consisted of a physician's review of the radiology reports. Sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predicted values were calculated for each algorithm. The number of patients identified by each algorithm varied from 187 to 330 and the number of true positive cases confirmed by physician review ranged from 171 to 199 across the algorithms. The best performing algorithm had sensitivity 94%, specificity 100%, positive predictive value 90%, negative predictive value 100%, and accuracy of 99%. Our evaluation process identified the optimal method for rapid identification of patients with metastatic disease through automated screening of unstructured radiology reports. The methods developed using the CTED system could be readily implemented at other institutions to enhance the efficiency of research staff in the clinical trials eligibility screening process.

Perceptions of participation in a phase I, II, or III clinical trial among African American patients with cancer: what do refusers say?

BACKGROUND

Less than 5% of all adult patients with cancer enter clinical trials. These rates are lower in racial/ethnic minority populations, negatively affecting the generalizability and validity of trial results. Many studies have identified barriers to minority enrolment, yet few have gathered in-depth insights into minority patients' reasons for trial refusal. We aimed to (1) explore trial refusal reasons in a sample of African American (AA) patients with cancer who declined trial participation and (2) gather patients' perceptions of the potential benefit of an array of decision support tools.

METHODS

Participants were 22 consecutively recruited AA patients with cancer who had declined participation in a therapeutic clinical trial. Within 3 months of the trial refusal decision, participants completed an audio-recorded semistructured interview that asked about demographic and disease information, psychosocial factors, and patients' experience with clinical trials. Two months later, participants completed a questionnaire that asked about their trial decision.

RESULTS

Few patients received positive recommendations about joining a trial. Patients gave multiple refusal reasons. Only two participants refused to join a clinical trial as a result of issues of mistrust. Most participants refused as a result of fears of additional burdens and adverse effects. Many patients and family members misunderstood trial information. Family members mostly recommended against trial participation. Most patients felt that question prompt lists or decision aids would assist information seeking and decision making.

CONCLUSION

Low rates of physician recommendations for clinical trial participation of AA patients with cancer warrant further investigation. Interventions to reduce misunderstandings and aid decision making, both within and external to the clinical interaction, need to target both patients and family members.

Exploring barriers and facilitators to clinical trial enrollment in the context of sickle cell anemia and hydroxyurea

BACKGROUND

Several sickle cell clinical trials have closed due to inability to enroll patients. To limit the early cessation of a proposed clinical trial due to low accrual rates, we sought to better understand barriers and facilitators to enrolling parents of children with sickle cell anemia (SCD) into clinical trials.

PROCEDURE

Focus groups (n = 3) were conducted with parents/guardians (n = 14) who had not previously been recruited for a clinical trial and were not administering hydroxyurea to their children.

RESULTS

Three main themes related to barriers to clinical trial enrollment were identified during analysis of focus groups: general barriers to health related research (general mistrust of research studies, emotional and practical concerns), barriers to trial design (randomization), and barriers to hydroxyurea (long term unknown risks, cancer, myelosuppressive effects). Facilitators identified were need for more education, including request for peer education, and improved explanation of clinical trials or study rationale.

CONCLUSION

Engagement of parents/guardians of children with SCD in identifying barriers and facilitators to clinical trial enrollment may be critical to the development of strategies to enhance SCD trial completion.