Power of an effective clinical conversation: improving accrual onto clinical trials

Disparities in cancer clinical trials information-seeking: Findings from the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service

OBJECTIVE

To better understand cancer clinical trials (CCT) information-seeking, a necessary precursor to patient and provider engagement with CCT.

METHODS

Data from the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service (CIS) were used to examine CCT information-seeking patterns over a 5-year period. Descriptive and logistic regression analyses were conducted to examine characteristics of CIS inquiries and their associations with having a CCT discussion.

RESULTS

Between September 2018 - August 2023, 117,016 CIS inquiries originated from cancer survivors, caregivers, health professionals, and the general public; 27.5 % of these inquiries included a CCT discussion (n = 32,160). Among CCT discussions, 35.5 % originated from survivors, 53.5 % from caregivers, 6.1 % from the public, and 4.9 % from health professionals. Inquiries in Spanish had lower odds of a CCT discussion (OR=.26, [.25-.28]), whereas inquiries emanating from the CIS instant messaging (OR=2.29, [2.22-2.37]) and email (OR=1.24, [1.18-1.30]) platforms were associated with higher odds of discussing CCT compared to the telephone. Individuals who were male, younger, insured, and had higher income and education had significantly higher odds of a CCT discussion while those who were non-Hispanic Black and living in rural locales had significantly lower odds.

CONCLUSIONS

Disparities in CCT information-seeking may contribute to downstream CCT participation.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Quality, language-concordant health information is needed to enable equitable awareness of - and ultimately engagement in - CCT.

Reducing Health Disparities Among African American and Black Caribbean Patients by Improving the Communication Practices of Clinical Research Coordinators

This manuscript focuses on the communication factors that affect the willingness of African Americans and Black Caribbean patients to participate in clinical trials and research studies. Low rates of research participation by members of communities of color have long been linked to health disparities. While there are many factors that contribute to low rates of accrual of African American and Black patients to clinical trials, a lack of attention to communication factors that enhance or inhibit the recruitment process is central to the problem. In this study, we describe results from the analysis of six focus groups (N = 31) consisting of African American (k = 3) and Black Caribbean (k = 3) participants. Our analyses focus on verbal and nonverbal communication behaviors and how they affect participants' willingness to participate in clinical trials. Specifically, when clinical research coordinators (CRCs) had a professional appearance, made the effort to explain a study in detail, made eye contact, took the time to listen and answer questions patiently, and gave the sense that the CRC was being truthful and transparent, patients felt respected and valued. Additionally, participants emphasized the importance of the process of developing and maintaining a trusting relationship between study participants and CRCs. The results of this study will be used to develop a clinical trial communication training program designed to enhance the communication skills of clinical research coordinators who discuss research participation with African American and Caribbean Black patients.

Facilitators, Challenges, and Messaging Strategies for Hispanic/Latino Populations Participating in Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias Clinical Research: A Literature Review

Alzheimer's disease and Alzheimer's disease-related dementias (AD/ADRD) disproportionally affect Hispanic and Latino populations, yet Hispanics/Latinos are substantially underrepresented in AD/ADRD clinical research. Diverse inclusion in trials is an ethical and scientific imperative, as underrepresentation reduces the ability to generalize study findings and treatments across populations most affected by a disease. This paper presents findings from a narrative literature review (N = 210) of the current landscape of Hispanic/Latino participation in clinical research, including the challenges, facilitators, and communication channels to conduct culturally appropriate outreach efforts to increase awareness and participation of Hispanics/Latinos in AD/ADRD clinical research studies. Many challenges identified were systemic in nature: lack of culturally relevant resources; staffing that does not represent participants' cultures/language; eligibility criteria that disproportionately excludes Hispanics/Latinos; and too few studies available in Hispanic/Latino communities. The paper also details facilitators and messaging strategies to improve engagement and interest among Hispanics/Latinos in AD/ADRD research, starting with approaches that recognize and address the heterogeneity of the Hispanic/Latino ethnicity, and then, tailor outreach activities and programs to address their diverse needs and circumstances. The needs identified in this article represent longstanding failures to improve engagement and interest among Hispanics/Latinos in AD/ADRD research; we discuss how the field can move forward learning from the experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Refusal to participate in heart failure studies: do age and gender matter?

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The objective of this retrospective study was to evaluate reasons heart failure patients decline study participation, to inform interventions to improve enrollment.

BACKGROUND

Failure to enrol older heart failure patients (age > 65) and women in studies may lead to sampling bias, threatening study validity.

DESIGN

This study was a retrospective analysis of refusal data from four heart failure studies that enrolled 788 patients in four states.

METHODS

Chi-Square and a pooled t-test were computed to analyse refusal data (n = 300) obtained from heart failure patients who were invited to participate in one of the four studies but declined.

RESULTS

Refusal reasons from 300 patients (66% men, mean age 65·33) included: not interested (n = 163), too busy (n = 64), travel burden (n = 50), too sick (n = 38), family problems (n = 14), too much commitment (n = 13) and privacy concerns (n = 4). Chi-Square analyses showed no differences in frequency of reasons (p > 0·05) between men and women. Patients who refused were older, on average, than study participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Some reasons were patient-dependent; others were study-dependent. With 'not interested' as the most common reason, cited by over 50% of patients who declined, recruitment measures should be targeted at stimulating patients' interest. Additional efforts may be needed to recruit older participants. However, reasons for refusal were consistent regardless of gender.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Heart failure researchers should proactively approach a greater proportion of women and patients over age 65. With no gender differences in type of reasons for refusal, similar recruitment strategies can be used for men and women. However, enrolment of a representative proportion of women in heart failure studies has proven elusive and may require significant effort from researchers. Employing strategies to stimulate interest in studies is essential for recruiting heart failure patients, who overwhelmingly cited lack of interest as the top reason for refusal.

Modeling and validating Bayesian accrual models on clinical data and simulations using adaptive priors

Slow recruitment in clinical trials leads to increased costs and resource utilization, which includes both the clinic staff and patient volunteers. Careful planning and monitoring of the accrual process can prevent the unnecessary loss of these resources. We propose two hierarchical extensions to the existing Bayesian constant accrual model: the accelerated prior and the hedging prior. The new proposed priors are able to adaptively utilize the researcher's previous experience and current accrual data to produce the estimation of trial completion time. The performance of these models, including prediction precision, coverage probability, and correct decision-making ability, is evaluated using actual studies from our cancer center and simulation. The results showed that a constant accrual model with strongly informative priors is very accurate when accrual is on target or slightly off, producing smaller mean squared error, high percentage of coverage, and a high number of correct decisions as to whether or not continue the trial, but it is strongly biased when off target. Flat or weakly informative priors provide protection against an off target prior but are less efficient when the accrual is on target. The accelerated prior performs similar to a strong prior. The hedging prior performs much like the weak priors when the accrual is extremely off target but closer to the strong priors when the accrual is on target or only slightly off target. We suggest improvements in these models and propose new models for future research.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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