Perceptions and attitudes toward clinical trials in adolescent and young adults with cancer: a systematic review

Access to Care for Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer in the United States: State of the Literature

Access to care remains a persistent challenge for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer. We review key findings in the science to date. (1) Location of care matters. There is survival benefit for AYAs treated either at a pediatric center or site with special status (eg, Children's Oncology Group, National Cancer Institute [NCI]-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center). (2) Socioeconomic status and insurance require further investigation. Medicaid expansion has had a moderate effect on AYA outcomes. The dependent care expansion benefit has come largely from improvements in coverage for younger populations whose parents have insurance, while some subgroups likely still face insurance gaps. (3) Clinical trial enrollment remains poor, but access may be improving. Numerous barriers and facilitators of clinical trial enrollment include those that are system level and patient level. NCI has established several initiatives over the past decade to improve enrollment, and newer collaboratives have recently brought together multidisciplinary US teams to increase clinical trial enrollment. (4) Effective AYA programs require provider and system flexibility and program reflection. With flexibility comes a need for metrics to assess program effectiveness in the context of the program model. Centers treating AYAs with cancer could submit a subset of metrics (appropriate to their program and/or services) to maintain their status; persistence would require an entity with staying power committed to overseeing the metrics and the system. Substantial clinical and biological advances are anticipated over the next 20 years that will benefit all patients with cancer. In parallel, it is crucial to prioritize research regarding access to health care and cancer care delivery; only with equitable access to care for AYAs can they, too, benefit from these advances.

Views of Adolescents and Young Adults with Cancer and Their Oncologists Toward Patients' Participation in Genomic Research

Purpose: With increased use of genomic testing in cancer research and clinical care, it is important to understand the perspectives and decision-making preferences of adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer and their treating oncologists. Methods: We conducted an interview substudy of the BASIC3 Study, which enrolled newly diagnosed cancer patients <18 years of age with assent. Of 32 young adults (YAs) with cancer who reached the age of majority (AOM; 18 years) while on study, 12 were successfully approached and all consented to study continuation at AOM. Of those, seven completed an interview. Patients' oncologists, who enrolled and participated in return of clinical genomic results, were also interviewed (n = 12). Interviews were transcribed, deidentified, and analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: YAs cited the possibility of helping others and advancing science as major reasons for their assent to initial study enrollment and their willingness to consent at AOM. YAs thought obtaining informed consent from research participants for study continuation at AOM was a good idea in case they changed their minds or wanted to make their own decisions, and to keep them aware of study activities. There was diversity in what YAs understood and learned from genomic testing: some recalled specific findings, while some remembered minimal information about their results. Oncologists varied in their assessment of adolescents' engagement with the study and understanding of their results. Conclusion: Given the different ways AYAs engage with genomic information, careful assessment of AYAs' diverse communication and decision-making preferences is needed to tailor interactions accordingly.

Active Treatment to Survivorship Care: A Mixed-Methods Study Exploring Resource Needs and Preferences of Young Adult Cancer Survivors in Transition

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to identify resource needs and preferences of young adult cancer survivors (YAs) during the transition from active treatment to survivorship care to inform tailored care tools to support YAs during this period. Methods: A mixed methods study following a sequential explanatory approach was conducted among YAs between the ages of 15 and 39. Online surveys were distributed to assess participant information and resource needs, and responses were further explored during virtual focus group and interview discussions. Frequencies and proportions were calculated to identify quantitative resource needs, and a descriptive qualitative approach was used to gather and analyze qualitative data. Results: Thirty-one participants completed the online surveys, and 27 participated in qualitative data collection. The top resource needs identified in the surveys and discussed in focus groups and interviews were (1) fear of recurrence, (2) sleep and fatigue, (3) anxiety, (4) nutrition, (5) physical activity, and (6) finances. Emergent themes identified during transcript analyses included the need for (1) tailored, customizable resources, (2) connection with other survivors, (3) tools to guide conversations about cancer, (4) clarity in what to expect during treatment and survivorship, and (5) consistent and equitable care in YA oncology. Conclusions: Participants identified six important information needs in addition to an overarching need for tailored support and equitable distribution of resources while transitioning into early survivorship. Thus, tailored interventions are needed to enhance the distribution of YA-centered resources, improve equity in YA cancer care, and connect YAs with peer survivors.

Factors that impact on recruitment to vaccine trials in the context of a pandemic or epidemic: a qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 pandemic on 11 March 2020. Vaccine development and deployment were swiftly prioritised as a method to manage and control disease spread. The development of an effective vaccine relies on people's participation in randomised trials. Recruitment to vaccine trials is particularly challenging as it involves healthy volunteers who may have concerns around the potential risks and benefits associated with rapidly developed vaccines.

OBJECTIVES

To explore the factors that influence a person's decision to participate in a vaccine trial in the context of a pandemic or epidemic.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was June 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included qualitative studies and mixed-methods studies with an identifiable qualitative component. We included studies that explored the perspectives of adults aged 18 years or older who were invited to take part in vaccine trials in the context of a pandemic or epidemic.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We assessed the title, abstracts and full texts identified by the search. We used a sampling frame to identify data-rich studies that represented a range of diseases and geographical spread. We used QSR NVivo to manage extracted data. We assessed methodological limitations using an adapted version of the Critical Skills Appraisal Programme (CASP) tool for qualitative studies. We used the 'best-fit framework approach' to analyse and synthesise the evidence from our included studies. We then used the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (GRADE-CERQual) assessment to assess our confidence in each finding and develop implications for practice.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 34 studies in our review. Most studies related to HIV vaccine trials. The other studies related to Ebola virus, tuberculosis, Zika virus and COVID-19. We developed 20 key findings, under three broad themes (with seven subthemes), that described the factors that people consider when deciding whether to take part in a vaccine trial for a pandemic or epidemic disease. Our GRADE-CERQual confidence was high in nine of the key findings, moderate in 10 key findings and low in one key finding. The main reason for downgrading review findings were concerns regarding the relevance and adequacy of the underlying data. As a result of the over-representation of HIV studies, our GRADE-CERQual assessment of some findings was downgraded in terms of relevance because the views described may not reflect those of people regarding vaccine trials for other pandemic or epidemic diseases. Adequacy relates to the degree of richness and quantity of data supporting a review finding. Moderate concerns about adequacy resulted in a downgrading of some review findings. Some factors were considered to be under the control of the trial team. These included how trial information was communicated and the inclusion of people in the community to help with trial information dissemination. Aspects of trial design were also considered under control of the trial team and included convenience of participation, provision of financial incentives and access to additional support services for those taking part in the trial. Other factors influencing people's decision to take part could be personal, from family, friends or wider society. From a personal perceptive, people had concerns about vaccine side effects, vaccine efficacy and possible impact on their daily lives (carer responsibilities, work, etc.). People were also influenced by their families, and the impact participation may have on relationships. The fear of stigma from society influenced the decision to take part. Also, from a societal perspective, the level of trust in governments' involvement in research and trial may influence a person's decision. Finally, the perceived rewards, both personal and societal, were influencing factors on the decision to participate. Personal rewards included access to a vaccine, improved health and improved disease knowledge, and a return to normality in the context of a pandemic or epidemic. Potential societal rewards included helping the community and contributing to science, often motivated by the memories of family and friends who had died from the disease.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review identifies many of the factors that influence a person's decision to take part in a vaccine trial, and these reflect findings from reviews that examine trials more broadly. However, we also recognise some factors that become more important in connection with a vaccine trial in the context of a pandemic or epidemic. These factors include the potential stigma of taking part, the possible adverse effects of a vaccine, the added motivation for helping society, the role of community leaders in trial dissemination, and the level of trust placed in governments and companies developing vaccines. These specific influences need to be considered by trial teams when designing, and communicating about, vaccine trials in the context of a pandemic or epidemic.

Efficacy of DigiKnowItNews: Teen, a multimedia educational website for adolescents about pediatric clinical trials: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Pediatric research is crucial for the development of new scientific advancements, treatments, and therapies for adolescents. Yet relatively few pediatric clinical trials are conducted due to barriers to successful recruitment and retention, including knowledge and attitudes about clinical trials. Adolescents tend to experience greater autonomy to make decisions and have expressed interest in being part of the decision to participate in clinical trials. Increasing knowledge, positive attitudes, and self-efficacy related to clinical trials could positively impact the decision to participate in a pediatric clinical trial. However, there are currently few interactive, developmentally appropriate, web-based resources available to educate adolescents about clinical trials. DigiKnowItNews: Teen was created as a multimedia educational website to address the relatively low levels of enrollment in pediatric clinical trials and need for information to empower adolescents to make decisions about participating in clinical trials.

METHODS

This is a parallel group randomized controlled superiority trial to test the effectiveness of DigiKnowItNews: Teen, for improving factors related to clinical trial participation among adolescent and parents. Eligible parent-adolescent (ages 12 to 17 years) pairs will be randomly assigned to one of two conditions: intervention or wait-list control. All participants will complete pre- and post-test questionnaires and participants assigned to the intervention will receive access to review the DigiKnowItNews: Teen content for 1 week. Wait-list control participants will have the option to review DigiKnowItNews: Teen after study completion. The primary outcomes are knowledge about clinical research, attitudes, and beliefs toward pediatric clinical trials, self-efficacy for making decisions related to clinical trial participation, willingness to participate in a future clinical trial, procedural fears, and parent-adolescent communication quality. Overall feedback and satisfaction related to DigiKnowItNews: Teen will also be collected.

DISCUSSION

The trial will evaluate the effectiveness of DigiKnowIt News: Teen, an educational website about pediatric clinical trials for adolescents. If found effective in promoting factors related to future pediatric clinical trial participation, DigiKnowIt News: Teen could be used by adolescents, along with their parents, as they make the decision to participate in a clinical trial. Clinical trial researchers can also use DigiKnowIt News: Teen to aid their participant recruitment efforts.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05714943. Registered on 02/03/2023.

Developing a Family Resource: Considerations for Family Member Research Participation

When individuals participate in health care research, the choice often affects the entire family. Researchers are responsible for protecting participants and minimizing any burdens the research may place on them. Resources to educate potential study participants about these issues from a family perspective are lacking. A family-focused, evidence-based resource was created for individuals and families to prompt discussion prior to their consenting to enrollment in research. The resource includes key relevant questions to consider related to their study participation and was revised based on input from family nurse scientists and a hospital-based family advisory group. This resource raises awareness of the importance of employing a family lens when designing research and during the recruitment and enrollment of participants. Adopting a family lens in health care research will support the participant's ability to make an informed choice regarding participation and may ultimately enhance the experience of participants and their families and study outcomes.

Motivators and barriers towards clinical research participation: A population-based survey from an Arab MENA country

Jordan was the first Arab country to enact clinical research regulations. The country has a well-flourished pharmaceutical industry that leans heavily on clinical research (CR) for drug development and post-marketing surveillance. In this cross-sectional study, we sought to assess the public's awareness and attitude towards CR as well as their perceived motivators and barriers to CR participation. A population-based, self-administered questionnaire was distributed to the general public in Jordan. Among the 1061 participants in this survey, 74% reported being aware of CR. The majority (70%) agreed to the role of CR in health promotion. Online information and healthcare staff were the two main sources of CR information for the participants. About 25% of the participants received prior invitations to participate in CR with 21% agreeing to participate. However, most participants of the current study (63%) were willing to participate in future CR. Contributing to science, benefiting others, and promoting one's own health were the top motivating factors for participating in CR; while time constraints, fear of research procedure, and lack of interest were the most cited reasons for rejecting participation. Filling out questionnaire surveys, donating blood samples, and participating in physical examinations were the main CR contributions of the participants. Nearly 31% of the participants believed that CR is conducted in a responsible and ethical manner, while 57% did not have an opinion regarding the same matter. In addition, 49% and 44% were neutral with regards to the degree of harm and confidentiality posed by CR. While only 27% disagreed that CR exposes participants to some form of harm, 48% either strongly agreed (15%) or agreed (33%) that it maintains high level of confidentiality for participants. The current study provides insight into the public's perception of CR in Jordan as well as its motivating factors and perceived barriers towards participating in CR. We envisage to utilize this insight as an aid in the design of vigilant future awareness campaigns and recruitment strategies.

A qualitative study of barriers and facilitators to adolescents and young adults' participation in cancer clinical trials: Oncologist and patient perspectives

BACKGROUND

Despite efforts to increase participation of adolescents and young adults (AYAs; 15-39 years) in cancer clinical trials (CTs), enrollment remains very low. Even when provided access to CTs, AYAs are less likely to participate than children and older adults. A better understanding of oncologist- and AYA survivor-reported barriers, facilitators, and potential areas for CT enrollment improvement is needed.

PROCEDURES

From December 2019 to August 2020, we conducted 43 semi-structured interviews with oncologists (n = 17) and AYA cancer survivors (n = 26) who were offered and/or participated in CTs at cancer centers in California and Utah. Thematic analyses were used to interpret the findings.

RESULTS

Oncologists identified a lack of available CTs, strict eligibility criteria, lack of awareness of open CTs, and poor communication between pediatric and adult oncologists as major barriers to enrollment. AYA cancer survivors identified financial and psychosocial barriers, and a poor understanding of what a CT means and its potential benefits as barriers to enrollment. Areas for improvement identified by oncologists and AYAs include educational, financial, and psychosocial support to AYAs. Oncologists also emphasized the need to increase CT availability, improve awareness of open CTs, and better communication between both pediatric and adult oncologists and oncologists and AYAs.

CONCLUSIONS

For AYAs with cancer, a lack of CT eligibility and physician awareness of open CTs likely factor into their lower CT enrollment. Potential strategies to improve AYA enrollment in CTs require comprehensive collaboration between pediatric and adult institutions, as well as educational, psychosocial, and financial support to AYAs.

Shared barriers and facilitators to enrollment of adolescents and young adults on cancer clinical trials

Adolescent and young adult (AYA) enrollment in cancer clinical trials (CCT) is suboptimal. Few studies have explored site level barriers and facilitators to AYA enrollment on CCTs and the efficacy of interventions to enhance enrollment. A cross sectional survey was developed by the COG AYA Oncology Discipline Committee Responsible Investigator (RI) Network to identify perceived barriers and facilitators to enrollment, as well as opportunities to improve enrollment. Associations of barriers and facilitators to enrollment with program demographics were assessed. The survey was sent to all AYA RI Network members (n = 143) and quantitative and thematic analyses were conducted. The overall response rate was 42% (n = 60/143). Participants represented diverse institutions based on size, presence or absence of dedicated AYA programs, and proximity and relationship between pediatric and medical oncology practices within the institution. The most frequently cited barriers to enrolling AYAs in CCTs were administrative logistical issues (45%), disparate enrollment practices (42%) and communication issues (27%) between pediatric and medical oncology and perceived limited trial availability (27%). The most frequently reported facilitators to enrollment included having strong communication between pediatric and medical oncology (48%), having a supportive research infrastructure (35%) and the presence of AYA champions (33%). Many barriers and facilitators were similar across institutions and AYA program types. Shared barriers and facilitators to AYA CCT enrollment exist across the landscape of cancer care settings. Interventions aimed at increasing coordination between pediatric and medical oncology clinical trials offices and providers have high potential to improve site-level AYA enrollment.

DigiKnowIt News: Educating youth about pediatric clinical trials using an interactive, multimedia educational website

Pediatric clinical trials allow for the testing of appropriate and effective treatments for children. However, some challenges exist with recruitment. This study examined the effectiveness of DigiKnowIt News, an interactive, multimedia website (which includes activities, videos, and comic books) designed to educate children about clinical trials. A randomized controlled trial was conducted in 2018 with 91 participants (M age = 10.92 years; SD = 2.06). Participants were randomly assigned to intervention or wait-list control groups and completed questionnaires at pretest and posttest (1 week later) about their knowledge, attitudes, beliefs about clinical trials, and self-efficacy for participating in clinical trials. Participants in the intervention group received access to DigiKnowIt News between pretest and posttest and completed a satisfaction questionnaire at posttest. At the end of the study, participants in the wait-list control group were offered the option to use the website and complete a satisfaction questionnaire. At posttest, participants in the intervention group, compared to participants in the wait-list control group, had more knowledge about clinical trials and more reported confidence for participating in clinical trials. Participants reported high levels of satisfaction with DigiKnowIt News. The findings suggest that an educational website can improve factors related to increasing rates of participation in clinical trials.

Psychosocial Needs and Preferences for Care among Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Patients (Ages 15–39): A Qualitative Study

Simple Summary

Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) are a unique population: they are a diverse group between the ages of 15–39 years with distinct needs and experience numerous developmental milestones during this age range. Notably, AYAs have faced worse outcomes in cancer care, both with shorter survival and worse quality of life compared to children and older adults. Understanding AYAs’ psychosocial, communication and informational needs is crucial to addressing this disparity and improving cancer care delivery. By hearing directly from AYAs, we are able to capture nuances of their experiences and provide clinical recommendations to healthcare providers involved in the care of AYAs with cancer. This study specifically interviewed AYAs with cancer to understand their perspectives, identify needs and to develop recommendations for cancer care delivery and accommodations across the cancer experience.

Abstract

Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) require a multidisciplinary approach to cancer care due to their complex biopsychosocial situations and varied developmental maturity. Currently, age and diagnosis determine referral to pediatric or adult oncology, with differing treatment paradigms and service utilization patterns, contributing to suboptimal improvements in outcomes. Understanding the unique perspectives of AYAs is essential to designing patient-centered AYA services. Thus, we conducted six focus groups with AYAs (n = 25) treated by medical or pediatric oncologists to evaluate: (1) the unique experiences of cancer care as an AYA; (2) AYA-specific information needs and communication preferences; and (3) recommendations for service provision, delivery and accommodations for AYAs. Transcripts were analyzed using inductive thematic content analysis and identified six major themes to inform clinically-actionable recommendations and the development of a patient-reported outcome measure: (1) AYAs experience social isolation and loss of independence; (2) AYAs have an uncertain sense of the future and need conversations around survivorship and long-term and late effects; (3) AYAs desire greater control over discussions with their care team; (4) AYAs need additional navigational and social/caregiver supports; (5) AYAs prefer an inclusive AYA space in the hospital; and (6) LGBTQ+ patients experience distinct concerns as AYA cancer patients. These will form the basis for specific and tailored clinical recommendations to improve AYA cancer care delivery.

Barriers and facilitators to the participation of subjects in clinical trials: An overview of reviews

BACKGROUND

The demand for clinical trial participants is today one of the highest it has ever been and continues to increase. At the same time, subject recruitment continues to be problematic and the major reason for clinical trial premature terminations. The literature on clinical trial recruitment, which spans several decades and includes hundreds of studies, has an abundance of findings that can be synthesized by way of an overview to provide a well-informed and complete picture of the factors that determine subject participation.

OBJECTIVES

An overview of the systematic reviews that report barriers and facilitators to clinical trial participation was conducted. The extracted data were synthesized, and a thematic framework of the factors that affect subject participation in clinical trials was developed. The overview extended across medical subjects and demographics.

METHODS

Thirty reviews that complied with the inclusion criteria were included. These reviews covered 753 relevant primary studies and reported 881 barriers and facilitators. The barriers and facilitators were thematically synthesized and a thematic framework of 20 themes was developed. The quality of the included reviews was assessed and reported.

MAIN RESULTS

Several opportunities to increase clinical trial participation, by developing interventions and changing the trial design, derived from an analysis of the thematic framework. That analysis also showed that most of the 20 themes operate mainly as a barrier or as a facilitator, and that most have an effect across medical subjects. As to the quality elements assessed, some reviews complied almost fully but most only partially.

Systems-Level Change to Alleviate Barriers to Cancer Clinical Trial Access for Adolescents and Young Adults in Australia

Purpose:

International data demonstrate association between clinical trial participation and reduced cancer mortality. Adolescents and young adults (AYA) have low clinical trial enrollment rates. We established a program to understand local barriers and develop targeted solutions that lead to greater AYA clinical trial participation.

Methods:

A steering committee (SC) with expertise in adult and pediatric oncology, research ethics, and consumer representation was formed. The SC mapped barriers related to AYA trial access and established working groups (WGs) around three themes.

Results:

The Regulatory Awareness WG identified a lack of understanding of processes that support protocol approval for clinical trials across the AYA age range. A guideline to raise awareness was developed. The Access WG identified challenges for young adults (18–25 years) to access a pediatric hospital to enroll in a pediatric trial. A procedure was developed to streamline applications for access. The first six applications using this procedure have been successful. The Availability WG identified lack of pediatric–adult oncology reciprocal relationships as a barrier to awareness of open trials, and future collaboration. An AYA Craft Group Framework was established to grow relationships within tumor streams across institutions; two craft groups are now operating locally. An additional achievement was a successful request to the Therapeutic Goods Administration for Australian adoption of the Food and Drug Administration Guidance on Considerations for the Inclusion of Adolescent Patients in Adult Oncology Clinical Trials.

Conclusion:

This multipronged approach to improving AYA clinical trial access has relevance for other health environments. Our knowledge products are available as an online toolkit.

Care Experience, by Site of Care, for Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer

PURPOSE

Most of the 77,000 adolescents and young adults (AYAs) 15-39 years of age diagnosed with cancer annually in the United States are treated at community rather than academic centers. Little is known about their healthcare experience.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, anonymous, online survey was conducted with a convenience sample of AYAs treated for cancer at US academic (n = 112) or community centers (n = 64).

RESULTS

Clinical trials were offered more frequently to respondents treated at academic centers (26.8% v 7.8%; P = .005). Eighty percent of all those offered a clinical trial chose to enroll. Over three-fourths reported awareness of community-based or online AYA oncology support services; however, significantly more respondents from academic centers reported awareness of services provided by the institution itself (40.2% v 7.8%; P < .001). Significantly more respondents from academic centers reported receiving information relevant to their age group (41.1% v 15.6%; P < .001). Respondents treated at academic centers were significantly more satisfied with support, communication, and overall treatment. Odds of respondents treated at an academic center reporting that their healthcare team knew enough about AYAs were 3.12-fold higher than those treated at community centers (95% CI, 1.6 to 6.4; P = .002). Odds of overall satisfaction were significantly higher for respondents who reported that their healthcare team "knew enough about AYAs" (aOR, 9.7, 95% CI, 2.4 to 53.9; P = .003).

CONCLUSION

Cancer treatment for AYAs at both academic and community centers can be optimized by improving healthcare providers' understanding of the key issues facing AYAs with cancer and by increasing AYA-specific institutional resources and support services.

Transparency, trust and minimizing burden to increase recruitment and retention in trials: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To describe patient perspectives on recruitment and retention in clinical trials.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Systematic review of qualitative studies that reported the perspective of adult patients with any health condition who accepted or declined to participate in clinical trials.

RESULTS

Sixty-three articles involving 1681 adult patients were included. Six themes were identified. Four themes reflected barriers: ambiguity of context and benefit - patients were unaware of the research question and felt pressured in making decisions; lacking awareness of opportunities - some believed health professionals obscured trials opportunities, or felt confused because of language barriers; wary of added burden - patients were without capacity because of sickness or competing priorities; and skepticism, fear and mistrust - patients feared loss of privacy, were suspicious of doctor's motivation, afraid of being a guinea pig, and disengaged from not knowing outcomes. Two themes captured facilitators: building confidence - patients hoped for better treatment, were supported from family members and trusted medical staff; and social gains and belonging to the community - altruism, a sense of belonging and peer encouragement motivated participation in trials.

CONCLUSION

Improving the visibility and transparency of trials, supporting informed decision making, minimizing burden, and ensuring confidence and trust may improve patient participation in trials.

Strategies for improving access to clinical trials by teenagers and young adults with cancer: A qualitative study of health professionals' views

OBJECTIVE

Few teenagers and young adults (TYA) with cancer participate in clinical trials. Lack of opportunity has been identified as a major barrier. We canvassed health professionals' views on how TYA's access to trials might be improved.

METHODS

We interviewed 35 professionals with responsibility for delivering or facilitating cancer care and/or clinical trials. We analysed data using a qualitative descriptive approach.

RESULTS

Interviewees viewed improving TYA's access to trials as challenging, but possible. They reframed the problem as one of rare disease and surmised that modifying the organisation, administration and resourcing of research (and care) might expand opportunities for both TYA and other patients with low volume conditions. Proposals coalesced around four themes: consolidating the pool of patients; streamlining bureaucratic requirements; investing in the research workforce; and promoting pragmatism in trial design.

CONCLUSION

Accounts suggest there is scope to improve access to trials by TYA with cancer and other patients with rare diseases. Though re-configuring care, research and resource frameworks would present substantial challenges, doing nothing would also have costs. Change will require the support of a range of stakeholders, and agreement as to the best way forward. Further work, such as priority setting exercises, may be necessary to reach a consensus.

Outcomes among pediatric patients with cancer who are treated on trial versus off trial: A matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

Approximately 50% of children with cancer in the United States who are aged <15 years receive primary treatment on a therapeutic clinical trial. To the authors' knowledge, it remains unknown whether trial enrollment has a clinical benefit compared with the best alternative standard therapy and/or off trial (ie, clinical trial effect). The authors conducted a retrospective matched cohort study to compare the morbidity and mortality of pediatric patients with cancer who are treated on a phase 3 clinical trial compared with those receiving standard therapy and/or off trial.

METHODS

Subjects were aged birth to 19 years; were diagnosed between 2000 and 2010 with acute lymphocytic leukemia (ALL), acute myeloid leukemia (AML), rhabdomyosarcoma, or neuroblastoma; and had received initial treatment at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. On-trial and off-trial subjects were matched based on age, race, ethnicity, a diagnosis of Down syndrome (for patients with ALL or AML), prognostic risk level, date of diagnosis, and tumor type.

RESULTS

A total of 428 participants were matched in 214 pairs (152 pairs for ALL, 24 pairs for AML, 32 pairs for rhabdomyosarcoma, and 6 pairs for neuroblastoma). The 5-year survival rate did not differ between those treated on trial versus those treated with standard therapy and/or off trial (86.9% vs 82.2%; P = .093). On-trial patients had a 32% lower odds of having worse (higher) mortality-morbidity composite scores, although this did not reach statistical significance (odds ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.45-1.03 [P = .070]).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no statistically significant difference in outcomes noted between those patients treated on trial and those treated with standard therapy and/or off trial. However, in partial support of the clinical trial effect, the results of the current study indicate a trend toward more favorable outcomes in children treated on trial compared with those treated with standard therapy and/or off trial. These findings can support decision making regarding enrollment in pediatric phase 3 clinical trials.

Why do patients take part in research? An overview of systematic reviews of psychosocial barriers and facilitators

BACKGROUND

Understanding why people take part in health research is critical to improve research efficiency and generalisability. The aim of this overview of systematic reviews was to identify psychosocial determinants of research participation and map them to psychological theory and empirical recruitment research, to identify effective strategies to increase research participation.

METHODS

Qualitative and quantitative systematic reviews were systematically identified. No date or language limits were applied. Two reviewers independently selected reviews. Methodological quality was rated using AMSTAR, and poor-quality reviews (scoring 0-3) were excluded. Barriers and facilitators were coded to psychological theory (Theoretical Domains Framework) and empirical recruitment research (recruitment interventions that had been subjected to randomised controlled trial evaluation).

RESULTS

We included 26 systematic reviews (429 unique primary studies), covering a wide range of patient populations and health settings. We identified five groups of facilitators, of which three were dominant (potential for personal benefit, altruism, trust) and appear to be relevant across research setting and design. We identified nine groups of barriers, which were more dependent on the particular study (context, population, design). Two determinants (participant information, social influences) were found to be both barriers and facilitators. Barriers and facilitators could be coded to the Motivation and Opportunity components of the Theoretical Domains Framework; only one was coded to a Capability component. There was some overlap between psychosocial determinants and empirical recruitment research, but some barriers and facilitators had not been tested at all.

CONCLUSIONS

Identifying effective recruitment strategies could increase the efficiency and generalisability of primary research. We identified a number of barriers and facilitators that could be addressed by researchers. There is a need for more research to identify effective recruitment strategies that draw on the psychosocial facilitators and barriers identified in this overview.

Systematic review of barriers and facilitators to clinical trial enrollment among adolescents and young adults with cancer: Identifying opportunities for intervention

Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) are underrepresented in cancer clinical trials (CCTs). Limited trial enrollment slows progress in improving survival rates and prevents the collection of valuable biospecimens. A systematic literature review was conducted to assess barriers and facilitators to AYA enrollment in CCTs and to identify opportunities to improve enrollment. The PubMed MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, and PsycINFO databases were searched to identify studies relevant to AYA CCT enrollment. Eligibility criteria included the qualitative and/or quantitative evaluation of barriers and facilitators to AYA enrollment. One hundred fifty-five unique publications were identified; 13 were included in the final analysis. Barriers to AYA enrollment in CCTs included a lack of existing trials applicable to the patient population, limited access to available CCTs, and a lack of physician awareness of relevant trials. Facilitators of enrollment included optimizing the research infrastructure, improving the awareness of available CCTs among providers, and enhancing communication about CCTs between providers and patients. In conclusion, the limited available research reports institution- and patient-level barriers and facilitators to AYA CCT enrollment. Because of persistent disparities in AYA enrollment, there is an urgent need to further identify the barriers and facilitators to AYA CCT enrollment to determine actionable areas for intervention.

Evaluation of Adolescents’ and Young Adults’ Attitudes Toward Participation in Cancer Clinical Trials

PURPOSE:

Participation in cancer clinical trials (CCTs) for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) remains the lowest of any patient group with cancer. Little is known about the personal barriers to AYA accrual. The aim of this study was to explore AYA attitudes that influence CCT participation.

METHODS:

A mixed-methods approach was used. AYAs and non-AYAs (≥ 40 years) completed the Cancer Treatment subscale of the Attitudes Toward Cancer Trials Scales and 9 supplementary questions formed from interview analysis. Differences between AYA and non-AYA cohorts were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test, and logistic regression models were constructed to evaluate the effect of demographics on perceptions of CCTs.

RESULTS:

Surveys were distributed to 61 AYAs (median age, 29 years; range, 17-39 years) and 74 non-AYAs (median age, 55 years; range, 40-88 years). Compared with non-AYAs, AYAs perceived CCTs to be unsafe/more difficult (Personal Barrier/Safety domain; P = .01). There were no differences based on age in other domains. AYAs were also more concerned with CCT interference in their long-term goals ( P = .04). Multivariable ordered logistic regression identified increased personal barriers in the Personal Barrier/Safety domain for AYAs ( P = .01), in patients with English as a second language (ESL; P < .01), and in patients previously not offered a clinical trial ( P = .03). Long-term goals were identified as a barrier in particular tumor types ( P = .01) and in patients with ESL ( P < .01), with a trend identified in AYAs ( P = .12).

CONCLUSION:

Age-related differences in attitudes toward CCTs suggest that tailored approaches to CCT accrual are warranted. Patient-centered delivery of information regarding CCTs, particularly in patients with ESL and who are trial naïve, may improve accrual.

The challenges of making informed decisions about treatment and trial participation following a cancer diagnosis: a qualitative study involving adolescents and young adults with cancer and their caregivers

BACKGROUND

Limited attention has been paid to adolescents and young adults' (AYA's) experiences in the aftermath of a cancer diagnosis, despite this being a time when potentially life-changing decisions are made. We explored AYA's and caregivers' experiences of, and views about, making treatment and trial participation decisions following a cancer diagnosis, in order to understand, and help facilitate, informed treatment decision-making in this age group.

METHODS

Interviews were undertaken with 18 AYA diagnosed, or re-diagnosed, with cancer when aged 16-24 years, and 15 parents/caregivers. Analysis focused on the identification and description of explanatory themes.

RESULTS

Most AYA described being extremely unwell by the time of diagnosis and, consequently, experiencing difficulties processing the news. Distress and acceleration in clinical activity following diagnosis could further impede the absorption of treatment-relevant information. After referral to a specialist cancer unit, many AYA described quickly transitioning to a calm and pragmatic mind-set, and wanting to commence treatment at the earliest opportunity. Most reported seeing information about short-term side-effects of treatment as having limited relevance to their recovery-focused outlook at that time. AYA seldom indicated wanting to make choices about front-line treatment, with most preferring to defer decisions to health professionals. Even when charged with decisions about trial participation, AYA reported welcoming a strong health professional steer. Parents/caregivers attempted to compensate for AYA's limited engagement with treatment-relevant information. However, in seeking to ensure AYA received the best treatment, these individuals had conflicting priorities and information needs.

CONCLUSION

Our study highlights the challenging context in which AYA are confronted with decisions about front-line treatment, and reveals how their responses make it hard to ensure their decisions are fully informed. It raises questions about the direct value, to AYA, of approaches that aim to promote decision-making by improving understanding and recall of information, though such approaches may be of value to caregivers. In seeking to improve information-giving and involvement in treatment-related decision-making at diagnosis, care should be taken not to delegitimize the preference of many AYA for a directive approach from trusted clinicians.

Researching the Experiences of Children with Cancer: Considerations for Practice

Children and adolescents with cancer often participate in medical and psychosocial research throughout their diagnosis and treatment. Furthermore, this involvement frequently extends into the survivorship period. Sometimes referred to as "doubly vulnerable" research participants, children and adolescents with cancer are not only minors, but also minors facing significant medical, developmental, and psychosocial stressors associated with chronic illness. Thus, it is important to exercise care in designing and conducting research with this population; however, these considerations have not been adequately addressed in pediatric healthcare literature. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to describe the research preferences and experiences of children and adolescents with cancer to identify techniques for supporting this population as research participants. By incorporating developmentally appropriate, context-specific, and child-centered adjustments, researchers can help children and adolescents with cancer effectively and meaningfully describe their illness experiences while also developing a positive outlook on future research participation.

Evaluation of the Pediatric Research Participation Questionnaire for Measuring Attitudes Toward Cancer Clinical Trials Among Adolescents and Young Adults

Purpose: Reasons for the relatively low rates of adolescent and young adults (AYA) enrollment in cancer clinical trials in the United States require further empirical examination. In addition to structural factors such as lack of access and insurance barriers, attitudes toward clinical trials may be important to consider. This study aimed to evaluate and validate the Pediatric Research Participation Questionnaire (PRPQ)-a measure of attitudes to clinical trials adapted for AYA (15-29) with cancer and their caregivers. Methods: One hundred twenty-four AYA and 94 caregivers completed the PRPQ-AYA and measures of clinical trial knowledge and developmental/emotional maturity. Factor analysis evaluated the PRPQ-AYA structure, interitem reliability was computed, and Pearson correlations examined associations of validation measures with factor scores and computed scores reflecting perceived barriers, perceived benefits, and decision balance. Results: Confirmatory factor analysis did not confirm the prior PRPQ factor structure. Exploratory factor analysis suggested a new four-factor structure for: AYA (1) trust/mistrust, (2) barriers/costs, (3) support for participation, and (4) incentives; and caregivers (1) trust/access, (2) mistrust/costs, (3) support for participation, and (4) risks to AYA. Factor scores and barriers, benefits, and decision balance scores demonstrated acceptable interitem reliability and were significantly correlated with clinical trial knowledge and emotional maturity in the expected direction. Conclusion: PRPQ-AYA factor structure for AYA and caregivers varied and should be interpreted cautiously due to limited power. Simple solutions of perceived benefits, perceived barriers, and decision balance were reliable and valid and provide important information to address and engage AYA through the clinical trial informed consent process.