Deciding to Enrol in a Cancer Trial: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies

The journey of patients in cancer clinical trials: A qualitative meta-synthesis on experiences and perspectives

OBJECTIVE

To synthesize findings from qualitative studies focusing on adult cancer patients and their experiences and perspectives on clinical trials.

METHODS

A meta-synthesis was conducted on the literature retrieved from Scopus, Embase, PubMed, and PsycInfo databases. Patient quotes from papers were coded line-by-line using Nvivo software, and themes were created.

RESULTS

45 papers were included. Three large themes were identified based on the timeline of trials: (1) "pre-trial participation" includes sub-themes regarding informational needs, experience with the decision, and representations. (2) "Ongoing trial" includes subthemes covering supportive care, practical and psycho-physical burdens, identity and comparison with others, and the importance of maintaining hope. (3) "Post-trial," with subthemes covering comprehension of results and attitudes towards data sharing, perception of being left unattended, and hindsight and regretful thoughts.

CONCLUSION

This work emphasizes the importance of contextualizing patient experiences and holistically viewing trials. Additionally, this review stresses that patient narratives in the post-trial period are underrepresented in the literature.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Further research should prioritize the post-trial stage to enhance patients' psychological well-being and address concerns such as regret to reduce trial dropout rates. Emphasizing patient connections, providing clear trial-related information, and offering remote participation options, particularly for rural patients, are crucial steps in improving patient experience and trial adherence.

Patient, Relative and Staff Experiences of Clinical Trial Participation in Neurooncology: "Maybe You Can Also Show the Positive, No Matter How It Ends"

Purpose

There is a lack of evidence regarding how patients with malignant brain tumor and their relatives experience participation in neurooncological clinical trials. Similarly, insights from the perspective of trial staff caring for this group of patients are missing. This study aims to investigate patient, relative and trial staff experiences regarding participation in clinical neurooncological trials.

Methods

Within a qualitative exploratory study, 29 semi-structured interviews with brain tumor patients, relatives and trial staff were conducted and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis (RTA) by Braun and Clarke. A patient researcher and patient council were involved in data analysis and interpretation.

Results

Four themes were developed reflecting significant aspects of the trial experience: 1. "It all revolves around hope"; 2. "Trial participation: experiencing unique medical care"; 3. "Everyone's roles are changing"; 4. "Communication as a possible area of conflict". Experiencing trial participation and general medical treatment were found to be interconnected to such a degree that they were often not meaningfully distinguished by patients and relatives.

Conclusion

In addition to assessing traditional endpoints for patient outcomes, we recommend increased emphasis on investigating the impact of the "soft" components constituting trial participation. Due to the interconnectedness of medical treatment and trial participation, we recommend further investigation in comparison to experiences in regular care. A deeper understanding of trial participation is needed to inform improvements for patient experiences and staff satisfaction alongside medical and scientific progress.

A qualitative study examining newly diagnosed breast cancer patients' experiences of participating in the Alberta Moving Beyond Breast Cancer (AMBER) prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Decisions to participate in cancer trials are associated with uncertainty, distress, wanting to help find a cure, the hope for benefit, and altruism. There is a gap in the literature regarding research examining participation in prospective cohort studies. The aim of this study was to examine the experiences of newly diagnosed women with breast cancer participating in the AMBER Study to identify potential strategies to support patients' recruitment, retention, and motivation.

METHODS

Newly diagnosed breast cancer patients were recruited from the Alberta Moving Beyond Breast Cancer (AMBER) cohort study. Data were collected using semi-structured conversational interviews with 21 participants from February to May 2020. Transcripts were imported into NVivo software for management, organization, and coding. Inductive content analysis was undertaken.

RESULTS

Five main concepts associated with recruitment, retention, and motivation to participate were identified. These main concepts included: (1) personal interest in exercise and nutrition; (2) investment in individual results; (3) personal and professional interest in research; (4) burden of assessments; (5) importance of research staff.

CONCLUSIONS

Breast cancer survivors participating in this prospective cohort study had numerous reasons for participating and these reasons could be considered in future studies to enhance participant recruitment and retention. Improving recruitment and retention in prospective cancer cohort studies could result in more valid and generalizable study findings that could improve the care of cancer survivors.

"There's not enough studies": Views of black breast and ovarian cancer patients on research participation

BACKGROUND

Black breast and ovarian cancer patients are underrepresented in clinical cancer trials disproportionate to the prevalence of these cancers in Black females. Historically, lower enrollment has been attributed to individualized factors, including medical mistrust, but more recently structural factors, including systemic racism, have received additional scrutiny. We interviewed Black women with a personal or family history of breast and ovarian cancer to understand their views and experiences related to research participation.

METHODS

Qualitative interviews were conducted via telephone or video conference and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were qualitatively analyzed for iterative themes related to the offer and participation in cancer clinical trials and research studies, impact on cancer care, and recommendations to increase enrollment of Black patients.

RESULTS

Sixty-one Black women completed an interview. Participants expressed that Black women are underrepresented in cancer research, and that this negatively impacted their own care. Many cited past historical abuses, including the Tuskegee syphilis trial, as a potential factor for lower enrollment but suggested that lower enrollment was better understood in the context of the entirety of their healthcare experiences, including present-day examples of patient mistreatment or dismissal. Participants suggested that proactive community engagement, transparency, and increased representation of Black research team members were strategies likely to foster trust and bolster research participation.

CONCLUSION(S)

Medical mistrust is only a partial factor in the lower participation of Black patients in cancer research. Researchers should implement the strategies identified by our participants to promote diverse enrollment and ensure that Black patients are included in future therapeutic advances.

Intentional and actional components of engaged participation in public health research studies: qualitative synthesis of a recruitment and retention process into the theory-informed INTACT-RS framework

BACKGROUND

Ensuring motivated and successful study participation is a key challenge in the design and conduct of health research studies. Previously, recruitment barriers and facilitators have been identified mainly from experience, and rarely based on theoretical approaches. We developed a framework of intentional and actional components of engaged participation in public health research studies (INTACT-RS), informed by psychological behavioral models. We aimed a) to identify precise indicators for each framework component and b) to better understand which components and decision processes are essential for study participants.

METHODS

Within a multicenter research network, we applied various approaches to recruit parents of newborns, pediatricians, and midwives. All recruitment processes were documented from the perspective of both participants and researchers. We used different qualitative and quantitative data material, which we applied in a multistage process according to the basic principles of qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

INTACT-RS encompasses pre-intentional, intentional and actional phases with a total of n = 15 components covering all aspects of an individual's involvement with a research study. During intention formation, an understanding of efforts and benefits, why participation is valuable beyond contributing to research, and how others perceive the study, were particularly important to (potential) participants. Subsequently (intentional phase), participants consider how and when participation is compatible with their own resources, ability and availability, and hence seek for close communication with, and flexibility and support from the research team. During and after (initial) participation (actional phase), participants' assessment of whether expectations and interests have been met impact crucial further steps, especially the willingness to continue and to recommend participation to others. A strong topic-wise and or supportive participation interest as well as active, continuous exchange with the researchers appeared to be central determinants of study completion and data validity.

CONCLUSIONS

A theoretical framework is now available to plan and conduct recruitment of different target groups, which accounts for essential motivational and volitional decision-making processes. Based on empirically specified constructs, possible barriers can be addressed even before the initial recruitment process. Therefore, recommendations for scientific practice have been formulated.

Feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness of a decision aid versus an informational website to promote clinical trial decision-making among cancer patients: A pilot randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess intervention feasibility and acceptability, and compare the effectiveness of the CHOICES Decision Aid (DA) versus the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Clinical Trials (CCT) website to improve knowledge about CCTs and preparedness to make an informed decision.

METHODS

Oncology patients (n = 101) with a scheduled clinic visit were enrolled and randomized. Decision-making variables were collected at two timepoints. Post-intervention scores were examined via paired t-tests and multivariate regression analyses. Predictors of the magnitudes of the change in scores were examined in multivariable regression analyses.

RESULTS

The interventions were feasible to implement and acceptable to participants. Both interventions increased objective and subjective knowledge, improved clarity of opinions, and reduced decisional conflict (p-values < 0.01). Improvements in the belief that one could find out about CCTs were observed in the CHOICES DA arm (p < 0.001). Multivariable analyses controlling for educational attainment showed no significant differences in the magnitude of change in outcome variables between intervention arms, but did find that improvements in some variables in the NCI arm - but not CHOICES DA arm - were associated with previous educational attainment.

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions were feasible to implement and acceptable. Improvements in knowledge and decision-making outcomes were observed in both arms, supporting the view that interventions to improve CCT decision making are effective and feasible. Our results suggest that the CHOICES DA may be more effective than an informational website in improving decision-making outcomes regardless of participants' educational attainment.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

CCT resources should support informed decision-making among all cancer survivors, regardless of educational attainment.

Knowledge and attitudes towards clinical trials among women with ovarian cancer: results of the ACTO study

BACKGROUND

Despite several initiatives by research groups, regulatory authorities, and scientific associations to engage citizens/patients in clinical research, there are still obstacles to participation. Among the main discouraging aspects are incomplete understanding of the concepts related to a clinical trial, and the scant, sometimes confused, explanations given. This observational, cross-sectional multicenter study investigated knowledge, attitudes and trust in clinical research. We conducted a survey among women with ovarian cancer at their first follow-up visit or first therapy session, treated in centers belonging to the Mario Negri Gynecologic Oncology (MaNGO) and Multicenter Italian Trials in Ovarian Cancer (MITO) groups. A questionnaire on knowledge, attitudes and experience was assembled ad hoc after a literature review and a validation process involving patients of the Alliance against Ovarian Cancer (ACTO).

RESULTS

From 25 centers 348 questionnaire were collected; 73.5% of responders were 56 years or older, 54.8% had a high level of education, more than 80% had no experience of trial participation. Among participants 59% knew what clinical trials were and 71% what informed consent was. However, more than half did not know the meaning of the term randomization. More than half (56%) were in favor of participating in a clinical trial, but 35% were not certain. Almost all responders acknowledged the doctor's importance in decision-making. Patients' associations were recognized as having a powerful role in the design and planning of clinical trials.

CONCLUSIONS

This study helps depict the knowledge and attitudes of women with ovarian cancer in relation to clinical trials, suggesting measures aimed at improving trial "culture", literacy and compliance, and fresh ways of communication between doctors and patients.

"Something Good Has to Come Out of the Horror": A Qualitative Examination of Cancer Survivors' Attitudes Towards Participation in Research During the First Year of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Introduction: The first year of the COVID-19 pandemic has been highly disruptive for people with cancer. Furthermore, it has been shown that accrual to cancer trials dropped substantially in 2020. Building on findings from a previous pilot survey, the present study used qualitative methods to gain insights into attitudes towards participation in research studies amongst people who have experienced cancer, in the context of the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and Methods: We interviewed 13 participants from the UK, who were purposively sampled, including a broad sample of cancer types, and a mixture of individuals who have and have not taken part in research previously. Participants underwent semi-structured interviews (median interview duration: 47 min) and were asked open-ended questions about their attitude towards and experiences with COVID-19, and their attitude towards research participation. In addition to this, prompts were used to ask participants about concerns that were highlighted by our previous quantitative work on this topic, such as concerns about being older or having to travel to participate. Interview transcripts were analysed using a framework analysis approach. Results: Our findings suggest that cancer patient decision-making about research participation during an infectious disease pandemic may be a function of a basic cost-benefit analysis, which considers the benefit of taking part, either personally to themselves or to wider society. The benefit may then be weighed by the patient against the risk of being infected, which may be influenced by trust in the relevant clinicians/researchers; familiarity with the study location; provision of detailed information on safety protocols for infectious disease; and, in particular, the availability of safe transport to and from the study location. Discussion: Some cancer patients say that they would be less likely to participate in a research study in the middle of an infectious disease pandemic due to an increased risk to themselves. Patients' perceived risk to themselves from participating may be ameliorated via the provision of certain practical solutions that can be considered at the study protocol design stage, such as safe travel, information, and the use of staff and study sites familiar to the patient.

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.

Reasons for not reaching or using web-based self-management applications, and the use and evaluation of Oncokompas among cancer survivors, in the context of a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

The web-based self-management application Oncokompas was developed to support cancer survivors to monitor health-related quality of life and symptoms (Measure) and to provide tailored information (Learn) and supportive care options (Act). In a previously reported randomised controlled trial (RCT), 68% of 655 recruited survivors were eligible, and of those 45% participated in the RCT. Among participants of the RCT that were randomised to the intervention group, 52% used Oncokompas as intended. The aim of this study was to explore reasons for not participating in the RCT, and reasons for not using Oncokompas among non-users, and the use and evaluation of Oncokompas among users.

METHODS

Reasons for not participating were assessed with a study-specific questionnaire among 243 survivors who declined participation. Usage was investigated among 320 participants randomised to the intervention group of the RCT via system data and a study-specific questionnaire that was assessed during the 1 week follow-up (T1) assessment.

RESULTS

Main reasons for not participating were not interested in participation in scientific research (40%) and not interested in scientific research and Oncokompas (28%). Main reasons for not being interested in Oncokompas were wanting to leave the period of being ill behind (29%), no symptom burden (23%), or lacking internet skills (18%). Out of the 320 participants in the intervention group 167 (52%) used Oncokompas as intended. Among 72 non-users, main reasons for not using Oncokompas were no symptom burden (32%) or lack of time (26%). Among 248 survivors that activated their account, satisfaction and user-friendliness were rated with a 7 (scale 0-10). Within 3 (IQR 1-4) sessions, users selected 32 (IQR 6-37) topics. Main reasons for not using healthcare options in Act were that the information in Learn was already sufficient (44%) or no supportive care needs (32%).

DISCUSSION

Main reasons for not reaching or using Oncokompas were no symptom burden, no supportive care needs, or lack of time. Users selected many cancer-generic and tumour-specific topics to address, indicating added value of the wide range of available topics.