The experience of clinical study and trial participation in rare diseases: A scoping review of centronuclear myopathy and other neuromuscular disorders

The design of a clinical trial for a rare disease can be challenging. An optimal study design is required to effectively study the clinical outcomes for possible therapies for these types of disorders. Understanding the study participants' experiences as well as barriers and facilitators of participation are important to optimize future research and to inform clinical trial management. Centronuclear myopathies (CNMs) including X-linked myotubular myopathy (XLMTM) are a group of rare congenital myopathies for which there is no cure currently. Since 2014, a number of natural history studies and clinical trials have been conducted in CNMs. Two trials have been prematurely terminated because of severe adverse events. Since no research has been conducted regarding trial experience in CNM, we performed a scoping literature research on clinical trial experience of patients with neuromuscular disorders in general. The most common barriers to trial participation of patients comprise concerns about potential harmful effects, opportunity loss and the expected burden on daily life. The most common facilitators were an expected benefit on the disease course, altruism and collateral benefit. While several results are in line with trial experiences of other types of patients, for example oncological patients, distinctions can be made for patients with CNM and other neuromuscular disorders. However, the limited availability of relevant literature suggests that future (qualitative) research should focus on trial experiences in CNM patients.

Qualitative interviews of patients with COPD and muscle weakness enrolled in a clinical trial evaluating a new anabolic treatment: patient perspectives of disease experience, trial participation and outcome assessments

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and muscle weakness can cause impaired physical function, significantly impacting patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Loss of muscle strength is usually assessed through clinical and performance outcome (PerfO) assessments, which consists of tasks performed in a standardized manner, providing evidence of a patient's functional ability. However, evidence documenting the patient experience of COPD and muscle weakness is limited.

METHODS

This two-stage qualitative study used semi-structured interviews in patients aged 45-80 years with COPD (post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1s [FEV1]/forced vital capacity ratio < 0.70, and FEV1% predicted of 30-80%) and muscle weakness. In Stage 1, 30-minute concept elicitation interviews were conducted with participants recruited across three US sites to explore impacts on physical functioning and activities of daily living. In Stage 2, interviews were performed with participants exiting a Phase IIa trial investigating the efficacy of a selective androgen receptor modulator (GSK2881078) on leg strength, whereby PerfOs were used to evaluate strength and physical functioning endpoints. These participants completed either 60-minute in-depth (n = 32) or 15-minute confirmatory (n = 35) interviews exploring trial experience, completion of outcome measures, disease experience and treatment satisfaction.

RESULTS

In Stage 1 (n = 20), most participants described their muscles as weak (83.3%). Difficulties with walking (100%) and lifting heavy objects (90%) were reported. In Stage 2, 60-minute interviews, all participants (n = 32) reported a positive trial experience. Most participants reported that the home exercise program was easy to fit into daily life (77.8%), the PROactive daily diary was easy to complete (100%) and wearable sensors were easy to use (65.6%). However, technical issues were reported (71%), and few participants (19.4%) found physical assessments easy to complete. Improvements in muscle strength and functional limitations were reported by most participants. The shorter 15-minute confirmatory interviews (n = 35) supported the in-depth interview results.

CONCLUSION

The qualitative interviews generated in-depth evidence of key concepts relevant to patients with COPD and muscle weakness and support the assessments of patient strength and physical function as outcome measures in this population in future studies.

TRIAL NUMBER

GSK Stage 1: 206869; Stage 2: 200182, NCT03359473; Registered December 2, 2017, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03359473 .

Research participants may not recall their participation but have a better understanding of alternative management options than patients in routine care

BACKGROUND

Patient understanding of care interventions, of the clinical uncertainty, and of their participation in clinical research is often poor. We hypothesized that compared to routine care, patients would better understand the prevailing uncertainty when they participated in research.

METHODS

A questionnaire was administered to patients at the time they attended a follow-up neurovascular clinic 4 to 52 weeks after a care episode where they did or did not participate in a clinical trial. Patients were not reminded whether they had previously participated in a clinical trial. Questions concerned their understanding of the risks/benefits of interventions, the availability of alternative options, whether their personal opinion was taken into consideration, the reason for the final decision, their confidence at having received the best management, and whether they had been research participants.

RESULTS

Between June 2019 and June 2020, 167 patients were recruited; 71 had truly been research participants, while 96 had not. A greater proportion of research patients were aware of the existence of management alternatives (65% versus 44%; P=0.008). Patients of both groups believed their personal opinion counted in the final decision (76% versus 70%), and patients were equally confident that they had received the best management (94%). Research patients believed they had participated in research 46% of the time, compared to 12% of routine care patients (P=0.003).

CONCLUSION

Many patients do not recall that they participated in a clinical trial, but they have a better understanding of the clinical uncertainty and of the availability of alternative management options.

The mediating role of state anger in the associations between intentions to participate in the criminal trial and psychopathology in traumatically bereaved people

Victims of crimes have been granted increasing procedural rights to participate in the juridical process since the mid 1990s. However, knowledge about the (anti)-therapeutic effect of participation is limited. We examined the associations between symptom levels of persistent complex bereavement disorder (PCBD), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and depression and the intention to participate in a criminal trial. Furthermore, we investigated the mediating role of state anger in these associations. People who lost loved ones after a plane disaster with flight MH17 (N = 203) completed questionnaires within three weeks before the start of the criminal trial. Mediation analyses indicated that people, who did not intend to actively participate in the trial by delivering a written or oral victim statement, were less likely to experience anger, which is, in turn, associated with attenuated psychopathology levels. State anger explains 68% of the effect of the intention to exercise the right to speak on PCBD levels. An important limitation is the cross-sectional study design, which precludes conclusions about temporal associations. More research is needed to improve preparation and support of bereaved people when they intend to exercise their victim rights during a criminal trial.

Interventions supporting cancer patients in making decisions regarding participation in clinical trials - a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Existing research on the perspectives of patients with cancer and health care professionals indicates that patient decision making on cancer clinical trial participation is a complex process and may be poorly understood, possibly compromising their decision to participate. This systematic review investigates interventions that support patients in their decision-making processes regarding whether to participate or not and assesses the qualities of the interventions, measures used and related outcomes.

METHODS

Six databases were systematically searched and only studies evaluating interventions that support the decision making of adult patients offered to enter a cancer clinical trial were included. Ten articles met the criteria and were analysed using a narrative synthesis approach.

RESULTS

The research focus of the included studies reflected the multifactorial nature of what constitutes support for patient decision making in terms of entering a cancer clinical trial. However, most interventions were based on the hypothesis that more information leads to support in decision making, and did not take other factors, such as the relationship to the clinical staff or relatives, the patients' strong hope for therapeutic benefit or other existential needs into account. The interventions were primarily based on a specific tool, executed once, which seems to imply that decisions need only to be supported once and not at several time points throughout the decision process, and did not assess the importance of a patient's family- or social relations. Moreover, few interventions focused on the patients' counselling experience or assessed patient preferences in relation to decision making.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings demonstrate a lack of research on interventions to support patients' decision making that takes other factors, apart from improving knowledge of trials, into account. Limited evidence exists on the effectiveness of decision support interventions to improve the experience of support in adult patients with cancer. Interventions that take patient preferences in relation to decision making and the social context of decision processes into account need to be developed and assessed.

The attitude of patients with progressive ataxias towards clinical trials

Background

The development of new therapies may rely on the conduct of human experimentation as well as later clinical trials of therapeutic interventions. Ethical considerations seek to protect the patient from risk but few have sought to ascertain the attitude to such risk of patients with progressive debilitating or terminal conditions, for which no mitigating or curative therapies exist. Such understanding is also important if recruitment is to be maximized. We therefore sought to define the motivations for and barriers to trial participation amongst patients with progressive ataxias, as well as their condition-specific trial preferences.

Methods

We conducted an online survey consisting of 29 questions covering four key domains (demographics, personal motivation, drug therapy and study design) relating to the design of clinical trials. Two major ataxia charities, Ataxia UK and the Friedreich’s Ataxia Research Alliance (FARA) sent the survey to their members. Responses were analysed by disease and by ambulatory status.

Results

Of 342 respondents, 204 reported a diagnosis of Friedreich’s ataxia (FRDA), 55 inherited cerebellar ataxia (CA) and 70 idiopathic CA. The most important symptoms to be addressed by a trial were considered to be balance problems and ambulation, although these were superseded by speech problems in wheelchair users. Common motivations for participation were potential benefits to self and others. Reasons for non-participation included concerns about side effects, and the burden and cost of travel. Financial reimbursement for expenses was reported to be likely to increase trial engagement, Phase two trials were the most popular to participate in, and the use of a placebo arm was seen as a disincentive. Across all disease subgroups, drug repurposing trials proved popular and just under 70% of participants would be prepared to undergo intrathecal drug administration.

Conclusions

Knowledge of motivations for and barriers to trial participation as well as the acceptability of investigations, time commitments and routes of drug administration should inform better, more patient focused trial design. This in turn may improve recruitment and retention of participants to future trials.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13023-021-02091-x.

Does the number of doses matter? A qualitative study of HPV vaccination acceptability nested in a dose reduction trial in Tanzania

Background

The multi-dose regimen is a known barrier to successful human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination. Emerging evidence suggests that one vaccine dose could protect against HPV. While there are clear advantages to a single dose schedule, beliefs about vaccine dosage in low and middle income countries (LMICs) are poorly understood. We investigated acceptability of dose-reduction among girls, and parents/guardians of girls, randomised to receive one, two or three doses in an HPV vaccine dose-reduction and immunobridging study (DoRIS trial) in Tanzania.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews with girls (n = 19), and parents/guardians of girls (n = 18), enrolled in the study and completing their vaccine course.

Results

Most participants said they entrusted decisions about the number of HPV vaccine doses to experts. Random allocation to the different dose groups did not feature highly in the decision to participate in the trial. Given a hypothetical choice, girls generally said they would prefer fewer doses in order to avoid the pain of injections. Parental views were mixed, with most wanting whichever dose was most efficacious. Nonetheless, a few parents equated a higher number of doses with greater protection.

Conclusion

Vaccine trials and programmes will need to employ careful messaging to explain that one dose offers sufficient protection against HPV should emerging evidence from ongoing dose-reduction clinical trials support this.

•

We interviewed girls, and parents/carers of girls, enrolled in an HPV Vaccine dose reduction trial.

•

We found that enrolling in the trial in the context of community rumours required trust in the trial scientists.

•

Scientists were trusted to decide on dosage; thus randomisation by dosage was not an acceptability issue.

•

Girls preferred fewer vaccine doses in order to avoid injection-related pain.

•

Parents/guardians generally wanted whichever dose regimen was most efficacious.

Motivations, barriers and experiences of participants in an HIV reservoir trial

Objectives

We aimed to investigate the motives, barriers and experiences of HIV-STAR study participants. The HIV-STAR study was an analytical HIV treatment interruption trial (ATI) aiming to evaluate the origin of viral rebound, conducted in Ghent, Belgium.

Methods

A mixed-method study was performed among 11 participants of the HIV-STAR study. Two self-administered questionnaires with 32 and 23 items, respectively, assessed motives, barriers and experiences of the research participants. In-depth interviews were conducted to further explore and understand topics that had emerged from these surveys.

Results

Motives of ATI study participants were primarily related to the improvement of their own health perspectives and to their contribution to find an HIV cure. Barriers for ATI participation mostly related to practical issues, such as difficulty in planning study visits. Ten out of 11 participants reported a very high overall satisfaction and were willing to participate in another ATI. This satisfaction was predominantly linked to clear communication and guidance. Invasive sampling during the ATI was less of a burden than anticipated by participants. However, most participants underestimated the emotional impact of HIV treatment interruption, which was associated with feelings of uncertainty and loss of control. Risk of HIV transmission because of viral rebound was also mentioned as burdensome during this phase.

Conclusions

Involvement in an ATI was positively evaluated by HIV-STAR participants. Contributing to HIV cure research outweighed the burden of study participation for most participants. The latter aspects were attenuated by mutual decision making and the experience of empathy from the research team. Still, issues regarding privacy and the psychosocial impact of treatment interruption, including sexuality and HIV transmissibility, should be addressed in a better way.

A patient-focused, theory-guided approach to survey design identified barriers to and drivers of clinical trial participation

OBJECTIVES

Despite clear evidence showing that many clinical trials fail or are delayed because of poor patient recruitment, there is surprisingly little empirically supported guidance for trialists seeking to optimize their trial recruitment strategies. We propose that the challenges of recruitment can be better understood and addressed by thinking of research participation as one or more behaviors, subject to the same forces as other human behaviors. In this article, we describe an adaptable, behavioral theory-driven approach for designing pretrial surveys of the barriers and drivers relevant to trial participation. Instead of proposing a single survey instrument intended to be used uniformly across many situations, we propose that tailored surveys be informed by a common comprehensive, theory-guided development approach that ensures all domains potentially guiding participation are considered.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We used the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), which organizes over 100 constructs known to be associated with behavior and behavior change into 14 domains that describe determinants of professional and patient health behaviors, to inform the development of tailored surveys about barriers to and drivers of clinical trial participation. After searching the literature for barriers and drivers to trial recruitment relevant to each of the TDF domains, we developed separate surveys for members of two national health charities (Canadian Breast Cancer Network, Huntington Society of Canada) to exemplify how the approach can be adapted across settings. We conducted think-aloud interviews with members of each group to maximize the clarity and usability of the surveys, elicited opinions about which barriers/drivers were relevant for each patient group, and identified additional barriers/drivers. Interviews proceeded iteratively with changes incorporated into subsequent interviews. Here, we describe our two target patient groups, as well as our process of modifying, adding, and deleting barrier/driver items for each group and across theoretical domains.

RESULTS

We interviewed 8 women with a history of breast cancer from the Canadian Breast Cancer Network (48-65 year old) and 11 Huntington Disease community members (9 women) from the Huntington Society of Canada (26-70 year old). After the iterative development interviews, the breast cancer group had identified 38 barriers/drivers thought relevant to their participation in clinical trials across 12 TDF domains. The Huntington group identified 47 items across 13 TDF domains.

CONCLUSION

Our patient-focused and theory-guided approach was able to identify a more comprehensive range of barriers to and drivers of trial participation than existing published tools. Our approach is also more broadly adaptable than such tools, in that it uses a theoretical framework and in-depth piloting to generate a set of items tailored to each specific clinical area, rather than a single set of items intended to be applicable to all situations. This theory-guided approach also enables more specific recruitment strategies to be developed once domain-specific barriers are known, potentially optimizing participation for a given trial and helping build a cumulative evidence of barriers/drivers and strategies for addressing them.

Parents' understanding and motivation to take part in a randomized controlled trial in the field of adolescent mental health: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Little is known about why parents agree to take part in randomized controlled trials for adolescent mental health. This study aimed to investigate parents' perspectives on participating in a trial for psychological treatment of depression. The study explored parents' motivations, understanding of the trial and perspectives on the acceptability of the trial.

METHODS

Sixty-five parents took part in this qualitative study. Their adolescent children had been randomly allocated to one of three active psychological treatments for depression as part of the IMPACT trial and were interviewed about their experiences of participating in the study. Semi-structured interviews were analysed using framework analysis.

RESULTS

For seven of the sixty-five parents, their experience of taking part in the trial was not covered in their interview so they were excluded from the analysis. The analysis was therefore based on the data from the parents of 58 adolescents taking part in the trial. The most commonly cited motivation for taking part in the study reported by parents was a desire to help others going through similar difficulties. Parents generally reported finding trial participation acceptable, although there were aspects that some reported finding less acceptable, including randomization and the burden of research assessments. Others spoke positively about the experience of trial participation and found it enjoyable or even therapeutic. Importantly, some did not appear to have a good understanding of the trial design, including randomization and treatment allocation.

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates that trial participation can be a positive experience for parents, yet it raises concerns about how trialists can ensure that consent is fully informed, given that some parents appeared to have a poor understanding of the trial. Future studies should seek to explore how communication with trial participants can be improved, to ensure that trial participation is fully informed. Patient and public involvement will be crucial in ensuring this communication is accessible to stakeholders.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN registry ISRCTN83033550 . Registered on 15 October 2009.

A qualitative study of the factors influencing recruitment to a pilot trial on the prevention of striae gravidarum

Background

Striae gravidarum are a common occurrence in pregnancy and many women use a topical product to prevent their development or lessen their appearance if they do develop. There is a lack of evidence on the effectiveness of many of the products used by women. This study arose from challenges in recruitment to a pilot randomised trial (ISRCTN trial registration number:76992326) designed to evaluate the feasibility of a definitive trial to compare a moisturising oil to no treatment in the prevention and reduction in severity of striae gravidarum. The study reported here explored the factors influencing recruitment to that pilot trial.

Methods

A qualitative descriptive study was undertaken involving primigravid women attending an Irish maternity hospital. Data were collected by semi-structured telephone interviews over a four-week period and analysed using the framework method of analysis. Fifteen interview transcripts were included in the analysis.

Results

Four main themes consisting of twelve categories were identified from the interview data. The themes focused on women’s prevention of stretch marks and their choice of anti-stretch mark product, who and what influenced that choice and influences on trial participation. In relation to influences on trial participation, the possibility of being randomised to the non- intervention or control group was a deterrent for many women.

Conclusions

The prevention of stretch marks is important to pregnant women, as is their choice of product to prevent them. Offering women the opportunity to be part of a trial that would be of low burden and would test a well-known product may optimise recruitment. However, reluctance to be randomised because of the possibility of being allocated to the non-intervention control group suggests that further work is needed in this field on how best to communicate uncertainty to potential participants.

The research burden of randomized controlled trial participation: a systematic thematic synthesis of qualitative evidence

BACKGROUND

Participation in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) may be quite demanding and could represent an important burden for patients. We aimed to explore this research burden (i.e., the psychological, physical, and financial burdens) experienced by patients through their participation in a RCT.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of qualitative studies exploring adult patients' experiences with RCT participation. We searched MEDLINE (PubMed), CINAHL, PSYCHINFO, and Embase (search date March 2018) for eligible reports. Qualitative data coding and indexing were assisted by NVivo. The quality of reports was assessed by using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) tool.

RESULTS

We included 45 qualitative studies that involved 1732 RCT participants. Important psychological burdens were identified at every stage of the trial process. Participants reported feeling anxiety and being afraid of "being a 'guinea pig'" and described undergoing randomization and allocation to a placebo as particularly difficult resulting in disappointment, anger, and depression. Patients' follow-up and trial closure were also responsible for a wide range of psychological, physical, and financial burdens. Furthermore, factors related to burdensome impacts and consequences were discerned. These factors involved trial information, poorly organized and too-demanding follow-up, and lack of appropriate management when the patient's participation ended. Trial participation was also associated with beneficial effects such as the satisfaction of feeling "useful," gaining "a sense of control," and receiving special attention.

CONCLUSIONS

Our finding provides a detailed description of research burden across the whole RCT process. Many of the burdens described could be anticipated, and some avoided in a movement toward minimally disruptive clinical research. Such an approach could improve trial recruitment and retention.

REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42018098994.

Ambassadors of hope, research pioneers and agents of change-individuals' expectations and experiences of taking part in a randomised trial of an innovative health technology: longitudinal qualitative study

Background

While a growing body of research has explored why people take part in clinical trials, this research has not considered how people’s understandings, motivations and agendas might influence their conduct during a trial. This is an important area of enquiry because it is now widely recognised that an intervention might lead to different clinical outcomes when delivered as part of a trial than when implemented in routine clinical practice; however, the reasons for this are not fully understood.

Methods/design

We interviewed 24 individuals who took part in a trial of an innovative health technology under development for people with type 1 diabetes which automatically regulates blood glucose: the closed-loop system. Participants were interviewed following randomisation to a closed-loop and at trial closeout.

Results

Participants provided complex agendas for taking part in which altruistic and self-interested considerations were often inseparable. Many described belonging to a wider diabetes community and being beneficiaries of others’ participation in research and how this had given rise to attendant citizenship obligations. Participants also shared the excitement and pride they experienced from contributing to research which situated them at the forefront of technological innovation and enabled them to present themselves to others, by virtue of their trial participation, as ambassadors of hope and research pioneers. Given their desire to support the progression of a potentially life-changing technology, and be part of that innovation, participants, at follow-up, described having made extra effort during the trial. Specifically, participants described having been more focused on their diabetes management to help create conditions in which the closed-loop could work most effectively to optimize their blood glucose control.

Conclusions

Our findings contribute a new dimension to understandings of trial effects; specifically, we argue that, to aid interpretation of trial outcomes, participants’ understandings and motivations for participation need to be considered. We highlight the potential pertinence of our findings in the contemporary era of bio-citizenship where, increasingly, people are driving research agendas and see themselves as co-producers of knowledge. We also recommend a new concept be introduced into the literature—‘the altruselfish agenda’—to recognise potential inseparability of self-interested and altruistic motivations.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02523131. Registered on 14 August 2015.

Comparable indicators of therapeutic misconception between epilepsy or Parkinson's disease patients between those with clinical trial experience and trial non-participants

PURPOSE

Study design, personal persuasions, and experiences can influence willingness to participate in clinical trials (CTs). A study assessed differences between Parkinson's disease (PD) or epilepsy patients having participated in CTs and non-participants in knowledge of and attitudes toward CTs. Also considered were factors in willingness to take part and how CT participants experienced the informed consent process.

METHOD

Random samples of members of Finland's PD (n = 2000) and epilepsy (n = 1875) patient organisations were posted a questionnaire on their views about CTs. Of the 1050 questionnaires returned, 845 met inclusion criteria. In total, 126 had participated in CTs.

RESULTS

While over 90% of respondents knew that participation is always voluntary, CT participants were more often aware that one can withdraw (p<0.001). In both groups, most did not recognise the possibility of randomisation, and 57% in both CT participants and non-participants indicated that CTs are aimed primarily at seeking the best medication for the participant. Nevertheless, 83% of CT participants indicated ability to understand the information provided.

CONCLUSIONS

While most in our study agreed that patients should be asked to participate in CTs, only 15% of subjects had done so. The discrepancy between willingness to participate and recruitment figures could be minimised by improving knowledge of CTs and communication between patients and researchers. Additionally, the groups displayed comparable false CT-related assumptions, raising questions about whether these subjects fully understood the clinical research's ultimate goal and CT participants had given true informed consent. These issues have practical and ethics implications for clinical investigators.

Eligibility for phase 3 clinical trials of systemic therapy in real-world patients with metastatic renal cell cancer managed in a rural region

Previous research has identified disparities between urban and rural cancer care, including clinical trial access. Therefore, we addressed three different questions in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer managed according to national guidelines in a rural Norwegian standard practice setting. (1) How many patients would have been eligible for three recent landmark randomized clinical trials? (2) Is survival different between eligible and non-eligible patients receiving first-line systemic therapy? (3) Is survival different between eligible patients and published trial results? We performed a retrospective analysis of 101 consecutive patients (2006-2016). Only 52% of the patients were eligible for the first-line study of pazopanib versus sunitinib. The main reasons for violating inclusion or exclusion criteria were presence of brain metastases, absence of clear cell histology, and poor performance status. Even fewer patients were eligible for trials of nivolumab and cabozantinib in pre-treated patients. Eligible patients had significantly better survival than non-eligible patients, median 29.2 versus 8.5 months (p = 0.0001). These results confirm that many patients from rural practices do not fulfill all mandatory trial eligibility criteria. However, eligible patients managed according to national guidelines had survival outcomes in line with published first-line trial results.

Developing and evaluating multimedia information resources to improve engagement of children, adolescents, and their parents with trials (TRECA study): Study protocol for a series of linked randomised controlled trials

Background

Randomised controlled trials are widely established as the best method for testing health interventions whilst minimising bias. However, recruitment and subsequent retention of children and adolescents in healthcare trials is challenging. Participant information sheets are often lengthy and difficult to read and understand. Presenting key information using multimedia may help to overcome these limitations and better support young people and their parents in deciding whether to participate in a clinical trial.

Methods

The TRECA (TRials Engagement in Children and Adolescents) study has two phases. The first phase involves a qualitative study with children and adolescents and their parents to inform the development of multimedia information resources and iterative user testing to refine the resources. The second phase will embed the use of the multimedia information resources into six host trials in the United Kingdom. Patients and parents approached to participate in the host trials will be randomly allocated to either use the multimedia information resource in conjunction with standard participant information sheets, the multimedia information resource alone, or the standard participant information sheets alone. The primary outcome will be the effect of the multimedia information resources on recruitment into trials. Other outcomes measured include the effect of multimedia information resources on retention of participants into the host trials and the impact on family members’ decision-making processes, when compared to standard participant information sheets alone.

Discussion

This study will inform whether multimedia information resources, when developed using participatory design principles, are able to increase recruitment and retention of children and adolescents into trials. There is also the potential for patients to make better informed decisions through the use of multimedia information resources. The multimedia information resources also have the potential to assist with providing information on other healthcare decisions outside of clinical trials.

Trial registration

ISRCTN registry: ISRCTN73136092 (doi:10.1186/ISRCTN73136092). Registered on 24 August 2016.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-1962-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Screening for and subsequent participation in a trial for depression and anxiety in people with type 2 diabetes treated in primary care: Who do we reach?

AIMS

This study investigated (factors related to) (a) the response to a screening procedure for depression and anxiety in people with type 2 diabetes in primary care, and (b) participation in a subsequent randomised controlled trial targeting depressive or anxiety symptoms.

METHODS

People with type 2 diabetes (n=1837) received a screening questionnaire assessing depressive symptoms (PHQ-9) and anxiety symptoms (GAD-7). Eligible persons who scored above the cut-off score (PHQ-9≥7 or GAD-7≥8) were offered to participate in the trial.

RESULTS

In total, 798 people (43%) returned the screening questionnaire. Non-responders were more often female (53% vs 44%, p<0.001), had higher LDL cholesterol levels (Cohen's d=0.17, p=0.001) and a higher albumin/creatinine ratio (Cohen's d=0.08, p=0.01). In total, 130 people (18%) reported elevated depressive or anxiety symptoms. Twenty-seven persons agreed to participate in the trial. Factors related to participation were a high education level, a higher level of diabetes distress and a history of psychological problems.

CONCLUSIONS

Using screening as recruitment resulted in a small number of participants in a treatment trial for anxiety and depression. Research is needed to investigate whether screening is also followed by a low uptake of treatment in primary care outside a RCT setting.

The experience of adolescents participating in a randomised clinical trial in the field of mental health: a qualitative study

Background

This descriptive study aimed to investigate adolescents’ motivations for participating in a randomised controlled trial (RCT), to explore the understanding that the young people had regarding a number of aspects of the trial design, to examine whether or not they found participation in the trial to be acceptable and what affected this, and to identify whether and how the young people felt that their participation in the RCT impacted on their experience of therapy and on therapeutic change.

Methods

Seventy-six adolescents who were taking part in a large-scale RCT to evaluate the clinical and cost effectiveness of psychological therapies for depression were interviewed at two time-points after completing therapy. The semi-structured interviews, which included a focus on the young people’s experience of the research study, were analysed using framework analysis.

Results

The vast majority of adolescents found it acceptable to participate in the clinical trial, and many agreed to participate for reasons of ‘conditional altruism’. However consent was often given without great understanding of the key elements of the trial, including the difference between treatment arms and the randomisation process. Although the adolescents were largely positive about their experiences from taking part, the study raises questions about whether clinical outcomes may be influenced by participation in the research elements of the trial.

Conclusions

Although adolescents are under-represented in clinical trials, those who do participate are generally positive about the experience; however, careful thought needs to be given to key elements of the trial design and the potential impact of the research participation on clinical outcomes.

Trial registration

ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN83033550. Registered on 15 October 2009.

Identifying components in consent information needed to support informed decision making about trial participation: An interview study with women managing cancer

BACKGROUND

Research governance requires patients give informed consent to participate in clinical trials. However, there are concerns that consent information may not support patient participation decisions. This study investigates the utility of consent information in supporting women's trial participation decisions when receiving treatment for cancer.

DESIGN

An interview study with women receiving cancer treatments at a medical oncology outpatient clinic in Yorkshire (UK). All women over 18 years, not admitted to a hospital ward and who had currently or previously been invited to take part in a trial were invited to take part in the study over a three month period. Interviews were audio-tape recorded, transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Of those eligible (n = 41), 21 women with breast (n = 11), ovarian (n = 8) and endometrial (n = 2) cancer participated (mean age = 57 years). Eighteen had made at least one trial decision and three were considering taking part in a trial. Findings are synthesised under two analytical themes: 1) Influence of the cancer and cancer treatment context on decision making for trial participation; and 2) Experiences of the consenting process and their influence on decision making.

CONCLUSIONS

Designing trial information to represent explicitly the trial participation decision as being between standard care and study-related care options is more likely to effectively support patients in making informed decisions between standard care treatments and taking part in a trial.

Comparison of Characteristics and Outcomes of Trial Participants and Nonparticipants: Example of Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network 0201 Trial

Controversy surrounds the question of whether clinical trial participants have better outcomes than comparable patients who are not treated on a trial. We explored this question using a recent large, randomized, multicenter study comparing peripheral blood (PB) with bone marrow transplantation from unrelated donors, conducted by the Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network (BMT CTN). We compared characteristics and outcomes of study participants (n = 494) and nonparticipants (n = 1384) who appeared eligible and received similar treatment without enrolling on the BMT CTN trial at participating centers during the study time period. Data were obtained from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research. Outcomes were compared between the 2 groups using Cox proportional hazards regression models. No significant differences in age, sex, disease distribution, race/ethnicity, HLA matching, comorbidities, and interval from diagnosis to hematopoietic cell transplantation were seen between the participants and nonparticipants. Nonparticipants were more likely to have lower performance status, lower risk disease, and older donors, and to receive myeloablative conditioning and antithymocyte globulin. Nonparticipants were also more likely to receive PB grafts, the intervention tested in the trial (66% versus 50%, P < .001). Overall survival, transplantation-related mortality, and incidences of acute or chronic graft-versus-host disease were comparable between the 2 groups though relapse was higher (hazard ratio, 1.22; 95% confidence interval, 1.02 to 1.46; P = .028) in nonparticipants. Despite differences in certain baseline characteristics, survival was comparable between study participants and nonparticipants. The results of the BMT CTN trial appear generalizable to the population of trial-eligible patients.

Elements of informed consent and decision quality were poorly correlated in informed consent documents

OBJECTIVES

Although informed consent (IC) documents must contain specific elements, inclusion of these elements may be insufficient to encourage high-quality decision making. We assessed the extent to which documents conform to IC standards and how well conformity to decision quality (DQ) standards can be predicted by IC standards, IC document characteristics, and study characteristics.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We obtained 139 IC documents for trials registered with ClinicalTrials.gov from study investigators. Using a four-point scale, two raters independently assessed each IC document on 36 IC standard items and 9 DQ items.

RESULTS

Overall agreement between raters across all 45 items was 93%. Across the 36 IC standards items, conformity was generally quite high but variable, with 20 items showing conformity of 80% or more and seven items showing conformity of 50% or lower. IC standards concordance, overall length of the IC document, and country of study were all significant predictors of DQ standards but together accounted for less than 20% of the variance in DQ standards.

CONCLUSION

Conformity to recommendations for improving IC documents was relatively high but variable. The extent to which an IC document conformed to these recommendations was only moderately related to whether it conformed to recommendations for improving DQ. Existing IC regulations may not describe the optimal approach to helping people make good study participation decisions.