Low participation rates and disparities in participation in interventional clinical trials for myelodysplastic syndromes

Reducing clinical trial eligibility barriers for patients with MDS: an icMDS position statement

ABSTRACT

Excessively restrictive inclusion and exclusion criteria in clinical trials are one of many barriers to clinical trial enrollment for patients with myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDSs). Many organizations are developing efforts to increase clinical trial eligibility; yet, several recent publications focused on patients with MDS suggest that many patients with this disease may be excluded from clinical trials unnecessarily. Clinical trial eligibility should reflect the phase of the study and risks of the agent being studied. Phase 3 trials should be less restrictive than early-phase trials to represent the real-world population as closely as possible. We hypothesize that many clinical trials, particularly phase 3 trials, have unnecessarily restrictive eligibility criteria. This study aims to evaluate the most common eligibility criteria according to phase of trial and to determine whether criteria correspond with drug safety signals. We identified MDS clinical trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov from 1 January 2000 to 1 September 2023 and analyzed the eligibility criteria of 191 therapeutic MDS trials. We found that categorical inclusion and exclusion criteria are remarkably similar in representation across trial phases. Additionally, only 13% of trials are concordant with drug safety signals, suggesting that the eligibility criteria are often arbitrary. On behalf of the icMDS (International Consortium for Myelodysplastic Syndromes), an association of international MDS experts, we provide a position statement on restrictive eligibility criteria for MDS clinical trials that should be avoided with the aim of removing barriers to clinical trial enrollment.

Enablers and barriers of clinical trial participation in adult patients from minority ethnic groups: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials are essential to the development of healthcare innovations that advance life expectancy and improve quality of life. However, there exists a pronounced disparity in ethnic representation among trial participants. This imbalance, particularly in relation to minority ethnic groups, can lead to a limited understanding of how therapies affect diverse populations. The present systematic literature review (SLR) aims to identify the factors that both hinder and facilitate the participation of minority ethnic groups in clinical trials.

METHODS

This review involved a systematic search of keywords across four databases: Web of Science, PubMed, CINAHL Plus and The Cochrane Library. The review was not restricted by language or study site; however, the date of publication was limited between 1st January 2017 and 1st October 2022. Studies discussing or outlining the involvement of minority ethnic groups in clinical trials, and those outlining inclusive recruitment and participation procedures were targeted.

RESULTS

A total of 43 articles were included in the review. Of these, 36 articles were from the United States (US), 20 articles reported on oncology trials and 39 articles reported information from the patient's perspective. Reported barriers included a lack of researchers from minority ethnic groups implementing and conducting clinical research, inadequate funding for clinical trial efforts in geographical areas serving minority populations and a lack of awareness and education among research staff regarding which underrepresented groups to target for recruitment and the strategies to employ in reaching out to them. Several recommendations were suggested by the articles included in the review to address these barriers. Prominently, the use of patient navigators or community liaison roles was highly recommended as a way of supporting patients through the research recruitment process. The articles also highlighted the benefits of translating study materials and interventions into multiple languages and actively involving diverse communities in the development of health education materials. Lastly, leveraging technologies to address socioeconomic barriers, such as the use of virtual approaches to avoid lengthy travel, may also help to improve diversity in trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Ensuring representation of minority ethnic groups in clinical trials is critical to developing therapies with generalisable efficacies. While progress has been made in enhancing outreach of wider racial groups and fortifying educational resources, there remains a pressing need to delve deeper into the obstacles impeding the recruitment of a diverse participant base, particularly in regions outside the US, where relevant studies are scarce.

REGISTRATION

The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022368106) (1).

Disparities in Clinical Trial Enrollment- Focus on CAR-T and Bispecific Antibody Therapies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Recent studies show that unresolved disparities hinder enrollment to clinical trials, equitable distribution of treatments, and impact the generalizability of trials, compromising health outcomes across different populations. This review aims to examine the persistent disparities noted in clinical trial enrollment, with particular focus on lymphoid malignancies, CAR-T cell and bispecific antibody therapies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Targeted interventions can enhance recruitment of underrepresented groups in clinical trials and address the complex barriers hindering participation, which are essential for achieving healthcare access equity and treatment outcomes. Improvement must be multifaceted, addressing socioeconomic, geographic, and biologic factors contributing to underrepresentation. This includes more lenient eligibility criteria, improving outreach and education, as well as using technology to diversify trial participation.

Patient-centric care in myelodysplastic syndromes: A global systematic literature review and gap analysis

BACKGROUND

Disease progression and poor prognosis in higher-risk (HR) myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) create an urgent need for interventions to improve the patient care experience in this vulnerable population. Patient-centric physician-supported strategies in conjunction with emerging therapies can help advance overall care and improve outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate patient-centric care (PCC) in the treatment of HR-MDS and identify opportunities to develop strategies to address care gaps for an optimal patient care experience.

METHODS

A global systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted by cross-referencing MDS/HR-MDS with PCC terms, using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Collaboration databases (2017-2022) in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

RESULTS

In all, 59 MDS articles (45 empirical, 14 reviews) met the study inclusion criteria. Of these, 6 empirical articles focused on the HR-MDS population while none of the reviews did. Identified themes fell into 2 categories: health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and disparities. HRQoL was further categorized based on findings in the literature to include groupings of patient-reported outcomes (PROs), fatigue/frailty, and patient/preferences/treatment decisions/shared decision making (SDM).

CONCLUSIONS

With new treatments potentially on the horizon for HR-MDS, a call to action is timely to address the overall lack of empirical PCC data. The patient-centric approach presents critical opportunities for integration of physician-supported strategies with more effective first-line therapies to help optimize the journey of patients with HR-MDS and ensure meaningful outcomes by reducing patient/caregiver burden, aligning with and respecting patient preferences, and including patients as active participants in their treatment.

Enhancing Catchment Area Tools: A De-Identification Method for Integrating Clinical Trial Data with Cancer InFocus

Background

National Cancer Institute (NCI) designated cancer centers are entrusted with assessing the cancer burden within their catchment areas and using this information to guide research and outreach efforts. Data visualizations, like Cancer InFocus, have emerged as essential tools for facilitating this effort. Integrating clinical trial accrual data can further enhance our understanding of the catchment area. However, these data must be de-identified in accordance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). This study introduces a de-identification method through geographic aggregation, ensuring HIPAA compliance and enabling comprehensive catchment area surveillance.

Methods

Home addresses of patients enrolled in clinical trials at an NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center were geocoded to census tracts. Tracts with less than 20 accruals were merged using the R geographic aggregation tool. A risk assessment was conducted to ensure low re-identification risk. Accrual rates were calculated and integrated into Cancer InFocus.

Results

Successful aggregation exceeded the 20-patient threshold for all merged tracts with low re-identification risk. Disparities between clinical trial accruals and social determinants of health were identified.

Discussion

The geographic aggregation method, compliant with HIPAA standards and integrated with Cancer InFocus, can enhance catchment area surveillance, furthering cancer research and outreach by pinpointing area-specific needs.

Access to cancer clinical trials for racialised older adults: an equity-focused rapid scoping review protocol

BACKGROUND

The intersection of race and older age compounds existing health disparities experienced by historically marginalised communities. Therefore, racialised older adults with cancer are more disadvantaged in their access to cancer clinical trials compared with age-matched counterparts. To determine what has already been published in this area, the rapid scoping review question are: what are the barriers, facilitators and potential solutions for enhancing access to cancer clinical trials among racialised older adults?

METHODS

We will use a rapid scoping review methodology in which we follow the six-step framework of Arksey and O'Malley, including a systematic search of the literature with abstract and full-text screening to be conducted by two independent reviewers, data abstraction by one reviewer and verification by a second reviewer using an Excel data abstraction sheet. Articles focusing on persons aged 18 and over who identify as a racialised person with cancer, that describe therapies/therapeutic interventions/prevention/outcomes related to barriers, facilitators and solutions to enhancing access to and equity in cancer clinical trials will be eligible for inclusion in this rapid scoping review.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

All data will be extracted from published literature. Hence, ethical approval and patient informed consent are not required. The findings of the scoping review will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation at international conferences.

Effects of socioeconomic status on enrollment in clinical trials for cancer: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

To achieve equitable access to cancer clinical trials (CCTs), patients must overcome structural, clinical, and attitudinal barriers to trial enrollment. The goal of this systematic review was to study the relationship between socioeconomic status (SES), assessed either by direct or proxy measures, and CCT enrollment.

METHODS

The review team and medical librarian developed search strategies for each database to identify studies for this systematic review, which was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Inclusion criteria were as follows: studies published in relevant scientific journals between January 2000 and July 2022, primary sources, English literature, and studies conducted in the US. Sixteen studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were reviewed. The risk of bias assessment was conducted independently by two reviewers using the Newcastle Ottawa scale.

RESULTS

The initial search yielded 4070 citations, and 16 studies were included in our review. Four of the studies included used patient reported annual income as a measure of SES, while the remaining 12 studies used patient zip code as a proxy measurement of SES. Consistent with our hypothesis, 13 studies showed a positive association between high SES (patient-reported or proxy measurement) and CCT enrollment. Two studies showed a negative association, and one study showed no relationship.

CONCLUSIONS

The existing literature suggests that low SES is associated with lower participation in CCT. The small number of studies identified on this topic highlights the need for additional research on SES and other barriers to CCT participation.

Comparison of survival outcomes between clinical trial participants and non-participants of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have been conducted extensively. However, the effect of participation in clinical trials on survival outcomes remains unclear. This study aimed to assess whether participation in clinical trials was an independent prognostic factor for survival in patients with advanced NSCLC.

METHODS

We analyzed the medical records of patients aged ≥18 years who were newly diagnosed with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and received chemotherapy or immunotherapy from September 2016 to June 2020 in this retrospective cohort study. To reduce the impact of confounding factors, propensity score matching (PSM) was performed. The Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test were used to calculate and compare the overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of the patients. Finally, Cox proportional hazards regression was employed to examine the correlation between clinical trial participation and survival outcomes.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 155 patients in total, of which 62 (40.0 %) patients participated in NSCLC clinical trials. PSM identified 50 pairs of patients in total. The median PFS and OS of clinical trial participants and non-participants were 17.2 vs. 13.9 months (p = 0.554) and 32.4 vs. 36.5 months (p = 0.968), respectively. According to the results of multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, clinical trial participation was not an independent prognostic factor for advanced NSCLC patients (HR: 0.89, 95 % CI: 0.50-1.61; p = 0.701).

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical trial participants with advanced NSCLC displayed similar survival outcomes compared with the non-participating patients in this cohort.

Considerations for Drug Development in Myelodysplastic Syndromes

Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) have historically been challenging diseases for drug development due to their biology, preclinical modeling, and the affected patient population. In April 2022, the FDA convened a panel of regulators and academic experts in MDS to discuss approaches to improve MDS drug development. The panel reviewed challenges in MDS clinical trial design and endpoints and outlined considerations for future trial design in MDS to facilitate drug development to meaningfully meet patient needs. Challenges for defining clinical benefit in patients with MDS include cumbersome response criteria, standardized transfusion thresholds, and application and validation of patient reported outcome instruments. Clinical trials should reflect the biology of disease evolution, the advanced age of patients with MDS, and how patients are treated in real-world settings to maximize the likelihood of identifying active drugs. In patients with lower-risk disease, response criteria for anemic patients should be based on baseline transfusion dependency, improvement in symptoms, and quality of life. For higher-risk patients with MDS, trials should include guidance to prevent dose reductions or delays that could limit efficacy, specify minimal durations of treatment (in the absence of toxicity or progression), and have endpoints focused on overall survival and durable responses. MDS trials should be designed from the outset to allow the practicable application of new therapies in this high-needs population, with drugs that can be administered and tolerated in community settings, and with endpoints that meaningfully improve patients' lives over existing therapies.

Why do we not have more drugs approved for MDS? A critical viewpoint on novel drug development in MDS

Approval of new agents to treat higher risk (HR) myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) has stalled since the approval of DNA methyltransferase inhibitors (DNMTi). In addition, the options for patients with lower risk (LR) MDS who have high transfusion needs and do not harbor ring sideroblasts or 5q- syndrome are limited. Here, we review the current treatment landscape in MDS and identify areas of unmet need, such as treatment after failure of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents or DNMTis, TP53-mutated disease, and MDS with potentially targetable mutations. We discuss how our understanding of MDS pathogenesis can inform therapy development, including treating HR-MDS similarly to AML and pursuing therapies to address splicing factor mutations and dysregulated inflammation. We then bring a critical lens to current methodology of MDS studies and propose solutions to improve the efficiency and yield of these clinical trials, including using the most meaningful response metrics and expanding enrollment.

Growth in eligibility criteria content and failure to accrue among National Cancer Institute (NCI)-affiliated clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Cancer trial accrual is a national priority, yet up to 20% of trials fail to accrue. Trial eligibility criteria growth may be associated with accrual failure. We sought to quantify eligibility criteria growth within National Cancer Institute (NCI)-affiliated trials and determine impact on accrual.

METHODS

Utilizing the Aggregated Analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov, we analyzed phase II/III interventional NCI-affiliated trials initiated between 2008 and 2018. Eligibility criteria growth was assessed via number of unique content words within combined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Association between unique word count and accrual failure was evaluated with multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for known predictors of failure. Medical terms associated with accrual failure were identified via natural language processing and categorized.

RESULTS

Of 1197 trials, 231 (19.3%) failed due to low accrual. Accrual failure rate increased with eligibility criteria growth, from 11.8% in the lowest decile (12-112 words) to 29.4% in the highest decile (445-750 words). Median eligibility criteria increased over time, from 214 (IQR [23, 282]) unique content words in 2008 to 417 (IQR [289, 514]) in 2018 (r²  = 0.73, P < 0.001). Eligibility criteria growth was independently associated with accrual failure (OR: 1.09 per decile, 95% CI [1.03-1.15], p = 0.004). Eighteen exclusion criteria categories were significantly associated with accrual failure, including renal, pulmonary, and diabetic, among others (Bonferroni-corrected p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Eligibility criteria content growth is increasing dramatically among NCI-affiliated trials and is strongly associated with accrual failure. These findings support national initiatives to simplify eligibility criteria and suggest that further efforts are warranted to improve cancer trial accrual.

Epidemiologic evaluation of clinical outcomes in ethnic minorities with myelodysplastic syndromes

Since race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status (SES), including economic and educational disadvantage (EED), may impact overall survival (OS) in primary myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), we analyzed the impact of these characteristics on OS in Non-Hispanic White (NHW), Non-Hispanic Black (NHB) and Hispanic patients. In this retrospective review using the SEER US population and American Community Survey data between 2001 and 2016, factor analysis was used for 23 county-level SES indicators to identify groups of interrelated measures of EED. For the 52,739 patients identified, increased age at diagnosis, male sex, higher prognostic risk category and higher EED were all associated with reduced OS. The most prominent SES factor extracted by factor analysis was EED. NHB patients had the highest OS compared to NHW and Hispanics. For all patients, EED analysis showed lower OS for most compared to least disadvantaged, most notably in lower-risk disease and Hispanics. More NHB and Hispanics (51% and 49%) were in the most disadvantaged category compared with NHW (30%). No significant differences were noted for causes of death by race/ethnicity. In conclusion, these data indicate that in addition to standard clinical measures for analyzing OS, race/ethnicity, SES and EED are critical determinants for assessing clinical outcomes in MDS patients.

The wider perspective: twenty years of clinical trials in myelodysplastic syndromes

Most patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) require therapeutic intervention. However, there are few approved treatments for MDS. To explore reasons, we searched clinicaltrials.gov and clinicaltrialsregister.eu for MDS trials from 2000 to 2020. We assessed which agents were under investigation and analysed clinical trial characteristics and continuation rates from phase I to II to III to approval. As such, we identified 384 unique agents in 426 phase I, 430 phase II and 48 phase III trials. Success rates for phase III trials and agents were low, and MDS trials took markedly longer to complete than the average clinical trial. Although success rates were higher when MDS-specific phase I trials were conducted, 52% of the agents had not been evaluated in a phase I trial for MDS. MDS trials often failed to include quality of life, an especially important outcome for older MDS patients. Our work identifies factors potentially contributing to the paucity of available agents for MDS. We suggest a framework to improve clinical research in MDS that might ultimately augment the number of available agents.