Adolescent and young adult enrollment to a National Cancer Institute-sponsored National Clinical Trials Network Research Group over 25 years

Strategies for increasing accrual in cancer clinical trials: What is the evidence?

INTRODUCTION

Despite the importance of clinical trial participation among cancer patients, few participate-and even fewer patients from ethnic and racial minoritized groups. It is unclear whether suggested approaches to increase accrual are successful. We conducted a scoping review to identify evidence-based approaches to increase participation in cancer treatment clinical trials that demonstrated clear increases in accrual. Notably, more stringent than other published reviews, only those studies with comparison data to measure a difference in accrual rates were included.

METHODS

We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science for English-language articles published from January 1, 2012, to August 8, 2022. Studies were included if they were conducted in the United States, described single or multicomponent interventions, and provided data to measure accrual relative to baseline levels or that compared accrual rates with other interventions.

RESULTS

Sixteen articles were included: six with interventions addressing patient barriers, two addressing provider barriers, seven describing institutional change, and one describing policy change. Key themes emerged, such as a focus on patient education, cultural competency, and building the capacity of clinics. Few studies provide comparative accrual data, making it difficult to identify with certainty any effective, evidence-based approaches for increasing accrual. Some patient- and system-level interventions studies showed modest increases in accrual primarily through pre-post measurement.

CONCLUSION

Despite an extensive body of literature about the barriers that impede cancer treatment trial accrual, along with numerous recommendations for how to overcome these barriers, results reveal surprisingly little evidence published in the last 10 years on interventions that increase accrual relative to baseline levels or compared with other interventions. As clinical trials are a primary vehicle through which we improve cancer care, it is critical that evidence-based approaches are used to inform all efforts to increase accrual. Strategies for increasing participation in cancer clinical trials must be developed and rigorously evaluated so that these strategies can be disseminated, participation in trials can increase and become more equitable, and trial results can become more generalizable.

Exclusion of pregnant and lactating persons from breast cancer clinical trials: a review of active trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov

INTRODUCTION

Treatment of pregnancy-associated breast cancer is complex, as providers try to balance risks to the pregnant person and the developing fetus. Given increased case fatality and increasing incidence, there is a pressing need understand the efficacy and safety of different treatment regimens in this population; however, pregnant and lactating people have traditionally been excluded from participating in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Given recent efforts to expand the inclusion criteria for oncology RCTs, this study aimed to review the inclusion/exclusion criteria of current breast cancer RCTs to assess what proportion of trials permitted enrollment of pregnant and lactating persons.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search of ClinicalTrials.gov in January 2022 to identify interventional studies of breast cancer in adults that were actively recruiting. The primary outcomes were the exclusion of pregnant and lactating people.

RESULTS

The search identified 1706 studies, of which 1451 met eligibility criteria. Overall, 69.4% and 54.8% of studies excluded pregnant and lactating people, respectively. The exclusion of pregnant and lactating persons differed by study characteristics but extended across all trial designs, locations, phases and interventions. Exclusion of pregnant and lactating persons was most common in trials where the intervention was biological (86.3%), drug (83.5%) or radiation (81.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

The exclusion of pregnant and lactating people from clinical trials contributes to evidence gaps in how to treat this population. A paradigm shift is needed that focuses on how research can be used to protect pregnant people from future harms, instead of protecting pregnant people from research-related risks.

Alliance A151945: Accrual and characteristics of adolescent and young adult patients in Alliance trials from 2000 to 2017

BACKGROUND

Identifying patient- and disease-specific characteristics associated with clinical trial enrollment of adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer may target efforts to improve accrual.

METHODS

Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology (Alliance) trials opened from January 1, 2000, and closed before January 1, 2018, for common AYA cancers were identified. Proportions of AYAs (aged 18-39 years old) versus non-AYAs (aged ≥40 years old) enrolled by cancer type were summarized by descriptive statistics. Among studies with ≥20 AYAs enrolled, demographic and disease characteristics of AYAs versus non-AYAs were compared with χ2 and Kruskal-Wallis tests. A qualitative review was also conducted of therapeutic trials included in analysis in PubMed through December 31, 2021, that reported AYA-specific survival.

RESULTS

Among 188 trials enrolling 40,396 patients, AYAs represented 11% (4468 of 40,396) of accrual. AYA accrual varied by cancer type (leukemia, 23.6%; breast, 9.9%; lymphoma, 14.8%; colorectal, 6.2%; central nervous system, 8.1%; melanoma, 11.8%; sarcoma, 12%). Across ages, the proportion of Black and Hispanic patients enrolled was 1%-10%. Compared to non-AYAs, AYAs in breast and colorectal cancer trials were less likely to be White and more likely to be Hispanic. Disease characteristics differed by age for selected trials. Two trials reported AYA-specific survival, with no significant differences observed by age.

CONCLUSIONS

AYA accrual to Alliance trials was comparable to or exceeded population-based, age-specific prevalence estimates for most cancer types. Greater proportional representation of Hispanic and non-White patients among AYAs reflects US demographic trends. The small number of minority patients enrolled across ages underscores the persistent challenge of ensuring equitable access to trials, including for AYAs.

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.

Have we made progress in taking care of adolescents and young adults with cancer? Results of a European multi-professional survey

BACKGROUND

It is well documented that traditional health care models do not meet the specific needs of Adolescents and Young Adults (AYA) cancer patients.

METHODS

We explore a map of the development of age-specific AYA cancer care across Europe, from the perspective of healthcare professionals with an interest in AYA care, in order to understand the specific challenges and map progress over time. An on-line survey was developed by international professional cancer organisations.

RESULTS

We had 377 respondents from 60 countries. The majority of respondents were physicians 298 (79%), a minority of survey respondents (39, 10.4%) work exclusively with AYA patients, most respondents declared substantial and routine clinical service collaborations to provide care and treatment to AYA with cancer. Policy for the multidisciplinary management of AYA cancer patients commonly appears in Europe now, and was reported by 234 (78.52%) respondents. Specific professional training for AYA cancer care is not uniformly available.

CONCLUSION

There is considerable opportunity for many organisations to work together in raising the profile of AYA cancer related issues, in providing education and in encouraging research and collaboration.

Clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis of adolescents and young adults with gastric cancer after gastrectomy: a propensity score matching analysis

Background

Gastric cancer (GC) among adolescents and young adults (AYAs, aged 15-39 years) has limited data on clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis. This study aimed to compare the clinicopathological characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and long-term outcomes of AYAs and older adults (OAs, aged > 39 years) with GC who underwent curative gastrectomy.

Methods

From January 1994 to June 2019, patients with GC undergoing curative gastrectomy were enrolled and divided into AYA group and OA group. The clinicopathological characteristics, treatment variables, perioperative outcomes and long-term outcomes were compared between the two groups, both before and after propensity score matching (PSM).

Results

AYAs had fewer comorbid conditions and were more likely to be females, have normal carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels, poorly differentiated tumors with perineural invasion, and receive adjuvant chemotherapy. AYA patients had lower incidence of postoperative complications and shorter length of postoperative hospital stay than OA patients. No significant differences in postoperative 30-day or 90-day mortality were observed between AYAs and OAs, both before and after PSM. In the entire cohort, AYAs had similar median overall survival (OS) to OAs. However, in the PSM cohort, AYAs had significantly shorter median OS. Young age (15-39 years) was an independent risk factor for OS in GC patients following gastrectomy.

Conclusion

The clinicopathological characteristics were significantly different between AYA and OA patients with GC. AYA patients with GC had worse long-term prognosis than OA patients, and young age was an independent risk factor for OS in GC patients following gastrectomy.

Loss to follow-up of minorities, adolescents, and young adults on clinical trials: A report from the Children's Oncology Group

BACKGROUND

The increasing number of childhood cancer survivors necessitates continued follow-up to monitor for long-term complications. Inequities in loss to follow-up for patients enrolled on pediatric clinical trials have not been well studied.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of 21,084 patients residing in the United States enrolled on phase 2/3 and phase 3 Children's Oncology Group (COG) trials between January 1, 2000 and March 31, 2021. Rates of loss to follow-up to COG were evaluated using log-rank tests and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models with adjusted hazard ratios (HRs). Demographic characteristics included age at enrollment, race, ethnicity, and zip code level socioeconomic data.

RESULTS

Adolescent and young adult (AYA) patients 15-39 years old at diagnosis had an increased hazard of loss to follow-up compared to patients 0-14 years old (HR, 1.89; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.76-2.02). In the overall cohort, non-Hispanic Blacks were found to have an increased hazard of loss to follow-up compared to non-Hispanic Whites (HR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.43-1.70). Among AYAs, the highest loss to follow-up rates were among non-Hispanic Blacks (69.8% ± 3.1%), patients on germ cell tumor trials (78.2% ± 9.2%), and patients living in zip codes with a median household income ≤150% of the federal poverty line at diagnosis (66.7% ± 2.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

AYAs, racial and ethnic minority patients, and those living in lower socioeconomic status areas had the highest rates of loss to follow-up among clinical trial participants. Targeted interventions are warranted to ensure equitable follow-up and improved assessment of long-term outcomes.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Little is known about disparities in loss to follow-up for pediatric cancer clinical trial participants. In this study, we found that participants who were adolescents and young adults when treated, those who identified as a racial and/or ethnic minority, or those residing in areas with lower socioeconomic status at diagnosis were associated with higher rates of loss to follow-up. As a result, the ability to assess their long-term survival, treatment-related health conditions, and quality of life is hindered. These findings suggest the need for targeted interventions to improve long-term follow-up among disadvantaged pediatric clinical trial participants.

Trend of gastric cancer incidence and death rate in adolescents and young adults: A retrospective cohort study based on the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Less attentions are paid into the adolescents and young adults (AYAs) diagnosed with gastric cancer (GC). Our study aims to explore incidence rate trend, death rate trend, and prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) in AYAs with GC.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study based on the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database was performed. Joinpoint regression analysis was used to calculate average annual percent change (AAPC) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for incidence and death rate trends. Prognostic factors for OS and CSS were investigated using Cox proportional hazard model and gray test, respectively, with results shown as hazard ratio (HR) with 95% CI.

RESULTS

Although no statistical significance, incidence rate trend showed a tendency to an increase in AYAs (AAPC = 0.2, 95% CI: -0.2-0.6). All-cause death rate trends were declined both in AYAs and middle-aged and elderly people (MAEP), with AAPC value of -0.6 (95% CI: -0.8 to -0.5) and -0.5 (95% CI: -0.6 to -0.4), respectively. AYAs had a lower risk of all-cause death (HR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.84-0.90) but a higher risk of GC-specific death (HR: 1.11, 95% CI: 1.07-1.15) than MAEP. Chemotherapy (HR: 1.27, 95% CI: 1.16-1.40) and intraoperative radiation (HR: 2.89, 95% CI: 1.13-7.37) were, respectively, identified as risk factors for worse OS and CSS in AYAs.

CONCLUSIONS

AYAs had a higher risk of GC-specific death, indicating more attention should be paid into AYAs with GC.

Enrollment of adolescent and young adult patients newly diagnosed with cancer in NCI CTEP-sponsored clinical trials before and after launch of the NCI National Clinical Trials Network

BACKGROUND

Participation of adolescents and young adults (AYAs) in oncology clinical trials is important to ensure adequate opportunities for AYA patients to contribute to, and benefit from, advances in cancer treatment.

METHODS

Accrual data for National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP) cooperative group-led treatment trials were examined to assess enrollment of newly diagnosed AYA patients (15-39 years) during the period 2004-2019, with particular interest in comparing enrollment before launch of the NCI National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) to after. All phase 2, 2/3, and 3 trials activated during the period between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2019, were identified (n = 1568) and reduced to a set of 304 that met predetermined criteria to focus on cooperative group-led trials that involved therapy for newly diagnosed cancer and had age eligibility overlapping the AYA range. The proportion of AYA patients relative to total accrual, along with 95% bootstrapped CI was calculated for patients enrolled pre-NCTN and post-NCTN.

RESULTS

AYA accrual comprised 9.5% (95% CI, 7.6-11.8) pre-NCTN compared with 14.0% (95% CI, 9.9-18.3) post-NCTN. The mean difference in proportions post-NCTN compared with pre-NCTN was 4.4% (0.7%-8.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

These results indicate an increase in AYA participation in trials conducted within the NCTN relative to the pre-NCTN period. This suggests an awareness and utilization of NCTN trials for AYAs with cancer.

Challenges of Systemic Therapy Investigations for Bone Sarcomas

Bone sarcoma is a rare component of malignant solid tumors that accounts for only ~0.2% of malignancies. Bone sarcomas present various histological types, and genomic mutations differ markedly by the histological types. Although there are vast mutations in various bone sarcomas, most of them are non-actionable, and even potential targetable mutations that are actionable targets in other malignancies have not shown the appropriate responses in clinical trials for bone sarcomas. Investigations of new systemic therapy, including molecular targeted therapies for bone sarcomas, have thus not progressed like those for other solid tumors. Another problem is that high rates of pediatric/adolescent and young adult patients have bone sarcomas such as osteosarcoma, and patient recruitment for clinical trials (especially randomized trials) is challenging. For pediatric patients, evaluations of tolerability and appropriate dose modifications of new drugs are needed, as their findings could provide the threshold for investigating new drugs for bone sarcomas. To solve these problems, improvements in registry systems, real world data, and pediatric extrapolation have been attempted. We review the issues regarding targeted drug investigations for bone sarcomas, focusing on the current clinical evidence and efforts to resolve these issues.

Adolescents and Young Adults with Cancer: Survivorship and Special Considerations

Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) who have cancer face a distinct set of challenges beginning during the initial diagnosis, extending throughout treatment, and continuing into survivorship. Owing to significant strides made in cancer therapy in recent decades, more than 80% of this group will go on to become long-term survivors. Despite these improvements, however, many AYAs continue to have poorer outcomes when compared with older and younger patients. The purpose of this article is to underscore the unique set of multifaceted obstacles that this vulnerable group encounters and to pinpoint critical areas of attention and intervention throughout the health care journey. Moreover, it aims to highlight the importance of the role of the primary care provider as a constant partner in safeguarding the long-term physical and mental health of this diverse population within a complex and, at times, trying health care system. [Pediatr Ann. 2022;51(1):e27-e33.].