Reasons for participation in optional pharmacokinetic studies in children with cancer: a Children's Oncology Group phase 1 consortium study

Targetable Intercellular Signaling Pathways Facilitate Lung Colonization in Osteosarcoma

Outcomes for young people diagnosed with osteosarcoma hinge almost exclusively on whether they develop lung metastasis. The striking predilection that osteosarcoma shows for metastatic spread to lung suggests properties and/or lung interactions that generate tissue-specific survival and proliferation advantages. While these mechanisms remain overall poorly defined, studies have begun to describe biological elements important to metastasis. Mechanisms described to date include both cell-autonomous adaptations that allow disseminated tumor cells to survive the stressors imposed by metastasis and intercellular signaling networks that tumor cells exploit to pirate needed signals from surrounding tissues or to recruit other cells that create a more favorable niche. Evidence suggests that cell-autonomous changes are largely driven by epigenetic reprogramming of disseminated tumor cells that facilitates resistance to late apoptosis, manages endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stressors, promotes translation of complex transcripts, and activates clotting pathways. Tumor-host signaling pathways important for lung colonization drive interactions with lung epithelium, mesenchymal stem cells, and mediators of innate and adaptive immunity. In this chapter, we highlight one particular pathway that integrates cell-autonomous adaptations with lung-specific tumor-host interactions. In this mechanism, aberrant ΔNp63 expression primes tumor cells to produce IL6 and CXCL8 upon interaction with lung epithelial cells. This tumor-derived IL6 and CXCL8 then initiates autocrine, osteosarcoma-lung paracrine, and osteosarcoma-immune paracrine interactions that facilitate metastasis. Importantly, many of these pathways appear targetable with clinically feasible therapeutics. Ongoing work to better understand metastasis is driving efforts to improve outcomes by targeting the most devastating complication of this disease.

Provocative questions in osteosarcoma basic and translational biology: A report from the Children's Oncology Group

Patients who are diagnosed with osteosarcoma (OS) today receive the same therapy that patients have received over the last 4 decades. Extensive efforts to identify more effective or less toxic regimens have proved disappointing. As we enter a postgenomic era in which we now recognize OS not as a cancer of mutations but as one defined by p53 loss, chromosomal complexity, copy number alteration, and profound heterogeneity, emerging threads of discovery leave many hopeful that an improving understanding of biology will drive discoveries that improve clinical care. Under the organization of the Bone Tumor Biology Committee of the Children's Oncology Group, a team of clinicians and scientists sought to define the state of the science and to identify questions that, if answered, have the greatest potential to drive fundamental clinical advances. Having discussed these questions in a series of meetings, each led by invited experts, we distilled these conversations into a series of seven Provocative Questions. These include questions about the molecular events that trigger oncogenesis, the genomic and epigenomic drivers of disease, the biology of lung metastasis, research models that best predict clinical outcomes, and processes for translating findings into clinical trials. Here, we briefly present each Provocative Question, review the current scientific evidence, note the immediate opportunities, and speculate on the impact that answered questions might have on the field. We do so with an intent to provide a framework around which investigators can build programs and collaborations to tackle the hardest problems and to establish research priorities for those developing policies and providing funding.

Factors Influencing Participation Of Healthy Volunteers In Clinical Trials: Findings From A Cross-Sectional Study In Delhi, North India

PURPOSE

To identify the specific motivations that drive healthy volunteers to consent for their participation in clinical studies. Additionally, the study aimed to document the socio-demographic determinants of participation in the trial related solely to the intention of securing financial gains.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This cross-sectional study was conducted among subjects who participated as healthy volunteers in clinical trials conducted by Contract Research Organizations (CROs) of Delhi. Pre-tested, validated semi-structured questionnaires were used to collect baseline socio-demographic data, information about factors motivating participation in clinical trials, and pattern of utilisation of money received against participation in the trial. Logistic regression analysis was done to determine the factors that influenced participation in the trial related purely to the motive of securing financial gains.

RESULTS

A total of 400 participants were selected. The majority of the volunteers (77.5%) reported that their sole reason for participating in clinical trials was for monetary gain. Around a tenth of the volunteers participated with the intent to advance scientific knowledge and another 4.5% participated due to benefits of free medical check-ups. Participants in the age group of 29-38 years, those that were married, those residing in an urban slum, male participants, those with a high number of dependent family members (ie, 5 to 8), and those earning less than 5000 INR (71 USD) a month had higher odds of participating in a clinical trial purely for the financial benefits. Those educated till intermediate and above had lower odds of participation in the trial due to monetary benefits.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that healthy volunteers in Delhi consider participation in clinical trials mainly because of the prospect of financial reward. More research is needed to inform judgments around the ethics of providing financial rewards and enrollment of healthy research volunteers.

US Military Service Members' Reasons for Deciding to Participate in Health Research

Researchers have reported challenges in recruiting US military service members as research participants. We explored their reasons for participating. Eighteen US military service members who had participated in at least one health-related research study within the previous 3 years completed semi-structured individual interviews in person or by telephone, focused on the service members' past decisions regarding research participation. Service members described participation decisions for 34 individual research experiences in 27 separate studies. Service members' reasons for participation in research clustered in three themes: others-, self-, and fit-focused. Each decision included reasons characterized by at least two themes. Reasons from all three themes were apparent in two-thirds of individual participation decisions. Reasons described by at least half of the service members included a desire to make things better for others, to improve an organization, to help researchers, and to improve one's health; understanding how they fit in studies; and convenience of participation. Findings may help researchers, study sponsors, ethicists, military leaders, and military decision-makers better understand service members' reasons for participating in research and improve future recruitment of service members in health research. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Investigating the Experiences of Childhood Cancer Patients and Parents Participating in Optional Nontherapeutic Clinical Research Studies in the UK

BACKGROUND

While the majority of childhood cancer clinical trials are treatment related, additional optional research investigations may be carried out that do not directly impact on treatment. It is essential that these studies are conducted ethically and that the experiences of families participating in these studies are as positive as possible.

METHODS

A questionnaire study was carried out to investigate the key factors that influence why families choose to participate in optional nontherapeutic research studies, the level of understanding of the trials involved, and the experiences of participation.

RESULTS

A total of 100 participants from six UK centers were studied; 77 parents, 10 patients >16 years, and 13 patients aged 8-15 years. Ninety-seven percent of parents and 90% of patients felt that information provided prior to study consent was of the right length, with 52% of parents and 65% of patients fully understanding the information provided. Seventy-four percent of parents participated in research studies in order to "do something important", while 74% of patients participated "to help medical staff". Encouragingly, <5% of participants felt that their clinical care would be negatively affected if they did not participate. Positive aspects of participation included a perception of increased attention from medical staff. Negative aspects included spending longer periods in hospital and the requirement for additional blood samples. Ninety-six percent of parents and 87% of patients would participate in future studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The study provides an insight into the views of childhood cancer patients and their parents participating in nontherapeutic clinical research studies. Overwhelmingly, the findings suggest that participation is seen as a positive experience.

Motivations of children and their parents to participate in drug research: a systematic review

Information on motivations for research participation, may enable professionals to better tailor the process of recruitment and informed consent to the perspective of parents and children. Therefore, this systematic review assesses motivating and discouraging factors for children and their parents to decide to participate in clinical drug research. Studies were identified from searches in 6 databases. Two independent reviewers screened and selected relevant articles. Results were aggregated and presented by use of qualitative metasummary. 38 studies fulfilled the selection criteria and were of sufficient quality for inclusion in the qualitative metasummary. Most mentioned motivating factors for parents were: health benefit for child, altruism, trust in research, and relation to researcher. Most mentioned motivating factors for children were: personal health benefit, altruism and increasing comfort. Fear of risks, distrust in research, logistical aspects and disruption of daily life were mentioned most by parents as discouraging factors. Burden and disruption of daily life, feeling like a "guinea pig" and fear of risks were most mentioned as discouraging factors by children.

CONCLUSION

Paying attention to these motivating and discouraging factors of children and their parents during the recruitment and informed consent process in drug research increases the moral and instrumental value of informed consent.

WHAT IS KNOWN

• This systematic review pools the existing empirical literature on motivations of minors and their parents to consent or dissent to participation in clinical drug research. • The most mentioned motivating and discouraging factors for children and their parents to consent to participation in clinical drug research are identified aggregated and presented by use of qualitative metasummary. What is new: • This information can be used to adapt the research protocol, recruitment, and informed consent/assent process to the needs of children and their parents.

The complexity of consenting to clinical research in phase I pediatric cancer studies

The principal aim of phase I studies is to define the recommended dosing of drugs for phase II studies through assessment of drug pharmacokinetics and observation of the drug's toxicity profile. In the setting of pediatric oncology, the use of an experimental drug in phase I study is offered when prognosis is poor. Thus, phase I oncology studies are not given to patients with a primary purpose of an intent to cure. They may offer little to no treatment benefit and carry a potential toxic effect. They may offer other benefits such as improved quality of life and relief of pain, however. Three parties are involved in the informed consent process: the parents, patients, and physicians. Families report hope as the main cause for enrollment. Physicians focus on providing information so families can decide about participation. Physicians also try to maintain hope despite understanding the nature of the disease. This makes the informed consent complicated for all parties involved in the process. The purpose of this review is to discuss the aims of phase I studies in pediatric oncology and to convey the ethical challenges that patients, parents, and physicians are facing when discussing informed consent with potential study participants.