The effect of physician recommendation on enrollment in the Breast Cancer Chemoprevention Trial

Clinical reasoning in pragmatic trial randomization: a qualitative interview study

BACKGROUND

Pragmatic trials, because they study widely used treatments in settings of routine practice, require intensive participation from clinicians who determine whether patients can be enrolled. Clinicians are often conflicted between their therapeutic obligation to patients and their willingness to enroll them in trials in which treatments are randomly determined and thus potentially suboptimal. Refusal to enroll eligible patients can hinder trial completion and damage generalizability. In order to help evaluate and mitigate clinician refusal, this qualitative study examined how clinicians reason about whether to randomize eligible patients.

METHODS

We performed interviews with 29 anesthesiologists who participated in REGAIN, a multicenter pragmatic randomized trial comparing spinal and general anesthesia in hip fracture. Interviews included a chart-stimulated section in which physicians described their reasoning pertaining to specific eligible patients as well as a general semi-structured section about their views on clinical research. Guided by a constructivist grounded theory approach, we analyzed data via coding, synthesized thematic patterns using focused coding, and developed an explanation using abduction.

RESULTS

Anesthesiologists perceived their main clinical function as preventing peri- and intraoperative complications. In some cases, they used prototype-based reasoning to determine whether patients with contraindications should be randomized; in others, they used probabilistic reasoning. These modes of reasoning involved different types of uncertainty. In contrast, anesthesiologists expressed confidence about anesthetic options when they accepted patients for randomization. Anesthesiologists saw themselves as having a fiduciary responsibility to patients and thus did not hesitate to communicate their inclinations, even when this complicated trial recruitment. Nevertheless, they voiced strong support for clinical research, stating that their involvement was mainly hindered by production pressure and workflow disruptions.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that prominent ways of assessing clinician decisions about trial randomization are based on questionable assumptions about clinical reasoning. Close examination of routine clinical practice, attuned to the features of clinical reasoning we reveal here, will help both in evaluating clinicians' enrollment determinations in specific trials and in anticipating and responding to them.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Regional Versus General Anesthesia for Promoting Independence After Hip Fracture (REGAIN).

CLINICALTRIALS

gov NCT02507505. Prospectively registered on July 24, 2015.

Changing patient preferences toward better trial recruitment: an ethical analysis

While randomized controlled trials are essential to health research, many of these trials fail to recruit enough participants. Approaching recruitment through the lens of behavioral science can help trialists to understand influences on the decision to participate and use them to increase recruitment. Although this approach is promising, the use of behavioral influences during recruitment is in tension with the ethical principle of respect for persons, as at least some of these influences could be used to manipulate potential participants. In this paper, we examine this tension by discussing two types of behavioral influences: one example involves physician recommendations, and the other involves framing of information to exploit cognitive biases. We argue that despite the apparent tension with ethical principles, influencing trial participants through behavior change strategies can be ethically acceptable. However, we argue that trialists have a positive obligation to analyze their recruitment strategies for behavioral influences and disclose these upfront to the research ethics committee. But we also acknowledge that since neither trialists nor ethics committees are presently well equipped to perform these analyses, additional resources and guidance are needed. We close by outlining a path toward the development of such guidance.

Strategies to Identify and Recruit Women at High Risk for Breast Cancer to a Randomized Controlled Trial of Web-based Decision Support Tools

We evaluated strategies to identify and recruit a racially/ethnically diverse cohort of women at high-risk for breast cancer to a randomized controlled trial (RCT). We enrolled 300 high-risk women and 50 healthcare providers to a RCT of standard educational materials alone or in combination with web-based decision support tools. We implemented five strategies to identify high-risk women: (i) recruitment among patients previously enrolled in a study evaluating breast cancer risk; (ii) automated breast cancer risk calculation using information extracted from the electronic health record (EHR); (iii) identification of women with atypical hyperplasia or lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) using International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9/10 diagnostic codes; (iv) clinical encounters with enrolled healthcare providers; (v) recruitment flyers/online resources. Breast cancer risk was calculated using either the Gail or Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) models. We identified 6,229 high-risk women and contacted 3,459 (56%), of whom 17.2% were identified from prior study cohort, 37.5% through EHR risk information, 14.8% with atypical hyperplasia/LCIS, 29.0% by clinical encounters, and 1.5% through recruitment flyers. Women from the different recruitment sources varied by age and 5-year invasive breast cancer risk. Of 300 enrolled high-risk women, 44.7% came from clinical encounters and 27.3% from prior study cohort. Comparing enrolled with not-enrolled participants, there were significant differences in mean age (57.2 vs. 59.1 years), proportion of non-Whites (41.5% vs. 54.8%), and mean 5-year breast cancer risk (3.0% vs. 2.3%). We identified and successfully recruited diverse high-risk women from multiple sources. These strategies may be implemented in future breast cancer chemoprevention trials.

PREVENTION RELEVANCE

We describe five strategies to identify and successfully recruit a large cohort of racially/ethnically diverse high-risk women from multiple sources to a randomized controlled trial evaluating interventions to increase chemoprevention uptake. Findings could inform recruitment efforts for future breast cancer prevention trials to increase recruitment yield of high-risk women.

Behavioural approaches to recruitment and retention in clinical trials: a systematic mapping review

OBJECTIVES

To identify studies that applied behavioural approaches to issues of recruitment and/or retention to trials; to describe these approaches; and to identify gaps for future research.

DESIGN

Systematic mapping review of research undertaken in clinical trials within peer-reviewed sources. Review participants were individuals involved in clinical trials, including trial staff, participants, potential participants and former participants.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ERIC, PsycINFO, Web of Science and ASSIA from inception to 15 January 2020 with no date or language restrictions.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Studies within the context of clinical trials reporting the barriers/facilitators to recruitment and retention, or developing/evaluating solutions to said barriers/facilitators, using a behavioural approach.

RESULTS

31 articles were included. Recruitment-focused studies (n=22, 71%) represented the majority. Studies tended to focus on participant behaviours (n=22, 71%). Underserved populations (n=11, 35%) were a notable subset of studies. Most studies (n=23, 74%) were exploratory but those that evaluated interventions (n=8, 26%) often did so within underserved populations (n=6). A majority of studies (n=30, 97%) did not specify their behaviours consistent with guidelines from behavioural scientists. The most used approaches were social cognitive theory (n=8, 26%), the theory of planned behaviour (n=6, 19%) and the theoretical domains framework (n=5, 16%).

CONCLUSIONS

A range of behavioural approaches have been applied to recruitment and retention to trials. The multitude of recruitment research here is consistent with trials research generally and emphasises the need for research into retention. Authors report target behaviours minimally, which is not conducive to replication. Further research should build on lessons here, such as clearly specifying behaviours. Increased methodological rigour and transparency will lead to robust evidence bases and less research waste in poor recruitment and retention. Overall, trials informed by behavioural approaches promises to be efficient and more participant focused.

Patient and physician perspectives on engaging in palliative and healthcare trials: a qualitative descriptive study

Background

Researchers are encountering increasing challenges in recruiting participants for palliative and healthcare research. This paper aims to understand challenges to and methods for engaging physicians and seriously ill patients and their caregivers in research studies.

Methods

Between October 2019 to July 2020, we conducted qualitative interviews with 25 patients, proxies, and caregivers participants who were eligible for a randomized controlled trial of home-based palliative care and 31 physicians from participating accountable care organizations. Using thematic analysis, we analyzed participants’ responses to identify concepts and key ideas within the text. From these initial concepts, core themes around barriers to research and preferred research recruitment approaches were generated.

Results

Themes from patient and caregiver interviews included time constraints, privacy concerns, lack of research familiarity, disconnect with research institution, self-perceived health status, and concerns with study randomization. Physician-identified barriers focused on time constraints and study randomization. Patient and caregiver recommendations for study recruitment included in-person recruitment, recruitment at healthcare providers’ offices, recruitment via mail, additional study information, and frequent calls. Physician recommendations were related to placement of flyers at clinics, financial incentives, and formal events.

Conclusions

Findings demonstrated that although patients and caregivers prefer that their physicians recruit them for health-related research studies, physicians identified time constraints as a consistent barrier to research involvement.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12904-021-00856-6.

Expectations, experiences and preferences of patients and physicians in the informed consent process for clinical trials in oncology

PURPOSE

The aim of the present study was to explore (1) informed consent (IC) representations, level of understanding, needs, and factors that influence the willingness of cancer patients to participate in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (phase I) and (2) representations, experiences, and critical issues of physicians involved in the same process (phase II).

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 cancer patients who had been asked to enroll in a phase II/III RCT (phase I). Two focus groups were conducted with 13 physicians enrolled in the same process (phase II). The content produced was analyzed through a thematic analysis.

RESULTS

The themes that emerged in the first phase I were grouped into six categories: IC representation, randomization, experimentation, meeting with the physician, factors that influence the willingness to participate, and trial participants' needs. The themes emerged in the phase II were grouped into four: IC representation, critical issues of the IC, relationship, and recruitment of trial participants. Each theme is articulated into sub-themes and deeply discussed.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights (1) the gap between what is ethically demanded in a RCT consultation and the reality of the situation and (2) the difference in perceptions between patients and physicians with reference to the meaning, objectives, and level of understanding of IC.

IMPROVE, a community-based exercise intervention versus support group to improve functional and health outcomes among older African American and Non-Hispanic White breast cancer survivors from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds: Recruitment strategies and baseline characteristics

BACKGROUND

Behavioral intervention studies in older breast cancer survivors, particularly older African American (AA) and socioeconomic status-disadvantaged breast cancer survivors, are lacking. To inform future studies, the authors examined recruitment strategies in older breast cancer survivors who participated in an exercise intervention study.

METHODS

IMPROVE is a randomized trial designed to evaluate a group-based exercise intervention versus a support group (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02763228). Participants were aged ≥65 years who had survived stage I through III breast cancer and were within 5 years of treatment completion. Participants were recruited through multiple approaches, including peripheral, linguistic, and constituent-involving strategies that incorporated the identification of potentially eligible patients from 3 local hospitals and from State of Ohio registries and through direct clinician and community organization referrals.

RESULTS

Between October 2016 and November 2019, 7487 patients were screened, 4790 were potentially eligible, and 213 were randomized into the study. The eligible:randomization rates were 4.4% overall and 84%, 8%, and 2% for recruitment using direct referrals, hospital registries, and state registries, respectively. The median age of the randomized cohort was 70 years (range, 65-88 years) and included 44% AA and 44% socioeconomic status-disadvantaged breast cancer survivors. Compared with all registry-eligible patients, directly referred-eligible patients were more likely to be AA versus Non-Hispanic White (41% vs 19%; P = .006), to be contacted successfully (100% vs 33%; P < .0001), and to accept study participation (88% vs 16%; P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Direct referrals appeared to be the most efficient strategy for recruiting AA survivors. Behavioral intervention studies seeking to target older AA and socioeconomic status-disadvantaged breast cancer survivors should include strategies that foster direct referrals to study participation.

Disparities in Risk Reduction Therapy Recommendations for Young Women With Lobular Carcinoma In-Situ

BACKGROUND

Endocrine therapy (ET) significantly reduces the risk of breast cancer development in high-risk patients diagnosed with lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS). However, the variables impacting recommendation and use of ET in young adults (YAs) is not well-studied. We examined the role of provider recommendation and patient acceptance for ET for YAs with LCIS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The National Cancer Database was queried for women aged < 40 years with primary LCIS between 2000 and 2012. Socioeconomic, demographic, and treatment variables were examined to determine their impact on ET provider recommendation and initial patient acceptance of risk-reducing therapy.

RESULTS

Among 1650 YA patients with LCIS, only 749 (45.4%) were recommended ET. On multivariable analysis, women > 30 years of age were more likely recommended ET than women < 30 years (odds ratio [OR], 1.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.10-2.47), African Americans more than other ethnicities (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.1-2.0), and YAs treated in New England were more likely than those in the rest of the country (OR, 3.26; 95% CI, 2.0-5.2). Among YA women recommended ET, only 20.2% had a documented refusal. Only geography appeared to independently impact the likelihood of refusal, with YAs in the Southeastern-Central United States being most likely to refuse ET (OR, 5.4; 95% CI, 1.2-24.0).

CONCLUSION

ET is underutilized for risk-reduction in YAs with LCIS. This underuse appears dependent on disparities in provider recommendation practices rather than non-acceptance of therapy. This may reflect regional practice patterns, community standards of care, or provider bias regarding the significance of LCIS as a risk factor for development of invasive cancer.

Primary care perspectives on implementation of clinical trial recruitment

Introduction:

Poor clinical trial (CT) recruitment is a significant barrier to translating basic science discoveries into medical practice. Improving support for primary care provider (PCP) referral of patients to CTs may be an important part of the solution. However, implementing CT referral support in primary care is not only technically challenging, but also presents challenges at the person and organization levels.

Methods:

The objectives of this study were (1) to characterize provider and clinical supervisor attitudes and perceptions regarding CT research, recruitment, and referrals in primary care and (2) to identify perceived workflow strategies and facilitators relevant to designing a technology-supported primary care CT referral program. Focus groups were conducted with PCPs, directors, and supervisors.

Results:

Analysis indicated widespread support for the intrinsic scientific value of CTs, while at the same time deep concerns regarding protecting patient well-being, perceived loss of control when patients participate in trials, concern about the impact of point-of-care referrals on clinic workflow, the need for standard processes, and the need for CT information that enables referring providers to quickly confirm that the burdens are justified by the benefits at both patient and provider levels. PCP suggestions pertinent to implementing a CT referral decision support system are reported.

Conclusion:

The results from this work contribute to developing an implementation approach to support increased referral of patients to CTs.

Tissue vs Liquid Biopsies for Cancer Detection: Ethical Issues

Cancer is the second leading cause of death in developed countries, making it a global public health problem. In this scenario, early detection is the key to successful treatment. Tissue biopsy, the current gold standard for cancer diagnosis, offers reliable results, but it is feasible only when the mass becomes detectable. On the other hand liquid biopsy, a promising experimental system, not yet implemented within clinical practice, allows early detection as its functioning relies on the analysis of body fluids. Yet, its results are less reliable if compared to those of tissue biopsy as, for instance, false positives and false negatives might occur. Despite technical features, the tradeoff between a reliable diagnosis available at a later time and a potentially less reliable diagnosis available at an early stage poses significant ethical challenges in the clinical scenario which involve, among other aspects, informed consent, communication, and patient-physician encounter.

Chemoprevention Uptake for Breast Cancer Risk Reduction Varies by Risk Factor

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

The efficacy of chemoprevention for breast cancer risk reduction has been demonstrated in randomized controlled trials; however, use remains low. We sought to determine whether uptake differed by risk factors, and to identify reasons for refusal and termination.

METHODS

Women seen in a high-risk clinic from October 2014 to June 2017 considered eligible for chemoprevention (history of lobular carcinoma in situ, atypia, family history of breast/ovarian cancer, genetic mutation, or history of chest wall radiation) were retrospectively identified. Breast cancer risk factors were compared among those with and without chemoprevention use, and compliance was noted.

RESULTS

Overall, 1506 women were identified, 24% with prior/current chemoprevention use. Women ≥ 50 years of age were more likely to use chemoprevention than women < 50 years of age (28% vs. 11%, p < 0.001). Chemoprevention use by risk factor ranged from 7 to 40%. Having multiple risk factors did not increase use. Significant variation by risk factor was present among women ≥ 50 years of age (p < 0.001), but not among women < 50 years of age (p = 0.1). Among women with a documented discussion regarding chemoprevention (575/1141), fear of adverse effects was the most common refusal reason (57/156; 36%). The majority of women (61%) who initiated chemoprevention completed 5 years.

CONCLUSION

Chemoprevention use among women at increased risk for breast cancer remains low, with more frequent use among women ≥ 50 years of age. These data highlight the need for ongoing educational efforts and counseling, as the majority who begin therapy complete 5 years of use. Given the fear of adverse effects as well as low uptake, particularly among women < 50 years of age, alternative risk-reducing strategies are needed.

Assessing the medical workforces perceived barriers to the prescription of risk-reducing medication for women at high-risk of breast cancer

This study aims to determine the attitudes and barriers of Australian oncology health professionals towards using tamoxifen as a breast cancer risk-reducing medication (RRM). Our target group was health professionals involved in breast cancer risk assessment or treatment. Members of relevant medical organizations in Australia and New Zealand were invited to participate in a web-based survey assessing: their attitudes towards tamoxifen as a RRM; which health professionals they felt were responsible for initiating and monitoring women on RRM and their views on workforce issues related to RRM prescription. There were 100 respondents, including 33 genetic health professionals, 32 medical oncologists and 20 surgeons. Respondents perceived tamoxifen to be effective as a RRM (99%). However, only 41% of prescribing health professionals (n = 64) had ever prescribed tamoxifen as a RRM. Overall, survey respondents felt that the initiation of RRM was the role of specialists. Assessing a patient's risk of breast cancer was reported to be the role of cancer geneticists/familial cancer clinicians (74%) and medical oncologists (66%). Discussion about the use of RRM was reported to be the role of these same groups (84% and 85% respectively). Medical oncologists (83%) and breast physicians (70%) were most frequently considered to be responsible for initiating the prescription and monitoring women once commenced on RRM (72% and 71% respectively). Oncology health professionals express confidence in the effectiveness of tamoxifen as a RRM despite reporting low prescription rates. Findings demonstrate that these oncology health professionals felt that initiation of RRM was the role of cancer specialists, despite preventative medicine being seen as a primary care activity. If uptake among at-risk women increases, this will put a significant burden on cancer services and GPs will need to take on a greater role in the delivery of RRM.

A Survey among Breast Cancer Specialists on the Low Uptake of Therapeutic Prevention with Tamoxifen or Raloxifene

With this survey, we aimed to address the reasons why physicians are reluctant to prescribe breast cancer-preventive therapy with the selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERM) tamoxifen or raloxifene despite a strong evidence of efficacy. A self-administered 5-point Likert questionnaire was given during breast cancer meetings in Europe or sent via email to rank the importance of 10 predefined reasons for low uptake of SERMs for breast cancer therapeutic prevention. Analyses tested the associations between the stated reasons and physician characteristics such as gender, age, country of work, and specialty. Of 246 delivered questionnaires, 27 were incomplete and were excluded from analysis. Overall, there was a small variability in response scores, with a tendency for physicians to give moderate importance (score = 3) to all 10 statements. However, the top five reasons were: the expected greater preventive effectiveness of aromatase inhibitors (70.3% with score >3), difficulty applying current risk models in clinical practice (69.9%), the lack of clarity on the most appropriate physician for prevention advice (68.4%), the lack of reliable short-term biomarkers of effectiveness (67.5%), and the lack of commercial interest in therapeutic prevention (66.0%). The lack of reliable short-term biomarkers showed a tendency to discriminate between medical oncologists and other breast specialists (OR = 2.42; 95% CI, 0.93-6.25). This survey highlights the complexity of prescribing decisions among physicians in this context. Coupled with the known barriers among eligible women, these data may help to identify strategies to increase uptake of breast cancer therapeutic prevention. Cancer Prev Res; 11(1); 38-43. ©2017 AACR.

Deciding on breast cancer risk reduction: The role of counseling in individual decision-making - A qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

The presentation of risks and benefits in clinical practice is common particularly in situations in which treatment recommendations involve trade-offs. The treatment of breast cancer risk with selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) is such a decision. We investigated the influence of health care provider (HCP) counseling on women's decision-making.

METHODS

Thirty breast cancer risk counseling sessions were recorded from April 2012-August 2013 at a comprehensive cancer center and at a safety-net, community hospital in the US. Participating women and HCPs were interviewed. A cross-case synthesis was used for analysis.

RESULTS

Of 30 participants 21 received a SERM-recommendation, 11 decided to take SERMs. Counseling impacted decision-making, but did not determine it. Three categories emerged: 1.) ability to change the decision anytime, 2.) perceptions on medications, and 3.) proximity of cancer.

CONCLUSION

Decision-making under conditions of a risk diagnosis such as increased breast cancer risk is a continuous process in which risk information is transformed into practical and experiential considerations.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Individuals' health care decision-making is only marginally dependent on the interactions in the clinic. Accepting patients' experiences and beliefs in their own right and letting them guide the discussion may be important for a satisfying decision-making process.

Motivators and barriers of tamoxifen use as risk-reducing medication amongst women at increased breast cancer risk: a systematic literature review

Background

Selective estrogen receptor modulators, such as tamoxifen, reduce breast cancer risk by up to 50% in women at increased risk for breast cancer. Despite tamoxifen’s well-established efficacy, many studies show that most women are not taking up tamoxifen. This systematic literature review aimed to identify the motivators and barriers to tamoxifen use ‘s amongst high-risk women.

Methods

Using MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Embase plus reviewing reference lists of relevant articles published between 1995 and 2016, 31 studies (published in 35 articles) were identified, which addressed high-risk women’s decisions about risk-reducing medication to prevent breast cancer and were peer-reviewed primary clinical studies.

Results

A range of factors were identified as motivators of, and barriers to, tamoxifen uptake including: perceived risk, breast-cancer-related anxiety, health professional recommendation, perceived drug effectiveness, concerns about side-effects, knowledge and access to information about side-effects, beliefs about the role of risk-reducing medication, provision of a biomarker, preference for other forms of breast cancer risk reduction, previous treatment experience, concerns about randomization in clinical trial protocols and finally altruism.

Conclusions

Results indicate that the decision for high-risk women regarding tamoxifen use or non-use as a risk-reducing medication is not straightforward. Support of women making this decision is essential and needs to encompass the full range of factors, both informational and psychological.

Preventing invasive breast cancer using endocrine therapy

Developments in breast cancer treatment have resulted in reduction in breast cancer mortality in the developed world. However incidence continues to rise and greater use of preventive interventions including the use of therapeutic agents is needed to control this burden. High quality evidence from 9 major trials involving more than 83000 participants shows that selective oestrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) reduce breast cancer incidence by 38%. Combined results from 2 large trials with 8424 participants show that aromatase inhibitors (AIs) reduce breast cancer incidence by 53%. These benefits are restricted to prevention of ER positive breast cancers. Restricting preventive therapy to high-risk women improves the benefit-harm balance and many guidelines now encourage healthcare professionals to discuss preventive therapy in these women. Further research is needed to improve our risk-prediction models for the identification of high risk women for preventive therapy with greater accuracy and to develop surrogate biomarkers of response. Long-term follow-up of the IBIS-I trial has provided valuable insights into the durability of benefits from preventive therapy, and underscores the need for such follow up to fully evaluate other agents. Full utilisation of preventive therapy also requires greater knowledge and awareness among both doctors and patients about benefits, harms and risk factors. Healthcare professionals should routinely discuss preventive therapy with women at high-risk of breast cancer.

Primary care physicians' attitudes and beliefs about cancer clinical trials

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Cancer clinical trials give patients access to state-of-the-art treatments and facilitate the translation of findings into mainstream clinical care. However, patients from racial and ethnic minority groups remain underrepresented in clinical trials. Primary care physicians are a trusted source of information for patients, yet their role in decision-making about cancer treatment and referrals to trial participation has received little attention. The aim of this study was to determine physicians' knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about cancer clinical trials, their experience with trials, and their interest in appropriate training about trials.

METHODS

A total of 613 physicians in the New York City area primarily serving patients from ethnic and racial minority groups were invited via email to participate in a 20-min online survey. Physicians were asked about their patient population, trial knowledge and attitudes, interest in training, and personal demographics. Using calculated scale variables, we used descriptive statistical analyses to better understand physicians' knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about trials.

RESULTS

A total of 127 physicians completed the survey. Overall, they had low knowledge about and little experience with trials. However, they generally had positive attitudes toward trials, with 41.4% indicating a strong interest in learning more about their role in trials, and 35.7% indicating that they might be interested. Results suggest that Black and Latino physicians and those with more positive attitudes and beliefs were more likely to be interested in future training opportunities.

CONCLUSION

Primary care physicians may be an important group to target in trying to improve cancer clinical trial participation among minority patients. Future work should explore methods of educational intervention for such interested providers.

Decision making for breast cancer prevention among women at elevated risk

Several medical management approaches have been shown to be effective in preventing breast cancer and detecting it early among women at elevated risk: 1) prophylactic mastectomy; 2) prophylactic oophorectomy; 3) chemoprevention; and 4) enhanced screening routines. To varying extents, however, these approaches are substantially underused relative to clinical practice recommendations. This article reviews the existing research on the uptake of these prevention approaches, the characteristics of women who are likely to use various methods, and the decision-making processes that underlie the differing choices of women. It also highlights important areas for future research, detailing the types of studies that are particularly needed in four key areas: documenting women's perspectives on their own perceptions of risk and prevention decisions; explicit comparisons of available prevention pathways and their likely health effects; the psychological, interpersonal, and social processes of prevention decision making; and the dynamics of subgroup variation. Ultimately, this research could support the development of interventions that more fully empower women to make informed and values-consistent decisions, and to move towards favorable health outcomes.

Chemoprevention for breast cancer: overcoming barriers to treatment

Evidence from placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials supports the use of chemoprevention in women at high risk for developing breast cancer, and two agents-tamoxifen and raloxifene-are U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved for the indication. Despite clinical guidelines that recommend physicians counsel high-risk women about the use of chemoprevention and the estimated 2.4 million women in the United States who meet eligibility criteria for net benefit, the uptake of breast cancer chemoprevention has been exceedingly low. Assessments of the risks and benefits of chemoprevention are aided by the availability of models that can be used to estimate of the risk-benefit ratio. However, many physicians remain unaware of these resources to determine patient eligibility for chemoprevention and lack the time to provide informed counseling to their patients. The barriers for patients' acceptance of chemoprevention treatment include fear of side effects and the perception that chemoprevention will not substantially lower their risk of developing breast cancer. Despite these challenges, there are substantial opportunities to increase the utilization of chemoprevention. These strategies include education, dissemination of user-friendly risk-benefit models, and the support of research efforts focused on identifying biomarkers that can more accurately select women most likely to develop breast cancer and predict responsiveness of treatment.

Factors affecting uptake and adherence to breast cancer chemoprevention: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Preventive therapy is a risk reduction option for women who have an increased risk of breast cancer. The effectiveness of preventive therapy to reduce breast cancer incidence depends on adequate levels of uptake and adherence to therapy. We aimed to systematically review articles reporting uptake and adherence to therapeutic agents to prevent breast cancer among women at increased risk, and identify the psychological, clinical and demographic factors affecting these outcomes.

DESIGN

Searches were carried out in PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE and PsychInfo, yielding 3851 unique articles. Title, abstract and full text screening left 53 articles, and a further 4 studies were identified from reference lists, giving a total of 57. This review was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42014014957).

RESULTS

Twenty-four articles reporting 26 studies of uptake in 21 423 women were included in a meta-analysis. The pooled uptake estimate was 16.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) 13.6-19.0], with high heterogeneity (I(2) = 98.9%, P < 0.001). Uptake was unaffected by study location or agent, but was significantly higher in trials [25.2% (95% CI 18.3-32.2)] than in non-trial settings [8.7% (95% CI 6.8-10.9)] (P < 0.001). Factors associated with higher uptake included having an abnormal biopsy, a physician recommendation, higher objective risk, fewer side-effect or trial concerns, and older age. Adherence (day-to-day use or persistence) over the first year was adequate. However, only one study reported a persistence of ≥ 80% by 5 years. Factors associated with lower adherence included allocation to tamoxifen (versus placebo or raloxifene), depression, smoking and older age. Risk of breast cancer was discussed in all qualitative studies.

CONCLUSION

Uptake of therapeutic agents for the prevention of breast cancer is low, and long-term persistence is often insufficient for women to experience the full preventive effect. Uptake is higher in trials, suggesting further work should focus on implementing preventive therapy within routine care.

Patient knowledge and information-seeking about personalized cancer therapy

BACKGROUND

Understanding patients' knowledge and prior information-seeking regarding personalized cancer therapy (PCT) may inform future patient information systems, consent for molecular testing and PCT protocols. We evaluated breast cancer patients' knowledge and information-seeking behaviors regarding PCT.

METHODS

Newly registered female breast cancer patients (n=100) at a comprehensive cancer center completed a self-administered questionnaire prior to their first clinic visit.

RESULTS

Knowledge regarding cancer genetics and PCT was moderate (mean 8.7±3.8 questions correct out of 16). A minority of patients (27%) indicated that they had sought information regarding PCT. Higher education (p=0.009) and income levels (p=0.04) were associated with higher knowledge scores and with seeking PCT information (p=0.04). Knowledge was not associated with willingness to participate in PCT research.

CONCLUSION

Educational background and financial status impact patient knowledge as well as information-seeking behavior. For most patients, clinicians are likely to be patients' initial source of information about PCT. Understanding patients' knowledge deficits at presentation may help inform patient education efforts.

Barriers to preventive therapy for breast and other major cancers and strategies to improve uptake

The global cancer burden continues to rise and the war on cancer can only be won if improvements in treatment go hand in hand with therapeutic cancer prevention. Despite the availability of several efficacious agents, utilisation of preventive therapy has been poor due to various barriers, such as the lack of physician and patient awareness, fear of side effects, and licensing and indemnity issues. In this review, we discuss these barriers in detail and propose strategies to overcome them. These strategies include improving physician awareness and countering prejudices by highlighting the important differences between preventive therapy and cancer treatment. The importance of the agent-biomarker-cohort (ABC) paradigm to improve effectiveness of preventive therapy cannot be overemphasised. Future research to improve therapeutic cancer prevention needs to include improvements in the prediction of benefits and harms, and improvements in the safety profile of existing agents by experimentation with dose. We also highlight the role of drug repurposing for providing new agents as well as to address the current imbalance between therapeutic and preventive research. In order to move the field of therapeutic cancer prevention forwards, engagement with policymakers to correct research imbalance as well as to remove practical obstacles to implementation is also urgently needed.

Cancer clinical trial participants' assessment of risk and benefit

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this article is to examine the extent to which cancer clinical trial participants assess the benefits and risks of research participation before enrollment.

METHODS

One hundred and ten oncology research participants enrolled in cancer clinical research in a large Northeastern cancer center responded to a self-administered questionnaire on perceptions about cancer clinical trials.

RESULTS

Of the participants, 51.6% reported they did not directly assess the benefits or risks. Educational level, age, employment, treatment options, insurance, and spiritual-religious beliefs were significantly associated with whether participants assessed risk and benefits. Those who felt well informed were more likely to have assessed the benefits and risks at enrollment than those who did not feel well informed (odds ratio [OR] = 3.92, p = .014); of those who did not assess the risks and benefits, 21% did not feel well informed at enrollment (p = .001). Those who agreed that the clinical trial helped pay the costs of the care had nearly three times the odds of not assessing risks and benefits compared to those who disagreed.

CONCLUSION

Our findings have important implications for understanding the role of assessing risks and benefits in the research participation decisions of patients with cancer and call for further understanding of why participants are not assessing information believed to be essential for autonomous informed decisions.

A systematic review of electronic portal usage among patients with diabetes

The objectives of this review were (1) to examine characteristics associated with enrollment and utilization of portals among patients with diabetes and (2) to identify barriers and facilitators of electronic patient portal enrollment and utilization. PubMed and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) were systematically searched for papers reporting original research using quantitative or qualitative methods on characteristics, barriers, and facilitators associated with portal enrollment and utilization among patients with diabetes in the United States. The search was limited to articles published between February 1, 2005 (the date of the national symposium on personal health records) and January 1, 2014. Sixteen articles were identified. Of these, nine were quantitative, three were qualitative, and four used mixed-methods. Several demographic characteristics, having better-controlled diabetes, and providers who engaged in and encouraged portal use were associated with increased portal enrollment and utilization. Barriers to portal enrollment included a lack of patient (1) capacity, (2) desire, and (3) awareness of portal/portal functions. Barriers to portal utilization included (1) patient capacity, (2) lack of provider and patient buy-in to portal benefits, and (3) negative patient experiences using portals. Facilitators of portal enrollment and utilization were providers and family members recommending and engaging in portal use. Improved usability, increased access, educating patients how to use and benefit from portals, and greater endorsement by providers and family members might increase portal enrollment and utilization. As more providers and hospitals offer portals, addressing barriers and leveraging facilitators may help patients with diabetes achieve potential benefits.

Strengths and weaknesses of guideline approaches to safeguard voluntary informed consent of patients within a dependent relationship

BACKGROUND

It is thought that a dependent relationship between patients and physicians who enroll their own patients in research compromises voluntary informed consent. Therefore, several ethical guidelines for human subject research provide approaches to mitigate these compromises. Currently, these approaches have not been critically evaluated. In this article, we analyze the approaches of ethical guidelines to manage the influence of a dependent relationship between patients and physicians on voluntary informed consent and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of these approaches.

METHODS

We performed a review of international ethical guidance documents on human subject research, listed in the Oxford Textbook of Clinical Research Ethics and found through cross referencing. We also searched Global Ethics Observatory (GEObs) and the World Health Organization (WHO) website. Guidelines from all years were eligible for inclusion. The date last searched was December 2013.

DISCUSSION

We identified two basic guideline approaches: 1. A process approach, which focuses on the person who obtains informed consent, that is, an independent individual, such as a research nurse or counselor; and 2. A content approach, emphasizing the voluntary nature of participation. Both approaches are valuable, either because the influence of the physician may diminish or because it empowers patients to make voluntary decisions. However, the approaches also face challenges. First, research nurses are not always independent. Second, physician-investigators will be informed about decisions of their patients. Third, involvement of a counselor is sometimes unfeasible. Fourth, the right to withdraw may be difficult to act upon in a dependent relationship.

CONCLUSIONS

Current guideline approaches to protect voluntary informed consent within a dependent relationship are suboptimal. To prevent compromises to voluntary informed consent, consent should not only be obtained by an independent individual, but this person should also emphasize the voluntary nature of participation. At the same time, dependency as such does not imply undue influence. Sometimes the physician may be best qualified to provide information, for example, for a very specialized study. Still, the research nurse should obtain informed consent. In addition, patients should be able to consult a counselor, who attends the informed consent discussions and is concerned with their interests. Finally, both physicians and research nurses should disclose research interests.

Pediatric nephrologists' beliefs regarding randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Pediatrics and pediatric nephrology lag behind adult medicine in producing randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Physician attitudes have been shown to play a significant role in RCT enrollment.

METHODS

We surveyed members of the American Society of Pediatric Nephrology regarding beliefs about RCTs and factors influencing decisions to recommend RCT enrollment. Regression analyses were used to identify the effects of variables on an aggregate score summarizing attitudes toward RCTs.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty replies were received. Sixty-six percent had enrolled patients in RCTs. Respondents in practice for more than 15 years were more likely to have recruited a patient to an RCT than those in practice for less than 5 years. Respondents were more willing to recommend RCT enrollment if the study was multicenter, patients were sicker or had a poorer prognosis, or if the parent or participant received a financial incentive versus the provider. In multiple regression analysis, history of enrolling patients in an RCT was the only significant predictor of higher aggregate RCT-friendly attitude.

CONCLUSIONS

Many pediatric nephrologists have never enrolled a patient in an RCT, particularly those in practice for less than 5 years. Respondents who have not enrolled patients in RCTs have a less RCT-friendly attitude. Provision of improved training and resources might increase participation of junior providers in RCTs.

The National Cancer Institute-American Society of Clinical Oncology Cancer Trial Accrual Symposium: summary and recommendations

INTRODUCTION

Many challenges to clinical trial accrual exist, resulting in studies with inadequate enrollment and potentially delaying answers to important scientific and clinical questions.

METHODS

The National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) cosponsored the Cancer Trial Accrual Symposium: Science and Solutions on April 29-30, 2010 to examine the state of accrual science related to patient/community, physician/provider, and site/organizational influences, and identify new interventions to facilitate clinical trial enrollment. The symposium featured breakout sessions, plenary sessions, and a poster session including 100 abstracts. Among the 358 attendees were clinical investigators, researchers of accrual strategies, research administrators, nurses, research coordinators, patient advocates, and educators. A bibliography of the accrual literature in these three major areas was provided to participants in advance of the meeting. After the symposium, the literature in these areas was revisited to determine if the symposium recommendations remained relevant within the context of the current literature.

RESULTS

Few rigorously conducted studies have tested interventions to address challenges to clinical trials accrual. Attendees developed recommendations for improving accrual and identified priority areas for future accrual research at the patient/community, physician/provider, and site/organizational levels. Current literature continues to support the symposium recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

A combination of approaches addressing both the multifactorial nature of accrual challenges and the characteristics of the target population may be needed to improve accrual to cancer clinical trials. Recommendations for best practices and for future research developed from the symposium are provided.

Public awareness and perception of clinical trials: Quantitative study in Pune

Context:

Studies have reported that clinical research has experienced tremendous growth during past few decades with many multinational pharmaceutical companies recruiting millions of Indians in clinical trials (CTs). However, there is hardly any literature that talks about the participants, their knowledge, and awareness of CTs. It is important that the general public is aware about CTs so that they can take their own informed decision to participate in CTs.

Aim:

To assess public awareness, perceptions, and attitudes toward CTs and their views on various methods to create awareness about CTs.

Materials and Methods:

Cross sectional survey was conducted with 200 non trial participants (NTPs) and 40 trial participants (TPs).

Results:

TPs were significantly (P < 0.0001) older than NTPs. More than 80% of both TPs and NTPs mentioned participation in CT helps advance medical science and strongly felt that there is a need to create awareness about CTs. Nearly 70% of TPs could not remember the phase of the trial while 20% did not know which type of trial they had participated. The main reason for participation in the trial was physician's advice. About 80% of both TPs and NTPs felt that participation in CT will increase with free medications and advice from friends/relatives who had good experience with trial.

Conclusion:

Results of this pilot study revealed need to create CT awareness among the general public. However, considering ethno-cultural, regional, and literacy-level differences throughout the country, a nationwide study would be appropriate to provide reliable results about awareness of CTs among Indians.

Public awareness of clinical trials: A qualitative pilot study in Pune

Context:

Medical expertise combined with availability of patients with varied diseases have resulted in rapid increase in number of clinical trials (CTs) recruiting millions of patients in India. Yet, few researchers have tried to understand if the public in India is aware of CTs.

Aims:

To explore the awareness, perceptions of and attitude towards participating in CTs among general public in Pune.

Materials and Methods:

Focus group discussions (FGDs) and interviews were conducted by contacting people in the community of various age groups and socio economic status with 7 Trial participants (TPs) and 17 Non Trial Participants (NTPs). The survey tool consisted of open-ended questions that assessed the awareness and attitudes of the individuals regarding the CTs. Interview were recorded on paper and translated from (Marathi) local language to English for analysis. Qualitative analysis was used to report the findings.

Results:

Most participants could associate CTs with medicine or development of new medicine; however they did not have a good understanding of the manner and safeguards with which CTs are conducted. Participants were not aware about different types of CTs and phases of the CTs. CTs were felt to be of benefit to the community and advancement of science. However, due to fear of adverse effects, 80% of the respondents were not ready to participate in the CTs.

Conclusions:

The Indian Pharmaceutical company is the world's 3^rd largest by volume as per Dr. Shivathanu Pillai's report 17th March 2010, in spite of that it has been noticed that the awareness about CTs is very low; therefore there is a need to create awareness about CTs which helps the participants to participate in CTs based on their own decision. These FGD findings require validation in a larger sample.

Nurse Practitioners' attitudes about cancer clinical trials and willingness to recommend research participation

BACKGROUND

Recruitment and retention of human participants in cancer clinical trials remains challenging for all investigators. Nurse Practitioners (NPs) are in a prime position to discuss, educate and refer patients to clinical trials as many NPs work in ethnically and geographically diverse primary care settings in the U.S., yet they remain an untapped resource. We examined NPs' general attitudes toward cancer clinical trial recommendations and assessed their willingness to recommend such trials

METHODS

We randomly surveyed 455 primary care NPs in the state of Pennsylvania during 2008 with an adjusted response rate of 55.3%. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize NPs' demographic and practice characteristics, and logistic regression was used to assess the relative influence of the various attitudes and beliefs on the likelihood that the NP would bring up clinical trials as a treatment option.

RESULTS

NPs were more likely to bring up the topic of clinical trials with at least some patients if they were comfortable discussing treatment options with their cancer patients (OR=4.29, p=0.001), were comfortable discussing options of entering a clinical trial for treatment (OR=3.54, p=0.003), had adequate time during patients' visit to explain clinical trials (OR=3.40, p=0.008), and if they believed that patients in clinical trials were receiving the best medical treatment (OR=3.34, p=0.019). NPs who were comfortable discussing cancer clinical trials were almost 5 times more likely to think clinical trials were useful (OR=4.70; 95% CI=1.81-12.19; p=0.001). Nearly three-quarters (72.6%) of the entire responder sample reported three or more ethical concerns associated with clinical trials, including issues of randomization, informed consent, and patient burden.

CONCLUSIONS

NPs are willing to recommend clinical trials but need more education about the benefits and burdens of clinical trials, the associated ethical concerns, and evidence regarding the translatability of research to clinical practice to increase their knowledge and comfort level with discussing clinical trials.

Physician-related factors involved in patient decisions to enroll onto cancer clinical trials

The development of new cancer therapies requires additional, and more complex, clinical trials. But only approximately 3% to 5% of adult cancer patients participate in cancer clinical trials. This study seeks to identify and understand the attitudes of the public and cancer survivors toward health-related decisions and cancer clinical trials to identify the key factors that must be addressed to increase that percentage.

The attitudes of oncology physicians and nurses toward phase I, II, and III cancer clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the attitudes of oncology physicians and nurses toward phase I, II, and III cancer clinical trials.

METHODS

A questionnaire was administered to 358 oncology physicians and nurses.

RESULTS

The effective response rate was 79.3%. Of the respondents, 67.6%, 95.1%, and 98.6% reported that cancer patients would benefit from phase I, II, and III trials, respectively. Respondents would also recommend that their patients participate in phase I (64.4%), II (88.4%), and III trials (95.1%). When asked to assume the role of cancer patients, the respondents themselves were willing to participate in phase I (48.2%), II (72.9%), and III trials (89.8%). Respondents who admitted having little or no understanding of cancer clinical trials were not willing to recommend participation in phase I clinical trials to their patients (OR 0.187, 95% CI 0.110-0.319, p<0.001). No factor was significantly associated with respondents' willingness to recommend that their patients participate in phase II or III clinical trials.

CONCLUSION

Most physicians and nurses hold positive attitudes toward clinical trials, especially phases II and III. The number of medical staff who approved of clinical trials was positively associated with the stage of the phase trial.

Measuring cancer clinical trial understanding

Researchers, practitioners, and participants in cancer clinical trials must have a clear understanding of clinical trials if participation in them is to be solicited ethically and effectively. A valid and reliable measure of cancer clinical trial understanding did not exist prior to a 2005 study conducted for the Coalition of Cooperative Cancer Groups. This report outlines a measure derived from that study, discusses the rationale for its component items, examines its psychometric properties, and demonstrates the relationship of this measure to the enrollment decision. Data from national samples of cancer survivors and the general public demonstrate the measure's validity and reliability. Results are discussed as they relate to patient understanding of clinical trials, informed decision making, and health communication processes.

Identification of accrual barriers onto breast cancer prevention clinical trials: a case-control study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to examine factors influencing a woman's decision to participate in a breast cancer prevention clinical trial. Nine healthcare organizations in Massachusetts cooperated in the present project.

METHODS

The authors performed a case-control study to compare responses between the study group (Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene [STAR] trial eligible, but not enrolled) and the control group (STAR trial participants) on 12 factors previously identified as barriers to accrual for clinical trials. Eight hypotheses were tested using multiple logistic regression to estimate the strength of the association for each factor on the dependent variable (study participation).

RESULTS

The study samples were similar to the general population of eligible breast cancer prevention clinical trial subjects in the counties where the participating organizations were located, the state of Massachusetts, and nationally published STAR trial data. Results of a mailed questionnaire showed that when adjusting for subject demographics, and in the presence of other questions, 4 factors significantly influenced a woman's decision to enroll onto a breast cancer prevention clinical trial more than other eligible subjects: 1) clinician expertise and qualifications (P=.012; odds ratio [OR], 4.903; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.41-17.04); 2) personal desire to participate (P=.033; OR, 3.16; 95% CI, 1.10-9.06); 3) perceived value of the trial (P=.020; OR, 2.92; 95% CI, 1.18-7.21); and 4) level of trial inconvenience (P=.002; OR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.02-0.44).

CONCLUSIONS

Addressing these issues in the relationship between patients and clinicians should improve accrual to breast cancer prevention clinical trials.

RTOG physician and research associate attitudes, beliefs and practices regarding clinical trials: implications for improving patient recruitment

PURPOSE

Timely recruitment and retention of human subjects remains a leading problem in oncology clinical trials even among the national oncology clinical trial cooperative groups. The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) developed an exploratory survey to assess member attitudes, beliefs, and practices (ABPs) towards clinical trials that might influence patient accrual to clinical trials.

METHODS

The survey was developed using Survey Monkey(c) and emailed to principal investigators (PIs) and research associates (RAs) at 267 RTOG member institutions. Survey items were selected based on a review of the literature. PI and RA responses were matched by institution to determine whether responses varied due to job responsibilities and/or institutional practices. Principal component analysis was used to achieve variable reduction in further describing respondents' ABPs.

RESULTS

PIs and RAs reported similar recruitment concerns [kappa=0.55, 95% CI (0.51, 0.60)]. Five components related to recruitment concerns were identified: presentation of trials to patients, barriers and recruitment risks, staff involvement, access for underrepresented populations, and familial involvement (patient). Nearly one of four (24%) respondents perceived that patients did not understand what randomization means. Staff issues included nearly a third of respondents not having a formal mechanism at their institution for eligibility screening, and similarly, about one of three respondents felt that unrepresented patient populations would benefit from translated consent forms.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings of this survey inform RTOG strategies for addressing opportunities for improvement, including clinician/patient education and a best practices tool box that in the future would include successful mechanisms for eligibility screening and recruitment.

Validity assessment of the Breast Cancer Risk Reduction Health Belief scale

BACKGROUND

: Women at increased risk of breast cancer (BC) are not widely accepting of chemopreventive interventions, and ethnic minorities are underrepresented in related trials. Furthermore, there is no validated instrument to assess the health-seeking behavior of these women with respect to these interventions.

METHODS

: By using constructs from the Health Belief Model, the authors developed and refined, based on pilot data, the Breast Cancer Risk Reduction Health Belief (BCRRHB) scale using a population of 265 women at increased risk of BC who were largely medically underserved, of low socioeconomic status (SES), and ethnic minorities. Construct validity was assessed using principal components analysis with oblique rotation to extract factors, and generate and interpret summary scales. Internal consistency was determined using Cronbach alpha coefficients.

RESULTS

: Test-retest reliability for the pilot and final data was calculated to be r = 0.85. Principal components analysis yielded 16 components that explained 64% of the total variance, with communalities ranging from 0.50-0.75. Cronbach alpha coefficients for the extracted factors ranged from 0.45-0.77.

CONCLUSIONS

: Evidence suggests that the BCRRHB yields reliable and valid data that allows for the identification of barriers and enhancing factors associated with use of breast cancer chemoprevention in the study population. These findings allow for tailoring treatment plans and intervention strategies to the individual. Future research is needed to validate the scale for use in other female populations. Cancer 2009. (c) 2009 American Cancer Society.

Recruiting low-income healthy women to research: an exploratory study

OBJECTIVE

The study goals were (1) to assess the feasibility of using an existing telephone health information and referral service for low-income, ethnically diverse women to recruit women for research participation; (2) to assess the feasibility of recruiting low-income, African American and Latino men into health research through the women callers to the telephone service; and (3) to describe the challenges women face and the strategies they use when talking to men about the men's health and research participation.

DESIGN

We recruited women for individual semi-structured qualitative interviews via the Every Woman Counts (EWC) telephone information and referral service, a California Department of Health Services Cancer Detection Program. This paper describes our eligibility and recruitment assessment, and our qualitative data from 23 interviews with low-income African American and Latino women who called EWC.

RESULTS

We found that it was feasible to recruit women, but not to recruit men through women who call this telephone service. Almost 50% (113) of women demographically eligible for recruitment, completed our screening questionnaire, despite calling EWC for a different purpose. Some 48% (54) of those women were eligible for an interview. Of interview-eligible women, 58% (10) of African Americans and 35% (13) of Latinos completed an interview. Only 17% (4) of women referred a man for participation in an interview for our study. Several themes emerged from our analysis of interview data: (1) women's role in men's health can be significant but is often uneasy; (2) challenges when talking to men about their health include health access, gender dynamics, and men's fear of health care; (3) women's understanding of research may be limited; (4) women use a range of strategies to address and overcome men's resistance to taking care of their health and participating in research.

CONCLUSIONS

The challenges women face when talking with men about their health affect their ability to effectively speak to men about research participation. However, EWC and similar telephone health services may be an effective means for recruiting low-income women to chemoprevention and other studies requiring healthy participants.

Clinical trial resources on the internet must be designed to reach underrepresented minorities

PURPOSE

Internet-based clinical trial information services are being developed to increase recruitment to studies. However, there are limited data that evaluate their ability to reach elderly and underrepresented minority populations. This study was designed to evaluate the ability of an established clinical trials registry to reach these populations based on expected Internet use.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study compares general Internet users to participants who enrolled in an Internet based colorectal cancer clinical trials registry established by OncoLink (www.oncolink.org) and the National Colorectal Cancer Research Alliance. Observed rates of demographic groupings were compared to those established for general Internet users.

RESULTS

Two thousand, four hundred and thirty-seven participants from the continental United States used the Internet to register for the database. New England, the Mid-Atlantic region, and the Southeast had the highest relative frequency of participation in the database, whereas the Upper Midwest, California, and the South had the lowest rates. Compared to general Internet users, there was an overrepresentation of women (73% vs. 50%) and participants over 55 years old (27% vs. 14%). However, there was an underrepresentation of minorities (10.3% vs. 22%), particularly African Americans (3.1% vs. 8%) and Hispanics (2.8% vs. 9%).

DISCUSSION

The Internet is a growing medium for registry into clinical trials databases. However, even taking into account the selection bias of Internet accessibility, there are still widely disparate demographics between general Internet users and those registering for clinical trials, particularly the underrepresentation of minorities. Internet-based educational and recruitment services for clinical trials must be designed to reach these underrepresented minorities to avoid selection biases in future clinical trials.

Recommendation recall and satisfaction after attending breast/ovarian cancer risk counseling

This study examined women's recall of physician recommendations as well as patient satisfaction following participation in a breast/ovarian cancer risk and prevention program. Participants were 41 high risk women who attended a cancer risk program 4-6 months earlier. Two-thirds of women who received recommendations for tamoxifen treatment and genetic testing did not recall these recommendations upon follow-up. A number of women misunderstood recommendations and a quarter of the sample recalled recommendations that were not made during the consultation. Although these high risk women were generally satisfied with their counseling visit, those individuals who received particularly complex sets of recommendations reported feeling less understood and were less satisfied with the counseling. Findings underline the importance of examining recommendation recall, in addition to perceptions of cancer risk, when evaluating the clinical implications of cancer risk assessment.

Participation of patients with gynecological cancer in phase I clinical trials: two years experience in a major cancer center

OBJECTIVES

This study aims at analyzing the clinico-demographic features that influence the recruitment of gynecological cancer (GC) patients to phase I trials. The possible clinical benefit to patients resulting from the participation in these trials has been also investigated.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of GC patients referred to the Phase I Unit of the Royal Marsden Hospital in Sutton (Surrey, UK), over 2 years.

RESULTS

Overall 68 GC patients were referred, and subsequently 32 (47.1%) enrolled. The percentage of patients enrolled increased as the distance to travel between the patient's residence and the hospital shortened (8.3% through 47.8% to 60.8%, for travel time >2, 1-2 or < or =1 h, respectively; p=0.008). Better performance status (PS) was found to be associated with higher enrollment rate with percentages increasing from 0 through 51.2 to 58.8 in cases with PS> or =2, PS=1, PS=0, respectively (p=0.015). Among the biochemical parameters, only hepatobiliary dysfunction was found to be associated with lower enrollment (p=0.012). Minimal response/disease stabilization was observed in 11 patients (34.4%). An increased median survival following the first visit was observed in patients enrolled compared to those not enrolled (8 versus 4 months, respectively, p=0.0055). In the multivariate analysis, only PS and enrollment in trials retained an independent prognostic role (p=0.031 and p=0.040, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This study, suggesting liver function and PS as important factors influencing the recruitment of GC patients to phase I trials could guide referral of patients to phase I Units. Moreover, the practical limitations imposed by long distance travel, together with the potential clinical benefit due to the participation to these trials, should encourage more investigators to develop phase I units in major cancer centers.

The impact of breast cancer awareness and socioeconomic status on willingness to receive breast cancer prevention drugs

PURPOSE

To find associations between knowledge about risk factors for breast cancer and the socioeconomic status of healthy women, as well as their attitude toward taking chemopreventive drugs.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between April and September 1999, 7135 healthy women completed questionnaires providing information about their willingness to take chemopreventive drugs. Items in the questionnaire included the sources of the information they had, their estimates of the population and personal lifetime risk, and risk factors for breast cancer.

RESULTS

A total of 6597 questionnaires were evaluable. The responders' median age was 44. Fifty-five percent of the women were willing to consider receiving chemopreventive drugs to lower their risk for breast cancer. Participants who estimated the population risk as being very high were more disposed to receive chemoprevention (65.3%), as were women who estimated their own breast cancer risk as being high (74.1%). A family history of breast cancer only had a low impact on willingness to receive chemoprevention. Women with a family history of breast cancer were willing to take chemopreventive agents in 57.2% of cases. The multivariate analysis showed that knowing about risk factors and having a lower educational level were factors positively correlated with willingness to consider chemoprevention.

CONCLUSION

These findings emphasize the role of estimations of the risk of breast cancer for patients considering whether to accept chemoprevention treatment. To date, only a few modern models of risk estimation have been evaluated in relation to chemoprevention. There is a need for better integration of professional risk estimations into clinical practice.

Factors associated with participation in breast cancer treatment clinical trials

PURPOSE

It is well established that recruitment to clinical trials (CTs) is difficult and time consuming. This article reports on factors related to CT participation among women who were invited to participate in a CT for breast cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Breast cancer patients who were eligible for a CT were identified by 16 different cancer centers. After their invitation to participate in a trial, patients who were undecided about participation in a CT were recruited into the present study at that time. After a patient made a decision about trial participation, a telephone interview was conducted to assess knowledge of CTs, perceived benefits and drawbacks of CTs, and personal factors affecting the women's decision regarding participation.

RESULTS

A total of 208 patients participated in the study. Fifty-eight percent of the patients decided to participate in a trial. Logistic regression analyses showed that the factors best explaining participation were trial phase, perceived drawbacks, time and travel considerations, therapeutic benefit of trial, and physician recommendation. Participation rates were similar for both phase I and phase III trials. However, a higher percentage of women recruited to phase II trials accepted.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that reducing drawbacks of CT participation, particularly travel time, and improving physician communication of trials are needed to increase trial participation.