Patients' perceived tolerance of side effects in phase I cancer clinical trials: A qualitative study

Time Burdens for Participants With Advanced Cancer in Phase I Trials: A Cross-Sectional Study

PURPOSE

Participating in phase I cancer clinical trials often entails extra visits and procedures. We describe the planned time and procedures associated with phase I trial participation.

METHODS

We searched ClinicalTrials.gov for phase I cancer trials of new drugs with assessment schedules and results posted between 2020 and 2022. Trials were included if participants had advanced or metastatic disease. Our primary analysis measured the number of planned research days (PRDs; each day a clinic visit is required) per participant up to the first month of trial participation and for the entire trial duration. Secondarily, we estimated the number of research procedures.

RESULTS

Our sample included 71 phase I trials comprising 302 cohorts. These trials enrolled 3,904 participants; the median participation duration was 2.5 months. During screening and up to the first month of participation, the median PRDs per participant was 7 (IQR, 7-10). Across the entire trial, the median PRDs per participant was 4.5 days per month (IQR, 3.30-6.20). Participants spent 15% of trial days attending planned appointments. Per trial cohort, participants were given a median of 8 (IQR, 7-11) physical examinations, 6 (IQR, 3-10) infusions, 6 (IQR, 3-12) electrocardiograms, and 1 (IQR, 1-3) biopsy.

CONCLUSION

Participants commit a substantial amount of time to planned visits in phase I cancer trials, especially in the first month. Overall, they invest 15% of trial days attending planned research activities. These estimates provide a lower bound to the time participants in phase I trials donate to drug development, as our analysis excluded unplanned visits.

The journey of patients in cancer clinical trials: A qualitative meta-synthesis on experiences and perspectives

OBJECTIVE

To synthesize findings from qualitative studies focusing on adult cancer patients and their experiences and perspectives on clinical trials.

METHODS

A meta-synthesis was conducted on the literature retrieved from Scopus, Embase, PubMed, and PsycInfo databases. Patient quotes from papers were coded line-by-line using Nvivo software, and themes were created.

RESULTS

45 papers were included. Three large themes were identified based on the timeline of trials: (1) "pre-trial participation" includes sub-themes regarding informational needs, experience with the decision, and representations. (2) "Ongoing trial" includes subthemes covering supportive care, practical and psycho-physical burdens, identity and comparison with others, and the importance of maintaining hope. (3) "Post-trial," with subthemes covering comprehension of results and attitudes towards data sharing, perception of being left unattended, and hindsight and regretful thoughts.

CONCLUSION

This work emphasizes the importance of contextualizing patient experiences and holistically viewing trials. Additionally, this review stresses that patient narratives in the post-trial period are underrepresented in the literature.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Further research should prioritize the post-trial stage to enhance patients' psychological well-being and address concerns such as regret to reduce trial dropout rates. Emphasizing patient connections, providing clear trial-related information, and offering remote participation options, particularly for rural patients, are crucial steps in improving patient experience and trial adherence.

Assessing the unmet needs of patients with advanced cancer treated by biological and precision therapies: protocol for TARGET, a mixed methods study

INTRODUCTION

Biological and precision therapies are increasingly used in cancer treatment. Although they may improve survival, they are also associated with various-and unique-adverse effects, which can be long lasting. Little is known about the experiences of people treated with these therapies. Moreover, their supportive care needs have not been fully explored. Consequently, it is unclear whether existing instruments adequately capture the unmet needs of these patients. The TARGET study seeks to address these evidence gaps by exploring the needs of people treated with these therapies with the aim of developing an unmet needs assessment instrument for patients on biological and precision therapies.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The TARGET study will adopt a multi-methods design involving four Workstreams (1) a systematic review to identify, describe and assess existing unmet needs instruments in advanced cancer; (2) qualitative interviews with patients on biological and precision therapies, and their healthcare professionals, to explore experiences and care needs; (3) development and piloting of a new (or adapted) unmet needs questionnaire (based on the findings of Workstream 1 and Workstream 2) designed to capture the supportive care needs of these patients; and finally, (4) a large-scale patient survey using the new (or modified) questionnaire to determine (a) the psychometric properties of the questionnaire, and (b) the prevalence of unmet needs in these patients. Based on the broad activity of biological and precision therapies, the following cancers will be included: breast, lung, ovarian, colorectal, renal and malignant melanoma.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was approved by National Health Service (NHS) Heath Research Authority Northeast Tyne and Wear South Research Ethics Committee (REC ref: 21/NE/0028). Dissemination of the research findings will take several formats to reach different audiences, including patients, healthcare professionals and researchers.

A new landscape in illness uncertainty: A systematic review and thematic synthesis of the experience of uncertainty in patients with advanced cancer receiving immunotherapy or targeted therapy

OBJECTIVE

Over the past 20 years, immunotherapy and targeted therapy (TT) have been extending the life expectancy and providing hope for a growing number of patients with advanced and metastatic cancer. However, the efficacy, side effects, and overall prognosis of these treatments are highly unpredictable. Recent research suggests that these patients may be experiencing significant uncertainty which impacts their functioning. This study reviewed the literature on the experiences of uncertainty for individuals with advanced or metastatic cancer patients who are receiving immunotherapy or TT.

METHOD

A systematic literature review was conducted. Data was extracted from studies by pairs of reviewers. Literature quality was appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program checklist. Following data extraction, thematic synthesis was used to summarize findings across studies and generate overarching themes.

RESULTS

Fifteen qualitative studies were included. Findings highlighted impacts of various sources of uncertainty (financial, emotional, social), unmet needs related to uncertainty (practical, informational, communication), and recommendations for the management of uncertainty. Clinical implications and study limitations were indicated.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings were situated within Mishel's Uncertainty in Illness Theory and the literature on supportive care for advanced cancer populations. Recommendations related to improving healthcare provider communication and balancing hope and expectations for treatment outcomes were highlighted. Further research is needed to investigate experiences of uncertainty in this population. Tailored interventions for uncertainty may be warranted.

Hope and meaning-making in phase 1 oncology trials: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative evidence on patient-participant experiences

Background

Phase 1 drug trials are popular treatment options for patients with advanced disease, despite the greater levels of uncertainty associated with them. However, their meaning and consequences for patient-participants remains under-explored. This review synthesises the qualitative evidence of patients’ experiences of participating in phase 1 oncology trials, exploring their decisions to take part and the impacts of these trials on patient wellbeing.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search involving medical subject headings (MeSH) and keywords was undertaken in the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Scopus, CINAHL, and Cochrane CENTRAL, with supplementary searches also conducted. Studies were independently screened for inclusion by two researchers. Included studies were critically appraised and data extracted using standardised forms. Qualitative results were analysed using thematic synthesis.

Results

Three main themes were identified across 13 studies: decision-making and joining the trial; experiences of taking part in the trial and hope and coping. Patients primarily joined trials hoping for therapeutic benefits, sentiments which prevailed and shaped their experiences across their trial journey. Rather than indicate therapeutic misconception based on poor understanding, patient perspectives more commonly pointed to differences between hope and expectation and cultural narratives of staying positive, trying everything and trusting in experts.

Conclusions

These findings challenge information-based models of consent, favouring coping frameworks which account for the role of hope and meaning-making during serious illness. Personalised consideration of existential and quality-of-life matters before and during trials is recommended, including palliative and supportive care alternatives to active treatment.

Review Registration

The review was registered with PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD 42020163250).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06306-9.

Oncology patients' experiences in experimental medicine cancer trials: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to explore patients' experiences of experimental cancer medicine (ECM) clinical trials.

DESIGN

The study's design was qualitative. Two focus groups with patients were undertaken followed by semistructured interviews, to explore patients' experiences of ECM clinical trials. Interviews and focus groups were audiorecorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

SETTING

A regional cancer centre (tertiary care) in North-West England.

PARTICIPANTS

Twelve patients (aged 52-79) participated in one of the two focus groups and 22 patients (aged 42-83) participated in interviews.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

Patients' experiences of an ECM trial.

RESULTS

Four main themes were identified from the analysis: decision making, information needs, the experience of trial participation and impact of trial participation. Subthemes are presented in the manuscript.

CONCLUSION

To make fully informed decisions about trial participation, patients required the simplification of trial information and wanted more information about side effects, their response to trial treatment and the overall trial progress throughout the trial. Patients highlighted the need for improvement for the support provided to their family and friends.

Supportive Care: An Indispensable Component of Modern Oncology

The advent of new cancer therapies, alongside expected growth and ageing of the population, better survival rates and associated costs of care, is uncovering a need to more clearly define and integrate supportive care services across the whole spectrum of the disease. The current focus of cancer care is on initial diagnosis and treatment, and end of life care. The Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer defines supportive care as 'the prevention and management of the adverse effects of cancer and its treatment'. This encompasses the entire cancer journey, and necessitates involvement and integration of most clinical specialties. Optimal supportive care can assist in accurate diagnosis and management, and ultimately improve outcomes. A national strategy to implement supportive care is needed to acknowledge evolving oncology practice, changing disease patterns and the changing patient demographic.

Patients' experiences of discontentment one year after total knee arthroplasty- a qualitative study

Background

Total knee arthroplasty is a common procedure with generally good results. However, there are still patients who are dissatisfied without known explanation. Satisfaction and dissatisfaction have previously been captured by quantitative designs, but there is a lack of qualitative studies regarding these patients’ experiences. Qualitative knowledge might be useful in creating strategies to decrease the dissatisfaction rate.

Methods

Of the 348 patients who responded to a letter asking if they were satisfied or dissatisfied with their surgery, 61 (18%) reported discontent. After excluding patients with documented complications and those who declined to participate, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 44 patients. The interviews were analyzed according to qualitative content analysis. The purpose was to describe patients’ experiences of discontentment 1 year after total knee arthroplasty.

Results

The patients experienced unfulfilled expectations and needs regarding unresolved and new problems, limited independence, and lacking of relational supports. They were bothered by pain and stiffness, and worried that changes were complications as a result of surgery. They described inability to perform daily activities and valued activities. They also felt a lack of relational supports, and a lack of respect and continuity, support from health care, and information adapted to their needs.

Conclusion

Patient expectation seems to be the major contributing factor in patient discontentment after knee replacement surgery. This qualitative study sheds light on the on the meaning of unfulfilled expectations, in contrast to previous quantitative studies. The elements of unfulfilled expectations need to be dealt with both on the individual staff level and on the organizational level. For instance, increased continuity of healthcare staff and facilities may help to improve patient satisfaction after surgery.

Phase I cancer trials: a qualitative study of specialist palliative care

Objective

In recent years, a simultaneous care model for advanced cancer patients has been recommended meaning that palliative care services are offered throughout their cancer journey. To inform the successful adoption of this model in a phase I trial context, the study aimed to explore patients’ care needs and their perceptions of specialist palliative care.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 advanced cancer patients referred to the Experimental Cancer Medicine team. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed with a framework approach to data organisation.

Results

Despite reporting considerable physical and psychological impacts from cancer and cancer treatment, participants did not recognise a need for specialist palliative care support. Understanding of the role of specialist palliative care was largely limited to end of life care. There was perceived conflict between considering a phase I trial and receiving specialist palliative care. Participants felt specialist palliative care should be introduced earlier and educational resources developed to increase patient acceptability of palliative care services.

Significance of results

Patients with advanced cancer referred for phase I trials are likely to benefit from specialist palliative care. However, this study suggests patients may not recognise a need for support nor accept this support due to misperceptions about the role of palliative care. Developing a specific educational resource about specialist palliative care for this population would help overcome barriers to engaging with a simultaneous care model.