What attitudes and beliefs underlie patients' decisions about participating in chemotherapy trials?

A Content Analysis of the Discussions about Clinical Trials on A Cancer-dedicated Online Forum

Enrollment rates of cancer clinical trials remain low, affecting the delivery of effective medical treatments. Recent research has documented common factors affecting trial participation, but to improve these efforts more studies are needed to further understand specific concerns and issues of potential participants in multiple contexts. Forums and other online peer-to-peer health communities are crucial to the coping and survivorship of cancer patients. Online health communities will offer valuable information to understand how patients discuss perceptions, motivations, and challenges associated with clinical trial participation, and to understand how patients provide support to each other. The present study conducted a content analysis of 270 posts shared by 154 unique users between August 2017 and January 2018 on a popular online breast cancer forum. The analysis identifies common characteristics of patient users, salient post themes, perceived barriers, emotions, and misconceptions regarding clinical trial participation. The study findings are generally consistent with previous studies but provide in-depth insights into online support between cancer patients about clinical trial participation. Implications for practice and future research are also discussed.

Ready to Make A Decision: A Model of Informational Aids to Improve Informed Participation in Clinical Trial Research

Enrollment rates for cancer clinical trials remain low, affecting the generalizability of new treatments. Research shows that many patients face significant challenges in understanding basic clinical trial vocabulary and making informed decisions about participation. Informational aids (IA) are developed to address these challenges and support decision making of cancer clinical trial participation. The present study proposed and tested a structural path model to explain the efficacy of three (i.e., interactive, non-interactive, non-cancer control) IAs. The results revealed that clinical trial participation intention was associated with attitudes and social constructs (i.e., social norm, social sharing, and cues to action). Ease of use, rather than knowledge, was the primary communication feature of IA that influenced the outcome variables. The path relations linking messages features, mediators, and outcome variables were different across all three IAs. The results therefore provide theoretical and practical implications for the use and development of IAs to support clinical trial accrual.

Typologies of Altruistic and Financial Motivations for Research Participation

Questions arise concerning participants' motives in risky studies, such as HIV vaccine trials (HVTs). We interviewed in-depth 20 gay/bisexual men. Participants described both altruistic and nonaltruistic motives. Altruistic motivations emerged primarily, with nine typologies: (a) cultural, (b) community related, (c) familial, (d) religious, (e) professional, (f) political (e.g., HIV activism), (g) moral (e.g., making up for past wrongs), (h) existential (e.g., providing sense of meaning), and (i) other psychological (e.g., emotional gratification). Views of compensation varied: not a factor (55%), added incentive (25%), main motivator, but in conjunction with altruism (15%), and primary motivator (5%). HVT participants thus often have both altruistic and financial motives, and related typologies emerged. These findings have critical implications for studies on HIV, other conditions, and research ethics.

Attitudinal barriers to participation in oncology clinical trials: factor analysis and correlates of barriers

Patient participation in cancer clinical trials is low. Little is known about attitudinal barriers to participation, particularly among patients who may be offered a trial during an imminent initial oncology consult. The aims of the present study were to confirm the presence of proposed subscales of a recently developed cancer clinical trial attitudinal barriers measure, describe the most common cancer clinical trials attitudinal barriers, and evaluate socio-demographic, medical and financial factors associated with attitudinal barriers. A total of 1256 patients completed a survey assessing demographic factors, perceived financial burden, prior trial participation and attitudinal barriers to clinical trials participation. Results of a factor analysis did not confirm the presence of the proposed four attitudinal barriers subscale/factors. Rather, a single factor represented the best fit to the data. The most highly-rated barriers were fear of side-effects, worry about health insurance and efficacy concerns. Results suggested that less educated patients, patients with non-metastatic disease, patients with no previous oncology clinical trial participation, and patients reporting greater perceived financial burden from cancer care were associated with higher barriers. These patients may need extra attention in terms of decisional support. Overall, patients with fewer personal resources (education, financial issues) report more attitudinal barriers and should be targeted for additional decisional support.

Participation in cancer clinical trials: why are patients not participating?

BACKGROUND

Participation in cancer clinical trials is low, particularly in racial and ethnic minorities in some cases, which has negative consequences for the generalizability for study findings. The objective of this study was to determine what factors are associated with patients' participation or willingness to participate and whether these factors vary by race/ethnicity.

DESIGN

or

METHODS

. White, Hispanic, and black participants were obtained through the Florida cancer registry and who were diagnosed with breast, lung, colorectal, or prostate cancer (N = 1100). Participants were surveyed via telephone to obtain demographic information, past participation, and willingness to participate in clinical trials, as well as barriers and facilitators to participation. Logistic and Poisson regressions were performed.

RESULTS

. Respondents were on average 67.4 years old, 42.7% were male, and 50.1% were married. In this population, 7.7% of respondents had participated in a clinical trial, and 36.5% stated that they would be willing to participate. In multivariate models, blacks and Hispanics were equally likely as whites to be willing to participate in cancer trials, but Hispanics were less likely to have participated, and this was especially more likely in non-English-speaking Hispanics compared with English-speaking Hispanics. Notable barriers across race/ethnicity were mistrust and lack of knowledge of clinical trials. Limitations. Cross-sectional design limits cause-and-effect conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

. There are racial differences in participation rates but not in willingness to participate. We hypothesize that willingness to participate is not very high because people are uninformed about participating, particularly in non-English-speaking Hispanics. Barriers and facilitators to participation vary by race. Improved understanding of cultural differences that can be addressed by physicians may restore faith, comprehension, and acceptability of clinical trials by all patients.

Discussions of cancer clinical trials with the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service

Clinical trials are essential for the development of new and effective treatments for cancer; however, participation rates are low. One reason for this is lack of knowledge about clinical trials. This study assessed how often clinical trials are discussed on calls to National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service (CIS). The authors quantitatively analyzed 283,094 calls to the CIS (1-800-4-CANCER) over 3 years (2006-2008). They calculated descriptive statistics and multivariate regressions to determine whether specific caller characteristics are associated with the presence of a clinical trials discussion. In addition, 2 focus groups were conducted with CIS information specialists (n=12) to provide insight into the findings. The authors found that approximately 9.3% of CIS calls discussed clinical trials, with higher percentages for patients (12.5%) and family members (15.4%). Calls with Hispanics, Blacks, and Spanish speakers were less likely to include a conversation. For all cancers, patients who are in treatment or experiencing a recurrence were statistically significantly more likely to discuss clinical trials. CIS information specialists reported callers' limited knowledge of clinical trials. The CIS has the unique ability to make a substantial effect in educating patients about clinical trials as an option in cancer treatment and care.

Lung cancer patients' decisions about clinical trials and the theory of planned behavior

The theory of planned behavior explores the relationship between behavior, beliefs, attitudes, and intentions presupposing that behavioral intention is influenced by a person's attitude about the behavior and beliefs about whether individuals, who are important to them, approve or disapprove of the behavior (subjective norm). An added dimension to the theory is the idea of perceived behavioral control, or the belief that one has control over performing the behavior. The theory of planned behavior suggests that people may make greater efforts to perform a behavior if they feel they have a high level of control over it. In this examination of data, we explored the application of the theory of planned behavior to patient's decisions about participating in a clinic trial. Twelve respondents in this study had previously participated in a clinical trial for lung cancer and nine respondents had declined a clinical trial for lung cancer. The data were analyzed with regard to the four constructs associated with the theory of planned behavior: behavioral intention, attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control. Results indicate that the theory of planned behavior may be a useful tool to examine psychosocial needs in relation to behavioral intention of clinical trial participation.

Recruiting underserved populations to dermatologic research: a systematic review

Recruitment of participants to dermatologic research studies can be challenging, particularly with historically underserved populations. Recruitment of these groups is essential to ethical, valid, and useful dermatologic research. This article discusses findings from a review of 78 studies that examined factors influencing participation in health research studies with an emphasis on underserved populations, particularly women and ethnic minorities. The most commonly encountered barriers to research participation are mistrust of research, lack of access to research programs, and culturally incompetent research design. Motives to participate in research include receipt of benefit from participation, perceived opportunities to help others, and culturally competent research design. Practical methods for addressing barriers and enhancing research participation include culturally competent research design, community-based recruitment, and easily understandable informed consent. These factors should be considered when recruiting subjects for dermatologic research, especially when recruitment of underserved populations is desired. In addition, the literature demonstrates a paucity of research among rural residents, infants, and children, as well as within clinical dermatologic research.

The accuracy and efficiency of electronic screening for recruitment into a clinical trial on COPD

Participant recruitment is an important process in successful conduct of randomized controlled trials. To facilitate enrollment into a National Institutes of Health-sponsored clinical trial involving patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), we developed and prospectively validated an automated electronic screening tool based on boolean free-text search of admission notes in electronic medical records. During a 2-week validation period, all patients admitted to prespecified general medical services were screened for eligibility by both the electronic screening tool and a COPD nurse. Group discussion was the gold standard for confirmation of true-positive results. Compared with the gold standard, electronic screening yielded 100% sensitivity, 92% specificity, 100% negative predictive value, and 72% positive predictive value. Compared with traditional manual screening, electronic screening demonstrated time-saving potential of 76%. Thus, the electronic screening tool accurately identifies potential study subjects and improves efficiency of patient accrual for a clinical trial on COPD. This method may be expanded into other institutional and clinical settings.

Comparing patients' and their partners' preferences for adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer

OBJECTIVE

Preferences of women who had completed adjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer were compared with those of their partners by determining the smallest benefits they judged sufficient to make adjuvant chemotherapy worthwhile.

METHODS

Forty-six women and their partners were interviewed separately, 3-34 months after completing adjuvant chemotherapy. Preferences were elicited using four sets of validated, hypothetical trade-off scenarios about the possible benefits of adjuvant chemotherapy on survival times (5 and 15 years) and survival rates (65% and 85% at 5 years). Agreement within couples was assessed with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Associations between baseline characteristics, preferences, and agreement within couples were assessed with linear regression after normal score transformation.

RESULTS

The mean age of the women was 57 years and of their partners' was 60. Most couples were married (91%). Benefits of an extra 1 day or 0.1% were judged sufficient to make adjuvant chemotherapy worthwhile by 59-72% of women and 54-59% of partners. Agreement was exact in 35-41% of couples and approximate in 59-83%. Agreement was better for scenarios with a worse prognosis (ICC 0.67 and 0.35) than for scenarios with a better prognosis (ICC 0.13 and 0.05). Having dependent children was associated with partners requiring larger benefits but patients requiring smaller benefits to make adjuvant chemotherapy worthwhile (interaction P=0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patients' and partners' preferences for adjuvant chemotherapy differed and were influenced by considerations other than length and quality of life.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Clinicians who are aware of these differences can tailor discussions to ensure that all interested parties understand and agree on the goals and benefits of treatment.

[Persuasive communications and regular blood donation: an experimental study]

This study aimed to: investigate yielding to the dependent variable "behavioral intent to become a regular blood donor", verify the impact of such communications on variance in the dependent variable, examine the single contribution of the external independent variable to the Rational Action Theory, and test the fit of the expanded Rational Choice Theory to the target behavior and sample. Only a post-test design and double-blinded procedure were used, randomly picking 405 university students for experimental groups 1 and 2, placebo control, and control only. The results showed: lack of yielding by the experimental groups; considerable percentage variance in the dependent variable explained by the independent variable in the experimental and placebo control groups; and satisfactory and significant correlations for variables in the expanded theory. Absence of yielding for the criterion variable was probably due to the time interval. The positive persuasive strategy accounted for the greatest variance in the dependent variable. Moral obligation showed the greatest impact on participants' intent to perform the behavior. The correlations corroborated the theoretical and methodological validity of the expanded theory.

[Perceptions of patients and physicians involved in clinical trials: an overview of the literature]

OBJECTIVE - METHOD: The purpose of this review is to explore the expectations of patients and physicians prior to participate to a clinical trial and their positive or negative experiences after participating. A systematic review of Medline database from 1966 to 2005 identified 79 papers reported patients and physicians perceptions of clinical trials (only 3 in French), whom 27 English surveys conducted on patients and physicians.

RESULTS

If primary patients' motivation for enrolment was altruistic, physicians wish to help their patient. After enrolment, the most perceived positive benefit for patients and physicians are, respectively, the emotional improvement and the greater opportunity for personal benefit offered to enrolled patients. Most physicians' negative experience included logistical difficulties while patients are unease with randomisation and often uncomfortable with medical procedures. Unlike patients, all physicians' expectations seem to be fulfilled.

CONCLUSION

The knowledge of patients' and physicians' perception of participation may improve recruitment in clinical trials.

How important is the opinion of significant others to cancer patients’ adjuvant chemotherapy decision-making?

GOALS

Decisions regarding adjuvant chemotherapy are difficult, since value tradeoffs are involved. Little is known about the importance of the significant others in patients' decision-making regarding adjuvant treatment. We surveyed patients with breast and colorectal cancer about the importance they assigned to the opinions of their significant others and assessed correlates of these importance scores.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred and twenty-three patients rated on a five-point scale how much they cared about the opinion of six significant others.

MAIN RESULTS

Most important was the opinion of their treating specialist, followed by that of their partner, children, other family, friends, and colleagues. Women assigned higher scores to the opinion of their children, younger patients to that of their specialist, and patients who were about to undergo chemotherapy to that of their family. Patients with breast cancer and patients without paid employment assigned slightly more importance to the opinion of their partner.

CONCLUSIONS

Information on the influence of significant others may help clinicians when involving patients in treatment decision-making and discussing patients' treatment preferences.

Barriers to participation in clinical trials of cancer: a meta-analysis and systematic review of patient-reported factors

BACKGROUND

Enrolling participants onto clinical trials of cancer presents an important challenge. We aimed to identify the concerns of patients with cancer about, and the barriers to, participation in clinical trials.

METHODS

We did a systematic review to assess studies of barriers to participation in experimental trials and randomised trials for validity and content. We estimated the frequency with which patients identified particular issues by pooling across studies that presented data for barriers to participation in clinical trials as proportions.

FINDINGS

We analysed 12 qualitative studies (n=722) and 21 quantitative studies (n=5452). Two qualitative studies inquired of patients who were currently enrolled onto clinical trials, and ten inquired of patients who were eligible for enrolment onto various clinical trials. Barriers to participation in clinical trials were protocol-related, patient-related, or physician-related. The most common reasons cited as barriers included: concerns with the trial setting; a dislike of randomisation; general discomfort with the research process; complexity and stringency of the protocol; presence of a placebo or no-treatment group; potential side-effects; being unaware of trial opportunities; the idea that clinical trials are not appropriate for serious diseases; fear that trial involvement would have a negative effect on the relationship with their physician; and their physician's attitudes towards the trial. Meta-analysis confirmed the findings of our systematic review.

INTERPRETATION

The identification of such barriers to the participation in clinical trials should help trialists to develop strategies that will keep to a maximum participation and cooperation in cancer trials, while informing and protecting prospective participants adequately.

Why Cancer Patients Enter Randomized Clinical Trials: Exploring the Factors That Influence Their Decision

Purpose

Few interventions have been designed and tested to improve recruitment to clinical trials in oncology. The multiple factors influencing patients' decisions have made the prioritization of specific interventions challenging. The present study was undertaken to identify the independent predictors of a cancer patient's decision to enter a randomized clinical trial.

Methods

A list of factors from the medical literature was augmented with a series of focus groups involving cancer patients, physicians, and clinical research associates (CRAs). A series of questionnaires was developed with items based on these factors and were administered concurrently to 189 cancer patients, their physicians, and CRAs following the patient's decision regarding trial entry. Forward logistic regression modeling was performed using the items significantly correlated (by univariate analysis) with the decision to enter a clinical trial.

Results

A number of items were significantly correlated with the patient's decision. In the multivariate logistic regression model, the patient's perception of personal benefit was the most important, with an odds ratio (OR) of 3.08 (P < .05). CRA-related items involving supportive aspects of the decision-making process were also important. These included whether the CRA helped with the decision (OR = 1.71; P < .05), and whether the decision was hard for the patient to make (OR = 0.52; P < .05).

Conclusion

Strategies that better address the potential benefits of trial entry may result in improved accrual. Interventions or aids that focus on the supportive aspects of the decision-making process while respecting the need for information and patient autonomy may also lead to meaningful improvements in accrual.

Ambivalence towards meat

The purpose of the present study was to examine whether differences in ambivalence between meat eaters affect their attitude towards eating meat, the belief structure underlying these attitudes, meat consumption, and intentions to reduce consumption in the future. Not surprisingly, more ambivalent meat eaters held a less positive attitude towards meat as compared to less ambivalent meat eaters. Moreover, the belief structure of the two groups also differed: More ambivalent persons associated the consumption of meat with slightly negative feelings, morally unacceptable issues, and risks for both their health and the environment. In contrast, less ambivalent meat eaters reported positive affective beliefs, did not emphasize moral issues, and perceived less risk. Results highlight the role of affective beliefs as a predictor of both attitude and ambivalence. Ambivalence, in turn, was a predictor of actual meat consumption; i.e. increased ambivalence was related to reduced meat consumption. Moreover, more ambivalent meat eaters intended to further reduce their meat consumption in the future. Practical and theoretical implications of these results are discussed.

Willingness to participate in clinical treatment research among older African Americans and Whites

PURPOSE

Using a health services utilization conceptual framework, the purpose of this analysis was to examine race differences in factors predictive of the behavioral intention of older persons to participate in a clinical treatment trial should they have a diagnosis of cancer. In addition, the analysis sought to determine if older African Americans were less likely than Whites to express willingness to participate, given knowledge of the Tuskegee syphilis study and greater fatalistic cancer beliefs.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Data were drawn from a community-based telephone survey of 216 African Americans and 222 Whites, 50 years of age and older.

RESULTS

Findings show that willingness to participate was significantly higher among males, persons of younger age, higher incomes, and with nonfatalistic cancer beliefs. Race differences were only apparent for the two significant interactions of race with age and high income. Neither knowledge of the Tuskegee study nor fatalistic cancer beliefs were more important for African Americans than for Whites.

IMPLICATIONS

Study findings suggest that recruitment strategies need to be tailored to racial differences in factors affecting willingness to participate, particularly those related to age and income level.

The decision to take hormone replacement therapy among women with disabilities

Whereas making decisions during menopause can be challenging for all women, those with physical impairments face special issues with respect to menopause in general and hormone replacement therapy (HRT) in particular. In this correlational study the authors explored the factors such women consider when making decisions about HRT One hundred sixty-seven women with physical impairments throughout the United States completed surveys concerning their attitudes and knowledge about HRT Approximately half the menopausal women were currently taking HRT The strongest predictor of HRT use was women's perceptions of their health care providers opinions about their taking HRT, combined with their motivation to comply with the provider's recommendation. Thisfinding points to the significant role that nurses and other health care providers play in assisting women to make informed health care choices during menopause.

Attitudes towards clinical research amongst participants and nonparticipants

OBJECTIVES

To investigate attitudes to clinical research amongst cancer trial participants and nonparticipants, and to compare results with those from previous studies amongst participants in noncancer trials.

DESIGN

Trial participating respondents were given three questionnaires during the clinical trials. Respondents amongst patients declining randomization answered a single questionnaire.

SETTING

Participants and nonparticipants in randomized clinical cancer trials.

SUBJECTS

Forty-one participants and 47 nonparticipants in cancer trials.

RESULTS

Altruistic motives of physicians to conduct medical research were highly rated. Attitudes towards clinical research were positive in all groups, with nonparticipant respondents being the least positive. Eight to nine tenths found scientific testing necessary before general health service implementation. Trial participants were, as compared with nonparticipating respondents, more positive towards both participation of self and others. Both personal and altruistic motives for participation were highly rated. Primary reasons for nonparticipation were fear of 'the unknown' and/or unease with randomization. Only a minority felt a moral problem created by declining trial participation. Respondents amongst noncancer participants were more satisfied with the information given than both cancer participants and cancer nonparticipants. Negative experiences in cancer participants generally dealt with frustration related to seeing too many physicians at check-up appointments.

CONCLUSION

Attitudes towards clinical research are generally positive even in cancer nonparticipants. Both personal and altruistic motives for participation were highly rated. A fear of 'the unknown' and resentments towards randomization were primary reasons to renounce participation. Seeing too many physicians at check-up appointments seems to be an important factor for negative experiences in cancer trial participants.

Ethical aspects of clinical trials: the attitudes of participants in two non-cancer trials

OBJECTIVES

To investigate attitudes to clinical trials in non-cancer trial participants.

DESIGN

Questionnaires at entry, during, and after participation in a clinical study.

SETTING

Participants in: (i) ROC: a clinical study comparing systemic interferon-alpha-2A treatment vs. prednisolone enemas in ulcerative colitis; and (ii) MRCRUC: a clinical study investigating low-field magnetic resonance imaging as a new modality for the evaluation of patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

SUBJECTS

Thirty-two patients in ROC and 47 patients in MRCRUC.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Attitudes towards different aspects of clinical research.

RESULTS

The majority found scientific testing of clinical methods necessary, having positive attitudes towards both participation by themselves and others. The creation of a personal moral problem by denying participation was rejected by a large majority, and still both personal and altruistic motives for participation were highly rated. An important motive for accepting inclusion was the expectation of being 'a special patient' during the trial. The presence of research ethics committees controlling clinical research had a significant positive impact on decisions to participate, and drawing lots and blinding were found problematic by only a minority. Patients valued their satisfaction with participation in the trials highly, and would almost all accept a request to participate in future trials. The most important reason for this was a feeling of receiving better care and information than expected outside a trial setting, primarily determined by the patients seeing only one physician during the trials. A pronounced wish to obtain follow-up information was expressed.

CONCLUSION

Attitudes towards medical research are positive with both altruistic and nonaltruistic motives for participation. Expectations of being treated as 'a special patient' in the trial were important in accepting to participate. Seeing the same physician at control visits was an important factor for satisfaction with participation.

Expert decision making in relation to unanticipated blood glucose levels

How people (N = 22) with long-standing Type I diabetes make everyday self-care decisions, specifically in regard to unanticipated blood glucose levels (UBGLs) was investigated using grounded theory. Participants differentiated between decisions made in familiar and typical situations and those made in novel situations. Decisions made in familiar situations were straightforward, arising from a confident appraisal of the cause of the UBGL. The primary focus of decision making in response to an UBGL in familiar situations was the decision about the course of action. The focus in unfamiliar situations was the appraisal of the cause of the UBGL. It was characterized by the participants' lack of confidence and by a non-linear progression in which the individual retraced previous phases of the decision-making process or proceeded to tangential steps. Participants matched the features of previously encountered situations to construct a story that explained the events in order to generate some plausible hypotheses. A number of contextual and mediating variables were identified as influencing the decision-making process and the decisions they made. The findings of this research demonstrate that the decision maker's familiarity with the situation influences the nature of the decision-making processes that are used.

Pilot study of a point-of-use decision support tool for cancer clinical trials eligibility

Many adults with cancer are not enrolled in clinical trials because caregivers do not have the time to match the patient's clinical findings with varying eligibility criteria associated with multiple trials for which the patient might be eligible. The authors developed a point-of-use portable decision support tool (DS-TRIEL) to automate this matching process. The support tool consists of a hand-held computer with a programmable relational database. A two-level hierarchic decision framework was used for the identification of eligible subjects for two open breast cancer clinical trials. The hand-held computer also provides protocol consent forms and schemas to further help the busy oncologist. This decision support tool and the decision framework on which it is based could be used for multiple trials and different cancer sites.