Perceived Institutional Barriers Among Clinical and Research Professionals: Minority Participation in Oncology Clinical Trials

Use of cultural appropriateness strategies and behavioral frameworks in behavioral interventions for black and hispanic cancer survivors: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Black and Hispanic cancer survivors experience significant inequities in supportive cancer care. Incorporating cultural appropriateness strategies and behavioral frameworks into supportive care interventions can improve cancer outcomes of Black and Hispanic survivors. This review evaluated behavioral oncology trials for Black and Hispanic cancer survivors to assess their use of cultural appropriateness strategies and behavioral frameworks.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted across seven databases with a cutoff date of November 15, 2023: 1) PubMed, 2) Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, 3) Embase, 4) Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, 5) APA PsycInfo, 6) Scopus, and 7) Web of Science. Studies with Black or Hispanic cancer survivors, with or without a comparator, were included.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven trials met the inclusion criteria. Most focused on Black survivors (n = 19, 51.4%) and breast cancer survivors (n = 32, 86.5%). Most were psychosocial interventions addressing quality of life or distress (n = 20, 54.1%). Culturally appropriate strategies were reported in 86.5% (n = 32) of trials, with the most common being sociocultural (n = 30, 81.1%;), constituent-involving (n = 27, 73.0%;), and linguistic (n = 20, 54.1%;). Behavioral frameworks were reported in 56.8% (n = 21) of trials, with Social Cognitive Theory (n = 10, 52.6%) and Stress and Coping Theory (n = 3, 15.8%) being the most frequent. Less than half combined cultural adaptation strategies and a behavioral framework (n = 18, 48.6%).

CONCLUSION

While most trials incorporated cultural appropriateness strategies, fewer utilized behavioral frameworks, and even fewer used both. Future research should integrate these approaches to improve cancer outcomes and address disparities.

Analysis of participant race and sex reporting and disparities in US epilepsy clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

Studies have shown that a growing number of people with epilepsy belong to minority groups and experience health disparities. Inclusivity in clinical trial enrollment is essential for advancing health access but has not been well studied among epilepsy trials. The objective of this study was to analyze US epilepsy clinical trials to identify the prevalence and trends associated with race and sex enrollment disparities.

METHODS

We queried the Clinicaltrials.gov registry to identify completed epilepsy clinical trials with results reported between 2006 and 2022. Studies were assessed for reporting of participant race and sex information, and measures of trial diversity including the participation to prevalence ratio (PPR), representation ratio (RR), and representation quotient (RQ) were calculated. Other data including funding source, intervention type, location, and trial dates were also extracted.

RESULTS

Ninety trials met inclusion criteria, of which 89 (99%) and 53 (59%) reported participant sex and race, respectively. Three trials included only female participants and were excluded from further sex-specific analyses. Females were underrepresented in 10 of the remaining 86 trials reporting sex information (PPR < .8, 12%). We found that industry-funded trials were more likely to have equal female representation among participants (p = .0197). Of trials reporting participant race, 52 (98%) exhibited a lack of racial diversity (RQ < 1). Black participants were the most frequently underrepresented racial group (RR < 1, 42 of 53 trials, 79%).

SIGNIFICANCE

Our findings highlight significant disparities in epilepsy clinical trial enrollment, particularly for Black participants. Lack of diversity and underrepresentation of historically marginalized populations may contribute to research biases and perpetuate health inequities. More inclusive research practices are needed to ensure all people with epilepsy have access to effective care.

Association of Community-Level Social Vulnerability With Clinical Trial Discussion and Participation Among Cancer Survivors

PURPOSE

Community factors and structural barriers may contribute to disparities and underrepresentation in cancer clinical trials. We evaluate the influence of community-level social determinants of health, as measured by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), on disparities in cancer clinical trial discussion and participation.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the 2021 Health Information National Trends Survey-SEER, a representative survey of cancer survivors sampled from three SEER registries. The primary outcomes included patient-reported clinical trial discussion and participation. The primary exposure was county-level SVI, linked to each survey respondent by ZIP code of residence and categorized into quintiles. Survey-weighted bivariate comparisons and multivariable logistic regression were performed to evaluate the association between SVI and clinical trial discussion and participation, adjusting for age, sex, race and ethnicity, education, income, and cancer stage.

RESULTS

We identified 1,220 respondents residing in 153 counties with a median SVI of 0.41 (IQR, 0.27-0.62), representing a population of over 400,000 cancer survivors on weighted analysis. Of the cohort, 15.1% reported clinical trial discussion and 7.7% reported clinical trial participation. Patients who are most socially vulnerable (fifth quintile of SVI) had significantly lower odds of clinical trial discussion (odds ratio [OR], 0.36 [95% CI, 0.15 to 0.87]; P = .02) and clinical trial participation (OR, 0.15 [95% CI, 0.03 to 0.75]; P = .02) compared with patients who are least socially vulnerable (first quintile of SVI).

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest interventions to identify socially vulnerable communities for expansion of clinical trial opportunities and infrastructure may be an impactful strategy toward improving diversity and representation in cancer clinical trials.

Optimizing Recruitment and Retention in Cancer Clinical Trials in Low-Resource Settings: Barriers and Facilitators From Nigerian Provider's Perspectives

PURPOSE

The under-representation of African countries in cancer clinical trials continues to widen the cancer health disparity. In this study, we assessed health care workers' perspectives on recruitment and retention in cancer clinical trials in Nigeria.

METHODS

This study was a convergent parallel mixed-methods design, using a survey for quantitative analysis and focus group discussions (FGDs) for further qualitative investigation. The health care providers that participated in the study were drawn from the ICON-3 Practice-based Research Network across the six geopolitical zones in Nigeria.

RESULTS

Of the 42 providers, 35 completed the survey and 25 participated in the FGDs. The most cited (agreed or strongly agreed) patient-related barriers were lack of understanding of cancer clinical trials (83%), cultural barriers (77%), and lack of financial compensation for study visits (77%). The most cited provider-related barriers were negative attitude of the clinical team (89%), lack of training in good clinical practice (89%), and an overwhelming clinical workload (86%). On trial-related barriers, about 71% agreed or strongly agreed that lack of trial publicity was a barrier. Over 90% of the respondents agreed or strongly agreed that several factors, including the friendliness of the study team (97%) and clarity in the presentation of trial information (97%), are important facilitators. The FGDs unveiled additional themes, including systems-related barriers such as lack of infrastructure, limited research collaboration, and prolonged ethical approval process, and capacity building and community engagement as potential facilitators.

CONCLUSION

Our study provides providers' perspectives on the barriers and facilitators to the recruitment and retention of participants in cancer clinical trials in a low-resource setting and highlights the need for culturally appropriate recruitment strategies.

Factors Associated With Minority Patient Enrollment in a Gastric Cancer Biobank

INTRODUCTION

Human tissue samples are essential for translational cancer research. However, less than 20% of current biobank and genomic samples were obtained from minority patients, which may lead to biased understanding of cancer biology. The objective of this study was to identify factors associated with patient enrollment in our institution's gastric cancer biobank.

METHODS

Patients with suspected or confirmed gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer undergoing surgical procedures at our institution were invited to enroll in a prospective gastric cancer biobank. We retrospectively reviewed patients who were invited to enroll from 2017 to 2023 at our safety-net and university hospitals. We compared patients who enrolled to those who declined to identify factors that predict enrollment.

RESULTS

Hispanic patients had similar odds of enrollment as non-Hispanic White patients (odds ratio (OR): 1.22, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.54-2.73, P = 0.63). Non-Hispanic minorities (Black/African Americans and Asians) were less likely to enroll when compared to non-Hispanic Whites (OR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.18-0.95, P = 0.04). Minority patients treated at our safety-net hospital had higher odds of enrollment than those treated at our university hospital (OR: 2.62, 95% CI: 1.11-5.99, P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts to improve diversity in biomedical research cannot consider minority patients as a monolithic cohort. Instead, targeted interventions that address diverse cultural concerns and improve access to enrollment at safety-net centers are requisite.

Motivation to Clinical Trial Participation: Health Information Distrust and Healthcare Access as Explanatory Variables and Gender as Moderator

Background: There is significant underrepresentation in clinical trials across diverse populations. Less is known about how health system-related factors, such as relationships and trust, mediate the motivation for clinical trial participation. We aimed to investigate whether health system-related factors explain the association between sociodemographic factors and motivation for participation. Additionally, we explored whether the mediating effects differ by gender. Methods: We used the Health Information National Trends Survey 2020 cycle-4 data. Motivation for clinical trial participation, assessed through eight items, was the outcome variable (range 1-4). Predictors included age, race, ethnicity, education, general health, and depression. The health system-related explanatory variables were health information distrust, having a regular provider, and the frequency of healthcare visits. Gender was the moderator. A structural equation model (SEM) was used for the overall and gender-stratified analyses. Results: Among the 3865 participants (mean [SE] age of 48.4 [0.53] years, 51.4% women, and 24.3% non-White), older age (β = -0.170; p < 0.001) and non-White race (β = -0.078; p < 0.01) were negatively associated, and higher education (β = 0.117; p < 0.001) was positively associated with motivation. Higher distrust (β = -0.094; p < 0.01) decreased motivation, whereas having a regular provider increased motivation (β = 0.087; p < 0.01). The gender-stratified SEM revealed that women, but not men, with higher distrust showed lower motivation (β = -0.121; p < 0.01), and men, but not women, with a regular healthcare provider showed higher motivation (β = 0.116; p < 0.01). Conclusions: Our study found that women with higher distrust showed lower motivation, while men with a regular healthcare provider demonstrated higher motivation. These gender differences highlight the need for tailored recruitment approaches that account for their distinct relationships with the health system.

Ethical considerations for referral partnerships in clinical research

Recruitment challenges in clinical research are widespread, particularly for traditionally under-represented groups. Referral relationships-in which research partners and clinical partners agree to collaborate on selected research studies or programmes, with the expectation that the clinical partners refer appropriate patients as potential participants-may help alleviate these challenges. Referral relationships allow research partners access to expanded and more diverse pools of participants by increasing the engagement of medical providers, leveraging providers' connections with patients and providing structural support for study participation. Clinical partners can also benefit from the resources offered by research involvement, and patients may benefit from improved access to studies. Yet despite their potential, referral relationships can raise ethical concerns. Here, we discuss ethical considerations for referral relationships in clinical research to address these concerns. When establishing relationships, fair participant selection should guide the sites and studies involved. When defining the terms of a relationship, partners should build trust and respect, collaborating so that health centres or hospitals and communities benefit from their research involvement with the mitigation of associated burdens. When implemented, referral relationships should continue to honour fair participant selection, reduce misunderstanding or miscommunication about research and protect patients' privacy and confidentiality. Overall, when conducted ethically, referral relationships can help address study recruitment challenges and promote fair access to research opportunities.

"I eat chocolate milk for dinner because we just have nothing in our fridge": The invisible burden and dire consequences of food insecurity for people with cystic fibrosis in the United States

BACKGROUND

One-third of people with cystic fibrosis (pwCF) are food insecure, with profound negative implications for their health. This qualitative study explored lived experiences with food insecurity among pwCF or their caregivers and summarized their perspectives on food insecurity screening in the cystic fibrosis (CF) programs where they receive care.

METHODS

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with two groups: (1) adults with CF and (2) parents or caregivers of children with CF. PwCF or their caregivers with previously documented food insecurity were referred for participation by pediatric and adult CF programs across the United States. Interviews were recorded and transcribed, and data were coded and analyzed by two independent coders using a content-analysis approach with a constant comparative method to generate themes.

RESULTS

A total of 26 participants from 22 CF programs were interviewed. The sample included 17 adults with CF and nine parents of children with CF. Participants were predominantly White (88%) and female (92%). Five overarching themes emerged: (1) food insecurity among CF patients and their families is onerous, (2) financial constraints imposed by the CF disease contribute to food insecurity, (3) federal and state programs provide limited food assistance, and other support is minimal, (4) shame and stigma engulf conversations around food insecurity with CF care teams, and (5) food insecurity screening in clinical settings is critical.

CONCLUSIONS

Food insecurity among pwCF is invisible, but its consequences are dire. Assistance is limited, screening is inconsistent, and stigma is widespread. There is an urgent need to normalize food insecurity screening, standardize the screening process, and expand food assistance programs for pwCF.

The Barriers and Enablers to Participation in Oncology Clinical Trials for Ethnically Diverse Communities: A Qualitative Systematic Review Using Metaethnography

BACKGROUND

Racial and ethnic inequities exist in cancer clinical trial participation. Low recruitment across ethnically diverse communities contributes to health inequalities further disproportionately affecting these groups. Understanding barriers and enablers to clinical trial participation for ethnic minorities is key to developing strategies to address this problem.

OBJECTIVE

To explore, evaluate, and synthesize qualitative research surrounding patients' lived experiences and perceptions of participating in cancer clinical trials from ethnically diverse groups.

METHODS

Noblit and Hare's 7-stage metaethnography was used. Seven databases were searched. Inclusion criteria were as follows: qualitative studies published in English from January 1, 2012, to January 31, 2022; patients from any ethnic minority 18 years and older with a cancer diagnosis; and cancer patients' carers and healthcare professionals (HCPs)/healthcare leaders involved in the delivery of cancer clinical trials.

RESULTS

The majority of included articles were conducted in the United States. Interpretive qualitative synthesis resulted in 7 categories including patient perceptions and beliefs and HCP perception of trial burden and social determinants of health. Four lines of argument were established.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings capture the experience and perceptions of ethnic minority patients, their carers, HCPs, and healthcare leaders in this area of research. Incongruities exist between patient-reported barriers and those perceived by HCPs. Published empirical research outside the United States is limited.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

When developing strategies to increase clinical trial participation, research literacy, cultural safety, and unconscious biases within healthcare need to be addressed. Further research to examine intersectionality and the role of faith in decision-making among ethnic groups is warranted.

Bridging the Gap: Culturally Responsive Strategies for NIH Trial Recruitment

OBJECTIVE

To enhance recruitment and participation rates of non-Hispanic Black (NHB) and Hispanic adult patients in a NIH-funded clinical trial studying an emerging health technology.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING

This study includes primary data collected in Los Angeles, California from November 2020 through November 2023.

STUDY DESIGN

To improve the representation of NHB and Hispanic patients in a NIH-funded (NCT04409353) trial on virtual reality for chronic lower back pain (cLBP), we conducted a multi-phase study utilizing a mixed-method approach. First, we conducted focus groups with NHB and Hispanic cohorts aged 18 and older; based on the feedback, we culturally adapted recruitment materials and study correspondences concordantly. Additionally, a cohort builder was used to filter the electronic medical record to isolate non-Hispanic Black (NHB) and Hispanic patients with cLBP for micro-targeted recruitment. These changes were collectively integrated when the parent NIH study had recruited 222 of its 385 final samples (57.7%), creating a pre-post comparison timepoint (May 17, 2022). Quantitative analysis was performed to assess the efficacy of the modified recruitment strategies by comparing the number of recruited and randomized NHB and Hispanic patients pre- and post-intervention.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

Semi-structured focus groups were conducted with NHB and Hispanic patients and community members (age 18 and older). The focus groups were conducted online and recorded with participant consent; transcripts of the recording underwent inductive thematic analysis. Emergent themes directed the modification of study materials, including revised language and imagery, targeted outreach, and incorporation of treating physicians, were implemented in the second half of the study. Quantitative analyses were conducted following parent study completion by comparing records added to the screening database following the implementation of new recruiting methods (5/17/2022) to those added before.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Thematic analysis of focus groups identified four key themes: mistrust, lack of interest, culture, and communication. Modifications to recruitment methodology resulted in statistically significant increases in the pre- to post-randomization success rate for the overall study population (p < 0.001), the NHB population (p = 0.011), and the Hispanic population (p < 0.015). When looking at each cohort at different points in the recruitment process before and after the intervention, in the Hispanic population, we saw significant increases in the number approached (p < 0.001) and number randomized (p < 0.001) and statistically insignificant increases in the NHB population approached (p = 0.067) and randomized (p = 0.295). Similarly, we saw that the changes in the recruitment letter led to a statistically significant increase in Hispanic recruitment (7.0 to 39.1%, p < 0.001) but not the NHB cohort (19.6 to 35.8%, p < 0.065).

CONCLUSION

This study introduces several culturally sensitive considerations and possible approaches for the design of recruitment materials, addressing mistrust, lack of interest, culture, and communication for use in NHB and Hispanic populations. Similarly, the described microtargeting techniques leverage the technological advancements in cohort building to improve the reach and efficiency of the randomization rate of underrepresented groups thereby enhancing clinical trial diversity.

"First, Trust Needs to Develop": Hematologists' Perspectives on Factors Influencing Black Persons' Participation in Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

Cancer clinical trials are crucial for treatment standards and innovation but lack racial-ethnic diversity. Understanding physician perspectives on recruiting participants is critical due to their role in decision-making about trial candidacy and enrollment.

METHODS

From August 2021 to January 2022 we recruited 13 Academic hematologists experienced with treating blood cancers and enrolling clinical trial participants. Each hematologist participated in a 60-75-minute semistructured interview and completed a sociodemographic survey. Using the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities multilevel model as a framework, we characterized hematologists' perceived barriers to clinical trial participation among Black persons. ATLAS.ti v9 and later v 23.2.1 was used for project management and to facilitate data analysis using the Sort and Sift, Think and Shift approach (ResearchTalk Inc).

RESULTS

All hematologists were White, with 70% being male. Three factors influenced their perspectives on enrolling Black individuals in clinical trials: individual attitudes and beliefs, such as perceptions that Black or socioeconomically disadvantaged persons will be less willing or less compliant with the requirements for trial participation and follow-up. The need to build trusting relationships between themselves and patients prior to discussing clinical trials and the prevailing legacy of medical mistrust among the Black community. Trust was found to be the underlying factor in determining communication between hematologists and Black persons about clinical trials across all three levels.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights how hematologists' attitudes, beliefs, biases, and views on trust in patient relationships influence their communication with Black individuals about clinical trials. It emphasizes the need for further research to develop interventions that address the lack of racial and ethnic diversity in trials.

Empowering minoritized Alabamians screened for lung cancer-The Alabama Lung Cancer Awareness Screening and Education (ALCASE) project

BACKGROUND

In Alabama only 4% of those eligible have been screened for lung cancer. The ALCASE project focused on navigating eligible individuals to lung cancer screening.

METHODS

Trained local staff enrolled screen eligible individuals from seven rural counties and one urban county. Demographics and knowledge of and barriers to lung cancer screening were collected using questionnaires. Education was provided and individuals were navigated to undergo screening. Descriptive statistics for enrolled and screened participants were computed using SAS 9.4. Debriefing interviews were conducted with the ALCASE staff regarding facilitators/barriers to implementing this project and lessons learned. Using NVivo, themes were identified through a combined deductive and inductive process.

RESULTS

In total, 447 people were contacted of which 257 were enrolled. Participants were predominantly African American (86.8%), female (56.8%), and 86.4% had health insurance. Study participants acknowledged the need for more education of lung cancer/screening procedures; help navigating clinics for screening services and having healthcare facilities close to home. The top five barriers to getting screened were transportation, financial issues, emotional concerns, healthcare insurance, and COVID-19. Of the 257, 106 participants (41%) completed a primary care referral and were screened for lung cancer. Debriefing interviews revealed: (i) Overall impressions of implementing ALCASE were positive. (ii) Barriers in implementing ALCASE were identified predominantly at the physician and institutional level. (iii) Facilitators in implementing ALCASE were identified at multiple levels. (iv) Suggestions on improving lung cancer screening leaned toward mitigating barriers at the institutional and structural level.

CONCLUSION

Ability to get screened is severely challenged by both personal and structural barriers.

Exploring Racial Disparities in Awareness and Perceptions of Oncology Clinical Trials: Cross-Sectional Analysis of Baseline Data From the mychoice Study

BACKGROUND

Black/African American adults are underrepresented in oncology clinical trials in the United States, despite efforts at narrowing this disparity.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to explore differences in how Black/African American oncology patients perceive clinical trials to improve support for the clinical trial participation decision-making process.

METHODS

As part of a larger randomized controlled trial, a total of 244 adult oncology patients receiving active treatment or follow-up care completed a cross-sectional baseline survey on sociodemographic characteristics, clinical trial knowledge, health literacy, perceptions of cancer clinical trials, patient activation, patient advocacy, health care self-efficacy, decisional conflict, and clinical trial intentions. Self-reported race was dichotomized into Black/African American and non-Black/African American. As appropriate, 2-tailed t tests and chi-square tests of independence were used to examine differences between groups.

RESULTS

Black/African American participants had lower clinical trial knowledge (P=.006), lower health literacy (P<.001), and more medical mistrust (all P values <.05) than non-Black/African American participants. While intentions to participate in a clinical trial, if offered, did not vary between Black/African American and non-Black/African American participants, Black/African American participants indicated lower awareness of clinical trials, fewer benefits of clinical trials, and more uncertainty around clinical trial decision-making (all P values <.05). There were no differences for other variables.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite no significant differences in intent to participate in a clinical trial if offered and high overall trust in individual health care providers among both groups, beliefs persist about barriers to and benefits of clinical trial participation among Black/African American patients. Findings highlight specific ways that education and resources about clinical trials could be tailored to better suit the informational and decision-making needs and preferences of Black/African American oncology patients.

Race and ethnicity expression in reproductive endocrinology and infertility research studies compared with other obstetrics and gynecology subspecialty studies

Objective

To compare the percentage of patients per race and ethnicity group in the most cited reproductive endocrinology and infertility studies with the most cited studies in 3 other obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) subspecialties: gynecologic oncology, urogynecology (URO), and maternal-fetal medicine.

Design

Retrospective cohort study.

Setting

Not applicable.

Patients

Patients previously recruited in research studies.

Interventions

None.

Main Outcome Measures

Expression of minorities in research studies.

Results

Individual searches were conducted for the most cited articles in OBGYN subspecialties until 50 studies met the inclusion criteria for each OBGYN subspecialty. A total of 29,821,148 patients were included and compared between subspecialty and US Census data. Reproductive endocrinology and infertility studies had the highest percentage of White patients (80.5%), although URO studies had fewer Black patients (6.6%) compared with other subspecialties. Reproductive endocrinology and infertility studies had the lowest percentage of Hispanic patients (4.9%), yet more Asian patients were present in URO studies (3.3%) than in other subspecialties. Gynecologic oncology studies were most likely to have missing data in race expression (19.3%). Comparing study types, retrospective studies had the highest percentage of White patients (61.9%), although randomized controlled trials had the lowest expression of Hispanic patients (8.8%).

Conclusions

Reproductive endocrinology and infertility studies featured the highest rates of White patients compared with other OBGYN subspecialty studies, although URO studies had the lowest rates of Black patients. Randomized controlled trials featured higher rates of White patients and lower levels of Hispanic patients compared with US Census data.

Inclusivity of patients in early phase breast cancer clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

Studies have shown that certain groups of patients are underrepresented in clinical trials including non-Caucasian ethnicity, poor fluency in English, low socioeconomic status, older age, neurodivergence, and large Body Mass Index (BMI). There is a need to ensure adequate representation of these groups so that the results of any trial accurately reflect the population. The aim of this study was to review the pathway of patients recruited into two early phase breast cancer clinical and determine the inclusivity of patients from the aforementioned sub-groups.

METHODS

The Breast Cancer Research Database was reviewed, and the characteristics of all patients who were screened for eligibility in two early phase clinical trials was examined. The English Indices of Deprivation was used to populate the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) for each patient using their postcode.

RESULTS

In total, 392 patients were eligible to participate, between September 2020 to May 2023. Of these, 144 (36.7 %) were recruited to these two trials. In all, 100 % of patients eligible for these trials were approached and screened for participation. Eligible patients had a mean age of 53.5 years. Recruited patients were younger on average than those not recruited (49.1 years vs 56.0 years, p<0.0001). Only one recruited patient required an interpreter, compared with 24 (9.7 %%) of those who were not recruited (p<0.001). There was no difference in the IMD (p=0.38), BMI (p=0.34) and neurodiversity (p=0.10) between patients recruited into clinical trials and those who were not.

CONCLUSION

Older age and poor fluency in the English language remain barriers to participation in early-phase clinical trials despite implementing a clear pathway to trial recruitment. There is a pressing need to address these barriers by raising awareness, improve appropriate training and providing comprehensive trial information to patients in the language of their choice.

Factors Influencing Interest and Engagement in Biomedical Research Among Community Medicine Residents in India: A Descriptive Cross-Sectional Study

Introduction Medical science must be based on sound and scientific evidence and requires continuous research. Engaging in research allows students and faculty to explore new frontiers, question existing paradigms, and discover innovative solutions to medical challenges. As a specialty, community medicine plays a pivotal role in addressing public health issues. However, the engagement of community medicine residents in biomedical research remains suboptimal, which may impede the generation of evidence-based practices tailored to the Indian context. This study was conducted to find the interest and engagement of community medicine residents, and factors influencing their interest in biomedical research. Methods An online survey was conducted among community medicine residents of Uttar Pradesh, from February to April 2024, using Google Forms having a semi-structured, pretested questionnaire. Results One hundred and ninety-six residents participated in the study, where females (52.6%; 103/196) outnumbered males (47.4%; 93/196). The majority of participants were third-year residents (40.8%). Most participants seemed interested in biomedical research (83.2%) and thought that Basic Course in Biomedical Research (BCBR) helps conduct research projects (75%). Around half had previous experience in research projects, with cross-sectional studies being the most common (75.9%) study design. Enhancing research skills and a desire to contribute to medical knowledge emerged as primary motivators. On the other hand, the lack of time due to being overburdened with academic and educational activities was seen as the most common barrier to conducting research. Conclusions The majority of participants were found interested in research activities. The opportunity to improve research skills, desire to serve the medical fraternity, and a positive impact on resumes were the leading motivating factors for conducting research. Difficulty in sparing time, little knowledge, and poor support from mentors were found as important barriers.

Mitigating disparity?: Treatment patterns, survival, and recurrence rates by race, ethnicity, and hospital site across a large urban health system

Objective

National data have shown worse endometrial cancer (EC) outcomes among racial and ethnic minorities. We aimed to analyze EC patient outcomes within a large urban academic health system, with a focus on patterns of care and recurrence rates.

Methods

This was a retrospective chart review of EC patients at three system hospitals from 1/1/07-12/31/17. Demographic and clinical factors, including time from EMB to surgery, rate of chemotherapy completion, persistent or recurrent disease, and palliative care referrals were extracted. Descriptive statistics and survival curves were generated. Analysis was done using SAS version 9.4.

Results

Black patients had lower overall survival compared to all others on univariate analysis only (p < 0.0001). Hospital site was associated with OS, with the academic anchor and satellite 1 having higher rates of all-cause mortality compared to satellite 2 (HR 4.68 academic anchor, 95 % CI 1.72-12.76, HR 5.36 satellite 1, 95 % CI 1.85-15.52). Time from EMB to surgery and rates of persistent disease following primary treatment were higher in Black patients. After adjusting for stage and grade, chemotherapy completion rate was significantly associated with race. Palliative care was utilized more for Black than White patients after adjusting for stage and grade (p = 0.005).

Conclusions

Racial disparities in EC are caused by a complex web of interconnected factors that ultimately lead to worse outcomes in Black women. While precision medicine has helped to close the gap, social determinants of health should be addressed, and models focusing on the complex interactions between biologic, genetic, and social factors should be utilized.

Increasing Clinical Trial Participation of Black Women Diagnosed with Breast Cancer

Despite racial disparities in breast cancer mortality, Black women remain underrepresented in clinical trials. In this mixed methods research, 48 Black women were engaged via focus group discussions and in-depth interviews to better understand the lived experience of women with breast cancer. The results of this qualitative study informed the development of a subsequent online survey to identify barriers, motivators, and other factors that influence decision-making by Black women diagnosed with breast cancer when considering clinical trial participation. Among the 257 Black survey participants, most (95%) were aware of clinical trials; of those, most viewed them as lifesaving (81%) and/or benefiting others (90%). Negative perceptions such as serious side effects (58%), not receiving real treatment (52%), or risk of potential harm (62%) were indicated. Barriers included financial expenses (49%), concerns that their condition could be made worse (29%), that they would receive a placebo (28%), or that treatment was unapproved (28%). Participants were more likely than their health care providers (HCPs) to initiate discussions of clinical trials (53% versus 33%), and 29% of participants indicated a need for more information about risks and benefits, even after having those conversations. The most trustworthy sources of information on clinical trials were HCPs (66%) and breast cancer support groups (64%). These results suggest that trusted communities are key for providing education on clinical trials. However, there is also a need for HCPs to proactively discuss clinical trials with patients to ensure that they are adequately informed about all aspects of participation.

Impact of race and ethnicity on early mortality in multiple myeloma: a SEER analysis

Over the past two decades, there have been significant advances in the treatment of multiple myeloma which has led to an improvement in overall survival.1,2 However, a notable proportion of patients continue to experience early mortality (EM), defined as 2 years from the time of diagnosis. This raises the possibility that improvements in myeloma survival have not extended equally to all groups. Using the latest data drawn from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database of patients in the United States spanning 2000-2019, we study impact of important sociodemographic factors on EM. Through regression modeling, we demonstrate that patients diagnosed from 2000-2005, of older age, male sex, and of certain racial minority status (non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic) have higher odds of EM. Of these factors, minority status contributed to worse 2-year overall survival as well. We evaluate whether income, as a surrogate to access to care, could potentially explain this finding, but find that race has a distinct relationship with EM that is not modified by income. This is further reinforced by subgroup analysis. After characterizing groups vulnerable to EM, we examine reasons for these disparities and potential avenues to address them.

Racial and ethnic disparities in knowledge, attitudes, and invitation to participate in clinical trials among cancer survivors in the United States: An analysis of the 2020 U.S. HINTS

Background

Despite the use of clinical trials to provide gold-standard evidence of cancer treatment and intervention effectiveness, racial/ethnic minorities are frequently underrepresented participants. Our objective was to evaluate racial/ethnic differences in knowledge and attitudes towards clinical trials among U.S. cancer survivors.

Methods

We leveraged the 2020 Health Informational National Trends Survey (HINTS) data (February-June 2020), which is a weighted, nationally representative survey of 3865 adults (≥18 years), including cancer survivors. We descriptively evaluated cancer survivor's (n = 553) knowledge of clinical trials, and trusted sources of information regarding clinical trials. Using Poisson regression, we estimated predictors of self-reported knowledge of clinical trials.

Results

Among cancer survivors, 82 % were NH-White and 60 % self-reported to at least have some knowledge about clinical trials. When asked about factors that would influence their decision to participate in clinical trials, participants across racial groups frequently chose "I would want to get better" and "If the standard care was not covered by my insurance." NH-White (76 %), NH-Black (78 %), and Hispanic/Latinx (77 %) cancer survivors reported their trusted source of information about clinical trials was their health care provider; NH-Asian cancer survivors reported their health care provider (51 %) as well as government health agencies (30 %) as trusted sources. Cancer survivors with only a high school degree were less likely to have any knowledge of clinical trials compared to those with a Baccalaureate degree or more (aPR:0.61;95 % CI:0.45-0.83).

Conclusion

Health care providers are a trusted source of clinical trial information.

A health equity framework to support the next generation of cancer population simulation models

Over the past 2 decades, population simulation modeling has evolved as an effective public health tool for surveillance of cancer trends and estimation of the impact of screening and treatment strategies on incidence and mortality, including documentation of persistent cancer inequities. The goal of this research was to provide a framework to support the next generation of cancer population simulation models to identify leverage points in the cancer control continuum to accelerate achievement of equity in cancer care for minoritized populations. In our framework, systemic racism is conceptualized as the root cause of inequity and an upstream influence acting on subsequent downstream events, which ultimately exert physiological effects on cancer incidence and mortality and competing comorbidities. To date, most simulation models investigating racial inequity have used individual-level race variables. Individual-level race is a proxy for exposure to systemic racism, not a biological construct. However, single-level race variables are suboptimal proxies for the multilevel systems, policies, and practices that perpetuate inequity. We recommend that future models designed to capture relationships between systemic racism and cancer outcomes replace or extend single-level race variables with multilevel measures that capture structural, interpersonal, and internalized racism. Models should investigate actionable levers, such as changes in health care, education, and economic structures and policies to increase equity and reductions in health-care-based interpersonal racism. This integrated approach could support novel research approaches, make explicit the effects of different structures and policies, highlight data gaps in interactions between model components mirroring how factors act in the real world, inform how we collect data to model cancer equity, and generate results that could inform policy.

Patient navigation across the cancer care continuum: An overview of systematic reviews and emerging literature

Patient navigation is a strategy for overcoming barriers to reduce disparities and to improve access and outcomes. The aim of this umbrella review was to identify, critically appraise, synthesize, and present the best available evidence to inform policy and planning regarding patient navigation across the cancer continuum. Systematic reviews examining navigation in cancer care were identified in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), Epistemonikos, and Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) databases and in the gray literature from January 1, 2012, to April 19, 2022. Data were screened, extracted, and appraised independently by two authors. The JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Review and Research Syntheses was used for quality appraisal. Emerging literature up to May 25, 2022, was also explored to capture primary research published beyond the coverage of included systematic reviews. Of the 2062 unique records identified, 61 systematic reviews were included. Fifty-four reviews were quantitative or mixed-methods reviews, reporting on the effectiveness of cancer patient navigation, including 12 reviews reporting costs or cost-effectiveness outcomes. Seven qualitative reviews explored navigation needs, barriers, and experiences. In addition, 53 primary studies published since 2021 were included. Patient navigation is effective in improving participation in cancer screening and reducing the time from screening to diagnosis and from diagnosis to treatment initiation. Emerging evidence suggests that patient navigation improves quality of life and patient satisfaction with care in the survivorship phase and reduces hospital readmission in the active treatment and survivorship care phases. Palliative care data were extremely limited. Economic evaluations from the United States suggest the potential cost-effectiveness of navigation in screening programs.

Improving Access to Cancer Clinical Trials for Patients From Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Backgrounds in Australia: A Survey of Clinical and Research Professionals

PURPOSE

Patients with cancer from racial and ethnic minorities, referred to as culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) in Australia, are significantly under-represented in cancer clinical trials. We performed a national survey of the Australian cancer clinical trials workforce to determine barriers and preferred solutions to address this inequity.

METHODS

A 15-item online survey containing both closed- and open-ended purpose-designed questions was created using REDCap. The survey was emailed to members of the Clinical Oncology Society of Australia, Medical Oncology Group of Australia, and Australian cancer cooperative trial groups, and promoted via Twitter. Descriptive analyses summarized quantitative data, and free-text entries underwent thematic analysis with NVivo Version 12.

RESULTS

Ninety one respondents completed the survey-with representation across Australia. Eighty-seven percent were directly involved in clinical trial recruitment. Sixty-eight percent were clinicians. Seventy-four percent of respondents did not collect routine data on CALD patient enrollment to cancer clinical trials. Communication (eg, lack of translated materials) and opportunity-related barriers (eg, exclusionary trial protocols) were the most frequently perceived barriers to recruitment. Additionally, qualitative analysis indicated that insufficient consultation time and difficulties accessing interpreters for patients with non-English language preference were significant barriers. Trial navigators and a generic cancer trial pamphlet available in multiple languages were judged the most likely solutions to improve recruitment.

CONCLUSION

This study articulates the Australian clinical trials workforce's perspective on current barriers and potential solutions to the under-representation of patients from CALD backgrounds on cancer clinical trials. The insights and solutions from this survey provide steps toward achieving equity in Australian cancer clinical trials.

Maintaining High-Touch in High-Tech Digital Health Monitoring and Multi-Omics Prognostication: Ethical, Equity, and Societal Considerations in Precision Health for Palliative Care

Advances in digital health, systems biology, environmental monitoring, and artificial intelligence (AI) continue to revolutionize health care, ushering a precision health future. More than disease treatment and prevention, precision health aims at maintaining good health throughout the lifespan. However, how can precision health impact care for people with a terminal or life-limiting condition? We examine here the ethical, equity, and societal/relational implications of two precision health modalities, (1) integrated systems biology/multi-omics analysis for disease prognostication and (2) digital health technologies for health status monitoring and communication. We focus on three main ethical and societal considerations: benefits and risks associated with integration of these modalities into the palliative care system; inclusion of underrepresented and marginalized groups in technology development and deployment; and the impact of high-tech modalities on palliative care's highly personalized and "high-touch" practice. We conclude with 10 recommendations for ensuring that precision health technologies, such as multi-omics prognostication and digital health monitoring, for palliative care are developed, tested, and implemented ethically, inclusively, and equitably.

Advancing Equity in Cancer Research: Opportunities for Sponsors, Institutions, and Investigators

Numerous studies have documented patient-level barriers to research participation that are often connected to social determinants of health. As described in this paper, to significantly move the needle toward greater diversity and inclusion in cancer research, it will take a full commitment to integrating an equity lens across the cancer research ecosystem, specifically among sponsors, institutions, and investigators.

How to set up a clinical research center in Brazil, as an example of a middle-income country

In health care, innovation is a core part of the process that pushes advances forward. Drug and device development follow a step-by-step process from the discovery of a molecule to the final product. While patent filing and preclinical studies are usually performed by academic centers or start-ups, the clinical development is usually performed by pharmaceutical companies. To assess safety, efficacy and fulfil regulatory demands, clinical trials must be performed in sequential Phase I, II, and III stages prior to market access. In this context, clinical research centers have been established around the globe, also outside traditional academic centers, aiming to increase the access for patients to participate in clinical trials and the capacity for clinical development. The increasing number of clinical trial sites across the world, gives pharmaceutical companies, investigators and developers an improved access to properly test the exponentially increasing number of potential medicinal products and treatment approaches in trials in different parts of the world. Historically, Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMIC) did not significantly take part in clinical trial development. As participation in all steps of clinical research provides earlier access to novel treatment options in LMIC along with creating data on efficacy and toxicity within more diverse populations, it is warranted to improve clinical trial access in LMIC. With the goal to provide input on how to tackle the challenges during the built of a clinical research center, we here describe the experience from setting up a clinical trial unit within a private hospital network in Brasília, Brazil, a Middle-Income country, to provide inspiration, "how to" knowledge and a recipe for those with a similar road ahead in LMIC.

Education, incident cancer, and rate of memory decline in a national sample of US adults in mid-to-later-life

INTRODUCTION

Middle-aged and older adults who develop cancer experience memory loss following diagnosis, but memory decline in the years before and after cancer diagnosis is slower compared to their cancer-free counterparts. Educational attainment strongly predicts memory function during aging, but it is unclear whether education protects against memory loss related to cancer incidence or modifies long-term memory trajectories in middle-aged and older cancer survivors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data were from 14,449 adults (3,248 with incident cancer, excluding non-melanoma skin cancer) aged 50+ in the population-based US Health and Retirement Study from 1998 to 2016. Memory was assessed every two years as a composite of immediate and delayed word recall tests and proxy assessments for impaired individuals. Memory scores all time points were standardized at to the baseline distribution. Using multivariate-adjusted linear mixed-effects models, we estimated rates of memory decline in the years before cancer diagnosis, shortly after diagnosis, and in the years after diagnosis. We compared rates of memory decline between incident cancer cases and age-matched cancer-free adults, overall and according to level of education (<12 years, "low"; 12 to <16 years, "intermediate"; ≥16 years, "high").

RESULTS

Incident cancer diagnoses were followed by short-term declines in memory averaging 0.06 standard deviation (SD) units (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.084, -0.036). Those with low education experienced the strongest magnitude of short-term decline in memory after diagnosis (-0.10 SD units, 95% CI: -0.15, -0.05), but this estimate was not statistically significantly different from the short-term decline in memory experienced by those with high education (-0.04 SD units, 95% CI: -0.08, 0.01; p-value for education as an effect modifier = 0.15). In the years prior to and following an incident cancer diagnosis, higher educational attainment was associated with better memory, but it did not modify the difference in rate of long-term memory decline between cancer survivors and those who remained cancer-free.

DISCUSSION

Education was associated with better memory function over time among both cancer survivors and cancer-free adults aged 50 and over. Low education may be associated with a stronger short-term decline in memory after a cancer diagnosis.

Multimodal data fusion for cancer biomarker discovery with deep learning

Technological advances now make it possible to study a patient from multiple angles with high-dimensional, high-throughput multi-scale biomedical data. In oncology, massive amounts of data are being generated ranging from molecular, histopathology, radiology to clinical records. The introduction of deep learning has significantly advanced the analysis of biomedical data. However, most approaches focus on single data modalities leading to slow progress in methods to integrate complementary data types. Development of effective multimodal fusion approaches is becoming increasingly important as a single modality might not be consistent and sufficient to capture the heterogeneity of complex diseases to tailor medical care and improve personalised medicine. Many initiatives now focus on integrating these disparate modalities to unravel the biological processes involved in multifactorial diseases such as cancer. However, many obstacles remain, including lack of usable data as well as methods for clinical validation and interpretation. Here, we cover these current challenges and reflect on opportunities through deep learning to tackle data sparsity and scarcity, multimodal interpretability, and standardisation of datasets.

Clinical trial participation predicts improved survival in older adults receiving allogeneic blood and marrow transplant

BACKGROUND

Older adults represent a large oncologic demographic and are under-represented within oncology research despite constituting nearly two-thirds of the oncologic population in the United States. Because many social factors influence research participation, those who enroll in research do not reflect the oncology population at large, introducing bias and creating issue with external validity of studies. The same factors that influence study enrollment may also impact cancer outcomes, meaning that those who enroll in studies may already have an improved chance of cancer survival, further skewing results of these studies. This study evaluates characteristics that influence study enrollment in older adults and explore to what degree these factors may influence survival after allogeneic blood or marrow transplantation.

METHODS

This retrospective comparison study evaluates 63 adults aged 60 and above undergoing allogenic transplantation at one institution. Patients who elected and declined enrollment in a non-therapeutic observational study were evaluated. Demographic and clinical characteristics between groups were compared and assessed as predictors of transplant survival, including decision to enroll in the study.

RESULTS

Participants who chose to enroll in the parent study were not different with regard to gender, race/ethnicity, age, insurance type, donor age, and neighborhood income/poverty level compared to patients who were invited to participate but declined enrollment. The research participant group had higher proportion assessed as being fully active (23.8% vs. 12.7%, p = 0.034) and lower mean comorbidity scores (1.0 vs 2.47, p = 0.008). Enrollment in an observational study independently predicted transplant survival (HR = 0.316, 95% CI 0.12-0.82, p = 0.017). When controlling for relevant confounders of disease severity, comorbidities, and transplant age, enrolling in the parent study was associated with a lower hazards of death following transplant (HR = 0.302, 95% CI 0.10-0.87, p = 0.027).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite being demographically comparable, persons who enrolled in one non-therapeutic transplant study had significantly improved survivorship than those who did not participate in observational research. These findings suggest that there are unidentified factors that influence study involvement that may also impact disease survivorship, over-estimating outcomes from these studies. Results from prospective observational studies should be interpreted with the consideration that study participants have an improved chance of survival at baseline.

Diversity of Participation in Clinical Trials and Influencing Factors: Findings from the Health Information National Trends Survey 2020

BACKGROUND

Clinical trial diversity is critical to advance health and health equity. Research addressing the discrepancy between goals of achieving clinical trial diversity and realities of study enrollment remains underdeveloped.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to examine the association between race/ethnicity and clinical trial invitation, participation, knowledge, and sources of influence on clinical trial participation.

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

A cross-sectional, observational study using nationally representative data from 3689 US adults (≥ 18 years of age) who responded to the Health Information National Trends Survey fielded from February 24 to June 15, 2020.

MAIN MEASURES

Primary outcomes included clinical trial invitation, participation, knowledge, and sources of influence on participation. The independent variable of interest is self-reported race/ethnicity.

KEY RESULTS

Respondents identifying as non-Hispanic Black (relative to non-Hispanic White) had higher odds of being invited into a clinical trial (adjusted odds ratio: 2.0, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.1, 3.7), but no differences in odds of participation were observed by race/ethnicity. Respondents from all races/ethnicities reported that personal healthcare providers were the most trusted source of clinical trial information. Hispanic (marginal effect (ME): - 0.09; 95% CI: - 0.16, - 0.03), non-Hispanic Black (ME: - 0.11; 95% CI: - 0.18, - 0.04), and non-Hispanic other (ME: - 0.11; 95% CI: - 0.19, - 0.02) respondents had lower odds than non-Hispanic White respondents of saying they would be influenced "a lot" by their doctor encouraging participation. Non-Hispanic Black respondents had significantly lower odds (relative to non-Hispanic White) of indicating family encouragement would influence their clinical trial participation decision "a lot" (ME: - 0.09; 95%: CI: - 0.14, - 0.03).

CONCLUSION

While personal healthcare providers were trusted sources of information, racial/ethnic minority populations noted lower odds of clinical trial participation influence from providers and family. Thus, it is imperative for the healthcare, government, and industry organizations to build trust in medicine and science.

Enrollment of Racial and Ethnic Minoritized Groups in Gynecologic Oncology Clinical Trials: A Review of the Scope of the Problem, Contributing Factors, and Strategies to Improve Inclusion

Racial inequities are well-documented across the gynecologic oncology care continuum, including the representation of racial and ethnic minoritized groups (REMGs) in gynecologic oncology clinical trials. We specifically reviewed the scope of REMG disparities, contributing factors, and strategies to improve inclusion. We found systematic and progressively worsening under-enrollment of REMGs, particularly of Black and Latinx populations. In addition, race/ethnicity data reporting is poor, yet a prerequisite for accountability to recruitment goals. Trial participation barriers are multifactorial, and successful remediation likely requires multi-level strategies. More rigorous, transparent data on trial participants and effectiveness studies on REMG recruitment strategies are needed to improve enrollment.

Enhancing Diversity and Inclusion in Clinical Trials

Women and people from most racial and ethnic groups in the United States have historically been under-represented in clinical trials of investigational medical products. Inadequate representation of these groups may lead to an incomplete understanding of the safety and efficacy of new drugs, devices, biologics, and vaccines, and limit the generalizability of trial findings. As a result, new medical products may not be beneficial to all people who need them, and existing inequities in outcomes among various population groups may remain unchanged or worsen, or new disparities may arise. Although much work has focused on study-level strategies, research organizations must make systemic changes to how clinical trials are envisioned and implemented to achieve sustainable support for diversity and inclusion in clinical trials. The Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative (CTTI) conducted interviews with leaders at institutions that conduct clinical trials to explore perspectives on organizational-level practices that promote diversity and inclusion in clinical trials. Leaders described motivations, such as an ethical and moral imperative; organizational practices, such as staff investment and resource allocation; perceived return on investments, such as better science; and deterrents, such as cost and time. The CTTI also convened an expert meeting to discuss the interview findings and provide guidance. We present the interview findings and expert guidance in a framework that describes four key areas-commitment, partnerships, accountability, and resources-on sustaining organizational-level approaches for improving diversity and inclusion in clinical trials, with the ultimate goal of advancing health equity. Institutions who conduct and support clinical trials should implement organizational-level approaches to improve equitable access and diverse patient participation in clinical trials.

Alarming trends and disparities in high-risk endometrial cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize the most recent publications highlighting the trends and disparities among patients diagnosed with high-risk endometrial cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Endometrial cancer mortality continues to rise, driven by the increasing incidence of high-risk histologic subtypes that accounts for a disproportionate number of endometrial cancer deaths. The lack of progress made in endometrial cancer treatment, particularly of high-risk histologic subtypes, disproportionately affects black women who are more likely to be diagnosed with these aggressive tumor types. Even when accounting for high-risk histology, various factors across the spectrum of care may influence the survival disparities between black and white women, including timely access to guideline-concordant care, clinical trial enrollment, and systemic racism that impacts cancer outcomes.

SUMMARY

In this review, we highlight the disproportionate impact of worsening endometrial cancer mortality and healthcare inequalities contributing to the endometrial cancer survival disparity between black and white women.

Oncologist-Reported Barriers and Facilitators to Enrolling Patients in Optimization Trials That Test Less Intense Cancer Treatment

PURPOSE

As outcomes improve in early-stage breast cancer, clinical trials are undergoing a paradigm shift from intensification trials (more therapy) to improve survival to optimization trials, which assess the potential for using less toxic therapy while preserving survival outcomes. However, little is known about physician perspectives in community and academic settings about possible barriers and facilitators that could affect accrual to optimization clinical trials and the generalizability of future findings.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study with semistructured interviews of medical oncologists from different academic and community practices to assess their perspectives on optimization trials. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Three independent coders used a content analysis approach to analyze transcripts using NVivo. Major themes and exemplary quotes were extracted.

RESULTS

All 39 physicians reported that they would enroll patients in optimization clinical trials. Oncologists highlighted specific reasons to consider optimization trials. These included quality-of-life improvement by reducing toxicity, reduction in financial toxicity, fertility preservation, ability to avoid chemotherapy, minimization of overtreatment in patients with comorbid conditions, personalized treatment, opportunities to test novel therapies, and leveraging the availability of targeted therapies. Oncologists also identified accrual barriers, such as tumor-specific biology, individual (host) factors, prognostic markers of risk, access to therapies, provider experience, and system constraints. They voiced recommendations regarding preliminary data, trial design, and tools to support enrollment in optimization trials.

CONCLUSION

Although oncologists are generally willing to enroll patients on optimization clinical trials, barriers affect their acceptance. A scientific focus on overcoming these barriers is needed to support future enrollment on trials tailoring therapy on the basis of risk and potential benefit to allow true personalization of treatment.

Trust and Biomedical Research Engagement of Minority and Under-Represented Communities in Mississippi, USA

Trust is critical to the development and maintenance of effective research collaborations and community engagement. The purpose of this study was to assess the current attitudes and level of trust pertaining to health research among residents of Central Mississippi, the priority health region for the Research Centers in Minority Institutions (RCMI) Center for Health Disparities Research (RCHDR) at Jackson State University. The cross-sectional study was conducted from November 2021 to April 2022. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics carried out by SPSS statistical software. A total of 146 participants responded to the survey. The participants were predominately African American (99%) and female (75%). Historical research studies, the researchers' qualities, and potential benefits from participation were factors affecting the level of trust in the research process. Ninety percent (n = 131) expressed that it was important to be involved in the research process, and 98.5% (n = 144) agreed that discussing the research findings with the participants was important for establishing trust in the research process. While trust in the research process does not guarantee participation, trust is a precursor for those who decide to engage in health disparities research. Key findings will be integrated into the RCHDR research agenda to foster further development and implementation of innovative community-based participatory research toward the control and/or prevention of diseases that disproportionately affect minority and under-represented populations in Mississippi.

Artificial intelligence in pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is the deadliest disease, with a five-year overall survival rate of just 11%. The pancreatic cancer patients diagnosed with early screening have a median overall survival of nearly ten years, compared with 1.5 years for those not diagnosed with early screening. Therefore, early diagnosis and early treatment of pancreatic cancer are particularly critical. However, as a rare disease, the general screening cost of pancreatic cancer is high, the accuracy of existing tumor markers is not enough, and the efficacy of treatment methods is not exact. In terms of early diagnosis, artificial intelligence technology can quickly locate high-risk groups through medical images, pathological examination, biomarkers, and other aspects, then screening pancreatic cancer lesions early. At the same time, the artificial intelligence algorithm can also be used to predict the survival time, recurrence risk, metastasis, and therapy response which could affect the prognosis. In addition, artificial intelligence is widely used in pancreatic cancer health records, estimating medical imaging parameters, developing computer-aided diagnosis systems, etc. Advances in AI applications for pancreatic cancer will require a concerted effort among clinicians, basic scientists, statisticians, and engineers. Although it has some limitations, it will play an essential role in overcoming pancreatic cancer in the foreseeable future due to its mighty computing power.

Development and pilot implementation of guidelines for culturally tailored research recruitment materials for African Americans and Latinos

Background

Previous studies support cultural tailoring of recruitment materials as a strategy to promote the enrollment of minoritized groups in clinical trials. However, there is a lack of guidance for research teams to create culturally tailored materials, potentially contributing to low recruitment rates of minoritized groups. We describe the development and pilot testing of recruitment material guidelines used to culturally tailor clinical trial recruitment materials targeting African Americans and Latinos.

Methods

The guideline development team consisted of investigators, research staff, and community leaders and members experienced in the recruitment and community engagement of minoritized groups. The recruitment material guidelines were developed using the literature, focus groups with African Americans and Latinos, the teams’ research experience, and guidance from a community advisory board. To assess the effectiveness of the guidelines, a pilot study was conducted comparing advertisement click-through rates and enrollment outcomes between two institutions differing in use of culturally tailored versus non-tailored Facebook banner ads for the “Aspirin Dosing: A Patient-centric Trial Assessing Benefits and Long-Term Effectiveness” (ADAPTABLE) study.

Results

Five themes emerged from focus groups: (1) employ diversity and inclusion in recruitment efforts; (2) access multiple recruitment channels to increase reach and possible participation; (3) increase your “footwork”; (4) personalize outreach and recruitment to specific groups’ beliefs and values; (5) align recruitment messaging with language preferences and motivations for study participation; and (6) specify incentives for participation. Guidelines were: 1) be inclusive; 2) use all forms of media; 3) take a personalized approach; 4) align recruitment messaging with motivations for study participation; 5) specify incentives; and 6) get out into the community. Additional guidelines were developed addressing specific considerations for images and language when targeting African American and Latino populations. Pilot study results demonstrated that clicks per impression ratio (0.47 clicks per impression vs. 0.03 clicks per impression) and the percentage of African American enrollment were significantly higher when using tailored compared to non-tailored ads (12.8% vs. 8.3%, respectively).

Conclusion

The recruitment material guidelines offer practical recommendations to reach diverse populations for clinical trial participation more effectively. Our preliminary data supports use of these guidelines as a strategy to enhance recruitment of minoritized groups into clinical research studies.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01724-4.

Rationale and design of Children's Oncology Group (COG) study ACCL20N1CD: financial distress during treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukemia in the United States

BACKGROUND

The study purpose is to describe trajectories of financial distress for parents of children (ages 1-14.9 years) with newly diagnosed acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). The secondary aim is to identify multilevel factors (child, parent, household, treating institution) that influence change in financial distress over time.

METHODS

The study uses a prospective cohort design, repeated measurements, and mixed methods. The settings are Children's Oncology Group (COG) institutions participating in the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP). Eligible participants are English- and/or Spanish-speaking parents or legal guardians (hereafter "parents") of index children. Parents are asked to complete a survey during their child's induction (T1) and maintenance therapy (T2), and near treatment completion (T3). Study surveys include items about (a) the child's cancer and clinical course, (b) parental socio-economic status, financial distress and financial coping behaviors, and (c) household material hardships. At least 15 parents will be invited to participate in an optional semi-structured interview. NCORP institutions that enroll at least one parent must complete an annual survey about institution resources that could influence parental financial distress.

DISCUSSION

The results will inform future interventions to mitigate financial distress for parents of children diagnosed with ALL and could be instructive beyond this disease group.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was initially registered with the NCI Clinical Trial Reporting Program ID: NCI-2021-03,567 on June 16, 2021. The study can be found on clinicaltrials.gov, Identifier NCT04928599 .

Enabling community input to improve equity in and access to translational research: The Community Coalition for Equity in Research

Background:

The COVID vaccine trials illustrated the critical need for the development of mechanisms to serve as a bridge between least advantaged communities and researchers. Such mechanisms would increase the number of studies that are designed with community needs and interests in mind, in ways that will close gaps rather than widen them. This paper reports on the creation of the Community Coalition for Equity in Research, a community-driven resource designed to build community capacity to provide researchers with credible and actionable input on study design and implementation and increase researchers’ understanding of factors that influence community support of research.

Methods and Results:

We provide a description of the Coalition’s structure and process and an evaluation of its first year of operation. Researchers rated their experience very positively and reported that the Coalition’s review will improve their research. Coalition members reported high levels of satisfaction with their participation and the processes set up for them to engage with researchers. Members also largely agreed that their participation has value for their community, and that it has increased their interest in research and the likelihood that they would recommend research participation to others.

Conclusions:

The Coalition represents a model for increasing two-way engagement between researchers and the larger community. We are optimistic that the Coalition will continue to develop and grow into a vibrant entity that will bring value to both investigators and our local communities and will increase the consideration of equity as a foundational principle in all translational research.