Socioeconomic and clinical factors are key to uncovering disparity in accrual onto therapeutic trials for breast cancer

Effects of socioeconomic status on enrollment in clinical trials for cancer: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

To achieve equitable access to cancer clinical trials (CCTs), patients must overcome structural, clinical, and attitudinal barriers to trial enrollment. The goal of this systematic review was to study the relationship between socioeconomic status (SES), assessed either by direct or proxy measures, and CCT enrollment.

METHODS

The review team and medical librarian developed search strategies for each database to identify studies for this systematic review, which was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Inclusion criteria were as follows: studies published in relevant scientific journals between January 2000 and July 2022, primary sources, English literature, and studies conducted in the US. Sixteen studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were reviewed. The risk of bias assessment was conducted independently by two reviewers using the Newcastle Ottawa scale.

RESULTS

The initial search yielded 4070 citations, and 16 studies were included in our review. Four of the studies included used patient reported annual income as a measure of SES, while the remaining 12 studies used patient zip code as a proxy measurement of SES. Consistent with our hypothesis, 13 studies showed a positive association between high SES (patient-reported or proxy measurement) and CCT enrollment. Two studies showed a negative association, and one study showed no relationship.

CONCLUSIONS

The existing literature suggests that low SES is associated with lower participation in CCT. The small number of studies identified on this topic highlights the need for additional research on SES and other barriers to CCT participation.

Socioeconomic Barriers to Randomized Clinical Trial Retention in Patients Treated With Adjuvant Radiation for Early-Stage Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

Socioeconomic barriers contribute to breast cancer clinical trial enrollment disparities. We sought to identify whether socioeconomic disadvantage also is associated with decreased trial retention.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We performed a secondary analysis of 253 (of 287) patients enrolled in a randomized phase 3 trial of conventionally fractionated versus hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation. The outcome of trial retention versus dropout was defined primarily based on whether the patient completed breast cosmesis outcomes assessment at 3-year follow-up, and secondarily, at 5-year follow-up. Associations of retention with severity of socioeconomic disadvantage, quantified by patients' home neighborhood area deprivation index (ADI) rank (1 [least] to 100 [most deprivation]), were tested using the Kruskal-Wallis test and multivariate logistic regression. Associations of retention with patients' use of social resource assistance were analyzed using the χ² test.

RESULTS

In total, 21.7% (n = 55) of patients dropped out by 3 years and 36.7% (n = 92) by 5 years. Median ADI was 36.5 (interquartile range, 22-57) for retained and 46.0 (interquartile range, 29-60) for dropout patients. Dropout was associated with more severe socioeconomic deprivation (ADI ≥45 vs <45) at 3 years (odds ratio, 3.63; 95% confidence interval, 1.62-8.15; P = .002) and 5 years (odds ratio, 2.55; 95% confidence interval, 1.37-4.76; P = .003). While on study, patients who ultimately dropped out were more likely to require resource assistance for practical (transportation, housing, financial) than psychological needs (distress, grief) or advance care planning (P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, ADI was associated with disparities in clinical trial retention of patients with breast cancer receiving adjuvant radiation treatment. Results suggest that developing multidimensional interventions that extend beyond routine social determinants needs screening are needed, not only to enhance initial clinical trial access and enrollment but also to enable robust long-term retention of socioeconomically disadvantaged patients and improve the validity and generalizability of reported long-term trial clinical and patient-reported outcomes.

Health Literacy and Clinical Trial Participation in French Cancer Patients: A National Survey

Few studies have explored the relationship between health literacy (HL) and trial participation. In this context, we aimed to study this relationship in French cancer patients. We used data from the French national VIe après le CANcer (VICAN) survey. Two questionnaire items focused on previous invitations to participate in clinical trials and subsequent enrollment. The Single Item Literacy Screener was used to measure functional HL. In total, 1954 cancer patients responded to both VICAN surveys (two and five years after diagnosis). Mean age was 54.1 ± 12.7 years at diagnosis, and 37.6% were classified as having limited HL. One in ten (10.3%) respondents reported having been previously invited to participate in a clinical trial. Of these, 75.5% had enrolled. Limited HL was associated with fewer trial invitations but not with enrollment once invited. Multivariate analysis confirmed the negative effect of limited HL on clinical trial invitation (adjOR = 0.55 (0.39 to 0.77), p < 0.001) after adjustment for multiple characteristics. Patients with limited HL received fewer invitations to participate in trials but were likely to enroll when asked. Addressing HL is necessary to create a more inclusive health system and to reduce inequalities not only in access to innovative cancer care, but to health inequalities in general.

Breast Cancer Disparities and the COVID-19 Pandemic

Purpose of Review

The COVID-19 pandemic has placed unprecedented challenges on breast cancer patients and health care providers. The impact of the pandemic on preexisting breast cancer disparities remains unknown but is projected to have adverse outcomes.

Recent Findings

Early work has demonstrated that pandemic-related temporary suspensions in breast cancer screening, interruption of clinical trials, and treatment delays have an adverse impact on breast cancer patient outcomes and may worsen disparities.

Summary

In this review, we highlight existing knowledge regarding breast cancer disparities and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Strategies for mitigating disparities moving forward include targeted research evaluating race-specific outcomes, targeted education for providers regarding breast health disparities, improved access to telehealth, maintenance of patient navigation programs, and patient education regarding the safety and necessity of enrollment in clinical trials.

Discrete choice experiment (DCE) to quantify the influence of trial features on the decision to participate in cystic fibrosis (CF) clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

Engaging people with cystic fibrosis (CF) in clinical trials is critical to improving outcomes for this fatal disease. Following extensive exploration of engagement in CF trials we believe six key concepts require a quantitative understanding of their influence in the current CF trials landscape including how controversial issues like placebos, washouts, stipend provision and location of trial visits are viewed by the CF community and how these might be modified depending on the type of medicine being investigated and the mechanism of access to the drug on trial completion.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We have designed and will administer an online discrete choice experiment to elicit and quantify preferences of people with CF for these trials' attributes and estimate the relative importance of an attribute when choosing to participate in a trial. The cross-sectional data generated will be explored using conditional multinomial logit model. Mixed logit models such as the random-parameters logit and a latent class models will be used to explore preference heterogeneity. To determine the relative importance of an attribute, the difference between the attribute level with the highest preference weight and the level with the lowest preference weight will be calculated.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Imperial College London Joint Research Compliance Office has granted ethical approval for this study. Patient consent will be sought following full explanation. No identifying information will be collected. Dissemination will be via international conferences, peer-review publication and patient accessible forums. Major CF trials networks have agreed to incorporate our findings into their review process, meaning our results can realistically influence and optimise CF trial delivery.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020184886.

Physician Experiences and Understanding of Genomic Sequencing in Oncology

The amount of information produced by genomic sequencing is vast, technically complicated, and can be difficult to interpret. Appropriately tailoring genomic information for non-geneticists is an essential next step in the clinical use of genomic sequencing. To initiate development of a framework for genomic results communication, we conducted eighteen qualitative interviews with oncologists who had referred adult cancer patients to a matched tumor-normal tissue genomic sequencing study. In our qualitative analysis, we found varied levels of clinician knowledge relating to sequencing technology, the scope of the tumor genomic sequencing study, and incidental germline findings. Clinicians expressed a perceived need for more genetics education. Additionally, they had a variety of suggestions for improving results reports and possible resources to aid in results interpretation. Most clinicians felt genetic counselors were needed when incidental germline findings were identified. Our research suggests that more consistent genetics education is imperative in ensuring the proper utilization of genomic sequencing in cancer care. Clinician suggestions for results interpretation resources and results report modifications could be used to improve communication. Clinicians' perceived need to involve genetic counselors when incidental germline findings were found suggests genetic specialists could play a critical role in ensuring patients receive appropriate follow-up.