27
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Magnitude of Structural, Clinical, and Physician and Patient Barriers to Cancer Clinical Trial Participation

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Barriers to cancer clinical trial participation have been the subject of frequent study, but the rate of trial participation has not changed substantially over time. Studies often emphasize patient-related barriers, but other types of barriers may have greater impact on trial participation. Our goal was to examine the magnitude of different domains of trial barriers by synthesizing prior research.

          Methods

          We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that examined the trial decision-making pathway using a uniform framework to characterize and quantify structural (trial availability), clinical (eligibility), and patient/physician barrier domains. The systematic review utilized the PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Ovid Medline search engines. We used random effects to estimate rates of different domains across studies, adjusting for academic vs community care settings.

          Results

          We identified 13 studies (nine in academic and four in community settings) with 8883 patients. A trial was unavailable for patients at their institution 55.6% of the time (95% confidence interval [CI] = 43.7% to 67.3%). Further, 21.5% (95% CI = 10.9% to 34.6%) of patients were ineligible for an available trial, 14.8% (95% CI = 9.0% to 21.7%) did not enroll, and 8.1% (95% CI = 6.3% to 10.0%) enrolled. Rates of trial enrollment in academic (15.9% [95% CI = 13.8% to 18.2%]) vs community (7.0% [95% CI = 5.1% to 9.1%]) settings differed, but not rates of trial unavailability, ineligibility, or non-enrollment.

          Conclusions

          These findings emphasize the enormous need to address structural and clinical barriers to trial participation, which combined make trial participation unachievable for more than three of four cancer patients.

          Related collections

          Most cited references50

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Barriers to recruiting underrepresented populations to cancer clinical trials: a systematic review.

          Racial and ethnic minorities, older adults, rural residents, and individuals of low socioeconomic status are underrepresented among participants in cancer-related trials. The authors conducted a systematic review to determine the barriers to participation of underrepresented populations in cancer-related trials. Their search included English-language publications that reported original data on the recruitment of underrepresented groups to cancer treatment or prevention trials between 1966 and December 2005 in multiple electronic databases. They also hand-searched titles in 34 journals from January 2003 to December 2005 and they examined reference lists for eligible articles. Titles and abstracts were reviewed to identify relevant studies. Data on barriers to participation were synthesized both qualitatively and based on statistically significant associations with trial enrollment. Of 5257 studies that were cited, 65 studies were eligible for inclusion in the current analysis, including 46 studies on recruitment into cancer therapeutic trials, 15 studies on recruitment into prevention trials, and 4 studies on recruitment into both prevention and treatment trials. Numerous factors were reported as barriers to participation in cancer-related trials. However, only 20 of the studies reported statistically significant associations between hypothesized barriers and enrollment. The available evidence had limitations in quality regarding representativeness, justification of study methods, the reliability and validity of data-collection methods, potential for bias, and data analysis. The results indicated that underrepresented populations face numerous barriers to participation in cancer-related trials. The current systematic review highlighting the literature on recruitment of underrepresented populations to cancer trials and may be used as the evidence base toward developing an agenda for etiologic and intervention research to reduce the disparities in participation in cancer-related trials.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Barriers to participation in randomised controlled trials: a systematic review.

            A systematic review of three bibliographic databases from 1986 to 1996 identified 78 papers reporting barriers to recruitment of clinicians and patients to randomised controlled trials. Clinician barriers included: time constraints, lack of staff and training, worry about the impact on the doctor-patient relationship, concern for patients, loss of professional autonomy, difficulty with the consent procedure, lack of rewards and recognition, and an insufficiently interesting question. Patient barriers included: additional demands of the trial, patient preferences, worry caused by uncertainty, and concerns about information and consent. To overcome barriers to clinician recruitment, the trial should address an important research question and the protocol and data collection should be as straightforward as possible. The demands on clinicians and patients should be kept to a minimum. Dedicated research staff may be required to support clinical staff and patients. The recruitment aspects of a randomised controlled trial should be carefully planned and piloted. Further work is needed to quantify the extent of problems associated with clinician and patient participation, and proper evaluation is required of strategies to overcome barriers.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

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

              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. 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. 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. 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.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Natl Cancer Inst
                J. Natl. Cancer Inst
                jnci
                JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute
                Oxford University Press
                0027-8874
                1460-2105
                March 2019
                19 February 2019
                19 February 2019
                : 111
                : 3
                : 245-255
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
                [2 ]SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA
                [3 ]Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY
                [4 ]National Cancer Institute, Division of Cancer Prevention, Rockville, MD
                [5 ]American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network Inc., Washington, DC
                Author notes
                Correspondence to: Joseph M. Unger, PhD, MS, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Ave N, M3-C102, PO Box19024, Seattle, WA 98109-1024 ( junger@ 123456fredhutch.org ).
                Article
                djy221
                10.1093/jnci/djy221
                6410951
                30856272
                e83b92a8-4d35-45e4-bf73-41e998776039
                © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com

                History
                : 21 June 2018
                : 29 October 2018
                : 29 November 2018
                Page count
                Pages: 11
                Funding
                Funded by: National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health
                Award ID: UG1CA189974
                Categories
                Reviews

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                Oncology & Radiotherapy

                Comments

                Comment on this article