Literature DB >> 12796726

Patient entry into randomized controlled trials of colorectal cancer treatment: factors influencing participation.

Michael J Solomon1, Chet K Pager, Jane M Young, Rachael Roberts, Phyllis Butow.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to investigate willingness to participate in hypothetical surgical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) among patients and clinicians, who answered as if they themselves were patients.
METHODS: We interviewed consecutive patients with colorectal cancer admitted for surgery at a tertiary center in Sydney, Australia. We mailed a questionnaire to all colorectal surgeons and medical oncologists in Australia.
RESULTS: Overall, 42% (95% CI, 32% to 52%) of patients, 44% (95% CI, 29% to 60%) of surgeons, and 63% (95% CI, 53% to 72%) of oncologists were willing to enter a randomized clinical trial. Oncologists were significantly more likely to participate than either surgeons (P <.001) or patients (P =.001). No significant associations were seen between willingness to participate and patient characteristics. "Risk of cancer recurrence" was rated by the most patients and doctors as an important reason for refusal of trial entry, although patients additionally identified dislike of randomization and quality of life concerns as important barriers.
CONCLUSION: More than 40% of patients were willing to enter into a hypothetical RCT involving surgery. Aversion to randomization and perceptions of differential impact of treatment on cancer recurrence and quality of life are likely to be major barriers to patient accrual in trials of colorectal cancer treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12796726     DOI: 10.1067/msy.2003.119

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surgery        ISSN: 0039-6060            Impact factor:   3.982


  12 in total

1.  Limits of evidence-based surgery.

Authors:  Karem Slim
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 2.  Randomized controlled trial versus comparative cohort study in verifying the therapeutic role of lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Yukiharu Todo; Noriaki Sakuragi
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-12-01       Impact factor: 3.402

3.  Motivations of patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension to participate in randomized clinical trials.

Authors:  Ricki Carroll; Jules Antigua; Darren Taichman; Harold Palevsky; Paul Forfia; Steven Kawut; Scott D Halpern
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2012-03-02       Impact factor: 2.486

4.  Assessment of perceived cost to the patient and other barriers to clinical trial participation.

Authors:  Douglas J Weckstein; Christian A Thomas; Ivette F Emery; Barbara F Shea; Alison Fleury; Margaret E White; Elizabeth Chase; Cindy Robinson; Stacey Frazier; Christine Pilar
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 3.840

5.  Demographic analysis: an update of randomized controlled studies in prostatic oncology.

Authors:  Elias Wehbi; Karen Hersey; Tony Finelli; Neil E Fleshner
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 1.862

6.  Attitudes towards clinical research among cancer trial participants and non-participants: an interview study using a Grounded Theory approach.

Authors:  S M Madsen; S Holm; P Riis
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 2.903

Review 7.  Cancer patient decision making related to clinical trial participation: an integrative review with implications for patients' relational autonomy.

Authors:  Jennifer A H Bell; Lynda G Balneaves
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2015-01-17       Impact factor: 3.603

8.  YouTube Videos as a Source of Information About Clinical Trials: Observational Study.

Authors:  Grace Clarke Hillyer; Sarah A MacLean; Melissa Beauchemin; Corey H Basch; Karen M Schmitt; Leslie Segall; Moshe Kelsen; Frances L Brogan; Gary K Schwartz
Journal:  JMIR Cancer       Date:  2018-06-26

9.  The feasibility of performing a randomised controlled trial for femoroacetabular impingement surgery.

Authors:  A J R Palmer; G E R Thomas; T C B Pollard; I Rombach; A Taylor; N Arden; D J Beard; A J Andrade; A J Carr; S Glyn-Jones
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2013-02-01       Impact factor: 5.853

10.  All-arthroscopic versus mini-open repair of small or moderate-sized rotator cuff tears: a protocol for a randomized trial [NCT00128076].

Authors:  Joy C MacDermid; Richard Holtby; Helen Razmjou; Dianne Bryant
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2006-03-10       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.