Literature DB >> 16445602

Difficult clinical decisions in gynecological oncology: identifying priorities for future clinical research.

J D Harrison1, J Carter, J M Young, M J Solomon.   

Abstract

This study investigates the acceptability and feasibility of conducting randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in gynecological oncology by ascertaining the views of the Australian Society of Gynaecologic Oncologists (ASGO) about important clinical questions in this field, current treatment preferences, and willingness to participate in trials to address these questions. Members of ASGO received a mailed survey. Thirty-one gyneoncologists participated in this study (79% response fraction). There was considerable support for an RCT (81%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 63-93%) to compare sentinel node biopsy with total groin dissection for women with vulval cancer. This clinical question was also rated as "extremely" or "very" important by 91% (95% CI, 74-98%) of respondents, who also indicated high levels of individual equipoise. Another priority for research involved the use of second-line chemotherapy for women who have rising CA125 titers. This clinical question was rated as extremely or very important by 71% (95% CI, 52-86%), exhibited high levels of individual equipoise, with 74% (95% CI, 55-88%) of respondents willing to participate in an RCT to address this issue. The conduct of surveys of representative groups of clinicians provides useful empirical data to focus clinical research efforts where they are most likely to be successful based on equipoise, feasibility, and clinical interest.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16445602     DOI: 10.1111/j.1525-1438.2006.00424.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer        ISSN: 1048-891X            Impact factor:   3.437


  4 in total

1.  Improved clinical trial enrollments for uterine leiomyosarcoma patients after gynecologic oncology partnership with a sarcoma center.

Authors:  S E S Lange; J Liu; D R Adkins; M A Powell; B A Van Tine; D G Mutch
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2015-12-21       Impact factor: 5.482

2.  Addressing clinical trials: can the multidisciplinary Tumor Board improve participation? A study from an academic women's cancer program.

Authors:  Lindsay Kuroki; Ashley Stuckey; Priya Hirway; Christina A Raker; Christina A Bandera; Paul A DiSilvestro; Cornelius O Granai; Robert D Legare; Bachir J Sakr; Don S Dizon
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2009-12-29       Impact factor: 5.482

3.  Considering usual medical care in clinical trial design.

Authors:  Liza Dawson; Deborah A Zarin; Ezekiel J Emanuel; Lawrence M Friedman; Bimal Chaudhari; Steven N Goodman
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2009-09-29       Impact factor: 11.069

Review 4.  Is "rescue" therapy ethical in randomized controlled trials?

Authors:  Richard Holubkov; J Michael Dean; John Berger; Kanwaljeet J S Anand; Joseph Carcillo; Kathleen Meert; Jerry Zimmerman; Christopher Newth; Rick Harrison; Douglas F Willson; Carol Nicholson
Journal:  Pediatr Crit Care Med       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 3.624

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.