Literature DB >> 18543100

The impact of sharing results of a randomized breast cancer clinical trial with study participants.

Ann H Partridge1, A C Wolff, P K Marcom, P A Kaufman, L Zhang, R Gelman, C Moore, D Lake, G F Fleming, H S Rugo, J Atkins, E Sampson, D Collyar, E P Winer.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There has been growing interest in providing clinical trial participants with study results yet only limited information exists regarding the process and impact of sharing results. We sought to evaluate patient perceptions of how results had been shared from a large randomized cooperative group trial, and the impact of learning results. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A subset of women who participated in NCCTG 9831 (A Phase III Trial of Adjuvant Chemotherapy with or without Trastuzumab for Women with HER2-positive Breast Cancer) were mailed surveys after the preliminary study results were released to the public and mailed to participants.
RESULTS: One hundred and 67 of 228 surveys sent (73%) were returned; 61% reported receiving trastuzumab on study; 4% reported recurrent disease. Ninety-five percent of participants were glad they received results; 81% were satisfied with how results were shared; 23% were more anxious after learning the results. Sixty-nine percent correctly interpreted the results. Logistic regression revealed that satisfaction with the process of receiving results was associated with satisfaction with treatment (P = 0.04), and increased anxiety was associated with dissatisfaction with treatment (0.02), incorrect interpretation of results (0.04), and not having received trastuzumab (P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: Sharing results directly with study participants is met with overwhelmingly favorable responses from patients, although some may not initially understand the findings. The potential for increased anxiety should be considered, and psychosocial support may be required by some. A plan to share results should be routinely and prospectively considered in the design of cancer clinical trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18543100     DOI: 10.1007/s10549-008-0057-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 0167-6806            Impact factor:   4.872


  12 in total

1.  Patients' understanding of how genotype variation affects benefits of tamoxifen therapy for breast cancer.

Authors:  N T Brewer; J T Defrank; W K Chiu; J G Ibrahim; C M Walko; P Rubin; O A Olajide; S G Moore; R E Raab; D R Carrizosa; S W Corso; G Schwartz; J M Peppercorn; H L McLeod; L A Carey; W J Irvin
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2014-01-22       Impact factor: 2.000

2.  Public perspectives on returning genetics and genomics research results.

Authors:  J O'Daniel; S B Haga
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2011-05-07       Impact factor: 2.000

3.  Effect of Unblinding on Participants' Perceptions of Risk and Confidence in a Large Double-Blind Clinical Trial of Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Ann H Partridge; Karen Sepucha; Anne O'Neill; Kathy D Miller; Christine Motley; Ramona F Swaby; Bryan P Schneider; Chau T Dang; Donald W Northfelt; George W Sledge
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 31.777

4.  Researcher practices on returning genetic research results.

Authors:  Christopher Heaney; Genevieve Tindall; Joe Lucas; Susanne B Haga
Journal:  Genet Test Mol Biomarkers       Date:  2010-10-12

5.  Participants' uptake of clinical trial results: a randomised experiment.

Authors:  J Mancini; D Genre; F Dalenc; J-M Ferrero; P Kerbrat; A-L Martin; H Roché; F Maylevin; C Tarpin; P Viens; J Genève; C Julian-Reynier
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2010-03-02       Impact factor: 7.640

6.  Prospective biorepository participants' perspectives on access to research results.

Authors:  Laura M Beskow; Sondra J Smolek
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 1.742

7.  Feedback of trial results to participants: a survey of clinicians' and patients' attitudes and experiences.

Authors:  Karen Cox; Nima Moghaddam; Lydia Bird; Ruth Elkan
Journal:  Eur J Oncol Nurs       Date:  2010-07-31       Impact factor: 2.398

8.  The relative importance of information items and preferred mode of delivery when disseminating results from trials to participants: A mixed-methods study.

Authors:  Jessica Wood; Seonaidh C Cotton; Katie Gillies
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2021-12-08       Impact factor: 3.318

Review 9.  Providing trial results to participants in phase III pragmatic effectiveness RCTs: a scoping review.

Authors:  Hanne Bruhn; Elle-Jay Cowan; Marion K Campbell; Lynda Constable; Seonaidh Cotton; Vikki Entwistle; Rosemary Humphreys; Karen Innes; Sandra Jayacodi; Peter Knapp; Annabelle South; Katie Gillies
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2021-05-24       Impact factor: 2.279

10.  Incidental genetic findings in randomized clinical trials: recommendations from the Genomics and Randomized Trials Network (GARNET).

Authors:  Ebony B Bookman; Corina Din-Lovinescu; Bradford B Worrall; Teri A Manolio; Siiri N Bennett; Cathy Laurie; Daniel B Mirel; Kimberly F Doheny; Garnet L Anderson; Kate Wehr; Richard Weinshilboum; Donna T Chen
Journal:  Genome Med       Date:  2013-01-30       Impact factor: 11.117

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.