Literature DB >> 1941065

Oncologists' reluctance to accrue patients onto clinical trials: an Illinois Cancer Center study.

A B Benson1, J P Pregler, J A Bean, A W Rademaker, B Eshler, K Anderson.   

Abstract

Clinical trials are recognized as the standard of care for the cancer patient, and the randomized, controlled trial represents the most definitive method to determine the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of a cancer treatment. However, less than 3% of all eligible patients enter a clinical trial. Of the 437 physician members of the Illinois Cancer Center (ICC), 244 responded to a survey designed to determine factors that present a significant barrier to entering patients on clinical trials. Rigid protocol design was the primary deterrent to accrual, especially for medical oncologists. Surgeons, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists differed with respect to several factors, including willingness to seek a clinical trial, tendency to treat patients off study, quality-of-life issues, and the belief that trials were too excessive in time commitment (P less than .05). Compared with hospital-based physicians, community oncologists had fewer patients on trial, were more likely to enter patients on the basis of age, and were more concerned about aspects of informed consent and the financial burden of a trial (P less than .01). One third of the physicians never pursued a clinical trial because of conflict with the priorities of individual care and excessive follow-up time. Fourteen percent indicated that they discouraged patients from participating in a clinical trial due to the risk of a patient receiving a placebo and patient follow-up requirements (P less than .05). Subgroups of physicians differ in their reluctance to accrue patients, and there are clusters of beliefs expressed by physicians concerning their clinical trial activity. Current conduct of clinical trials needs to be reassessed, and intervention studies are required to determine the best methodology to alter physician reluctance to pursue clinical trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1941065     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.1991.9.11.2067

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  53 in total

1.  Pilot study of a point-of-use decision support tool for cancer clinical trials eligibility.

Authors:  P P Breitfeld; M Weisburd; J M Overhage; G Sledge; W M Tierney
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  1999 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.497

2.  Palliative care research: trading ethics for an evidence base.

Authors:  A M Jubb
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 2.903

Review 3.  Potential pitfalls of crossover and thoughts on iniparib in triple-negative breast cancer.

Authors:  Tito Fojo; Laleh Amiri-Kordestani; Susan E Bates
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2011-11-01       Impact factor: 13.506

4.  Barriers to enrollment of elderly adults in early-phase cancer clinical trials.

Authors:  Michele Basche; Anna E Barón; S Gail Eckhardt; Lodovico Balducci; Martha Persky; Adrah Levin; Nathaniel Jackson; Chan Zeng; Pamela Vranas; John F Steiner
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 3.840

5.  A prospective analysis of the influence of older age on physician and patient decision-making when considering enrollment in breast cancer clinical trials (SWOG S0316).

Authors:  Sara H Javid; Joseph M Unger; Julie R Gralow; Carol M Moinpour; Antoinette J Wozniak; J Wendall Goodwin; Primo N Lara; Pamela A Williams; Laura F Hutchins; Carolyn C Gotay; Kathy S Albain
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2012-06-20

6.  Cancer survivors' uptake and adherence in diet and exercise intervention trials: an integrative data analysis.

Authors:  Rebecca N Adams; Catherine E Mosher; Cindy K Blair; Denise C Snyder; Richard Sloane; Wendy Demark-Wahnefried
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2014-08-25       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 7.  An informatics blueprint for healthcare quality information systems.

Authors:  Joyce C Niland; Layla Rouse; Douglas C Stahl
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2006-04-18       Impact factor: 4.497

8.  The obligation to participate in biomedical research.

Authors:  G Owen Schaefer; Ezekiel J Emanuel; Alan Wertheimer
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2009-07-01       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Physicians' preferences for active-controlled versus placebo-controlled trials of new antihypertensive drugs.

Authors:  Scott D Halpern; Peter A Ubel; Jesse A Berlin; Raymond R Townsend; David A Asch
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  [Geriatric assessment. Is it significantly helpful in selection of elderly tumour patients for a difficult therapy?].

Authors:  S Krege; C Friedrich; G Lümmen; L Pientka; H Rübben
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 0.639

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.