PURPOSE: To determine whether patients' expectations of benefit in early-phase oncology trials depend on how patients are queried and to explore whether expectations are associated with patient characteristics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Participants were 171 patients in phase I or II oncology trials in the United States. After providing informed consent for a trial but before receiving the investigational therapy, participants answered questions about expectations of benefit. We randomly assigned participants to one of three groups corresponding to three queries about expectations: frequency type, belief type, or both. Main outcomes were differences in expectations by question type and the extent to which expectations were associated with demographic characteristics, numeracy, dispositional optimism, religiousness/spirituality, understanding of research, and other measures. RESULTS: The belief-type group had a higher mean expectation of benefit (64.4 of 100) than the combination group (51.6; P = .01) and the frequency-type group (43.1; P < .001). Mean expectations in the combination and frequency groups were not significantly different (P = .06). Belief-type expectations were associated with a preference for nonquantitative information (r = -0.19; 95% CI, -0.19 to -0.36), knowledge about research (r = -0.21; 95% CI, -0.38 to -0.03), dispositional optimism (r = 0.20; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.37), and spirituality (r = 0.22; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.38). Frequency-type expectations were associated with knowledge about clinical research (r = -0.27; 95% CI, -0.27 to -0.51). CONCLUSION: In early-phase oncology trials, patients' reported expectations of benefit differed according to how patients were queried and were associated with patient characteristics. These findings have implications for how informed consent is obtained and assessed.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To determine whether patients' expectations of benefit in early-phase oncology trials depend on how patients are queried and to explore whether expectations are associated with patient characteristics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Participants were 171 patients in phase I or II oncology trials in the United States. After providing informed consent for a trial but before receiving the investigational therapy, participants answered questions about expectations of benefit. We randomly assigned participants to one of three groups corresponding to three queries about expectations: frequency type, belief type, or both. Main outcomes were differences in expectations by question type and the extent to which expectations were associated with demographic characteristics, numeracy, dispositional optimism, religiousness/spirituality, understanding of research, and other measures. RESULTS: The belief-type group had a higher mean expectation of benefit (64.4 of 100) than the combination group (51.6; P = .01) and the frequency-type group (43.1; P < .001). Mean expectations in the combination and frequency groups were not significantly different (P = .06). Belief-type expectations were associated with a preference for nonquantitative information (r = -0.19; 95% CI, -0.19 to -0.36), knowledge about research (r = -0.21; 95% CI, -0.38 to -0.03), dispositional optimism (r = 0.20; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.37), and spirituality (r = 0.22; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.38). Frequency-type expectations were associated with knowledge about clinical research (r = -0.27; 95% CI, -0.27 to -0.51). CONCLUSION: In early-phase oncology trials, patients' reported expectations of benefit differed according to how patients were queried and were associated with patient characteristics. These findings have implications for how informed consent is obtained and assessed.
Authors: J D Cheng; J Hitt; B Koczwara; K A Schulman; C B Burnett; D J Gaskin; J H Rowland; N J Meropol Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2000-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Daniel P Sulmasy; Alan B Astrow; M Kai He; Damon M Seils; Neal J Meropol; Ellyn Micco; Kevin P Weinfurt Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-08-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Neal J Meropol; Kevin P Weinfurt; Caroline B Burnett; Andrew Balshem; Al B Benson; Liana Castel; Sandra Corbett; Michael Diefenbach; Darrell Gaskin; Yun Li; Sharon Manne; John Marshall; Julia H Rowland; Elyse Slater; Daniel P Sulmasy; David Van Echo; Shakira Washington; Kevin A Schulman Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-07-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Sam Horng; Ezekiel J Emanuel; Benjamin Wilfond; Jonathan Rackoff; Karen Martz; Christine Grady Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-12-26 Impact factor: 91.245
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
Authors: Andrea C Enzinger; Jennifer K Wind; Elizabeth Frank; Nadine J McCleary; Laura Porter; Heather Cushing; Caroline Abbott; Christine Cronin; Peter C Enzinger; Neal J Meropol; Deborah Schrag Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2017-03-22
Authors: Lynn G Dressler; Allison M Deal; Kouros Owzar; Dorothy Watson; Katherine Donahue; Paula N Friedman; Mark J Ratain; Howard L McLeod Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2015-07-09 Impact factor: 13.506