BACKGROUND: Stakeholders derive many benefits from cancer clinical trials, including guidance for future oncologic treatment decisions. However, whether enrollment in cancer trials also improves patient survival independently of trial outcomes remains underinvestigated. We hypothesized that cancer trial enrollment is not associated with patient survival outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Using the 2002 to 2008 California Cancer Registry, we identified 555,469 patients with stage I to IV solid organ tumors. Baseline characteristics were compared by trial participation status. Logistic regression determined predictors of trial enrollment. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression examined the impact of trial participation on overall and cancer-specific mortality with adjustment for covariates. RESULTS: Only 0.33% of our cohort was enrolled in clinical trials. Trial participants were likely to be younger than 65 (odds ratio [OR] 2.13; 95% CI 1.90 to 2.38), Hispanic rather than non-Hispanic white (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.67 to 0.90), and have breast cancer (OR 3.14; 95% CI 2.62 to 3.77). Multivariate survival analyses demonstrated that enrollment in cancer trials predicted a lower hazard of death. However, when stratified by disease site, this survival benefit was observed only in lung, colon, and breast cancers. Sensitivity and interaction analyses confirmed these relationships. CONCLUSIONS: In this first population-based study examining trial effect in solid organ cancers, enrollment into cancer trials predicted lower overall and cancer-specific mortality among common cancer sites. Although these findings may demonstrate a survival benefit due to trial enrollment, they likely also reflect the favorable attributes of trial enrollees. Once corroborated, stakeholders must consider broader cancer trial designs representative of the cancer burden treated in the real world.
BACKGROUND: Stakeholders derive many benefits from cancer clinical trials, including guidance for future oncologic treatment decisions. However, whether enrollment in cancer trials also improves patient survival independently of trial outcomes remains underinvestigated. We hypothesized that cancer trial enrollment is not associated with patient survival outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Using the 2002 to 2008 California Cancer Registry, we identified 555,469 patients with stage I to IV solid organ tumors. Baseline characteristics were compared by trial participation status. Logistic regression determined predictors of trial enrollment. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression examined the impact of trial participation on overall and cancer-specific mortality with adjustment for covariates. RESULTS: Only 0.33% of our cohort was enrolled in clinical trials. Trial participants were likely to be younger than 65 (odds ratio [OR] 2.13; 95% CI 1.90 to 2.38), Hispanic rather than non-Hispanic white (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.67 to 0.90), and have breast cancer (OR 3.14; 95% CI 2.62 to 3.77). Multivariate survival analyses demonstrated that enrollment in cancer trials predicted a lower hazard of death. However, when stratified by disease site, this survival benefit was observed only in lung, colon, and breast cancers. Sensitivity and interaction analyses confirmed these relationships. CONCLUSIONS: In this first population-based study examining trial effect in solid organ cancers, enrollment into cancer trials predicted lower overall and cancer-specific mortality among common cancer sites. Although these findings may demonstrate a survival benefit due to trial enrollment, they likely also reflect the favorable attributes of trial enrollees. Once corroborated, stakeholders must consider broader cancer trial designs representative of the cancer burden treated in the real world.
Authors: Linda S Elting; Catherine Cooksley; B Nebiyou Bekele; Michael Frumovitz; Elenir B C Avritscher; Charlotte Sun; Diane C Bodurka Journal: Cancer Date: 2006-06-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: S Davis; P W Wright; S F Schulman; L D Hill; R D Pinkham; L P Johnson; T W Jones; H B Kellogg; H M Radke; W W Sikkema Journal: Cancer Date: 1985-10-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: E Marubini; L Mariani; B Salvadori; U Veronesi; R Saccozzi; M Merson; R Zucali; F Rilke Journal: Lancet Date: 1996-04-13 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Khalid M Almutairi; Wadi B Alonazi; Abdulaziz A Alodhayani; Jason M Vinluan; Mahaman Moussa; Abdulrahman S Al-Ajlan; Khalid Alsaleh; Duna Alruwaimi; Nader E Alotaibi Journal: J Relig Health Date: 2017-04
Authors: K Allen Greiner; Daniela B Friedman; Swann Arp Adams; Clement K Gwede; Paula Cupertino; Kimberly K Engelman; Cathy D Meade; James R Hébert Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Bryan R Haugen; Erik K Alexander; Keith C Bible; Gerard M Doherty; Susan J Mandel; Yuri E Nikiforov; Furio Pacini; Gregory W Randolph; Anna M Sawka; Martin Schlumberger; Kathryn G Schuff; Steven I Sherman; Julie Ann Sosa; David L Steward; R Michael Tuttle; Leonard Wartofsky Journal: Thyroid Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 6.568
Authors: Jennifer A Wenzel; Olive Mbah; Jiayun Xu; Gyasi Moscou-Jackson; Haneefa Saleem; Kwame Sakyi; Jean G Ford Journal: J Racial Ethn Health Disparities Date: 2015-06
Authors: Samilia Obeng-Gyasi; Sheetal M Kircher; Kelsey P Lipking; Benjamin J Keele; Al B Benson; Lynne I Wagner; Ruth C Carlos Journal: Cancer Date: 2019-06-28 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Yat Tsang; Laura Ciurlionis; Anna M Kirby; Imogen Locke; Karen Venables; John R Yarnold; Jenny Titley; Judith Bliss; Charlotte E Coles Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2015-10-22 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Keith C Bible; Electron Kebebew; James Brierley; Juan P Brito; Maria E Cabanillas; Thomas J Clark; Antonio Di Cristofano; Robert Foote; Thomas Giordano; Jan Kasperbauer; Kate Newbold; Yuri E Nikiforov; Gregory Randolph; M Sara Rosenthal; Anna M Sawka; Manisha Shah; Ashok Shaha; Robert Smallridge; Carol K Wong-Clark Journal: Thyroid Date: 2021-03 Impact factor: 6.568