Mitchell S von Itzstein1, Elda Railey2, Mary L Smith2, Carol B White2,3, George W Sledge2,4, John R Howell2,5, Wendy Lawton2, Donna M Marinucci2,6, Nisha Unni1,7, David E Gerber1,2,7,8. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas. 2. Research Advocacy Network, Plano, Texas. 3. CBWhite, Evanston, Illinois. 4. Stanford University Medical Center, Palo Alto, California. 5. Marriott School of Business, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah. 6. College of Medicine, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 7. Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas. 8. Department of Population and Data Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although there is increased attention to designing and explaining clinical trials in ways that are clinically meaningful for patients, there is limited information on patient preferences, understanding, and perceptions of this content. METHODS: Maximum difference scaling (MaxDiff) methodology was used to develop a survey for assessing patients' understanding of 19 clinical terms and perceived importance of 9 endpoint surrogate phrases used in clinical trials and consent forms. The survey was administered electronically to individuals with metastatic breast cancer affiliated with the Metastatic Breast Cancer Alliance. Analyses were performed using Bayesian P values with statistical software. RESULTS: Among 503 respondents, 77% had a college degree, 70% were diagnosed with metastatic disease ≥2 years before survey completion, and 77% had received ≥2 lines of systemic therapy. Less than 35% of respondents reported understanding "fairly well" the terms symptomatic progression, duration of disease control, time to treatment cessation, and endpoints. Income level and time since onset of metastatic disease correlated with comprehension. Patients who had received ≥6 lines of therapy perceived that time until serious side effects (P < .001) and time on therapy (P < .001) were more important compared with those who had received only 1 line of therapy. Positively phrased parameters were associated with increased perceived importance. CONCLUSIONS: Even among educated, heavily pretreated patients, many commonly used clinical research terms are poorly understood. Comprehension and the perceived importance of trial endpoints vary over the course of disease. These observations may inform the design, discussion, and reporting of clinical trials.
BACKGROUND: Although there is increased attention to designing and explaining clinical trials in ways that are clinically meaningful for patients, there is limited information on patient preferences, understanding, and perceptions of this content. METHODS: Maximum difference scaling (MaxDiff) methodology was used to develop a survey for assessing patients' understanding of 19 clinical terms and perceived importance of 9 endpoint surrogate phrases used in clinical trials and consent forms. The survey was administered electronically to individuals with metastatic breast cancer affiliated with the Metastatic Breast Cancer Alliance. Analyses were performed using Bayesian P values with statistical software. RESULTS: Among 503 respondents, 77% had a college degree, 70% were diagnosed with metastatic disease ≥2 years before survey completion, and 77% had received ≥2 lines of systemic therapy. Less than 35% of respondents reported understanding "fairly well" the terms symptomatic progression, duration of disease control, time to treatment cessation, and endpoints. Income level and time since onset of metastatic disease correlated with comprehension. Patients who had received ≥6 lines of therapy perceived that time until serious side effects (P < .001) and time on therapy (P < .001) were more important compared with those who had received only 1 line of therapy. Positively phrased parameters were associated with increased perceived importance. CONCLUSIONS: Even among educated, heavily pretreated patients, many commonly used clinical research terms are poorly understood. Comprehension and the perceived importance of trial endpoints vary over the course of disease. These observations may inform the design, discussion, and reporting of clinical trials.
Authors: Michael J Raphael; Andrew Robinson; Christopher M Booth; Jennifer O'Donnell; Michael Palmer; Elizabeth Eisenhauer; Michael Brundage Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2019-12-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: K M Islam; Poppy E Deviany; Trisari Anggondowati; June E Ryan; Ann Fetrick; Danstan Bagenda; Mehmet S Copur; Addison Tolentino; Irfan Vaziri; Heidi A McKean; Steven Dunder; Jhanelle E Gray; Chao M D Huang; Apar Kishor Ganti Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2019-07-19 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Jane C Weeks; Paul J Catalano; Angel Cronin; Matthew D Finkelman; Jennifer W Mack; Nancy L Keating; Deborah Schrag Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-10-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Bryce B Reeve; Sandra A Mitchell; Amylou C Dueck; Ethan Basch; David Cella; Carolyn Miller Reilly; Lori M Minasian; Andrea M Denicoff; Ann M O'Mara; Michael J Fisch; Cynthia Chauhan; Neil K Aaronson; Corneel Coens; Deborah Watkins Bruner Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2014-07-08 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Mitchell S von Itzstein; Mary L Smith; Elda Railey; Carol B White; Julianne S Dieterich; Liz Garrett-Mayer; Suanna S Bruinooge; Andrew N Freedman; Janet De Moor; Stacy W Gray; Jason Y Park; Jingsheng Yan; Anh Quynh Hoang; Hong Zhu; David E Gerber Journal: JCO Oncol Pract Date: 2021-05-10
Authors: Janine Westendorp; Andrea W M Evers; Jacqueline M L Stouthard; Janneke Budding; Elsken van der Wall; Nicole M F Plum; Mirjam Velting; Anneke L Francke; Sandra van Dulmen; Tim C Olde Hartman; Liesbeth M Van Vliet Journal: Cancer Date: 2021-11-11 Impact factor: 6.921