Grace C Hillyer1,2, Melissa Beauchemin2,3,4, Dawn L Hershman1,2,5, Moshe Kelsen2, Frances L Brogan2, Rossy Sandoval2, Karen M Schmitt2,3, Andria Reyes2, Mary Beth Terry1,2, Andrew B Lassman2,6, Gary K Schwartz2,5. 1. Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health of Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. 2. Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center of Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. 3. New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA. 4. Columbia University School of Nursing, New York, NY, USA. 5. Division of Hematology/Oncology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA. 6. Department of Neurology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Essential to bringing innovative cancer treatments to patients is voluntary participation in clinical trials but approximately 8% of American cancer patients are enrolled onto a trial. We used a domain-oriented framework to assess barriers to cancer clinical trial enrollment. METHODS: Physicians (MD, DO, fellows, residents) and research staff (physician assistants, nurse practitioners, staff and research nurses, clinical assistants, and program coordinators) involved in clinical research at a comprehensive cancer center completed an online survey in 2017; adult cancer patients not currently enrolled in a trial were interviewed in 2018. To inform the construct of our physician/staff and patient surveys and to assess barriers to clinical trial enrollment, we first conducted in-depth interviews among 14 key informants representing medical, hematologic, gynecologic, neurologic, radiation oncology, as well as members of the clinical research team (one clinical research coordinator, one research nurse practitioner). Perceived structural, provider- and patient-level barriers to clinical trial enrollment were assessed. Differences in perceptions, attitudes, and beliefs toward clinical trial enrollment between (1) physicians and staff, (2) patients by ethnicity, and (3) physicians/staff and patients were examined. RESULTS: In total, 120 physicians/staff involved in clinical research (39.2% physicians, 60.8% staff; 48.0% overall response rate) and 150 cancer patients completed surveys. Nearly three-quarters of physician/staff respondents reported difficulty in keeping track of the eligibility criteria for open studies but was more often cited by physicians than staff (84.4% vs 64.3%, p = 0.02). Physicians more often reported lack of time to present clinical trial information than did staff(p < 0.001); 44.0% of staff versus 18.2% of physicians reported patient family interaction as a clinical trial enrollment barrier (p = 0.007). Hispanic patients more often stated they would join a trial, even if standard therapy was an option compared to non-Hispanic patients (47.7% vs 20.8%, p = 0.002). Comparing the beliefs and perceptions of physicians/staff to those of patients, patients more often reported negative beliefs about clinical trial enrollment (e.g. being in a trial does not help patients personally, 32.9% vs 1.8%, p < 0.001) but less often felt they had no other options when agreeing to join (38.1% vs 85.6%, p < 0.001), and less often refused clinical trial enrollment due to lack of understanding (9.1% vs 63.3%, p = 0.001) than reported by physicians/staff. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate a wide gap between physician/staff and patient attitudes and beliefs about clinical trial enrollment and highlight the importance of focusing future initiatives to raise awareness of this incongruency. Reconciling these differences will require tailored education to reduce implicit biases and dispel misperceptions. Strategies to improve the quality of patient-provider communication and address infrastructure and resource issues are also needed to improve patient enrollment onto cancer clinical trials.
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Essential to bringing innovative cancer treatments to patients is voluntary participation in clinical trials but approximately 8% of American cancerpatients are enrolled onto a trial. We used a domain-oriented framework to assess barriers to cancer clinical trial enrollment. METHODS: Physicians (MD, DO, fellows, residents) and research staff (physician assistants, nurse practitioners, staff and research nurses, clinical assistants, and program coordinators) involved in clinical research at a comprehensive cancer center completed an online survey in 2017; adult cancerpatients not currently enrolled in a trial were interviewed in 2018. To inform the construct of our physician/staff and patient surveys and to assess barriers to clinical trial enrollment, we first conducted in-depth interviews among 14 key informants representing medical, hematologic, gynecologic, neurologic, radiation oncology, as well as members of the clinical research team (one clinical research coordinator, one research nurse practitioner). Perceived structural, provider- and patient-level barriers to clinical trial enrollment were assessed. Differences in perceptions, attitudes, and beliefs toward clinical trial enrollment between (1) physicians and staff, (2) patients by ethnicity, and (3) physicians/staff and patients were examined. RESULTS: In total, 120 physicians/staff involved in clinical research (39.2% physicians, 60.8% staff; 48.0% overall response rate) and 150 cancerpatients completed surveys. Nearly three-quarters of physician/staff respondents reported difficulty in keeping track of the eligibility criteria for open studies but was more often cited by physicians than staff (84.4% vs 64.3%, p = 0.02). Physicians more often reported lack of time to present clinical trial information than did staff(p < 0.001); 44.0% of staff versus 18.2% of physicians reported patient family interaction as a clinical trial enrollment barrier (p = 0.007). Hispanic patients more often stated they would join a trial, even if standard therapy was an option compared to non-Hispanic patients (47.7% vs 20.8%, p = 0.002). Comparing the beliefs and perceptions of physicians/staff to those of patients, patients more often reported negative beliefs about clinical trial enrollment (e.g. being in a trial does not help patients personally, 32.9% vs 1.8%, p < 0.001) but less often felt they had no other options when agreeing to join (38.1% vs 85.6%, p < 0.001), and less often refused clinical trial enrollment due to lack of understanding (9.1% vs 63.3%, p = 0.001) than reported by physicians/staff. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate a wide gap between physician/staff and patient attitudes and beliefs about clinical trial enrollment and highlight the importance of focusing future initiatives to raise awareness of this incongruency. Reconciling these differences will require tailored education to reduce implicit biases and dispel misperceptions. Strategies to improve the quality of patient-provider communication and address infrastructure and resource issues are also needed to improve patient enrollment onto cancer clinical trials.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cancer clinical trials; clinical trials participation; health education; patient/provider communication
Authors: Mollie W Howerton; M Chris Gibbons; Charles R Baffi; Tiffany L Gary; Gabriel Y Lai; Shari Bolen; Jon Tilburt; Teerath Peter Tanpitukpongse; Renee F Wilson; Neil R Powe; Eric B Bass; Jean G Ford Journal: Cancer Date: 2007-02-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: P N Lara; R Higdon; N Lim; K Kwan; M Tanaka; D H Lau; T Wun; J Welborn; F J Meyers; S Christensen; R O'Donnell; C Richman; S A Scudder; J Tuscano; D R Gandara; K S Lam Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-03-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Terrance L Albrecht; Susan S Eggly; Marci E J Gleason; Felicity W K Harper; Tanina S Foster; Amy M Peterson; Heather Orom; Louis A Penner; John C Ruckdeschel Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-06-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: David Wendler; Raynard Kington; Jennifer Madans; Gretchen Van Wye; Heidi Christ-Schmidt; Laura A Pratt; Otis W Brawley; Cary P Gross; Ezekiel Emanuel Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2005-12-06 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Surbhi Sidana; Cristine Allmer; Melissa C Larson; Amylou Dueck; Kathleen Yost; Rahma Warsame; Gita Thanarajasingam; James R Cerhan; Jonas Paludo; S Vincent Rajkumar; Thomas M Habermann; Grzegorz S Nowakowski; Yi Lin; Morie A Gertz; Thomas Witzig; Angela Dispenzieri; Wilson I Gonsalves; Stephen M Ansell; Carrie A Thompson; Shaji K Kumar Journal: JCO Oncol Pract Date: 2022-05-17
Authors: Jennifer Cunningham-Erves; Tilicia L Mayo-Gamble; Pamela C Hull; Tao Lu; Claudia Barajas; Caree R McAfee; Maureen Sanderson; Juan R Canedo; Katina Beard; Consuelo H Wilkins Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2021-05-27 Impact factor: 2.532
Authors: Christa Braun-Inglis; Leigh M Boehmer; Laura J Zitella; Brianna Hoffner; Yurii B Shvetsov; Jeffrey L Berenberg; Randall A Oyer; Al B Benson Journal: J Adv Pract Oncol Date: 2022-03-25
Authors: Rebecca A Harrison; Alexander Ou; Syed M A A Naqvi; Syed M Naqvi; Shiao-Pei S Weathers; Barbara J O'Brien; John F de Groot; Eduardo Bruera Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2021-11-09 Impact factor: 4.452