Literature DB >> 7779722

Volunteers or victims: patients' views of randomised cancer clinical trials.

M Slevin1, J Mossman, A Bowling, R Leonard, W Steward, P Harper, M McIllmurray, N Thatcher.   

Abstract

Randomised clinical trials are essential for the objective evaluation of different treatment strategies in cancer. However, in the field of oncology, very few of the eligible patients are entered into trials, and most treatments have only been tested on a small percentage of patients. For doctors, a major deterrent to participating in trials is the lack of resources--particularly time, but often also the local facilities. This report suggests that patients themselves are willing to take part in clinical research, and are attracted by being treated by a doctor with a specialist interest in the disease and encouraged by the possibility that their progress will be monitored closely. With the recent NHS changes, it is timely for the Department of Health and other national health departments to consider carefully what can be done to ensure that no new treatments are adopted without effective evaluation. This will require departments of health to identify and implement ways to facilitate accrual of appropriate numbers of patients onto research protocols (whether non-randomised phase I or phase II studies or large, multicentre phase III trials) over short time periods.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomedical and Behavioral Research; Department of Health (Great Britain); Empirical Approach; National Health Service

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7779722      PMCID: PMC2033847          DOI: 10.1038/bjc.1995.245

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Cancer        ISSN: 0007-0920            Impact factor:   7.640


  14 in total

1.  Randomised comparison of procedures for obtaining informed consent in clinical trials of treatment for cancer.

Authors:  R J Simes; M H Tattersall; A S Coates; D Raghavan; H J Solomon; H Smartt
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1986-10-25

2.  National Cancer Institute sponsored cooperative clinical trials.

Authors:  M A Friedman; D F Cain
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1990-05-15       Impact factor: 6.860

3.  Patients' preferences in randomized clinical trials.

Authors:  M Angell
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1984-05-24       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Informed consent -- why are its goals imperfectly realized?

Authors:  B R Cassileth; R V Zupkis; K Sutton-Smith; V March
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1980-04-17       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Participants in prospective, randomized clinical trials for resected non-small cell lung cancer have improved survival compared with nonparticipants in such trials.

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

6.  Do treatment protocols improve end results? A study of survival of patients with multiple myeloma in Finland.

Authors:  S Karjalainen; I Palva
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1989-10-28

7.  Physicians' reasons for not entering eligible patients in a randomized clinical trial of surgery for breast cancer.

Authors:  K M Taylor; R G Margolese; C L Soskolne
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1984-05-24       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Informed consent for investigational chemotherapy: patients' and physicians' perceptions.

Authors:  D T Penman; J C Holland; G F Bahna; G Morrow; A H Schmale; L R Derogatis; C L Carnrike; R Cherry
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1984-07       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Selection bias in clinical trials.

Authors:  K Antman; D Amato; W Wood; J Carson; H Suit; K Proppe; R Carey; J Greenberger; R Wilson; E Frei
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1985-08       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Clinical trials in cancer: the role of surrogate patients in defining what constitutes an ethically acceptable clinical experiment.

Authors:  W J Mackillop; M J Palmer; B O'Sullivan; G K Ward; R Steele; G Dotsikas
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  27 in total

1.  Parents' perspectives on participating in genetic research in autism.

Authors:  Magan Trottier; Wendy Roberts; Irene Drmic; Stephen W Scherer; Rosanna Weksberg; Cheryl Cytrynbaum; David Chitayat; Cheryl Shuman; Fiona A Miller
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2013-03

2.  Community health workers' support for cancer clinical trials: description and explanation.

Authors:  Russell K Schutt; Lidia Schapira; Jennifer Maniates; Jessica Santiccioli; Silas Henlon; Judyann Bigby
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2010-08

3.  Training community health workers about cancer clinical trials.

Authors:  Lidia Schapira; Russell Schutt
Journal:  J Immigr Minor Health       Date:  2011-10

Review 4.  The ethics of randomised controlled trials from the perspectives of patients, the public, and healthcare professionals.

Authors:  S J Edwards; R J Lilford; J Hewison
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-10-31

5.  A comparative study of patients' attitudes toward clinical research in the United States and urban and rural China.

Authors:  Elizabeth Wu; Tianyi Wang; Tammy Lin; Xisui Chen; Zhe Guan; Claudia Cao; Huiying Rao; Ming Yang; Bo Feng; Sandra Pui; Melvin Chan; Sherry Fu; Andy Lin; Lai Wei; Anna S Lok
Journal:  Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2015-01-15       Impact factor: 4.689

6.  Patient attitudes to clinical trials: development of a questionnaire and results from asthma and cancer patients.

Authors:  Crispin Jenkinson; John S Burton; Julia Cartwright; Helen Magee; Ian Hall; Chris Alcock; Sherwood Burge
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 3.377

7.  Improving informed consent: pilot of a decision aid for women invited to participate in a breast cancer prevention trial (IBIS-II DCIS).

Authors:  I Juraskova; P Butow; A Lopez; M Seccombe; A Coates; F Boyle; N McCarthy; L Reaby; J F Forbes
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 3.377

8.  Random allocation or allocation at random? Patients' perspectives of participation in a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  K Featherstone; J L Donovan
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-10-31

Review 9.  What do palliative care patients and their relatives think about research in palliative care?-a systematic review.

Authors:  Clare White; Janet Hardy
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2009-08-25       Impact factor: 3.603

10.  A survey of the views of palliative care healthcare professionals towards referring cancer patients to participate in randomized controlled trials in palliative care.

Authors:  Clare White; Kristen Gilshenan; Janet Hardy
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2008-05-01       Impact factor: 3.603

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.