Literature DB >> 8490876

Patterns of enrollment on cooperative group studies. An analysis of trends from the Los Angeles County Cancer Surveillance Program.

M D Krailo1, L Bernstein, J Sullivan-Halley, G D Hammond.   

Abstract

To assess the proportion of children diagnosed with cancer who are enrolled on studies conducted by the two national pediatric cooperative groups, population-based cancer incidence data for Los Angeles county children younger than age 20 for the years 1980 through 1987 were linked with patient records of children registered with the Childrens Cancer Group (CCG) or the Pediatric Oncology Group (POG). For patients not enrolled on a protocol, demographic and disease characteristics were compared with summary eligibility requirements for CCG protocols that were open for enrollment during 1980-1987. The proportion of patients enrolled on studies conducted by the cooperative groups varied with tumor type and age at diagnosis. When patients younger than the age of 10 were diagnosed at an institution affiliated with one of the groups, the majority of those evaluated by our review as eligible for a study were enrolled on a protocol. The proportion of young patients entered on study among those whose diagnosis was not made at a cooperative group institution was generally smaller. Seventy-three percent of all potentially eligible patients with acute leukemia diagnosed between 1980-1987 were entered on a pediatric group protocol. Approximately 50% of all potentially eligible patients with brain tumors were entered on protocol. In contrast to this, less than 50% of patients older than the age of 14 and likely to be eligible for a study were entered on a pediatric group protocol, regardless of the tumor type. Indeed, bone tumors constituted the category of patients most likely to be enrolled, with 39% of all potentially eligible patients entered on a study in the period examined. If the patient's diagnosis was made at a cooperative group institution, the individual was more likely to be entered on a protocol than if the diagnosis was made at a center outside the cooperative group network. It was not possible to determine the precise reason for this trend from the data available. Some explanations include policies at cooperative group institutions regarding admission of patients older than age 14 and the availability of protocols from cooperative groups primarily focused on the treatment of cancers of adults.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8490876     DOI: 10.1002/1097-0142(19930515)71:10+<3325::aid-cncr2820711731>3.0.co;2-k

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  12 in total

1.  Adolescents and young adults with cancer: An orphaned population.

Authors:  Conrad V Fernandez; Ronald D Barr
Journal:  Paediatr Child Health       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 2.253

2.  A prospective, observational cohort study comparing cancer clinical trial availability and enrollment between early adolescents/young adults and children.

Authors:  Stefanie M Thomas; Jemily Malvar; Henry Tran; Jared Shows; David R Freyer
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2017-11-17       Impact factor: 6.860

3.  Disparities in pediatric acute myeloid leukemia (AML) clinical trial enrollment.

Authors:  Lena E Winestone; Kelly D Getz; Pooja Rao; Yimei Li; Matt Hall; Yuan-Shung V Huang; Alix E Seif; Brian T Fisher; Richard Aplenc
Journal:  Leuk Lymphoma       Date:  2019-02-07

4.  Patterns of enrollment of infants with central nervous system tumours on cooperative group studies: a report from the Canadian Pediatric Brain Tumour Consortium.

Authors:  Donna L Johnston; Daniel Keene; Ute Bartels; Anne-Sophie Carret; Bruce Crooks; David Eisenstat; Chris Fryer; Lucie Lafay-Cousin; Valerie Larouche; Albert Moghrabi; Beverly Wilson; Shayna Zelcer; Mariana Silva; Josee Brossard; Eric Bouffet
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2010-02-05       Impact factor: 4.130

Review 5.  Understanding and addressing the lack of clinical trial enrollment among adolescents with cancer.

Authors:  Eric Tai; Natasha Buchanan; Dena Eliman; Lauren Westervelt; Lynda Beaupin; Silvana Lawvere; Archie Bleyer
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 7.124

Review 6.  Clinical trial enrollment among adolescents with cancer: supplement overview.

Authors:  Eric Tai; Lynda Beaupin; Archie Bleyer
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 7.124

Review 7.  Treatment setting, clinical trial enrollment, and subsequent outcomes among adolescents with cancer: a literature review.

Authors:  Eric Tai; Natasha Buchanan; Lauren Westervelt; Dena Elimam; Silvana Lawvere
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 7.124

8.  A prospective comparison of cancer clinical trial availability and enrollment among adolescents/young adults treated at an adult cancer hospital or affiliated children's hospital.

Authors:  Stefanie M Thomas; Jemily Malvar; Hanh Henry Tran; Jared T Shows; David R Freyer
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2018-10-06       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Case-linked analysis of clinical trial enrollment among adolescents and young adults at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center.

Authors:  Chelsea L Collins; Jemily Malvar; Ann S Hamilton; Dennis M Deapen; David R Freyer
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2015-09-22       Impact factor: 6.921

10.  Are survival and mortality rates associated with recruitment to clinical trials in teenage and young adult patients with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia? A retrospective observational analysis in England.

Authors:  Rachael Hough; Sabrina Sandhu; Maria Khan; Anthony Moran; Richard Feltbower; Charles Stiller; Mike C G Stevens; Clare Rowntree; Ajay Vora; Martin G McCabe
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-10-05       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.