TY - JOUR
T1 - Before consent
T2 - Qualitative analysis of deliberations of patients with advanced cancer about early-phase clinical trials
AU - Garrett, Sarah B.
AU - Matthews, Thea M.
AU - Abramson, Corey M.
AU - Koenig, Christopher J.
AU - Hlubocky, Fay J.
AU - Daugherty, Christopher K.
AU - Munster, Pamela N.
AU - Dohan, Daniel
N1 - Funding Information: Supported by Grant No. R01 CA152195 from the National Cancer Institute (D.D.) and in part by Award No. ME-1409-22996 from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. Presented at the Palliative and Supportive Care Symposium, San Diego, CA, October 27-28, 2017. The funding agreement ensured the authors’ independence in designing the study, interpreting the data, and writing and publishing the report. The statements presented in this article are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the National Cancer Institute, the National Institutes of Health, or the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute or its board of governors or methodology committee. We thank Laura Trupin, Anne Reinert, Jim Wiley, Susan Miller, Gladis Chavez, Lizi Feng, Sumeet Brar, Henna Sawhney, Pearl Berchenko, and Michelle Bondi for their numerous contributions to the study. Publisher Copyright: Copyright © 2020 American Society of Clinical Oncology. All rights reserved.
PY - 2020
Y1 - 2020
N2 - PURPOSE Patients with advanced cancer and oncologists deliberate about early-phase (EP) trials as they consider whether to pursue EP trial enrollment. We have limited information about those deliberations and how they may facilitate or impede trial initiation. This study describes these deliberations and their relationship to trial initiation. PATIENTS AND METHODS We collected longitudinal, ethnographic data on deliberations of patients with advanced cancer at two academic medical centers. We used constant comparative and framework analyses to characterize the deliberative process and its relationship to trial initiation. RESULTS Of 96 patients with advanced cancer, 26% initiated EP enrollment and 19% joined a trial. Constant comparative analysis revealed two foci of deliberation. Setting the stage focused on patient and physician support for EP trial involvement, including patients’ interest in research and oncologists’ awareness of trials and assessment of patient fit. Securing a seat focused on eligibility for and entrance to a specific trial and involved trial availability, treatment history, disease progression, and enrollment timing. Patients enrolled in a trial only when both stages could be successfully navigated. CONCLUSION Ethnographic data revealed two foci of deliberation about EP trial enrollment among patients with advanced cancer. Physician support played a consequential role in both stages, but enrollment also reflected factors beyond the control of any specific individual. Insights from this study, combined with other recent studies of trial enrollment, advance our understanding of the complex process of EP trial accrual and may help identify strategies to improve rates of participation.
AB - PURPOSE Patients with advanced cancer and oncologists deliberate about early-phase (EP) trials as they consider whether to pursue EP trial enrollment. We have limited information about those deliberations and how they may facilitate or impede trial initiation. This study describes these deliberations and their relationship to trial initiation. PATIENTS AND METHODS We collected longitudinal, ethnographic data on deliberations of patients with advanced cancer at two academic medical centers. We used constant comparative and framework analyses to characterize the deliberative process and its relationship to trial initiation. RESULTS Of 96 patients with advanced cancer, 26% initiated EP enrollment and 19% joined a trial. Constant comparative analysis revealed two foci of deliberation. Setting the stage focused on patient and physician support for EP trial involvement, including patients’ interest in research and oncologists’ awareness of trials and assessment of patient fit. Securing a seat focused on eligibility for and entrance to a specific trial and involved trial availability, treatment history, disease progression, and enrollment timing. Patients enrolled in a trial only when both stages could be successfully navigated. CONCLUSION Ethnographic data revealed two foci of deliberation about EP trial enrollment among patients with advanced cancer. Physician support played a consequential role in both stages, but enrollment also reflected factors beyond the control of any specific individual. Insights from this study, combined with other recent studies of trial enrollment, advance our understanding of the complex process of EP trial accrual and may help identify strategies to improve rates of participation.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85079135597&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85079135597&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1200/JOP.19.00256
DO - 10.1200/JOP.19.00256
M3 - Article
C2 - 31603726
SN - 1554-7477
VL - 16
SP - E56-E63
JO - Journal of Oncology Practice
JF - Journal of Oncology Practice
IS - 1
ER -