Why Cancer Patients Enter Randomized Clinical Trials: Exploring the Factors That Influence Their Decision
- 1 November 2004
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) in Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Vol. 22 (21) , 4312-4318
- https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2004.01.187
Abstract
Purpose Few interventions have been designed and tested to improve recruitment to clinical trials in oncology. The multiple factors influencing patients' decisions have made the prioritization of specific interventions challenging. The present study was undertaken to identify the independent predictors of a cancer patient's decision to enter a randomized clinical trial. Methods A list of factors from the medical literature was augmented with a series of focus groups involving cancer patients, physicians, and clinical research associates (CRAs). A series of questionnaires was developed with items based on these factors and were administered concurrently to 189 cancer patients, their physicians, and CRAs following the patient's decision regarding trial entry. Forward logistic regression modeling was performed using the items significantly correlated (by univariate analysis) with the decision to enter a clinical trial. Results A number of items were significantly correlated with the patient's decision. In the multivariate logistic regression model, the patient's perception of personal benefit was the most important, with an odds ratio (OR) of 3.08 (P < .05). CRA-related items involving supportive aspects of the decision-making process were also important. These included whether the CRA helped with the decision (OR = 1.71; P < .05), and whether the decision was hard for the patient to make (OR = 0.52; P < .05). Conclusion Strategies that better address the potential benefits of trial entry may result in improved accrual. Interventions or aids that focus on the supportive aspects of the decision-making process while respecting the need for information and patient autonomy may also lead to meaningful improvements in accrual.Keywords
This publication has 27 references indexed in Scilit:
- Ethical communication in clinical trialsCancer, 2002
- Quality of informed consent in cancer clinical trials: a cross-sectional surveyThe Lancet, 2001
- Can improved communication increase patient participation in randomised clinical trials?European Journal Of Cancer, 2001
- Barriers to Participation in Randomised Controlled Trials: A Systematic ReviewPublished by Elsevier ,1999
- A Study in Contrasts: Eligibility Criteria in a Twenty-Year Sample of NSABP and POG Clinical TrialsJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1998
- What Attitudes and Beliefs Underlie Patients' Decisions about Participating in Chemotherapy Trials?Medical Decision Making, 1998
- Validation of a Decisional Conflict ScaleMedical Decision Making, 1995
- Offering the Option of Randomized Clinical Trials to Cancer Patients Who Overestimate Their Prognoses with Standard TherapiesCancer Investigation, 1993
- Viability of Cancer Clinical Research: Patient Accrual, Coverage, and Reimbursement: American Medical Association Council on scientific AffairsJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1991
- Best Subsets Logistic RegressionBiometrics, 1989