SWOG closes prostate cancer trial

2007 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Trial

Long-term results of the Dutch randomized prostate cancer trial: Impact of dose-escalation on local, biochemical, clinical failure, and survival

2014 ◽  
Vol 110 (1) ◽  
pp. 104-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wilma D. Heemsbergen ◽  
Abrahim Al-Mamgani ◽  
Annerie Slot ◽  
Michel F.H. Dielwart ◽  
Joos V. Lebesque
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Dose Escalation ◽  
Long Term Results ◽  
Clinical Failure ◽  
Cancer Trial

Racial disparities in access to prostate cancer clinical trials: A county-level analysis.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6553-6553
Author(s):  
Aasthaa Bansal ◽  
Wei-Jhih Wang ◽  
Caroline Savage Bennette ◽  
Scott David Ramsey
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Cancer Clinical Trials ◽  
County Level ◽  
Prostate Cancer Treatment ◽  
Cancer Trial ◽  
Treatment Trials ◽  
Per Capita ◽  
The Relationship

6553 Background: African American men (AAs) have a higher burden of prostate cancer compared to other populations. We sought to determine if they experience disparities in access to prostate cancer clinical trials. Methods: We created a county-level database of all U.S. counties by linking together prostate cancer clinical trial data from the Aggregate Analysis of ClincalTrials.gov (AACT) database with county-level socioeconomic, demographic and healthcare facility data derived from several external data sources. Using this data linkage, we examined two specific potential access barriers. First, we investigated the relationship between %AAs in the county and access to NCI designated cancer facilities, adjusting for county population size and other characteristics. Then, among counties with cancer facilities, we investigated the relationship between the %AAs in the county and number of available prostate cancer treatment trials per capita per year. We used logistic and negative binomial regression models, respectively, to address these questions. Results: Between 2008 and 2015, 613 prostate cancer trial sites were found among 3,145 U.S. counties. Counties with higher %AAs were less likely to have cancer facilities (adjusted odds ratio = 0.85, 95% CI (0.78, 0.92)). Among counties with cancer facilities, those with higher %AAs had significantly fewer prostate cancer trials per capita per year (rate ratio per 10% increase in %AAs: 0.90, 95% CI (0.83,0.96)), after adjusting for county-level sociodemographic and healthcare system factors. Conclusions: Counties with higher proportions of AAs appear to be less likely to have access to NCI designated cancer facilities. Among counties with cancer facilities, those with higher proportions of AAs appear to have fewer available prostate cancer treatment trials per capita per year. Clinical trials in prostate cancer therapy should ensure adequate availability of enrollment sites in regions with high concentrations of AAs.

scholarly journals Chemohormonal Therapy in Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: Long-Term Survival Analysis of the Randomized Phase III E3805 CHAARTED Trial

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (11) ◽  
pp. 1080-1087 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christos E. Kyriakopoulos ◽  
Yu-Hui Chen ◽  
Michael A. Carducci ◽  
Glenn Liu ◽  
David F. Jarrard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
High Volume ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Cancer Trial ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Chemohormonal Therapy ◽  
Androgen Ablation ◽  
Hormone Sensitive ◽  
Low Volume

Purpose Docetaxel added to androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) significantly increases the longevity of some patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. Herein, we present the outcomes of the CHAARTED (Chemohormonal Therapy Versus Androgen Ablation Randomized Trial for Extensive Disease in Prostate Cancer) trial with more mature follow-up and focus on tumor volume. Patients and Methods In this phase III study, 790 patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer were equally randomly assigned to receive either ADT in combination with docetaxel 75 mg/m2 for up to six cycles or ADT alone. The primary end point of the study was overall survival (OS). Additional analyses of the prospectively defined low- and high-volume disease subgroups were performed. High-volume disease was defined as presence of visceral metastases and/or ≥ four bone metastases with at least one outside of the vertebral column and pelvis. Results At a median follow-up of 53.7 months, the median OS was 57.6 months for the chemohormonal therapy arm versus 47.2 months for ADT alone (hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.89; P = .0018). For patients with high-volume disease (n = 513), the median OS was 51.2 months with chemohormonal therapy versus 34.4 months with ADT alone (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.79; P < .001). For those with low-volume disease (n = 277), no OS benefit was observed (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.55; P = .86). Conclusion The clinical benefit from chemohormonal therapy in prolonging OS was confirmed for patients with high-volume disease; however, for patients with low-volume disease, no OS benefit was discerned.

955 ADDRESSING BARRIERS TO PATIENT ACCRUAL IN CLINICAL TRIALS: LESSONS FROM THE EORTC PROSTATE CANCER TRIAL 22043-30041

2012 ◽  
Vol 187 (4S) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Bolla ◽  
S. Joniau ◽  
L.H. Pylkkanen ◽  
V. Pouillon ◽  
P. Maingon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Cancer Trial ◽  
Patient Accrual

Unpacking clinical trial offers: A qualitative analysis of interactions with physicians and patients potentially eligible for a prostate cancer trial.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e23169-e23169
Author(s):  
Lauren M. Hamel ◽  
David W. Dougherty ◽  
Mark A. Manning ◽  
Louis Penner ◽  
Terrance Lynn Albrecht ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Qualitative Content Analysis ◽  
Physician Attitudes ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Trial ◽  
Clinical Communication ◽  
High Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trial Accrual

e23169 Background: Clinical trial accrual among cancer patients is low (2-5%). More data are needed to identify barriers to enrollment and inform interventions. One way to identify the greatest barriers is by examining clinical interactions. We investigated whether and under what circumstances patients potentially eligible for a trial at a major cancer center were offered the chance to enroll. Methods: We conducted a qualitative content analysis of 50 recorded interactions with physicians (n = 8) and patients (n = 36) with intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer who were initially eligible for a trial at two NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers. We observed and coded the interactions in three steps: 1) classification of all interactions as explicit offer, offer pending, trial discussed but not offered, or trial not discussed; 2) in interactions with no explicit offer, classification of patients who were informed their disease was stable or had progressed; 3) in interactions classified as cancer progressed but no trial offered, identification of factors discussed that may explain the lack of an offer. Results: Of the 50 interactions, 30% were classified as explicit offer; 6% as offer pending; 18% as trial discussed but not offered; and 40% as trial not discussed. Of the 35 interactions with no offer, 54% were with patients whose cancer had not progressed. In the 16 remaining interactions with patients with no offer and whose cancer had progressed, reasons for the lack of offer included: testing needed, no trial/study slot, and comorbidities; but in 25% of these, no reason was provided. Conclusions: Even in this highly selected population, few patients were offered a trial, often because they were ultimately ineligible. Findings support professional recommendations to broaden inclusion criteria to increase the pool of eligible patients. Findings also suggest trial accrual rates could be more accurately calculated by considering patients who are eligible to enroll, rather than all patients with cancer. In 40% of interactions, there was no mention of a trial, suggesting interventions should also be aimed at patient and physician attitudes and clinical communication. Clinical trial information: NCT 02906241.

Cancer expert doubts claims about prostate cancer trial

BMJ ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 337 (jul24 3) ◽  
pp. a979-a979 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Cole
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Trial
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document