scholarly journals Challenges to National Cancer Institute–Supported Cooperative Group Clinical Trial Participation: An ASCO Survey of Cooperative Group Sites

2010 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 114-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allison R. Baer ◽  
Chelsey A. Kelly ◽  
Suanna S. Bruinooge ◽  
Carolyn D. Runowicz ◽  
Douglas W. Blayney
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Research ◽  
National Cancer Institute ◽  
Trial Participation ◽  
Cooperative Group ◽  
Clinical Trial Participation ◽  
Anecdotal Information

Anecdotal information regarding clinical research sites limiting participation in NCI-funded cooperative group studies prompted ASCO to collect data on and investigate the reasons behind this trend.

scholarly journals Understanding the Barriers to Pediatric Oncologist Engagement and Accrual to Clinical Trials in National Cancer Institute–Designated Community Oncology Research Programs

2020 ◽  
pp. JOP.19.00707 ◽  
Author(s):  
David S. Dickens ◽  
Michael E. Roth ◽  
Brad H. Pollock ◽  
Anne-Marie Langevin
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Research ◽  
National Cancer Institute ◽  
Time Allocation ◽  
Trial Participation ◽  
Clinical Trial Participation ◽  
Clinical Trial Research ◽  
Protected Time ◽  
Oncology Research ◽  
Community Oncology

PURPOSE: Clinical trial participation leads to progress in cancer care. Principal investigators (PIs) and clinical research associates (CRAs) play key roles in the provision and maintenance of clinical trial portfolios at their sites. Previous studies have evaluated the educational and resource needs of adult oncology providers, but nothing to date has focused on providers of pediatric oncology care. We aimed to identify the educational needs and clinical trial participation barriers at National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) Children’s Oncology Group (COG) sites to improve the quality of site investigator engagement. METHODS: Quality improvement surveys of pediatric clinical research staff at NCORP sites were performed. The first was a web-based inquiry of NCORP COG PIs and lead CRAs to assess their general understanding of NCORP organizational structure and needs. The second survey of COG PIs was conducted by one-on-one telephone interviews aimed at identifying specific barriers to physician engagement and patient enrollment in clinical trial research. RESULTS: The majority of NCORP COG PIs and CRAs (63%) reported an incomplete understanding of NCORP structure, with approximately half expressing interest in developing stronger collaborations and engagement. Most NCORP COG PIs reported at least one shared barrier to clinical trial enrollment (78%), with inadequate protected time and research support (39% each) being the most frequently cited barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Contributions to pediatric cancer clinical research at COG NCORP sites could be enhanced through improved education, resources, and time allocation.

Multiple uses for a clinical research database

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 17037-17037
Author(s):  
A. O. Greco ◽  
C. M. Licavoli ◽  
L. A. White ◽  
J. R. Eckardt ◽  
K. O. Easley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Research ◽  
Data Base ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Trial Participation ◽  
Research Database ◽  
Cooperative Group ◽  
Oncology Clinical Trials ◽  
Referring Physicians

17037 Background: In Sept 2000, the research staff at The Center for Cancer Care and Research (TCCCR) developed an excel data base to track new consults referred to the practice. It is used to identify pts for participation in Cooperative Group Clinical Trials and to identify gaps in the active protocol list. Several additional uses for the data base have evolved. Methods: Medical records provided by referring physicians for each new consult are evaluated by a Research Coordinator. Information including the pt's name, date of visit, physician, referring physician, diagnosis, protocol for which the pt is evaluated, and eligibility information is entered in the data base. Results: The data base provides a method by which we can follow pts through the protocol selection and informed consent process. Early on, the data base identified a site need for trials in metastatic breast cancer prompting us to search other sources such as the CTSU and industry. Additionally, the percentage of new consults actually enrolled on a clinical trial can be determined as well as tracking eligibility/ineligibility trends. The Pharmaceutical Research Dept can use the information to complete feasibility studies prior to participating in industry trials. The data base can be used to evaluate trends in referral patterns and has helped identify referring physicians who support our research efforts. In 2006, TCCCR had a protocol available for 45% of new consults with a cancer dx. Of those pts, 16% enrolled on a Cooperative Group Clinical Trial. According to published evaluations, 16% is well above the national average of pts who participate in oncology clinical trials. It is our assessment that TCCCR's success is due in part to the data base. Conclusions: It is well known that in order to improve treatment outcomes and diminish treatment toxicity, oncology practices and pts must participate in clinical research. It is also well known that the numbers of pts who participate in oncology clinical trials is dismal. This data base has become a valuable tool providing a method to identify and evaluate some of the reasons why pts do not enroll in clinical trials and given our practice guidance to increase pt participation. Our next goal is to evaluate the differences between the rural and urban population at TCCCR's two sites to identify additional trends in clinical trial participation. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

scholarly journals A Screening Tool to Enhance Clinical Trial Participation at a Community Center Involved in a Radiation Oncology Disparities Program

2011 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 161-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julian W. Proctor ◽  
Elaine Martz ◽  
Larry L. Schenken ◽  
Rebecca Rainville ◽  
Ursula Marlowe
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
National Cancer Institute ◽  
Radiation Oncology ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Community Center ◽  
Trial Participation ◽  
Clinical Trial Participation ◽  
Oncology Center ◽  
Simple Screening

A simple screening tool was used to enhance clinical trial participation at a community radiation oncology center involved in a National Cancer Institute–funded disparities program but lacking on site clinical trials personnel.

Nationally representative estimates of the participation of cancer patients in clinical research studies according to the commission on cancer.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 74-74
Author(s):  
Joseph M. Unger ◽  
Mark Fleury
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Research ◽  
Trial Participation ◽  
Clinical Trial Participation ◽  
Cancer Centers ◽  
Treatment Trials ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
Enrollment Data

74 Background: The successful conduct of cancer clinical trials hinges on the willingness of patients to participate. The rate of adult clinical trial participation has been regarded as being < 5%. However, national estimates of trial participation are nearly two decades old, and no evidence based on original data sources has been examined for many years. Moreover, studies about trial participation have focused solely on enrollment to treatment trials, which does not reflect the willingness of patients to contribute to other key elements of clinical research, such as quality of life or biorepository studies. We determined inclusive, contemporary estimates of clinical trial participation for adults with cancer using a national sample of data from 1,200 institutions. Methods: The data were from the Commission on Cancer (CoC), a consortium of cancer-related organizations providing accreditation for both academic and community cancer care facilities across the U.S. CoC enrollment data represent 70% of all cases of cancer diagnosed each year. Deidentified, institution-level aggregate counts of annual enrollment to treatment, biorepository, diagnostic, economic, genetic, prevention, quality of life, registry, and screening studies were examined. Overall, study-type estimates for the period 2013-2017 were estimated. Multiple imputation by chained equations was used to account for missing data, with summary estimates calculated separately by type of program (e.g., NCI-designated cancer programs) and pooled. Results: Across the entire U.S. system, the estimated participation rate to cancer treatment trials was 6.3%. Enrollment to treatment trials was highest at NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers (18.9%), while for community cancer programs (CCPs) and comprehensive CCPs, treatment trial rates were 4.4% and 3.6%, respectively. Nearly 1 in 7 patients participated in biorepository studies (13.4%), including 39.4% at NCI cancer centers. Patients participated in a wide variety of other study types, including registry (8.1%), prevention (6.4%), genetic (3.6%), quality of life (2.9%), economic (2.7%), diagnostic (2.7%), and screening studies (1.8%). At least 25.4% of adult cancer patients were estimated to participate in one or more cancer clinical research studies. Conclusions: In a first-time use of nationally representative enrollment data from the CoC, enrollment to cancer treatment trials was 6.3%, higher than historical estimates of < 5%. Patients participated in a diverse set of other study types, and taken together, at least one quarter of patients participated in a study. Contributions of adult patients with cancer to clinical research is much more comprehensive than previously understood.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document