Search

Objectives: Rural patients have poor cancer outcomes and clinical trial (CT) enrollment compared to urban patients due to attitudinal, awareness, and healthcare access differential. Knowledge of cancer survival disparities and CT enrollment is important for designing interventions and innovative approaches to address the stated barriers. The study explores the potential disparities in cancer survival rates and clinical trial enrollments in rural and urban breast and lung cancer patients. Our hypotheses are that for both cancer types, urban cancer patients will have longer 5-year survival rates and higher enrollment rates in clinical trials than those in rural counties. Methods: We compared breast and lung cancer patients' survival rates and enrollment ratios in clinical trials between rural (RUCC 4-9) and urban counties in Georgia at a Comprehensive Cancer Center (CCC). To assess these differences, we carried out a series of independent samples t-tests and Chi-Square tests. Results: The outcomes indicate comparable 5-year survival rates across rural and urban counties for breast and lung cancer patients, failing to substantiate our hypothesis. While clinical trial enrollment rates demonstrated a significant difference between breast and lung cancer patients at CCC, no significant variation was observed based on rural or urban classification. Conclusion: These findings underscore the need for further research into the representation of rural patients with diverse cancer types at CCC and other cancer centers. Further, the findings have considerable implications for the initiation of positive social change to improve CT participation and reduce cancer survival disparities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Patients with localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) benefit from multi-modality therapy. Whether care patterns and oncologic outcomes vary if a patient was seen through a pancreatic multi-disciplinary clinic (PMDC) versus only individual specialty clinics is unclear. Methods: Using institutional Pancreatic Cancer Registry, we identified patients with localized PDAC from 2019-2022 who eventually underwent resection. It was our standard practice for borderline resectable (BRPC) patients to undergo =4 months of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, ± radiation, followed by exploration, while locally advanced (LAPC) patients were treated with 4-6 months of chemotherapy, followed by radiation and potential exploration. Descriptive and multivariable analyses (MVA) were performed to examine the association between clinic type (PMDC vs individual specialty clinics i.e. surgical oncology, medical oncology, or radiation oncology) and study outcomes. Results: A total of 416 patients met inclusion criteria. Of these, 267 (64.2%) had PMDC visits. PMDC group received radiation therapy more commonly (53.9% versus 27.5%, p=0.001), as compared to individual specialty clinic group. Completion of neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) was far more frequent in patients seen through PMDC compared to patients seen through individual specialty clinics (69.3% vs 48.9%). On MVA, PMDC group was significantly associated with receipt of NAT per institutional standards (adjusted OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.46-7.07, p=0.006). Moreover, the average treatment effect of PMDC on progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.45 (95CI: 0.87-8.03) months. No significant association between overall survival (OS) and clinic type was observed. Discussion: Provision of care through PMDC was associated with significantly higher odds of completing NAT per institutional standards as compared to individual specialty clinics, which possibly translated into improved PFS. The development of multidisciplinary clinics for management of pancreatic cancer should be incentivized, and any barriers to such development should be addressed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Racial and ethnic minorities remain underrepresented in clinical trials . Underrepresentation of racial groups leads to the selection of therapeutic interventions that may not be representative of the population expected to use the medicine. This study evaluates the effectiveness of a set of implementation strategies to increase underrepresented patients in gynecologic cancer clinical trials. Methods: An interrupted time series analysis evaluating implementation strategies (pre-screening and fast-track referral) was conducted from January 2021 to May 2022. Descriptive analysis of gynecologic oncology patient screening and accrual was compared before and after intervention implementation. Results: During the study period (pre- and post-intervention), 26 patients were screened, and 9 patients enrolled in therapeutic gynecologic cancer clinical trials. Prior to the intervention, 7 patients were screened and 2 patients enrolled onto a clinical trial. Following the intervention, 19 patients were screened and 7 patients enrolled in a cancer clinical trial. Black patients comprised 13 of 19 (68.4%) of patients post-intervention compared to 1 of 7 (14.3 %) of patients screened pre-intervention (p

Despite dedicated efforts to improve equitable access to cancer care in the United States, disparities in cancer outcomes persist, and geographically underserved patients remain at an increased risk of cancer with lower rates of survival. The critical evaluation of cancer prevention inequities and clinical trial access presents the opportunity to outline novel strategies to incrementally improve bookended access to gynecologic cancer care for geographically underserved patients. Cancer prevention strategies that can be addressed in the rural patient population mirror priorities in the Healthy People 2030 objectives and include increased identification of high risk individuals who may benefit from increased cancer screening and risk reduction, increasing the proportion of people who discuss interventions to prevent cancer, such as HPV vaccination, with their provider, and increasing the proportion of adults who complete evidence based cancer screening. Barriers to accrual to clinical trials for rural patients overlap significantly with the same barriers to obtaining health care in general. These barriers include: lack of facilities and specialized providers; lack of robust health infrastructure; inability to travel; and financial barriers. In this review, we will discuss current knowledge and opportunities to improve cancer prevention initiatives and clinical trial enrollment in geographically underserved populations with a focus on rurality. • Access to cancer prevention services and clinical trials in rural populations continues to lag behind urban counterparts. • Novel strategies in cancer prevention partnered with trusted providers are needed for improved uptake in rural populations. • Decentralization of trials and combatting provider bias are needed for equitable access to clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundVaccine clinical trials should strive to recruit a racially, socioeconomically, and ethnically diverse range of participants to ensure appropriate representation that matches population characteristics. Yet, full inclusion in research is often limited.MethodsA single-center retrospective study was conducted of adults enrolled at Brigham and Women’s Hospital (Boston, MA) between July 2020 and December 2021. Demographic characteristics, including age, race, ethnicity, ZIP code, and sex assigned at birth, were analyzed from both HIV and COVID-19 vaccine trials during the study period, acknowledging the limitations to representation under these parameters. We compared the educational attainment of vaccine trial participants to residents of the Massachusetts metropolitan area, geocoded participants’ addresses to their census block group, and linked them to reported median household income levels from publicly available data for 2020. Frequency and quartile analyses were carried out, and spatial analyses were performed using ArcGIS Online web-based mapping software (Esri).ResultsA total of 1030 participants from four COVID-19 vaccine trials (n = 916 participants) and six HIV vaccine trials (n = 114 participants) were included in the analysis. The median age was 49 years (IQR 33–63) and 28 years (IQR 24–34) for the COVID-19 and HIV vaccine trials, respectively. Participants identifying as White were the majority group represented for both the COVID-19 (n = 598, 65.3%) and HIV vaccine trials (n = 83, 72.8%). Fewer than 25% of participants identified as Hispanic or Latin. Based on ZIP code of residence, the median household income for COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial participants (n = 846) was 102,088 USD (IQR = 81,442–126,094). For HIV vaccine clinical trial participants (n = 109), the median household income was 101,266 USD (IQR 75,052–108,832).ConclusionWe described the characteristics of participants enrolled for HIV and COVID-19 vaccine trials at a single center and found similitude in geographical distribution, median incomes, and proportion of underrepresented individuals between the two types of vaccine candidate trials. Further outreach efforts are needed to ensure the inclusion of individuals from lower educational and socioeconomic brackets. In addition, continued and sustained efforts are necessary to ensure inclusion of individuals from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds.

IntroductionPatients with localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) benefit from multi-modality therapy. Whether care patterns and oncologic outcomes vary if a patient was seen through a pancreatic multi-disciplinary clinic (PMDC) versus only individual specialty clinics is unclear.MethodsUsing institutional Pancreatic Cancer Registry, we identified patients with localized PDAC from 2019- 2022 who eventually underwent resection. It was our standard practice for borderline resectable (BRPC) patients to undergo ≤4 months of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, ± radiation, followed by exploration, while locally advanced (LAPC) patients were treated with 4-6 months of chemotherapy, followed by radiation and potential exploration. Descriptive and multivariable analyses (MVA) were performed to examine the association between clinic type (PMDC vs individual specialty clinics i.e. surgical oncology, medical oncology, or radiation oncology) and study outcomes.ResultsA total of 416 patients met inclusion criteria. Of these, 267 (64.2%) had PMDC visits. PMDC group received radiation therapy more commonly (53.9% versus 27.5%, p=0.001), as compared to individual specialty clinic group. Completion of neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) was far more frequent in patients seen through PMDC compared to patients seen through individual specialty clinics (69.3% vs 48.9%). On MVA, PMDC group was significantly associated with receipt of NAT per institutional standards (adjusted OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.46-7.07, p=0.006). Moreover, the average treatment effect of PMDC on progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.45 (95CI: 0.87-8.03) months. No significant association between overall survival (OS) and clinic type was observed.DiscussionProvision of care through PMDC was associated with significantly higher odds of completing NAT per institutional standards as compared to individual specialty clinics, which possibly translated into improved PFS. The development of multidisciplinary clinics for management of pancreatic cancer should be incentivized, and any barriers to such development should be addressed.

ObjectivesOlder adults under-enroll in early phase cancer clinical trials. There are limited data on their trial experiences, which hampers our ability to understand potential reasons and responses to under-enrollment. We aimed to explore older adults' experiences and deliberations with phase 1 trials.Materials and methodsWe analyzed 101 in-depth interviews with 39 adults (average 2.6 interviews per participant) about their experiences with phase 1 trials. All respondents were ≥ 65 years and had advanced cancer. Interviews lasted 60-90 min and were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed to identify respondents' understanding of clinical research, perceptions of early phase trials, and experiences with enrollment.ResultsClinical trial participation was an interactive process that unfolded over time. Older adults relied on ongoing guidance and discussion with their oncologist to navigate the process. Respondents were generally interested in life-prolonging therapies, including enrollment in early phase clinical trials, but did not necessarily state this explicitly to their oncologist. While respondents did not mention age as a limitation to trials participation, participants age > 70 were less enthusiastic about participation and more often discussed their quality of life and weighed benefits of trial participation in the context of their remaining months of life.ConclusionEarly phase clinical trial enrollment is complex, and older adults rely on their oncologist to navigate this process. Acknowledging this complexity through shared decision-making may ensure that older adults have appropriate opportunities to enroll in early phase clinical trials and guard against inappropriate under-enrollment.

Introduction: Clinical trials investigating the safety and efficacy of experimental drugs and devices are the cornerstone of medicinal advancement. Enrolling sufficient participants in these trials is vital to ensure adequate statistical power and generalizability. Clinical trial participation is particularly low among certain populations, including medically underserved communities (i.e., rural areas) and Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC). Methods: A retrospective study design was used to understand patient outcomes and access/barriers to clinical trial participation in the rural northwest United States. A quantitatively focused retrospective chart review was conducted for adult participants enrolled in at least one clinical trial in a single northwest health system between 1999 and 2022. Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were performed to assess trial outcomes at a significance level 0.05. Results: The retrospective chart review yielded 833 clinical trial records with 753 individual enrolled participants. The all-cause relative frequency of death at last known follow-up amongst clinical trial participants was 8.90% (n = 67). Based on logistic regression, the death was significantly associated with the participants' age at initial trial screening (ß = 0.09, p-value <0.001), those that resided in nonmetro areas (ß = -0.86, p-value = 0.045), and those that lived in Northeastern Montana (ß = 1.27, p-value = 0.025). Additionally, death at last known follow-up was significantly associated with enrollment in 2021-2022 (ß = -1.52, p-value <0.001), enrolled in more than one study (ß = 0.84, p-value = 0.023), in internationally sponsored trials (ß = -2.08, p-value <0.001), in Phase I (ß = 5.34, p-value <0.001), in Phase II trials (ß = 1.37, p-value = 0.013), diabetes as a primary trial target (ß = -2.04, p-value = 0.003). Conclusion: As decentralized trial design and remote or virtual elements of traditional trials become normative, representation of rural and frontier populations is imperative to support the generalizability of trial data encouraged by the FDA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The informed consent form (ICF) is intended to assure that subject participation in research studies is informed and voluntary. Yet, there is ample evidence that many subjects do not adequately understand the concepts and language in a clinical trial ICF, which may undermine their willingness to participate in a clinical trial. In a randomized setting, we compared a standard read-only ICF to an audio-assisted ICF with or without teach-back. We found that audio-assisted ICFs significantly improved willingness to participate in a mock clinical trial among our sample of primarily African-American participants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION: Alzheimer's disease (AD) blood tests are likely to become increasingly important in clinical practice, but they need to be evaluated in diverse groups before use in the general population. METHODS: This study enrolled a community‐based sample of older adults in the St. Louis, Missouri, USA area. Participants completed a blood draw, Eight‐Item Informant Interview to Differentiate Aging and Dementia (AD8®), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and survey about their perceptions of the blood test. A subset of participants completed additional blood collection, amyloid positron emission tomography (PET), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR®). RESULTS: Of the 859 participants enrolled in this ongoing study, 20.6% self‐identified as Black or African American. The AD8 and MoCA correlated moderately with the CDR. The blood test was well accepted by the cohort, but it was perceived more positively by White and highly educated individuals. DISCUSSION: Studying an AD blood test in a diverse population is feasible and may accelerate accurate diagnosis and implementation of effective treatments. Highlights: A diverse group of older adults was recruited to evaluate a blood amyloid test.The enrollment rate was high and the blood test was well accepted by participants.Cognitive impairment screens have moderate performance in a diverse population.Alzheimer's disease blood tests are likely to be feasible for use in real‐world settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundAdolescent and young adult (AYA) patients with cancer are underrepresented on cancer clinical trials (CCTs), and most AYAs are treated in the community setting. Past research has focused on individual academic institutions, but factors impacting enrollment vary across institutions. Therefore, we examined the patterns of barriers and facilitators between high- and low-AYA enrolling community-based clinics to identify targets for intervention.Materials and methodsWe conducted 34 semi-structured interviews with stakeholders employed used at National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) affiliate sites ("clinics"). Stakeholders (eg, clinical research associates, patient advocates) were recruited from high- and low-AYA enrolling clinics. We conducted a content analysis and calculated the percentage of stakeholders from each clinic type that reported the barrier or facilitator. A 10% gap between high- and low-enrollers was considered the threshold for differences.ResultsBoth high- and low-enrollers highlighted insufficient resources as a barrier and the presence of a patient eligibility screening process as a facilitator to AYA enrollment. High-enrolling clinics reported physician gatekeeping as a barrier and the improvement of departmental collaboration as a facilitator. Low-enrollers reported AYAs' uncertainty regarding the CCT process as a barrier and the need for increased physician endorsement of CCTs as a facilitator.ConclusionsHigh-enrolling clinics reported more barriers downstream in the enrollment process, such as physician gatekeeping. In contrast, low-enrolling clinics struggled with the earlier steps in the CCT enrollment process, such as identifying eligible trials. These findings highlight the need for multi-level, tailored interventions rather than a "one-size-fits-all" approach to improve AYA enrollment in the community setting.

Introduction: Clinical trials investigating the safety and efficacy of experimental drugs and devices are the cornerstone of medicinal advancement. Enrolling sufficient participants in these trials is vital to ensure adequate statistical power and generalizability. Clinical trial participation is particularly low among certain populations, including medically underserved communities (i.e., rural areas) and Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC).Methods: A retrospective study design was used to understand patient outcomes and access/barriers to clinical trial participation in the rural northwest United States. A quantitatively focused retrospective chart review was conducted for adult participants enrolled in at least one clinical trial in a single northwest health system between 1999 and 2022. Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were performed to assess trial outcomes at a significance level 0.05.Results: The retrospective chart review yielded 833 clinical trial records with 753 individual enrolled participants. The all-cause relative frequency of death at last known follow-up amongst clinical trial participants was 8.90% (n = 67). Based on logistic regression, the death was significantly associated with the participants’ age at initial trial screening (β = 0.09, p-value

Introduction: Clinical research professionals (i.e., clinical research assistants, clinical research nurses, clinical research coordinators, etc.), as outlined by the Joint Task Force (JTF) Core Competency Framework, are highly trained to support the breadth of clinical trial operations and manage participant care. Clinical research professionals are uniquely equipped with a scope of practice that permits product administration, participant assessments, and data management. As clinical trials grow in complexity and their management expands beyond traditional, site-based operations models to decentralized and/or hybrid models, the need becomes great to ensure adequate staffing. However, rural hospitals frequently lack the research staff or patient recruiters that would allow them to support decentralized clinical trials across a sizeable rural geographic demographic.Methods: This paper examines the contributory factors of the clinical research professional workforce contraction and response efforts at professional and organizational levels within a large, Magnet-designated healthcare system in the rural northwestern United States. Perspectives are shared on adapting the Core Competency Framework to reflect the unique strengths and opportunities towards decentralized trials in rural regions of the United States and areas of priority for workforce cultivation and retention. A descriptive survey was used to gather initial data identifying the current research perspectives of healthcare workers working across a rural community. Participants were asked to complete questions about the JTF Competency domains and behavior-based questions.Analysis: Both competency and behavior-based questions were asked and related to roles. These were then cross-referenced using a Rasmussen Ladder system. Descriptive statistics were conducted for sample characteristics, self-reported competency domain questions, and behavior questions.Results and discussion: Survey findings suggest that although healthcare workers and clinical research teams interact, they are unlikely to ask their patients to participate in research. Based on the limited response rate, results suggest that better education throughout the rural community could benefit from decentralized research efforts. Increased use of technology was also highlighted as an area of interest.

Abstract Background Significant racial disparities in prostate cancer incidence and mortality have been reported between African American Men (AAM), who are at increased risk for prostate cancer, and European American Men (EAM). In most of the studies carried out on prostate cancer, this population is underrepresented. With the advancement of genome‐wide association studies, several genetic predictor models of prostate cancer risk have been elaborated, as well as numerous studies that identify both germline and somatic mutations with clinical utility. Recent Findings Despite significant advances, the AAM population continues to be underrepresented in genomic studies, which can limit generalizability and potentially widen disparities. Here we outline racial disparities in currently available genomic applications that are used to estimate the risk of individuals developing prostate cancer and to identify personalized oncology treatment strategies. While the incidence and mortality of prostate cancer are different between AAM and EAM, samples from AAM remain to be unrepresented in different studies. Conclusion This disparity impacts the available genomic data on prostate cancer. As a result, the disparity can limit the predictive utility of the genomic applications and may lead to the widening of the existing disparities. More studies with substantially higher recruitment and engagement of African American patients are necessary to overcome this disparity.

Purpose: Although participation of adolescents and young adults (AYAs) in cancer clinical trials (CCTs, i.e., cancer-directed treatment studies) is low, their decision-making perspectives are not well understood, especially following recent diagnosis. Methods: Semistructured interviews with younger AYAs (15–21 years old) eligible for a CCT were to be held within 60 days of beginning treatment at Children's Hospital Los Angeles, an academic pediatric hospital. Using grounded theory methods, key themes regarding CCT participation, barriers, and facilitators were identified from interview transcripts. Thematic saturation was confirmed. Results: Of nine participants, three were <18 years old, four Hispanic, six male, six diagnosed with leukemia, eight enrolled in a CCT, and eight also enrolled in ancillary studies. Four overarching themes emerged: (1) Initial Consent encompassed the first discussion of CCT with patients reflecting positive and negative effects of timing, decisional role, and the emotional impact following cancer diagnosis; (2) Informing Participation involved decision-making processes, specific knowledge, comprehension, and external influences; (3) Participant Relationships emphasized the importance of communication and relationships with providers and parents; and (4) Patient Determinants centered on motives from different perspectives, pre-conceived attitudes, and understanding of CCTs. Conclusion: Recommendations for improving CCT participation among younger AYAs include separating the diagnosis/treatment and CCT discussions, assigning AYAs a meaningful decisional role, having ongoing provider conversations, designing trials to minimize burden, and developing age-appropriate decision aids. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Assessment for risks associated with acute stable COVID-19 is important to optimize clinical trial enrollment and target patients for scarce therapeutics. To assess whether healthcare system engagement location is an independent predictor of outcomes we performed a secondary analysis of the ACTIV-4B Outpatient Thrombosis Prevention trial. Methods: A secondary analysis of the ACTIV-4B trial that was conducted at 52 US sites between September 2020 and August 2021. Participants were enrolled through acute unscheduled episodic care (AUEC) enrollment location (emergency department, or urgent care clinic visit) compared to minimal contact (MC) enrollment (electronic contact from test center lists of positive patients).We report the primary composite outcome of cardiopulmonary hospitalizations, symptomatic venous thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, stroke, transient ischemic attack, systemic arterial thromboembolism, or death among stable outpatients stratified by enrollment setting, AUEC versus MC. A propensity score for AUEC enrollment was created, and Cox proportional hazards regression with inverse probability weighting (IPW) was used to compare the primary outcome by enrollment location. Results: Among the 657 ACTIV-4B patients randomized, 533 (81.1%) with known enrollment setting data were included in this analysis, 227 from AUEC settings and 306 from MC settings. In a multivariate logistic regression model, time from COVID test, age, Black race, Hispanic ethnicity, and body mass index were associated with AUEC enrollment. Irrespective of trial treatment allocation, patients enrolled at an AUEC setting were 10-times more likely to suffer from the adjudicated primary outcome, 7.9% vs. 0.7%; p < 0.001, compared with patients enrolled at a MC setting. Upon Cox regression analysis adjustment patients enrolled at an AUEC setting remained at significant risk of the primary composite outcome, HR 3.40 (95% CI 1.46, 7.94). Conclusions: Patients with clinically stable COVID-19 presenting to an AUEC enrollment setting represent a population at increased risk of arterial and venous thrombosis complications, hospitalization for cardiopulmonary events, or death, when adjusted for other risk factors, compared with patients enrolled at a MC setting. Future outpatient therapeutic trials and clinical therapeutic delivery programs of clinically stable COVID-19 patients may focus on inclusion of higher-risk patient populations from AUEC engagement locations. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04498273. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Demographic minorities are underrepresented in clinical trials. For the approval of new drug applications (NDAs), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has asserted that clinical trial enrollment should represent the demographics of patients likely to receive the trial drug. The aim of this study is to assess the demographics of clinical trials included in NDAs and biologics license applications (BLAs) approved by the FDA since 1990 for allergic rhinitis (AR), a condition whose demographic prevalence mirrors the US population. Methods: Federal Freedom of Information Act requests were submitted to the US government to obtain documents related to all relevant NDAs and BLAs. The Drugs@FDA database was queried for all clinical trial documentation. Demographic data were extracted from clinical trials used to inform FDA approval for AR pharmacotherapies. Demographics were analyzed relative to national US Census data. Results: Since 1990, 22 drugs have been approved for AR. The racial, ethnic, and sex composition of all included study populations differed significantly (p < 0.05) from the demographics of AR and from US Census data. Most NDAs and BLAs included overrepresentation of White participants and underrepresentation of Black, Asian, Pacific Island, Native American, and Hispanic participants. Conclusion: The patients enrolled in clinical trials used to inform FDA approval for AR pharmacotherapeutics do not represent the demographics of the United States or the demographics of AR. The clinical significance of unrepresentative demography between study and treatment populations has been examined for several medical disorders, but has not been studied for AR. Level of Evidence: 4 Laryngoscope, 133:755–763, 2023 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the summer of 2020, multiple efforts were undertaken to establish safe and effective vaccines to combat the spread of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19). In the United States (U.S.), Operation Warp Speed (OWS) was the program designated to coordinate such efforts. OWS was a partnership between the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Department of Defense (DOD), and the private sector, that aimed to help accelerate control of the COVID-19 pandemic by advancing development, manufacturing, and distribution of vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs’ (VA) was identified as a potential collaborator in several large-scale OWS Phase III clinical trial efforts designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of various vaccines that were in development. Given the global importance of these trials, it was recognized that there would be a need for a coordinated, centralized effort within VA to ensure that its medical centers (sites) would be ready and able to efficiently initiate, recruit, and enroll into these trials.The manuscript outlines the partnership and start-up activities led by two key divisions of the VA's Office of Research and Development's clinical research enterprise. These efforts focused on site and enterprise-level requirements for multiple trials, with one trial serving as the most prominently featured of these studies within the VA. As a result, several best practices arose that included designating clinical trial facilitators to study sites to support study initiation activities and successful study enrollment at these locations in an efficient and timely fashion.

Abstract: To have a complete understanding of an experimental analgesic's efficacy in treating acute postoperative pain, it is necessary to understand its effect on both hard-tissue pain and soft-tissue pain. For this reason, regulatory bodies including the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and European EMA typically require drug developers to demonstrate efficacy in both hard-tissue and soft-tissue pain to grant a broad approval for an analgesic in acute postoperative pain. Hard-tissue models such as bunionectomy and molar extraction are well-validated and efficient with long histories in clinical trials, but until recently, a similarly well-standardized and fast-enrolling soft-tissue model was not available. Abdominoplasty was developed as an acute postoperative pain model and introduced to the clinical trial marketplace in 2014 to address the need for a viable soft-tissue model. Since then, at least 13 industry-sponsored studies, including multiple pivotal trials, have been conducted, providing a data set that can be used to interrogate the model's strengths and weaknesses. The authors outline the development history of abdominoplasty, discuss key clinical and design characteristics of the model, and review public data from abdominoplasty acute pain studies available to date. The data suggest that abdominoplasty is a well-validated soft-tissue surgical model that provides high-quality experimental outputs, enabling the efficacy of investigational analgesics in soft-tissue pain to be understood successfully. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The use of biomarker testing to inform treatment decisions has emerged as a standard of care in multiple cancer types. However, the rates of patients with genomic testing results in hand to inform treatment decision-making remain variable. Here, we studied the impact of comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) on clinical trial enrollment rates in patients with advanced-stage non-small cell lung, colorectal, breast, and prostate cancer using a real-world clinicogenomic database. On average, clinical trial enrollment in the therapy line immediately after CGP report receipt was 5.4%, which represents a 3.0 percentage point increase compared to therapy lines preceding CGP report receipt, supporting a meaningful association between CGP report availability and increased clinical trial enrollment., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Objective: Despite declining lung cancer mortality in the United States, survival differences remain among racial and ethnic minorities in addition to those with limited health care access. Improvements in lung cancer treatment can be obtained through clinical trials, yet there are disparities in clinical trial enrollment of other cancer types. This study aims to evaluate disparities in lung cancer clinical trial enrollment to inform future enrollment initiatives., Methods: We analyzed patients with non-small cell lung cancer from the National Cancer Database (2004-2018), categorizing them as enrolled or not enrolled in clinical trials based on "rx&#95;summ&#95;other" data element. Clinical, demographic, and institutional factors associated with trial enrollment were assessed using bivariate and multivariate analysis, adjusting for institutional-level clustering., Results: A total of 1924 (0.12%) patients with lung cancer were enrolled in clinical trials. Enrolled patients were predominantly non-Hispanic White (82%), with greater socioeconomic status, treated at academic programs (67%), and had private insurance (42%) or Medicare (44%). They also traveled further for treatment compared with unenrolled patients (56 vs 27 miles, P < .001). After adjusting for demographic and clinical factors, lung cancer trial enrollment was significantly less likely among Black (odds ratio, 0.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.5-0.7, P < .001) and Hispanic (0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.5-0.9, P = .01) patients. Patients with Medicaid or uninsured, in the lowest socioeconomic status group, and those treated at community-based cancer programs were the least likely to enroll., Conclusions: Enrollment in lung cancer trials disproportionally excludes minority patients, those in the lowest socioeconomic status, community cancer programs, and the underinsured. These disparities in demographic and access for trial participation show a need for improved enrollment strategies., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Statement C.W.T. is a consultant for Zimmer Biomet, AtriCure, Astra Zeneca, and Bristol Myers Squibb. C.W.T. also discloses research finding and nonfinancial research support from Zimmer Biomet and Medtronic. All other authors reported no conflicts of interest. The Journal policy requires editors and reviewers to disclose conflicts of interest and to decline handling or reviewing manuscripts for which they may have a conflict of interest. The editors and reviewers of this article have no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Vulnerable older adults, such as physically impaired or care-dependent individuals, are vastly underrepresented in psychotherapy research. Improving their inclusion in randomized controlled trials is necessary to determine the effectiveness of psychotherapy in this population. This study is the first to systematically evaluate strategies to recruit home-living vulnerable older adults with clinically significant depression into a large randomized controlled psychotherapy trial. Potential participants were approached directly (self-referral) or via cooperation with gatekeepers (gatekeeper-referral).Methods: Successful recruitment strategies and the person initiating the first contact with the study team were recorded. Recruitment strategies were compared with respect to the number of inquiries and inclusion rates, study personnel's time investment, and participant characteristics (sociodemographics, functional and cognitive status, depression and anxiety scores).Results: Most of the N = 197 participants were included via gatekeeper-referral (80.5%, 95% confidence interval = [74.9, 86.1]), but time investment for gatekeeper-referrals was five times higher than for self-referral by media reports. Clinical psychologists and medical practitioners referred the largest proportion of participants (32.3% each) and referral by medical practitioners led to highest inclusion rates (55.6%; χ²(3) = 8.964, p <0.05). Most participants were referred from a hospital setting (50.3%), whereas referral numbers by medical practices were low (15.9%). Participants who initiated the first contact themselves had higher inclusion rates and were less functionally impaired.Conclusion: Including home-living vulnerable older adults into psychotherapy trials requires simultaneous implementation of diverse recruitment strategies. Medical practitioners and psychologists, especially in hospitals, are the most effective recruitment strategy, but self-referral via media is most cost-efficient in terms of time investment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Racial and ethnic minorities remain underrepresented in clinical trials . Underrepresentation of racial groups leads to the selection of therapeutic interventions that may not be representative of the population expected to use the medicine. This study evaluates the effectiveness of a set of implementation strategies to increase underrepresented patients in gynecologic cancer clinical trials., Methods: An interrupted time series analysis evaluating implementation strategies (pre-screening and fast-track referral) was conducted from January 2021 to May 2022. Descriptive analysis of gynecologic oncology patient screening and accrual was compared before and after intervention implementation., Results: During the study period (pre- and post-intervention), 26 patients were screened, and 9 patients enrolled in therapeutic gynecologic cancer clinical trials. Prior to the intervention, 7 patients were screened and 2 patients enrolled onto a clinical trial. Following the intervention, 19 patients were screened and 7 patients enrolled in a cancer clinical trial. Black patients comprised 13 of 19 (68.4%) of patients post-intervention compared to 1 of 7 (14.3 %) of patients screened pre-intervention (p < 0.05). All 7 patients enrolled post intervention were racial and ethnic minorities (non-Hispanic Black [4 of 7] and Hispanic White [3 of 7]) compared to no minority patients enrolled pre-intervention (p < 0.05). Screening increased 2.5-fold for all patients, and 5- fold for minority patients. Clinical trial enrollment increased 3.5-fold following intervention., Conclusions: A combination of pre-screening and fast-track referral intervention in a racial and ethnically diverse urban academic hospital was associated with a significant increase in minority screening and enrollment. Structured strategies to overcome barriers to underrepresented racial and ethnic patient accrual in academic hospitals are urgently warranted., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (© 2024 The Author(s).)

Background: Vaccine clinical trials should strive to recruit a racially, socioeconomically, and ethnically diverse range of participants to ensure appropriate representation that matches population characteristics. Yet, full inclusion in research is often limited., Methods: A single-center retrospective study was conducted of adults enrolled at Brigham and Women's Hospital (Boston, MA) between July 2020 and December 2021. Demographic characteristics, including age, race, ethnicity, ZIP code, and sex assigned at birth, were analyzed from both HIV and COVID-19 vaccine trials during the study period, acknowledging the limitations to representation under these parameters. We compared the educational attainment of vaccine trial participants to residents of the Massachusetts metropolitan area, geocoded participants' addresses to their census block group, and linked them to reported median household income levels from publicly available data for 2020. Frequency and quartile analyses were carried out, and spatial analyses were performed using ArcGIS Online web-based mapping software (Esri)., Results: A total of 1030 participants from four COVID-19 vaccine trials ( n  = 916 participants) and six HIV vaccine trials ( n  = 114 participants) were included in the analysis. The median age was 49 years (IQR 33-63) and 28 years (IQR 24-34) for the COVID-19 and HIV vaccine trials, respectively. Participants identifying as White were the majority group represented for both the COVID-19 ( n  = 598, 65.3%) and HIV vaccine trials ( n  = 83, 72.8%). Fewer than 25% of participants identified as Hispanic or Latin. Based on ZIP code of residence, the median household income for COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial participants ( n  = 846) was 102,088 USD (IQR = 81,442-126,094). For HIV vaccine clinical trial participants ( n  = 109), the median household income was 101,266 USD (IQR 75,052-108,832)., Conclusion: We described the characteristics of participants enrolled for HIV and COVID-19 vaccine trials at a single center and found similitude in geographical distribution, median incomes, and proportion of underrepresented individuals between the two types of vaccine candidate trials. Further outreach efforts are needed to ensure the inclusion of individuals from lower educational and socioeconomic brackets. In addition, continued and sustained efforts are necessary to ensure inclusion of individuals from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds., Competing Interests: LB, SW, and AS are involved in HIV, COVID, and other vaccine clinical trials conducted in collaboration with the NIH, HIV Vaccine Trials Network, COVID Vaccine Prevention Network, International AIDS Vaccine Initiative, Crucell/Janssen, Moderna, Military HIV Research Program, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and the Ragon Institute. SW has received grant and research support from Johnson & Johnson, Moderna, Pfizer, Sanofi Pasteur, VIR, and Worcester HIV Vaccine. AS has received grant and research support from Merck. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Lezo Ramirez, Koleske, Ometoruwa, Park Chang, Kanwal, Morreale, Avila Paz, Tong, Baden, Sherman and Walsh.)

Background: For results to be generalizable to all patients with cancer, clinical trials need to include a diverse patient demographic that is representative of the general population. We sought to characterize the effect of receiving care at a minority-serving hospital (MSH) and/or safety-net hospital on clinical trial enrollment among patients with gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies., Methods: Adult patients with GI cancer who underwent oncologic surgery and were enrolled in institutional-/National Cancer Institute-funded clinical trials between 2012 and 2019 were identified in the National Cancer Database. Multivariable regression was used to assess the relationship between MSH and safety-net status relative to clinical trial enrollment., Results: Among 1,112,594 patients, 994,598 (89.4%) were treated at a non-MSH, whereas 117,996 (10.6%) were treated at an MSH. Only 1857 patients (0.2%) were enrolled in a clinical trial; most patients received care at a non-MSH (1794 [96.6%]). On multivariable analysis, the odds of enrollment in a clinical trial were markedly lower among patients treated at an MSH vs non-MSH (odds ratio [OR], 0.32; 95% CI, 0.22-0.46). In addition, even after controlling for receipt of care at MSH, Black patients remained at lower odds of enrollment in a clinical trial than White patients (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.45-0.73; both P < .05)., Conclusion: Overall, clinical trial participation among patients with GI cancer was extremely low. Patients treated at an MSH and high safety-net burden hospitals and Black individuals were much less likely to be enrolled in a clinical trial. Efforts should be made to improve trial enrollment and address disparities in trial representation., (Copyright © 2024 Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective/Hypothesis: The aim of this study is to assess the ethnic and racial demographics of patients enrolled in prospective chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) studies relative to the corresponding geographic demographics of the United States (U.S.) census data. Study Design: Systematic Review and Population analysis. Methods: A systematic review was performed to identify CRS clinical trials, conducted in the U.S. and published between 2010 and 2020 in which patients were prospectively enrolled. Pooled racial and ethnicity data were compared to national and corresponding regional census data. Results: Eighty‐three studies were included, comprising 12,027 patients. 50.4% were male and the average age was 49.2 years. 8,810 patients underwent a surgical procedure. Of the 12,027 patients, 81.67% were identified as White, 5.35% as Black, 1.27% as Asian, 0.02% as Pacific Islander, 0.12% as American Indian, and 11.57% were classified as Other. The racial and ethnic composition of the pooled study population differs significantly from the national U.S. census data with the underrepresentation of each minority population (P ≤.0002). Regional sub‐analyses yield variable results. In the Northeast and West, there was an underrepresentation of all minority populations. In the South and Midwest, Black enrollment was similar to the U.S. census data, while all other minorities were underrepresented. Conclusions: The racial and ethnic composition of patients enrolled in prospective CRS clinical trials differs significantly from the demographics of the U.S. population. The generalizability and external validity of findings derived from studies comprised of demographically mismatched populations has not been established. Future efforts to enroll more representative populations should be emphasized by the research community, funding bodies, and editorial boards. Level of Evidence: NA Laryngoscope, 131:1722–1728, 2021 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractBackground:To identify potential participants for clinical trials, electronic health records (EHRs) are searched at potential sites. As an alternative, we investigated using medical devices used for real-time diagnostic decisions for trial enrollment.Methods:To project cohorts for a trial in acute coronary syndromes (ACS), we used electrocardiograph-based algorithms that identify ACS or ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) that prompt clinicians to offer patients trial enrollment. We searched six hospitals’ electrocardiograph systems for electrocardiograms (ECGs) meeting the planned trial’s enrollment criterion: ECGs with STEMI or > 75% probability of ACS by the acute cardiac ischemia time-insensitive predictive instrument (ACI-TIPI). We revised the ACI-TIPI regression to require only data directly from the electrocardiograph, the e-ACI-TIPI using the same data used for the original ACI-TIPI (development set n = 3,453; test set n = 2,315). We also tested both on data from emergency department electrocardiographs from across the US (n = 8,556). We then used ACI-TIPI and e-ACI-TIPI to identify potential cohorts for the ACS trial and compared performance to cohorts from EHR data at the hospitals.Results:Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve areas on the test set were excellent, 0.89 for ACI-TIPI and 0.84 for the e-ACI-TIPI, as was calibration. On the national electrocardiographic database, ROC areas were 0.78 and 0.69, respectively, and with very good calibration. When tested for detection of patients with > 75% ACS probability, both electrocardiograph-based methods identified eligible patients well, and better than did EHRs.Conclusion:Using data from medical devices such as electrocardiographs may provide accurate projections of available cohorts for clinical trials.

Background Clinical trial matching, essential for advancing medical research, involves detailed screening of potential participants to ensure alignment with specific trial requirements. Research staff face challenges due to the high volume of eligible patients and the complexity of varying eligibility criteria. The traditional manual process, both time-consuming and error-prone, often leads to missed opportunities. Recently, large language models (LLMs), specifically generative pre-trained transformers (GPTs), have become impressive and impactful tools. Utilizing such tools from artificial intelligence (AI) and natural language processing (NLP) may enhance the accuracy and efficiency of this process through automated patient screening against established criteria. Methods Utilizing data from the National NLP Clinical Challenges (n2c2) 2018 Challenge, we utilized 202 longitudinal patient records. These records were annotated by medical professionals and evaluated against 13 selection criteria encompassing various health assessments. Our approach involved embedding medical documents into a vector database to determine relevant document sections and then using an LLM (OpenAI's GPT-3.5 Turbo and GPT-4) in tandem with structured and chain-of-thought prompting techniques for systematic document assessment against the criteria. Misclassified criteria were also examined to identify classification challenges. Results This study achieved an accuracy of 0.81, sensitivity of 0.80, specificity of 0.82, and a micro F1 score of 0.79 using GPT-3.5 Turbo, and an accuracy of 0.87, sensitivity of 0.85, specificity of 0.89, and micro F1 score of 0.86 using GPT-4. Notably, some criteria in the ground truth appeared mislabeled, an issue we couldn't explore further due to insufficient label generation guidelines on the website. Conclusion Our findings underscore the potential of AI and NLP technologies, including LLMs, in the clinical trial matching process. The study demonstrated strong capabilities in identifying eligible patients and minimizing false inclusions. Such automated systems promise to alleviate the workload of research staff and improve clinical trial enrollment, thus accelerating the process and enhancing the overall feasibility of clinical research. Further work is needed to determine the potential of this approach when implemented on real clinical data., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright © 2024, Beattie et al.)

Women with heart failure (HF) are more symptomatic than their male counterparts. Despite deriving similar benefits from both medical and devices therapies, women continue to be underrepresented in clinic trials. Important sex-based disparities exist in enrollment in clinical trials and access to medical and device-based therapies, in part stemming from differences in medical and psychosocial comorbidities. Disparities in access to beneficial interventions likely contribute to the greater symptom burden identified in women with HF. Improved focus on the enrollment of women in clinical trials will allow a better understanding of the underpinnings of these disparities and improve the care of women with HF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Clinical trials are considered the gold standard in evidence-based medicine, yet few patients with cancer ultimately enroll. Here we examine patients screened for thoracic radiation oncology clinical trials to better understand enrollment trends.Methods and Materials: A prospective database tracking screening and enrollment for patients referred for thoracic radiation oncology consultation at our institution from 2016 to 2019 was evaluated. Proportional enrollment rates, patient and disease characteristics, self-reported socioeconomic factors, and reasons for ineligibility or nonenrollment across 17 radiation therapy trials were compared.Results: Enrollment data on 2372 patients were available for analysis. Of these patients, 40.0% (949) were deemed "not eligible" (NE) for any trial or were unwilling to be further screened. Reasons for ineligibility included stage (44%), histology (13%), radiation therapy not indicated (12%), patient decision (7%), and enrollment in a competing medical or surgical oncology trial (5%). The remaining 60.0% (1423) were "potentially eligible" (PE) for one or more trials. Most had non-small cell lung cancer (71%) or esophageal cancer (16%), and there were significantly fewer stage IV PE (29%) versus NE (49%) patients (P < .0001). Of 2372 patients, 281 (11.9%) enrolled. Notable reasons for nonenrollment were inclusion and exclusion criteria (58%), patients declining enrollment (14%), and physician decision (5%). The proportion of white patients was higher in the PE versus NE group (82.5% vs 75.8%; P < .001). Additionally, white race (87.9% vs 81.2%; P = .008), English language preference (96.4% vs 92.9%; P = .032), and non-Hispanic/Latino ethnicity (94.0% vs 90.1%; P = .042) were significantly different in enrolled versus nonenrolled PE patients.Conclusions: Only 12% of patients screened for radiation therapy trials ultimately enrolled, and more than two-thirds had no trial available or were found ineligible. In addition, 19% of potential eligible patients did not enroll because the patient or physician declined. Future trials may benefit from pragmatic designs with more inclusive enrollment criteria and multidisciplinary engagement of referring providers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Delays in clinical trial enrollment and difficulties enrolling representative samples continue to vex sponsors, sites, and patient populations. Here we investigated use of an artificial intelligence-powered technology, Mendel.ai, as a means of overcoming bottlenecks and potential biases associated with standard patient prescreening processes in an oncology setting. Methods: Mendel.ai was applied retroactively to 2 completed oncology studies (1 breast, 1 lung), and 1 study that failed to enroll (lung), at the Comprehensive Blood and Cancer Center, allowing direct comparison between results achieved using standard prescreening practices and results achieved with Mendel.ai. Outcome variables included the number of patients identified as potentially eligible and the elapsed time between eligibility and identification. Results: For each trial that enrolled, use of Mendel.ai resulted in a 24% to 50% increase over standard practices in the number of patients correctly identified as potentially eligible. No patients correctly identified by standard practices were missed by Mendel.ai. For the nonenrolling trial, both approaches failed to identify suitable patients. An average of 19 days for breast and 263 days for lung cancer patients elapsed between actual patient eligibility (based on clinical chart information) and identification when the standard prescreening practice was used. In contrast, ascertainment of potential eligibility using Mendel.ai took minutes. Conclusions: This study suggests that augmentation of human resources with artificial intelligence could yield sizable improvements over standard practices in several aspects of the patient prescreening process, as well as in approaches to feasibility, site selection, and trial selection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Adolescent and young adult (AYA) participation in cancer clinical trials (CCTs) is suboptimal, hindering further improvements in survival, quality of life, and basic understanding of cancer pathophysiology in this population. Prior studies have identified barriers and facilitators to AYA CCT enrollment; however, few interventional studies have attempted to address these barriers and measure tangible changes. In September 2020, a task force was established to address CCT enrollment barriers at a multi-institutional level utilizing a quality improvement collaborative model for improvement. The AYA Trial Access Quality Initiative was developed with the goal of bring multidisciplinary teams together across multiple sites to learn, apply and share their methods of improvement. It uses a structured process of learning sessions lead by quality improvement and clinical experts who help facilitate learning and problem solving which are followed by action phases. During the pilot phase of the collaboration, one key driver of CCT enrollment in AYA's will be addressed: communication between adult and pediatric oncology by implementation of various interventions at sites. The number of AYAs screened for and enrolled on CCTs will be tracked over the course of the collaborative along with the process measures. It is expected that the interventions will promote engagement of stakeholders in the process of screening AYA oncology patients for eligibility on CCTs. This will hopefully create a favorable environment conducive for increasing enrollment on CCTs and lead to the development of a system-wide quality improvement framework to improve AYA CCT enrollment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Primary objective was to describe the proportion of children newly diagnosed with cancer enrolled on a therapeutic clinical trial. Secondary objectives were to describe reasons for non-enrollment and factors associated with enrollment on trials. Methods In this retrospective cohort study, we included children newly diagnosed with cancer between 0 and 14 years of age and diagnosed from 2001 to 2012. We used data from the Cancer in Young People in Canada (CYP-C) national pediatric cancer population-based database. CYP-C captures all cases of pediatric cancer (0–14 years) diagnosed and treated at one of the 17 tertiary pediatric oncology centers in Canada. Non-enrollment was evaluated using univariate and multiple logistic regression analysis. Results There were 9204 children with cancer included, of whom 2533 (27.5%) were enrolled on a clinical trial. The most common reasons cited for non-enrollment were lack of an available trial (52.2%) and physician choice (11.2%). In multiple regression, Asian and Arab/west Asian race were associated with lower enrollment (P = 0.006 and P = 0.032 respectively). All cancer diagnoses were more likely to be enrolled compared to astrocytoma and children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia had an almost 18-fold increased odds of enrollment compared to astrocytoma (P

Introduction: Clinical research professionals (i.e., clinical research assistants, clinical research nurses, clinical research coordinators, etc.), as outlined by the Joint Task Force (JTF) Core Competency Framework, are highly trained to support the breadth of clinical trial operations and manage participant care. Clinical research professionals are uniquely equipped with a scope of practice that permits product administration, participant assessments, and data management. As clinical trials grow in complexity and their management expands beyond traditional, site-based operations models to decentralized and/or hybrid models, the need becomes great to ensure adequate staffing. However, rural hospitals frequently lack the research staff or patient recruiters that would allow them to support decentralized clinical trials across a sizeable rural geographic demographic. Methods: This paper examines the contributory factors of the clinical research professional workforce contraction and response efforts at professional and organizational levels within a large, Magnet-designated healthcare system in the rural northwestern United States. Perspectives are shared on adapting the Core Competency Framework to reflect the unique strengths and opportunities towards decentralized trials in rural regions of the United States and areas of priority for workforce cultivation and retention. A descriptive survey was used to gather initial data identifying the current research perspectives of healthcare workers working across a rural community. Participants were asked to complete questions about the JTF Competency domains and behavior-based questions. Analysis: Both competency and behavior-based questions were asked and related to roles. These were then cross-referenced using a Rasmussen Ladder system. Descriptive statistics were conducted for sample characteristics, self-reported competency domain questions, and behavior questions. Results and discussion: Survey findings suggest that although healthcare workers and clinical research teams interact, they are unlikely to ask their patients to participate in research. Based on the limited response rate, results suggest that better education throughout the rural community could benefit from decentralized research efforts. Increased use of technology was also highlighted as an area of interest., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Besel, Johnson, Ma and Kiesow.)

Introduction: Alzheimer's disease (AD) blood tests are likely to become increasingly important in clinical practice, but they need to be evaluated in diverse groups before use in the general population., Methods: This study enrolled a community-based sample of older adults in the St. Louis, Missouri, USA area. Participants completed a blood draw, Eight-Item Informant Interview to Differentiate Aging and Dementia (AD8 ® ), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and survey about their perceptions of the blood test. A subset of participants completed additional blood collection, amyloid positron emission tomography (PET), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR ® )., Results: Of the 859 participants enrolled in this ongoing study, 20.6% self-identified as Black or African American. The AD8 and MoCA correlated moderately with the CDR. The blood test was well accepted by the cohort, but it was perceived more positively by White and highly educated individuals., Discussion: Studying an AD blood test in a diverse population is feasible and may accelerate accurate diagnosis and implementation of effective treatments., Highlights: A diverse group of older adults was recruited to evaluate a blood amyloid test. The enrollment rate was high and the blood test was well accepted by participants. Cognitive impairment screens have moderate performance in a diverse population. Alzheimer's disease blood tests are likely to be feasible for use in real-world settings., (© 2023 The Authors. Alzheimer's & Dementia published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Alzheimer's Association.)

Despite a growing number of clinical trials and supportive care programs for cancer survivors, recruitment of patients for these opportunities during the survivorship phase of care is challenging. We piloted a novel process to systematically educate patients about available research studies and supportive care programs as part of a survivorship care visit. Between 3/2015 and 8/2015, patients seen in the Adult Survivorship Program who had not previously received a treatment summary and survivorship care plan (TS/SCP) were provided with one accompanied by a list of survivorship research studies and care programs tailored to their diagnosis. Survivorship providers discussed the opportunities and recorded whether the patient was interested in relevant studies and placed referrals to study staff. Following the visit, we tracked study enrollment and surveyed patients about their experience. Fifty of 56 (89%) pilot participants completed the survey. Almost all (98%) reported that the TS/SCP visit and document helped with knowledge of research opportunities and supportive care interventions. Following receipt of the TS/SCP, 44% were interested in at least one study and in further follow-up with research staff. Of the 30 survivors eligible for at least one study, 6 (20%) have enrolled in at least one study to date. This pilot program demonstrates that the systematic sharing of available clinical studies and supportive care programming as part of a survivorship care plan visit is feasible and well received by cancer survivors and may facilitate and enhance accrual to clinical trials in the survivorship phase of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite few effective therapies, only a small percentage of patients diagnosed with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) in the United States are enrolled in prospective, interventional clinical trials. MDS-specific barriers to trial accrual include a high frequency of elderly patients with comorbid conditions, atypical disease features and uncertainty regarding the diagnosis (because other nonclonal processes also can cause dysplasia and cytopenias), a history of another nonmyeloid neoplasm resulting in therapy-related MDS, rapid disease recurrence after allogeneic stem cell transplantation, and an arbitrary division between MDS and acute myeloid leukemia. In addition, barriers to accrual that are common to other oncology populations, such as difficulty traveling to clinical trial enrollment sites and narrow trial eligibility criteria, also prevent patients with MDS from enrolling in studies. Collectively these barriers must be assessed systematically, and creative solutions are needed to improve outcomes for this needy patient population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To identify potential participants for clinical trials, electronic health records (EHRs) are searched at potential sites. As an alternative, we investigated using medical devices used for real-time diagnostic decisions for trial enrollment. Methods: To project cohorts for a trial in acute coronary syndromes (ACS), we used electrocardiograph-based algorithms that identify ACS or ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) that prompt clinicians to offer patients trial enrollment. We searched six hospitals' electrocardiograph systems for electrocardiograms (ECGs) meeting the planned trial's enrollment criterion: ECGs with STEMI or > 75% probability of ACS by the acute cardiac ischemia time-insensitive predictive instrument (ACI-TIPI). We revised the ACI-TIPI regression to require only data directly from the electrocardiograph, the e-ACI-TIPI using the same data used for the original ACI-TIPI (development set n = 3,453; test set n = 2,315). We also tested both on data from emergency department electrocardiographs from across the US (n = 8,556). We then used ACI-TIPI and e-ACI-TIPI to identify potential cohorts for the ACS trial and compared performance to cohorts from EHR data at the hospitals. Results: Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve areas on the test set were excellent, 0.89 for ACI-TIPI and 0.84 for the e-ACI-TIPI, as was calibration. On the national electrocardiographic database, ROC areas were 0.78 and 0.69, respectively, and with very good calibration. When tested for detection of patients with > 75% ACS probability, both electrocardiograph-based methods identified eligible patients well, and better than did EHRs. Conclusion: Using data from medical devices such as electrocardiographs may provide accurate projections of available cohorts for clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Clinical trials (CT) represent an important treatment option for cancer patients. Unfortunately, patients face challenges to enrolling in CTs, such as logistical barriers, poor CT understanding and complex clinical regimens. Patient navigation is a strategy that may help to improve the delivery of CT education and support services. We examined the feasibility and initial effect of one navigation strategy, use of lay navigators. Methods: A lay CT navigation intervention was evaluated in a prospective cohort study among 40 lung and esophageal cancer patients. The intervention was delivered by a trained lay navigator who viewed a 17-min CT educational video with each patient, assessed and answered their questions about CT participation and addressed reported barriers to care and trial participation. Results: During this 12-month pilot project, 85% (95% CI: 72%–93%) of patients eligible for a therapeutic CT consented to participate in the CT navigation intervention. Among navigated patients, CT understanding improved between pre- and post-test (means 3.54 and 4.40, respectively; p-value 0.004), and 95% (95% CI: 82%–98%) of navigated patients consented to participate in a CT. Navigated patients reported being satisfied with patient navigation services and CT participation. Conclusions: In this formative single-arm pilot project, initial evidence was found for the potential effect of a lay navigation intervention on CT understanding and enrollment. A randomized controlled trial is needed to examine the efficacy of the intervention for improving CT education and enrollment.

Background: Significant racial disparities in prostate cancer incidence and mortality have been reported between African American Men (AAM), who are at increased risk for prostate cancer, and European American Men (EAM). In most of the studies carried out on prostate cancer, this population is underrepresented. With the advancement of genome-wide association studies, several genetic predictor models of prostate cancer risk have been elaborated, as well as numerous studies that identify both germline and somatic mutations with clinical utility., Recent Findings: Despite significant advances, the AAM population continues to be underrepresented in genomic studies, which can limit generalizability and potentially widen disparities. Here we outline racial disparities in currently available genomic applications that are used to estimate the risk of individuals developing prostate cancer and to identify personalized oncology treatment strategies. While the incidence and mortality of prostate cancer are different between AAM and EAM, samples from AAM remain to be unrepresented in different studies., Conclusion: This disparity impacts the available genomic data on prostate cancer. As a result, the disparity can limit the predictive utility of the genomic applications and may lead to the widening of the existing disparities. More studies with substantially higher recruitment and engagement of African American patients are necessary to overcome this disparity., (© 2023 The Authors. Cancer Reports published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: It is questionable whether enrollment on clinical trials offers any survival advantage at the population level over standard-of-care treatment. The objectives of this study were to describe the impact of trial enrollment on event-free survival and overall survival in pediatric acute myeloid leukemia (AML) using the Cancer in Young People in Canada (CYP-C) database.Methods: Children were included if they had had AML newly diagnosed between ages birth and 14 years from 2001 to 2012. CYP-C is a national pediatric cancer population-based database that includes all cases of pediatric cancer diagnosed and treated at 1 of the 17 tertiary pediatric oncology centers in Canada. Univariate and Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the impact of initial trial enrollment on survival.Results: In total, 397 eligible children with AML were included in the analysis, of whom 94 (23.7%) were enrolled on a clinical trial at initial diagnosis. The most common reason for non-enrollment was that no trial was available. The event-free survival rate at 5 years was 57.8% ± 5.2% for those enrolled versus 54.8% ± 2.9% for those not enrolled (P = .75). The overall survival rate at 5 years was 70.1% ± 4.9% for those enrolled versus 66.3% ± 2.8% for those not enrolled (P = .58). Enrollment on a trial was not associated with improved event-free or overall survival in multiple regression analyses.Conclusions: Enrollment on a clinical trial was not associated with improved survival for children with AML in a population-based cohort. Rationale for trial enrollment should not include the likelihood of benefit compared with non-enrollment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Primary objective was to describe the proportion of children newly diagnosed with cancer enrolled on a therapeutic clinical trial. Secondary objectives were to describe reasons for non-enrollment and factors associated with enrollment on trials.Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we included children newly diagnosed with cancer between 0 and 14 years of age and diagnosed from 2001 to 2012. We used data from the Cancer in Young People in Canada (CYP-C) national pediatric cancer population-based database. CYP-C captures all cases of pediatric cancer (0-14 years) diagnosed and treated at one of the 17 tertiary pediatric oncology centers in Canada. Non-enrollment was evaluated using univariate and multiple logistic regression analysis.Results: There were 9204 children with cancer included, of whom 2533 (27.5%) were enrolled on a clinical trial. The most common reasons cited for non-enrollment were lack of an available trial (52.2%) and physician choice (11.2%). In multiple regression, Asian and Arab/west Asian race were associated with lower enrollment (P = 0.006 and P = 0.032 respectively). All cancer diagnoses were more likely to be enrolled compared to astrocytoma and children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia had an almost 18-fold increased odds of enrollment compared to astrocytoma (P < 0.0001). Greater distance from the tertiary care center was independently associated with non-enrollment (P < 0.0001).Conclusions: In Canada, 27.5% of children with cancer are enrolled onto therapeutic clinical trials and lack of an available trial is the most common reason contributing to non-enrollment. Future research should better understand reasons for lack of trial availability and physician preferences to not offer trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the summer of 2020, multiple efforts were undertaken to establish safe and effective vaccines to combat the spread of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19). In the United States (U.S.), Operation Warp Speed (OWS) was the program designated to coordinate such efforts. OWS was a partnership between the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Department of Defense (DOD), and the private sector, that aimed to help accelerate control of the COVID-19 pandemic by advancing development, manufacturing, and distribution of vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) was identified as a potential collaborator in several large-scale OWS Phase III clinical trial efforts designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of various vaccines that were in development. Given the global importance of these trials, it was recognized that there would be a need for a coordinated, centralized effort within VA to ensure that its medical centers (sites) would be ready and able to efficiently initiate, recruit, and enroll into these trials. The manuscript outlines the partnership and start-up activities led by two key divisions of the VA's Office of Research and Development's clinical research enterprise. These efforts focused on site and enterprise-level requirements for multiple trials, with one trial serving as the most prominently featured of these studies within the VA. As a result, several best practices arose that included designating clinical trial facilitators to study sites to support study initiation activities and successful study enrollment at these locations in an efficient and timely fashion., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Background The Florida Association of Pediatric Tumor Programs (FAPTP) has used the Statewide Patient Information Reporting System (SPIRS) since 1981 to track all new cases of pediatric cancer. We reviewed the last 40 years of data to see how pediatric cancer care has evolved. Methods We retrospectively analyzed SPIRS data from 1981 through 2020 in five-year increments, looking at numbers of new diagnoses, care delivery sites, and trial enrollment in Children's Oncology Group (COG) studies. Results From 1981-2020 Florida's population increased almost 88% while the pediatric population only grew 61%. New pediatric cancer diagnoses increased 326% to over 1,000 new cases/year. The percentage of patients treated at FAPTP centers grew from 30% to 57% with an annual percentage change (APC) of 10.3% (95% Confidence Interval [CI] of 0.6 to 20.9%). The rate of COG clinical trial enrollment decreased from 32% in 1981-1985 to 20% in 2016-2020, for an APC of 8.91% (95% CI of -13.3 to -4.3%). Conclusions The striking increase in pediatric cancer cases in Florida over the last 40 years was out of proportion to the population growth. More patients received care at FAPTP centers, but a lower percentage were enrolled on COG trials., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright © 2023, Shaw et al.)

Purpose The aim of this study was to identify patient and physician factors related to enrollment onto Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) trials. Methods Prospective study of women with primary or recurrent cancer of the uterus or cervix treated at a GOG institution from July 2010 to January 2012. Logistic regression examined probability of availability, eligibility and enrollment in a GOG trial. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for significant (p < 0.05) results reported. Results Sixty institutions, 781 patients, and 150 physicians participated, 300/780 (38%) had a trial available, 290/300 had known participation status. Of these, 150 women enrolled (59.5%), 102 eligible did not enroll (35%), 38 (13%) were ineligible. Ethnicity and specialty of physician, practice type, data management availability, and patient age were significantly associated with trial availability. Patients with > 4 comorbidities (OR 4.5; CI 1.7-11.8) had higher odds of trial ineligibility. Non-White patients (OR 7.9; CI 1.3-46.2) and patients of Black physicians had greater odds of enrolling (OR 56.5; CI 1.1-999.9) in a therapeutic trial. Significant patient therapeutic trial enrollment factors: belief trial may help (OR 76.9; CI 4.9-> 1000), concern about care if not on trial (OR12.1; CI 2.1-71.4), pressure to enroll (OR .27; CI 0.12-.64), caregiving without pay (OR 0.13; CI .02-.84). Significant physician beliefs were: patients would not do well on standard therapy (OR 3.6; CI 1.6-8.4), and trial would not be time consuming (OR 3.3; CI 1.3-8.1). Conclusions Trial availability, patient and physician beliefs were factors identified that if modified could improve enrollment in cancer cooperative group clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]