Dataset Information

Older adult participation in cancer clinical trials: A systematic review of barriers and interventions.

ABSTRACT: Cancer is a disease of aging and, as the world's population ages, the number of older persons with cancer is increasing and will make up a growing share of the oncology population in virtually every country. Despite this, older patients remain vastly underrepresented in research that sets the standards for cancer treatments. Consequently, most of what we know about cancer therapeutics is based on clinical trials conducted in younger, healthier patients, and effective strategies to improve clinical trial participation of older adults with cancer remain sparse. For this systematic review, the authors evaluated published studies regarding barriers to participation and interventions to improve participation of older adults in cancer trials. The quality of the available evidence was low and, despite a literature describing multifaceted barriers, only one intervention study aimed to increase enrollment of older adults in trials. The findings starkly amplify the paucity of evidence-based, effective strategies to improve participation of this underrepresented population in cancer trials. Within these limitations, the authors provide their opinion on how the current cancer research infrastructure must be modified to accommodate the needs of older patients. Several underused solutions are offered to expand clinical trials to include older adults with cancer. However, as currently constructed, these recommendations alone will not solve the evidence gap in geriatric oncology, and efforts are needed to meet older and frail adults where they are by expanding clinical trials designed specifically for this population and leveraging real-world data.

SUBMITTER: Sedrak MS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7854940 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Older adult participation in cancer clinical trials: A systematic review of barriers and interventions.

Sedrak Mina S MS Freedman Rachel A RA Cohen Harvey J HJ Muss Hyman B HB Jatoi Aminah A Klepin Heidi D HD Wildes Tanya M TM Le-Rademacher Jennifer G JG Kimmick Gretchen G GG Tew William P WP George Kevin K Padam Simran S Liu Jennifer J Wong Andrew R AR Lynch Andrea A Djulbegovic Benjamin B Mohile Supriya G SG Dale William W

CA: a cancer journal for clinicians 20201001 1

Cancer is a disease of aging and, as the world's population ages, the number of older persons with cancer is increasing and will make up a growing share of the oncology population in virtually every country. Despite this, older patients remain vastly underrepresented in research that sets the standards for cancer treatments. Consequently, most of what we know about cancer therapeutics is based on clinical trials conducted in younger, healthier patients, and effective strategies to improve clinic ...[more]

PMID: 33002206

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesExisting research on the perspectives of patients with cancer and health care professionals indicates that patient decision making on cancer clinical trial participation is a complex process and may be poorly understood, possibly compromising their decision to participate. This systematic review investigates interventions that support patients in their decision-making processes regarding whether to participate or not and assesses the qualities of the interventions, measures used and related outcomes.MethodsSix databases were systematically searched and only studies evaluating interventions that support the decision making of adult patients offered to enter a cancer clinical trial were included. Ten articles met the criteria and were analysed using a narrative synthesis approach.ResultsThe research focus of the included studies reflected the multifactorial nature of what constitutes support for patient decision making in terms of entering a cancer clinical trial. However, most interventions were based on the hypothesis that more information leads to support in decision making, and did not take other factors, such as the relationship to the clinical staff or relatives, the patients' strong hope for therapeutic benefit or other existential needs into account. The interventions were primarily based on a specific tool, executed once, which seems to imply that decisions need only to be supported once and not at several time points throughout the decision process, and did not assess the importance of a patient's family- or social relations. Moreover, few interventions focused on the patients' counselling experience or assessed patient preferences in relation to decision making.ConclusionsThe findings demonstrate a lack of research on interventions to support patients' decision making that takes other factors, apart from improving knowledge of trials, into account. Limited evidence exists on the effectiveness of decision support interventions to improve the experience of support in adult patients with cancer. Interventions that take patient preferences in relation to decision making and the social context of decision processes into account need to be developed and assessed.

Project description:Importance:Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of lipid-lowering therapies form the evidence base for national and international guidelines. However, concerns exist that women and older patients are underrepresented in RCTs. Objective:To determine the trends of representation of women and older patients (?65 years) in RCTs of lipid-lowering therapies from 1990 to 2018. Data Sources:The electronic databases of MEDLINE and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from January 1990 through December 2018. Study Selection:RCTs of lipid-lowering therapies with sample sizes of at least 1000 patients and follow-up periods of at least 1 year were included. Data Extraction and Synthesis:Two independent investigators abstracted the data on a standard data collection form. Main Outcomes and Measures:Patterns of representation of women and older adults were examined overall in lipid-lowering RCTs and according to RCT-level specific characteristics. The participation-to-prevalence ratio (PPR) metric was used to estimate the representation of women compared with their share of disease burden. Results:A total of 60 RCTs with 485?409 participants were included. The median (interquartile range) number of participants per trial was 5264 (1062-27?564). Overall, representation of women was 28.5% (95% CI, 24.4%-32.4%). There was an increase in the enrollment of women from the period 1990 to 1994 (19.5%; 95% CI, 18.4%-20.5%) to the period 2015 to 2018 (33.6%; 95% CI, 33.4%-33.8%) (P for trend?=?.01). Among common limiting factors were inclusion of only postmenopausal women or surgically sterile women (28.3%; 95% CI, 18.5%-40.7%) or exclusion of pregnant (23.3%; 95% CI, 14.4%-35.4%) and lactating (16.6%; 95% CI, 9.3%-28.1%) women. Women were underrepresented compared with their disease burden in lipid RCTs of diabetes (PPR, 0.74), heart failure (PPR, 0.27), stable coronary heart disease (PPR, 0.48), and acute coronary syndrome (PPR, 0.51). Only 23 RCTs with 263?628 participants reported the proportion of older participants. Overall representation of older participants was 46.7% (95% CI, 46.5%-46.9%), which numerically increased from 31.6% (95% CI, 30.8%-32.3%) in the period 1995 to 1998 to 46.2% (95% CI, 46.0%-46.5%) in the period 2015 to 2018 (P for trend?=?.43). A total of 53.0% (95% CI, 41.8%-65.3%) and 36.6% (95% CI, 25.6% to 49.3%) trials reported outcomes according to sex and older participants, respectively, which did not improve over time. Conclusions and Relevance:In this systematic review of RCTs of lipid-lowering therapies, the enrollment of women and older participants increased over time, but women and older participants remained consistently underrepresented. This limits the evidence base for efficacy and safety in these subgroups.

Project description:ImportanceClinical trials play a critical role in the development of novel cancer therapies, and precise estimates of the frequency with which older adult patients with cancer participate in clinical trials are lacking.ObjectiveTo estimate the proportion of older adult Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) beneficiaries with cancer who participate in interventional cancer clinical trials, using a novel population-based methodology.Design, setting, and participantsIn this retrospective cohort study evaluating clinical trial participation among older adult patients with cancer from January 1, 2014, through June 30, 2020, claims data from Medicare FFS were linked with the ClinicalTrials.gov to determine trial participation through the unique National Clinical Trial (NCT) identifier. The proportion of patients with newly diagnosed or newly recurrent cancer in 2015 participating in an interventional clinical trial and receiving active cancer treatment from January 2014 to June 2020 was estimated. Data analysis was performed from November 18, 2020, to November 1, 2021.ExposuresPatients with cancer aged 65 years or older with Medicare FFS insurance, with and without active cancer treatment.Main outcomes and measuresEnrollment in clinical trials among all patients with cancer 65 years and older and among patients receiving active cancer treatments as defined by the presence of at least 1 NCT identifier corresponding to an interventional cancer clinical trial in Medicare claims.ResultsAmong 1 150 978 patients (mean [SD] age, 75.7 [8.4] years; 49.9% men and 50.1% women) with newly diagnosed or newly recurrent cancer in 2015, 12 028 (1.0%) patients had a billing claim with an NCT identifier indicating enrollment in an interventional cancer clinical trial between January 2014 and June 2020. In a subset of 429 343 patients with active cancer treatment, 8360 (1.9%) were enrolled in 1 or more interventional trials. Patients enrolled in a trial tended to be younger, male, a race other than Black, and residing in zip codes with high median incomes.Conclusions and relevanceFindings of this cohort study show that clinical trial enrollment among older adult patients with cancer remains low, with only 1.0% to 1.9% of patients with newly diagnosed or recurrent cancer in 2015 participating in an interventional cancer clinical trial as measured by the presence of NCT identifiers in Medicare claims. These data provide a contemporary estimate of trial enrollment, persistent disparities in trial participation, and only limited progress in trial access over the past 2 decades.

Project description:BackgroundCachexia is a multisystem syndrome characterized by weight loss, anorexia, loss of muscle mass, systemic inflammation, insulin resistance, and functional decline. Management of cachexia involves addressing multiple underlying biological mechanisms. Previous review on pharmacological management of cancer cachexia identified progestins and corticosteroids as effective agents for treatment of cachexia. However, to date no consensus exists on a single effective or standard treatment for management of cachexia. The aim of this systematic review is to determine the effectiveness of pharmacological treatments used to manage cachexia among adult cancer patients.MethodsWe performed literature searches of PubMed (NLM), Embase (Ovid), and Medline(Ovid) to identify clinical trials focused on pharmacological management of cancer cachexia among adult cancer patients from 2004 to 2018. Three reviewers screened a random selection of abstracts to measure for interrater reliability. After this step, each screener screened two-thirds of all abstracts and 177 studies were identified for full text review. The primary outcome was impact of pharmacological management on change in either weight or lean body mass in cancer patients.ResultsWe identified 19 articles (representing 20 RCTs) that focused on pharmacological management of cancer cachexia. Agents showing promising results included Anamorelin and Enobosarm. Anamorelin at 50 or 100 mg per day for 12 weeks showed a consistent benefit across all studies and resulted in significant improvement in weight as compared to baseline among cancer patients. Enobosarm at 1 and 3 mg per day was also effective in improving lean body mass and QOL symptoms among advancer stage cancer patients. Finally, use of combination agents provide evidence for targeting multiple pathways underlying cachexia mechanism to achieve maximum benefit. No agents showed functional improvement in cancer patients.ConclusionAnamorelin as a single agent shows promising results in improving cachexia related weight loss among cancer patients. Further research on combination therapies may be helpful to address critical gaps in cachexia management.

Dataset Information

Older adult participation in cancer clinical trials: A systematic review of barriers and interventions.

Publications

Older adult participation in cancer clinical trials: A systematic review of barriers and interventions.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets