Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22101219›Full record

Trial reportContemporary clinical trials2012

Challenges and potential solutions to meeting accrual goals in a Phase II chemoprevention trial for prostate cancer.

Nagi Kumar, Theresa Crocker, Tiffany Smith, Julio Pow-Sang, Philippe E Spiess, Kathleen Egan, Gwen Quinn, Michael Schell, Said Sebti, Aslam Kazi and 11 more

Abstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Contemporary clinical trials, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

21 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.

Nagi KumarDepartment of Epidemiology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute at University of South Florida College of Medicine, Tampa, FL 33612, USA. nagi.kumar@moffitt.org
Theresa Crocker
Tiffany Smith
Julio Pow-Sang
Philippe E Spiess
Kathleen Egan
Gwen Quinn
Michael Schell
Said Sebti
Aslam Kazi
Tian Chuang
Raoul Salup
Mohamed Helal
Gregory Zagaja
Edouard Trabulsi
Jerry McLarty
Tajammul Fazili
Christopher R Williams
Fred Schreiber
Joel Slaton
J Kyle Anderson
University of South Florida · USMoffitt Cancer Center · USFlorida College · USMinneapolis VA Medical Center · USJefferson College · USLouisiana State University Health Sciences Center Shreveport · USOverton Brooks VA Medical Center · USUniversity of Florida · USUniversity of Illinois Chicago · USWatson Clinic · US

Funding

TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCHP30CA076292 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA · PI KENNETH Lynn WRIGHT · 1998 to 2026
$93.5M
UF Clinical and Translational Science AwardUL1TR000064 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI NELSON, DAVID R · 2012 to 2014
$12.2M
Phase II Clinical Trial of Polyphenon E in Prostate CancerR01CA122060 · NCI · H. LEE MOFFITT CANCER CTR & RES INST · PI KUMAR, NAGI B. · 2007 to 2011
$4.0M
Neural mechanisms of sound activation of vestibular systemR01DC012060 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF MISSISSIPPI MED CTR · PI ZHU, HONG · 2012 to 2016
$1.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000064NCI NIH HHS P30 CA076292NCI NIH HHS R01 CA12060-01A1NCI NIH HHS R01 CA122060NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC012060
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe goal of this report is to describe the on going strategies, successes, challenges and solutions for recruitment in this multi-center, phase II chemoprevention trial targeting men at high risk for prostate cancer.

methodsWe developed and implemented a multi-center clinical trial in institutions with supportive infrastructure, lead by a recruitment team of experienced and committed physicians and clinical trial staff, implementing multi-media and community outreach strategies to meet recruitment goals. Screening logs were reviewed to identify trends as well as patient, protocol and infrastructure -related barriers impacting accrual and revisions to protocol implemented.

resultsBetween January 2008 and February 2011 a total of 3547 individuals were prescreened with 94% (n=3092) determined to be ineligible based on diagnosis of cancer or benign biopsy results. Of these, 216 were considered eligible for further screening with 52% (n=113) declining to participate due to patient related factors and 14% (n=29) eliminated due to protocol-related criteria for exclusion. Ninety-four (94) subjects consented to participate with 34% of these subjects (n=74) meeting all eligibility criteria to be randomized to receive study agent or placebo. Across all sites, 99% of the recruitment of subjects in this clinical trial is via physician recruitment and referral with less than 1% responding to other recruitment strategies.

conclusionA contemporary approach to subject recruitment and frequent evaluation is needed to assure responsiveness to emerging challenges to accrual and the evolving scientific literature. A focus on investing on improving systems for physician recruitment may be key to meeting recruitment target in chemoprevention trials.

Indexed as

Patient SelectionAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntineoplastic AgentsBiopsyChemopreventionDiagnosis, DifferentialDouble-Blind MethodFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedProstatic NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesAntineoplastic Agents

Identifiers

PMID22101219
PMCPMC3268882
OpenAlexW2139698414

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.