ArticleThe oncologist2015
Temporal Trends and Predictors for Cancer Clinical Trial Availability for Medically Underserved Populations.
Article in The oncologist, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Financial Burden of Cancer Clinical Trial Participation and the Impact of a Cancer Care Equity Program.The oncologist · 2016Trial
- Feasibility of EHR-based prescreening for an adjuvant breast cancer trial in a safety-net health system.The oncologist · 2026Article
- Selection and Prejudice: Addressing Clinical Trial Disparities With a Review of Current Shortcomings and Future Directions.Seminars in radiation oncology · 2023Review
- Tight budgets lead to fewer language-diverse participants in academic than industry trials.Nature · 2023Article
- Access Denied: Disparities in Thyroid Cancer Clinical Trials.Journal of the Endocrine Society · 2023Review
- Landmark Cancer Clinical Trials and Real-World Patient Populations: Examining Race and Age Reporting.Cancers · 2021Article
- Experience, Perceptions, and Recommendations Concerning COVID-19-Related Clinical Research Adjustments.Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN · 2021Article
- Definition and Coordination of Roles and Responsibilities Among Cancer Center Clinic and Research Personnel.JCO oncology practice · 2020Article
- Conceptual Model for Accrual to Cancer Clinical Trials.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2019Article
- The Economic Impact of Clinical Research in an Italian Public Hospital: The Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma Case Study.International journal of health policy and management · 2018Article
- Cancer Center Clinic and Research Team Perceptions of Identity and Interactions.Journal of oncology practice · 2017Article
- Video intervention increases participation of black breast cancer patients in therapeutic trials.NPJ breast cancer · 2017Article
- Resolving Rivalries and Realigning Goals: Challenges of Clinical and Research Multiteam Systems.Journal of oncology practice · 2016Article
- Advancing Clinical Trials to Streamline Drug Development.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2015Article
- Clinical Trials, Disparities, and Financial Burden: It's Time to Intervene.The oncologist · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLack of access to available cancer clinical trials has been cited as a key factor limiting trial accrual, particularly among medically underserved populations. We examined the trends and factors in clinical trial availability within a major U.S. safety-net hospital system. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe identified cancer clinical trials activated at the Harold C. Simmons Cancer from 1991 to 2014 and recorded the characteristics of the trials that were and were not activated at the Parkland Health and Hospital System satellite site. We used univariate and multivariate logistic regression to determine the association between trial characteristics and nonactivation status, and chi-square analysis to determine the association between the trial characteristics and the reasons for nonactivation.
resultsA total of 773 trials were identified, of which 152 (20%) were not activated at Parkland. In multivariable analysis, nonactivation at Parkland was associated with trial year, sponsor, and phase. Compared with the 1991-2006 period, clinical trials in the 2007-2014 period were almost eightfold more likely not to be activated at Parkland. The most common reasons for nonactivation at Parkland were an inability to perform the study procedures (27%) and the startup costs (15%).
conclusionOver time, in this single-center setting, a decreasing proportion of cancer clinical trials were available to underserved populations. Trial complexity and costs appeared to account for much of this trend. Efforts to overcome these barriers will be key to equitable access to clinical trials, efficient accrual, and the generalizability of the results. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Despite numerous calls to increase and diversify cancer clinical trial accrual, the present study found that cancer clinical trial activation rates in a safety-net setting for medically underserved populations have decreased substantially in recent years. The principal reasons for study nonactivation were expenses and an inability to perform the study-related procedures, reflecting the increasing costs and complexity of cancer clinical trials. Future efforts need to focus on strategies to mitigate the increasing disparity in access to clinical research and cutting-edge therapies, which also threatens to hinder study accrual, completion rates, and generalizability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.