Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29985748›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology2018

Do Patients With Advanced Cancer Have the Ability to Make Informed Decisions for Participation in Phase I Clinical Trials?

Fay J Hlubocky, Greg A Sachs, Eric R Larson, Halla S Nimeiri, David Cella, Kristen E Wroblewski, Mark J Ratain, Jeffery M Peppercorn, Christopher K Daugherty

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Ethics and Clinical Research: Improving Transparency and Informed Consent in Phase I Oncology Trials.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Fay J HlubockyFay J. Hlubocky, Kristen E. Wroblewski, Mark J. Ratain, and Christopher K. Daugherty, The University of Chicago, Chicago; Halla S. Nimeiri and David Cella, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL; Greg A. Sachs, Indiana University and Regenstrief Institute, Indianapolis, IN; Eric R. Larson, Department of Veterans Affairs, Milwaukee, WI; and Jeffery M. Peppercorn, Massachusetts General Hospital, Dana-Farber Partners/Harvard Health System, Boston, MA.
Greg A SachsFay J. Hlubocky, Kristen E. Wroblewski, Mark J. Ratain, and Christopher K. Daugherty, The University of Chicago, Chicago; Halla S. Nimeiri and David Cella, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL; Greg A. Sachs, Indiana University and Regenstrief Institute, Indianapolis, IN; Eric R. Larson, Department of Veterans Affairs, Milwaukee, WI; and Jeffery M. Peppercorn, Massachusetts General Hospital, Dana-Farber Partners/Harvard Health System, Boston, MA.
Eric R LarsonFay J. Hlubocky, Kristen E. Wroblewski, Mark J. Ratain, and Christopher K. Daugherty, The University of Chicago, Chicago; Halla S. Nimeiri and David Cella, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL; Greg A. Sachs, Indiana University and Regenstrief Institute, Indianapolis, IN; Eric R. Larson, Department of Veterans Affairs, Milwaukee, WI; and Jeffery M. Peppercorn, Massachusetts General Hospital, Dana-Farber Partners/Harvard Health System, Boston, MA.
Halla S NimeiriFay J. Hlubocky, Kristen E. Wroblewski, Mark J. Ratain, and Christopher K. Daugherty, The University of Chicago, Chicago; Halla S. Nimeiri and David Cella, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL; Greg A. Sachs, Indiana University and Regenstrief Institute, Indianapolis, IN; Eric R. Larson, Department of Veterans Affairs, Milwaukee, WI; and Jeffery M. Peppercorn, Massachusetts General Hospital, Dana-Farber Partners/Harvard Health System, Boston, MA.
David CellaFay J. Hlubocky, Kristen E. Wroblewski, Mark J. Ratain, and Christopher K. Daugherty, The University of Chicago, Chicago; Halla S. Nimeiri and David Cella, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL; Greg A. Sachs, Indiana University and Regenstrief Institute, Indianapolis, IN; Eric R. Larson, Department of Veterans Affairs, Milwaukee, WI; and Jeffery M. Peppercorn, Massachusetts General Hospital, Dana-Farber Partners/Harvard Health System, Boston, MA.
Kristen E WroblewskiFay J. Hlubocky, Kristen E. Wroblewski, Mark J. Ratain, and Christopher K. Daugherty, The University of Chicago, Chicago; Halla S. Nimeiri and David Cella, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL; Greg A. Sachs, Indiana University and Regenstrief Institute, Indianapolis, IN; Eric R. Larson, Department of Veterans Affairs, Milwaukee, WI; and Jeffery M. Peppercorn, Massachusetts General Hospital, Dana-Farber Partners/Harvard Health System, Boston, MA.
Mark J RatainFay J. Hlubocky, Kristen E. Wroblewski, Mark J. Ratain, and Christopher K. Daugherty, The University of Chicago, Chicago; Halla S. Nimeiri and David Cella, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL; Greg A. Sachs, Indiana University and Regenstrief Institute, Indianapolis, IN; Eric R. Larson, Department of Veterans Affairs, Milwaukee, WI; and Jeffery M. Peppercorn, Massachusetts General Hospital, Dana-Farber Partners/Harvard Health System, Boston, MA.
Jeffery M PeppercornFay J. Hlubocky, Kristen E. Wroblewski, Mark J. Ratain, and Christopher K. Daugherty, The University of Chicago, Chicago; Halla S. Nimeiri and David Cella, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL; Greg A. Sachs, Indiana University and Regenstrief Institute, Indianapolis, IN; Eric R. Larson, Department of Veterans Affairs, Milwaukee, WI; and Jeffery M. Peppercorn, Massachusetts General Hospital, Dana-Farber Partners/Harvard Health System, Boston, MA.
Christopher K DaughertyFay J. Hlubocky, Kristen E. Wroblewski, Mark J. Ratain, and Christopher K. Daugherty, The University of Chicago, Chicago; Halla S. Nimeiri and David Cella, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL; Greg A. Sachs, Indiana University and Regenstrief Institute, Indianapolis, IN; Eric R. Larson, Department of Veterans Affairs, Milwaukee, WI; and Jeffery M. Peppercorn, Massachusetts General Hospital, Dana-Farber Partners/Harvard Health System, Boston, MA.
Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis · US

Funding

Ethics and Clinical Trials in Advanced Cancer CareR01CA087605 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI DAUGHERTY, CHRISTOPHER K · 2001 to 2009
$2.0M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA087605
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose Patients with advanced cancer (ACPs) participating in phase I clinical trials inadequately understand many elements of informed consent (IC); however, the prevalence and impact of cognitive impairment has not been described. Patients and Methods ACPs enrolled onto phase I trials underwent neuropsychological assessment to evaluate cognitive functioning (CF) covering the following domains: memory (Hopkins Verbal Learning Test), executive functioning (Trail Making Test B), language (Boston Naming Test-Short Version and Controlled Oral Word Association Test), attention (Trail Making Test A and Wechsler Adult Intelligenence Scale-IV Digit Span), comprehension (Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IV), and quality of life (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cognitive Function). Structured interviews evaluated IC and decisional capacity. Psychological measures included distress (Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale) and depression (Beck Depression Inventory-II). Results One hundred eighteen ACPs on phase I trials were evaluated, with CF ranging from mild impairment to superior performance. Only 45% of ACPs recalled physician disclosure of the phase I trial purpose. The 50% of ACPs who correctly identified the phase I research purpose had greater CF compared with ACPs who did not, as revealed by the mean T scores for memory (37.2 ± 5.6 v 32.5 ± 5.1, respectively; P = .001), attention (29 ± 2.7 v 26.9 ± 2.4, respectively; P < .001), visual attention (35.2 ± 6.6 v 31.5 ± 6.2, respectively; P = .001), and executive function (38.9 ± 7.5 v 34 ± 7.1, respectively; P < .001). Older ACPs (≥ 60 years) were less likely to recall physician disclosure of phase I purpose than younger ACPs (30% v 70%, respectively; P = .02) and had measurable deficits in total memory (34.2 ± 5.0 v 37.3 ± 5.6, respectively; P = .002), attention (24.5 ± 2.6 v 28 ± 2.8, respectively; P < .001), and executive function (32.8 ± 7.3 v 36.4 ± 7.6, respectively; P = .01). Older ACPs, compared with younger ACPs, also had greater depression scores (10.6 ± 9.2 v 8.1 ± 5.2, respectively; P = .03) and lower quality-of-life scores (152 ± 29.6 v 167 ± 20, respectively; P = .03). After adjustment by age, no psychological or neuropsychological variable was further significantly associated with likelihood of purpose identification. Conclusion CF seems to play a role in ACP recall and comprehension of IC for early-phase clinical trials, especially among older ACPs.

Indexed as

Decision MakingAdultAgedAged, 80 and overClinical Trials, Phase I as TopicFemaleHumansInformed ConsentMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsNeuropsychological TestsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID29985748
PMCPMC6097830
OpenAlexW2880257439

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.