ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2020
Partnering with patients to get better outcomes with chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy: towards engagement of patients in early phase trials.
Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03765177 (Canadian-Led Immunotherapies in Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Canadian-Led Immunotherapies in Cancer: CLIC-1901 for the Treatment of Patients With Relapsed/Refractory CD19 Positive Hematologic Malignancies
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient and Patient Group Engagement in Cancer Clinical Trials: A Stakeholder Charter.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2021Guideline
- Partnering with patients and the public in the clinical trials ecosystem: a decade of lessons learned and shared.BMJ open · 2026Review
- CARE Framework for Inclusive Clinical Studies: An Evidence-Based Approach for and Measurement of Recruitment and Retention of Black Women in Breast Cancer Research.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Review
- Article
- Role of Frailty in Assessing Eligibility for CAR T-Cell Therapy in Haematology.European journal of haematology · 2026Review
- Establishing patient partners' roles on research teams: a scoping review.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Article
- Development of consensus-driven SPIRIT and CONSORT extensions for early phase dose-finding trials: the DEFINE study.BMC medicine · 2023Review
- Identifying effect modifiers of CAR-T cell therapeutic efficacy: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis protocol.Systematic reviews · 2023Article
- Patient perspectives on the need for improved hearing rehabilitation: A qualitative survey study of German cochlear implant users.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Facilitating and supporting the engagement of patients, families and caregivers in research: the "Ottawa model" for patient engagement in research.Research involvement and engagement · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
aimThough patient engagement in clinical research is growing, recent reports suggest few clinical trials report on such activities. To address this gap, we describe our approach to patient engagement in the development of a clinical trial protocol to assess a new immunotherapy for blood cancer (chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, CAR-T cell therapy).
methodsOur team developed a clinical trial protocol by working with patient partners from inception. Two patient partners with lived blood cancer experience were identified through referrals from our team's professional network and patient organization contacts. Our patient partners were onboarded to the team and engaged in several studies conducted to develop the clinical trial protocol, including a systematic review of the existing literature on the therapy, patient interviews and a survey to obtain perspectives on barriers and enablers to participating in the trial, an early economic analysis, and a retrospective cohort study.
resultsEngaging patient partners enhanced our research in ways that would not have otherwise occurred. By selecting patient important outcomes for data collection, our partners helped flag that quality of life and health utility measures have not been reported in previous CAR-T cell therapy trials for blood cancer. Our partners also co-developed a non-technical summary of the systematic review that summarized results in an accessible manner. Our patient partners reviewed interview and survey questions, to improve the language and appropriateness; provided recruitment suggestions; and provided a patient perspective on the results, thereby confirming the importance of findings. Input was also obtained on costs for the early economic analysis. Our patient partners identified costs that may be a burden to both patients and caregivers during a trial and helped to confirm that the overall structure of the economic model reflected the patient care pathway. Our patient partners also shared their diagnosis and treatment stories, which helped to provide the research team with insight into this experience.
conclusionsContributions by our patient partners were invaluable to each component study, as well as the overall development of the trial protocol. We plan to use this approach in the future in order to meaningfully engage patients in the development of other clinical trials; we also hope that by reporting our methods this will help other research teams to do the same.
trial registrationAffiliated with the development of NCT03765177.
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.