Ethics. Research. Community.

The bottleneck effect in lung cancer clinical trials.

Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education. 
[Record Source: PubMed]
Clinical trials provide the most promising way to improve treatment outcomes in cancer. This study examined the rate at which eligible patients with lung cancer, at a National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center in the South, were offered a clinical trial and explored for reasons for ineligibility. We retrospectively reviewed 300 randomly selected lung cancer patients' medical records seen in 2010, to assess clinical trial offers to eligible patients, reasons for not offering an eligible patient a trial, demographic factors associated with eligibility, and reasons for refusal among those offered a trial. Of the 300 patient charts, seven were excluded for lack of confirmed lung cancer diagnosis. Forty-six of the remaining 293 (15.7%) patients were eligible for a clinical trial. Forty-five of the 46 (97.8%) were considered for a trial by their oncologist. Thirty-five of the 45 (77.8%) were offered a trial: 15 agreed (42.9% of those offered, 5.1% of patients reviewed), 11 declined, and 9 were undecided at the end of the review window. Patients with poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status levels and small cell (SC) diagnoses were significantly less likely to be eligible for a trial. Results suggest that oncologists at the cancer center are effectively presenting all eligible patients with the option of a clinical trial; however, there is a need to increase the number of approved clinical trials for patients with SC or ECOG score greater than 2.
Access the full text from your libraries at your institution.  You will be navigating away from EthicShare.

Database Keywords

Detailed Record Information

Record TypeJournal Article
Record Source Status
LicenseNone (All rights reserved) ©