» Articles » PMID: 22784878

Adoption, Acceptability, and Accuracy of an Online Clinical Trial Matching Website for Breast Cancer

Abstract

Background: Less than 5% of breast cancer patients participate in clinical trials. To increase patients' awareness and access to trials, we created BreastCancerTrials.org, a clinical trial matching website. BreastCancerTrials.org matched patients to trials based on their self-reported breast cancer history. It also provided a messaging platform through which patients could self-refer themselves to participating research sites.

Objective: To assess adoption by research sites, acceptability to patients, and patients' accuracy in providing information to BreastCancerTrials.org.

Methods: We approached 13 research sites in Northern California to list their trials on BreastCancerTrials.org. For adoption, we examined the willingness of contacted research sites to collaborate with BreastCancerTrials.org. For acceptability, we analyzed usage statistics of visitors who completed the BreastCancerTrials.org health history questionnaire in the first 14 months after launch and surveyed users who visited the website during its first year about their experience. For accuracy, we compared the self-reported health history of 20 patients against their medical records. The health history questionnaire was divided into four sections: About Me, personal information including date of birth and sex; My Health as of Today, current status including cancer stage, menopausal status, and sites with evidence of disease; My Cancer, diagnostic information such as hormone and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status; and My Treatment, an itemized record of past treatment including responses to therapy.

Results: A total of 12 sites contributed 55 trials. Regarding acceptability, 733 visitors registered on the website; 428 reported their health history; and 407 matched to at least one trial. Of 375 patients who were sent a survey, 75 responded (20%); 23 of the 75 (31%) contacted a research site, 12 of the 23 (52%) were eligible for a trial, and 5 of the 12 (42%) reported enrolling. As for accuracy, 20 clinic visitors reported 1456 health history items, 1324 of which matched their clinic record (90.93%).

Conclusions: BreastCancerTrials.org was adopted by research sites. Patients found it acceptable and were able to provide accurate information for trial matching. Based on our findings, we launched an upgraded version of BreastCancerTrials.org as a national service in October 2008.

Citing Articles

Improving Participant Recruitment in Clinical Trials: Comparative Analysis of Innovative Digital Platforms.

Bikou A, Deligianni E, Dermiki-Gkana F, Liappas N, Terius-Padron J, Beltran Jaunsaras M J Med Internet Res. 2024; 26():e60504.

PMID: 39693619 PMC: 11694053. DOI: 10.2196/60504.


Computer-Aided Clinical Trial Recruitment Based on Domain-Specific Language Translation: A Case Study of Retinopathy of Prematurity.

Zhang Y, Zhang G, Shang Q J Healthc Eng. 2017; 2017:7862672.

PMID: 29065644 PMC: 5396472. DOI: 10.1155/2017/7862672.


Trial prospector: matching patients with cancer research studies using an automated and scalable approach.

Sahoo S, Tao S, Parchman A, Luo Z, Cui L, Mergler P Cancer Inform. 2014; 13:157-66.

PMID: 25506198 PMC: 4259509. DOI: 10.4137/CIN.S19454.


Educating low-SES and LEP survivors about breast cancer research: pilot test of the Health Research Engagement Intervention.

Nickell A, Burke N, Cohen E, Caprio M, Joseph G J Cancer Educ. 2014; 29(4):746-52.

PMID: 24744119 PMC: 4428555. DOI: 10.1007/s13187-014-0650-x.


'Being there' for women with metastatic breast cancer: a pan-European patient survey.

Harding V, Afshar M, Krell J, Ramaswami R, Twelves C, Stebbing J Br J Cancer. 2013; 109(6):1543-8.

PMID: 24002595 PMC: 3777001. DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2013.492.

References
1.
Breitfeld P, Weisburd M, Overhage J, Sledge Jr G, Tierney W . Pilot study of a point-of-use decision support tool for cancer clinical trials eligibility. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1999; 6(6):466-77. PMC: 61390. DOI: 10.1136/jamia.1999.0060466. View

2.
Friedman M, CAIN D . National Cancer Institute sponsored cooperative clinical trials. Cancer. 1990; 65(10 Suppl):2376-82. DOI: 10.1002/1097-0142(19900515)65:10+<2376::aid-cncr2820651504>3.0.co;2-a. View

3.
Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, Margolese R, Deutsch M, Fisher E . Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002; 347(16):1233-41. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa022152. View

4.
Ash N, Ogunyemi O, Zeng Q, Ohno-Machado L . Finding appropriate clinical trials: evaluating encoded eligibility criteria with incomplete data. Proc AMIA Symp. 2002; :27-31. PMC: 2243370. View

5.
Metz J, Coyle C, Hudson C, Hampshire M . An Internet-based cancer clinical trials matching resource. J Med Internet Res. 2005; 7(3):e24. PMC: 1550658. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.7.3.e24. View