» Articles » PMID: 26160883

Participation in Cancer Pharmacogenomic Studies: A Study of 8456 Patients Registered to Clinical Trials in the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (Alliance)

Overview
Specialty Oncology
Date 2015 Jul 11
PMID 26160883
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Clinically annotated specimens from cancer clinical trial participants offer an opportunity for discovery and validation of pharmacogenomic findings. The purpose of this observational study is to better understand patient/institution factors that may contribute to participation in the pharmacogenomic component of prospective cancer clinical trials.

Methods: Patient demographic information (age, sex, self-reported race) and institutional characteristics (CALGB/CTSU site, "diversity," and accrual) were evaluated for 8456 patients enrolled in seven CALGB phase III studies with a pharmacogenomic component. All statistical tests were two-sided.

Results: The majority of patients (81%) consented to participate in the pharmacogenomic component. However, in a multivariable analysis, site (CALGB vs CTSU) and "institutional diversity" (percent minority cancer patients on national trials) were statistically significantly associated with participation. For both whites and nonwhites, patients from CALGB sites were more likely to participate compared with patients from CTSU sites (whites: odds ratio [OR] = 2.26, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.68 to 3.04, P < .001; nonwhites: OR = 1.79, 95% CI = 1.52 to 2.11, P < .001). However, as "institutional diversity" increased, the likelihood of participation in the pharmacogenomics component decreased for both white (OR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.91 to 0.97, P < .001) and nonwhite patients (OR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.81 to 1.00, P = .05).

Conclusions: Most clinical trial cancer patients across geographical, racial, and practice settings are willing to participate in pharmacogenomic studies. However, to promote equitable benefit to the larger cancer community, optimization of both patient and institutional participation are needed. Institutional factors may be even more compelling than patient demographics. Prospective studies are needed to identify and address barriers/incentives to participation in pharmacogenomic research at the patient, clinician, and institutional levels.

Citing Articles

The role of social, economic, and medical marginalization in cancer clinical trial participation inequities: A systematic review.

Hanvey G, Johnson H, Cartagena G, Dede D, Krieger J, Ross K J Clin Transl Sci. 2025; 9(1):e25.

PMID: 40052046 PMC: 11883616. DOI: 10.1017/cts.2024.677.


Disparities in Clinical Trial Enrollment- Focus on CAR-T and Bispecific Antibody Therapies.

Islam N, Budvytyte L, Khera N, Hilal T Curr Hematol Malig Rep. 2024; 20(1):1.

PMID: 39630328 PMC: 11618314. DOI: 10.1007/s11899-024-00747-6.


Barriers for cancer clinical trial enrollment: A qualitative study of the perspectives of healthcare providers.

Kumar G, Chaudhary P, Quinn A, Su D Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2022; 28:100939.

PMID: 35707483 PMC: 9189774. DOI: 10.1016/j.conctc.2022.100939.


Inequities in Alliance Acute Leukemia Clinical Trial and Biobank Participation: Defining Targets for Intervention.

Hantel A, Kohlschmidt J, Eisfeld A, Stock W, Jacobson S, Mandrekar S J Clin Oncol. 2022; 40(32):3709-3718.

PMID: 35696629 PMC: 9649272. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.22.00307.


Recruitment practices for U.S. minority and underserved populations in NRG oncology: Results of an online survey.

Cook E, Yeager K, Cecchini R, Boparai J, Brown C, Duncan M Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2018; 10:100-104.

PMID: 30023443 PMC: 6046466. DOI: 10.1016/j.conctc.2018.03.003.


References
1.
Zeger S, Liang K . Longitudinal data analysis for discrete and continuous outcomes. Biometrics. 1986; 42(1):121-30. View

2.
Beskow L, Botkin J, Daly M, Juengst E, Lehmann L, Merz J . Ethical issues in identifying and recruiting participants for familial genetic research. Am J Med Genet A. 2004; 130A(4):424-31. DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.a.30234. View

3.
Carpenter W, Godley P, Clark J, Talcott J, Finnegan T, Mishel M . Racial differences in trust and regular source of patient care and the implications for prostate cancer screening use. Cancer. 2009; 115(21):5048-59. PMC: 2779840. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.24539. View

4.
Paskett E, Reeves K, McLaughlin J, Katz M, McAlearney A, Ruffin M . Recruitment of minority and underserved populations in the United States: the Centers for Population Health and Health Disparities experience. Contemp Clin Trials. 2008; 29(6):847-61. PMC: 2642621. DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2008.07.006. View

5.
Guth A, Fineberg S, Fei K, Franco R, Bickell N . Utilization of Oncotype DX in an Inner City Population: Race or Place?. Int J Breast Cancer. 2014; 2013:653805. PMC: 3878389. DOI: 10.1155/2013/653805. View