Kuroki Lindsay, Stuckey Ashley, Hirway Priya, Raker Christina A, Bandera Christina A, DiSilvestro Paul A, Granai Cornelius O, Legare Robert D, Sakr Bachir J, Dizon Don S
Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.
Gynecol Oncol. 2010 Mar;116(3):295-300. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2009.12.005. Epub 2009 Dec 29.
The Tumor Board (TB) allows for an interdisciplinary approach to cancer treatment designed to encourage evidence-based treatment. However, its role in facilitating clinical trial participation has not been reported. We aimed to determine whether a prospective TB is an effective strategy for trial recruitment and to identify steps within the TB process that facilitate discussion of trial eligibility and optimize accrual.
We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of women presented to Gynecologic Oncology TB between March and December 2008. Patient demographics, TB recommendations, and post-TB patient discussions were abstracted. These were compared to data derived from the Department of Oncology Research to determine research team awareness of eligible patients and confirm trial enrollment(s). Data analysis was completed with Chi-square test; risk ratios and confidence intervals were calculated as summary measures.
We reviewed 1213 case presentations involving 916 women. Overall, 358 TB recommendations (30%) identified eligible patients, of which enrollment consisted of 87 (24%) trials (6% therapeutic trials and 18% non-therapeutic trials). Compared to other types of TB recommendations, those involving trials were discussed less frequently at post-TB patient visits (79% vs. 44%). Documentation of trial discussion at the post-TB visit was more likely to result in trial participation, versus solely relying on the research staff to communicate enrollment eligibility with the treating team (RR 2.5, p=0.006).
Patients identified by the TB were 2.5-times as likely to enroll in a clinical trial, but trials were mentioned only 44% of the time. Interventions that facilitate trial discussions during post-TB meetings are needed to improve trial participation.
肿瘤专家委员会(TB)采用跨学科方法进行癌症治疗,旨在鼓励基于证据的治疗。然而,其在促进临床试验参与方面的作用尚未见报道。我们旨在确定前瞻性肿瘤专家委员会是否是一种有效的试验招募策略,并确定肿瘤专家委员会流程中有助于讨论试验资格和优化入组的步骤。
我们对2008年3月至12月间提交给妇科肿瘤专家委员会的女性患者进行了回顾性横断面分析。提取了患者人口统计学信息、肿瘤专家委员会的建议以及肿瘤专家委员会会议后与患者的讨论内容。将这些信息与肿瘤研究部门的数据进行比较,以确定研究团队对符合条件患者的知晓情况并确认试验入组情况。采用卡方检验进行数据分析;计算风险比和置信区间作为汇总指标。
我们回顾了1213例病例报告,涉及916名女性。总体而言,358项肿瘤专家委员会建议(30%)确定了符合条件的患者,其中87项(24%)试验入组(6%为治疗性试验,18%为非治疗性试验)。与其他类型的肿瘤专家委员会建议相比,涉及试验的建议在肿瘤专家委员会会议后与患者的讨论中提及频率较低(79%对44%)。与仅依靠研究人员向治疗团队传达入组资格相比,在肿瘤专家委员会会议后记录试验讨论更有可能导致试验参与(风险比2.5,p = 0.006)。
肿瘤专家委员会确定的患者参加临床试验的可能性是其他人的2.5倍,但试验仅在44%的时间被提及。需要采取干预措施,在肿瘤专家委员会会议后促进试验讨论,以提高试验参与率。