Genesis Prevention Centre, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Trust, Manchester, UK.
J Med Genet. 2010 Dec;47(12):853-5. doi: 10.1136/jmg.2010.082768. Epub 2010 Oct 23.
Uptake of cancer trials and in particular prevention trials has been disappointing globally.
Uptake to three randomised chemotherapy breast cancer prevention trials and two dietary prevention trials in women at increased familial risk were assessed and compared with uptake of screening trials across a range of risk categories.
Uptake of drug prevention trials remains low at 5.3-13.6%, but is significantly higher in the high (12%) compared to very high risk group (8.4%) for IBIS1 and IBIS2 combined (p=0.004). Recruitment to two dietary prevention studies via mail shot was also disappointingly low at 6.2% and 12.5%. In contrast uptake to two mammography screening trials was >90% in all risk categories.
More work must be done to improve recruitment to prevention trials if they are to be seen as viable alternatives to risk reducing surgery.
Trial designs and decision aids need to be developed to improve recruitment.
全球范围内，癌症试验特别是预防试验的参与率一直令人失望。
评估了三种随机化疗乳腺癌预防试验和两种针对家族性高风险女性的饮食预防试验的参与率，并与一系列风险类别下的筛查试验的参与率进行了比较。
药物预防试验的参与率仍然很低，为 5.3-13.6%，但在 IBIS1 和 IBIS2 联合的高（12%）与极高风险组（8.4%）之间存在显著差异（p=0.004）。通过邮件发送招募的两项饮食预防研究的参与率也低得令人失望，分别为 6.2%和 12.5%。相比之下，两项乳房 X 线筛查试验在所有风险类别中的参与率都超过 90%。
如果要将预防试验视为降低风险手术的可行替代方案，就必须更加努力地招募参与者。
需要制定试验设计和决策辅助工具来提高参与率。
