• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

儿童医院中罹患癌症的青少年及青年的临床试验入组情况没有改善。

No improvement in clinical trial enrollment for adolescents and young adults with cancer at a children's hospital.

作者信息

Jacob Seethal A, Shaw Peter H

机构信息

Division of Hematology/Oncology, Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh of UPMC, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

出版信息

Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2017 Dec;64(12). doi: 10.1002/pbc.26638. Epub 2017 May 16.

DOI:10.1002/pbc.26638
PMID:28509440
Abstract

BACKGROUND

We have previously published data from 2001 to 2006 showing that adolescent and young adult (AYA) oncology patients have significantly lower therapeutic clinical trial enrollment rates than younger patients. Our objective was to determine if the enrollment of AYA patients on therapeutic studies at the same institution has improved in recent years with the greater focus on this population locally and nationally.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed cancer registry data at the Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh (CHP) for all new oncologic diagnoses between January 2010 and December 2014. These data included age, gender, diagnosis, race and whether the patient was enrolled on an open treatment study. Univariate analyses were carried out to compare demographic data between AYA patients (aged 15-22) who enrolled on study and those who did not.

RESULTS

Eight hundred sixty-five new oncology patients were seen at CHP during this time, 23% of whom were 15 years or older; 33% of all patients were treated on a clinical trial, including 34% of younger patients and 24% of older patients (P = 0.0017). The differences between these rates and those from prior years in both age groups (38% and 27%, respectively) were not statistically significant (P = 0.15, 0.53). The most common reason for the low enrollment rates was again the lack of an open therapeutic trial.

CONCLUSION

Despite initiatives at CHP and on the national level to enroll more AYA patients on clinical trials, our most recent data show no improvement. This is a potentially remediable factor that needs to continue to be prioritized nationally.

摘要

背景

我们之前发表了2001年至2006年的数据,表明青少年和青年(AYA)肿瘤患者的治疗性临床试验入组率显著低于年龄更小的患者。我们的目标是确定近年来,在同一机构进行的治疗性研究中,AYA患者的入组情况是否有所改善,因为本地和全国范围内对这一人群的关注有所增加。

方法

我们回顾性分析了匹兹堡儿童医院(CHP)2010年1月至2014年12月期间所有新确诊肿瘤患者的癌症登记数据。这些数据包括年龄、性别、诊断结果、种族以及患者是否参加了开放治疗研究。进行单因素分析以比较参加研究的AYA患者(年龄15 - 22岁)和未参加研究的患者之间的人口统计学数据。

结果

在此期间,CHP共诊治了865名新肿瘤患者,其中23%的患者年龄在15岁及以上;所有患者中有33%接受了临床试验治疗,其中年龄较小的患者为34%,年龄较大的患者为24%(P = 0.0017)。这两个年龄组的这些比率与前几年的比率(分别为38%和27%)之间的差异无统计学意义(P = 0.15,0.53)。入组率低的最常见原因再次是缺乏开放的治疗性试验。

结论

尽管CHP和国家层面都采取了措施,以使更多AYA患者参加临床试验,但我们的最新数据显示情况并未改善。这是一个可能可补救的因素,需要在全国范围内继续作为优先事项。

相似文献

1
No improvement in clinical trial enrollment for adolescents and young adults with cancer at a children's hospital.儿童医院中罹患癌症的青少年及青年的临床试验入组情况没有改善。
Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2017 Dec;64(12). doi: 10.1002/pbc.26638. Epub 2017 May 16.
2
Improved clinical trial enrollment in adolescent and young adult (AYA) oncology patients after the establishment of an AYA oncology program uniting pediatric and medical oncology divisions.在建立了一个将儿科肿瘤学和肿瘤医学部门联合起来的青少年和年轻成人(AYA)肿瘤学项目后,改善了 AYA 肿瘤学患者的临床试验入组。
Cancer. 2012 Jul 15;118(14):3614-7. doi: 10.1002/cncr.26634. Epub 2011 Dec 27.
3
A comparison of clinical trial enrollment between adolescent and young adult (AYA) oncology patients treated at affiliated adult and pediatric oncology centers.附属成人与儿科肿瘤中心治疗的青少年和青年成人(AYA)肿瘤患者临床试验入组情况的比较。
J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2009 Dec;31(12):927-9. doi: 10.1097/MPH.0b013e3181b91180.
4
Different rates of clinical trial enrollment between adolescents and young adults aged 15 to 22 years old and children under 15 years old with cancer at a children's hospital.一家儿童医院中,15至22岁的青少年及青年癌症患者与15岁以下儿童癌症患者的临床试验入组率有所不同。
J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2007 Dec;29(12):811-4. doi: 10.1097/MPH.0b013e31815814f3.
5
A prospective comparison of cancer clinical trial availability and enrollment among adolescents/young adults treated at an adult cancer hospital or affiliated children's hospital.在成人癌症医院或附属儿童医院接受治疗的青少年/青年癌症患者中,癌症临床试验的可及性和入组情况的前瞻性比较。
Cancer. 2018 Oct 15;124(20):4064-4071. doi: 10.1002/cncr.31727. Epub 2018 Oct 6.
6
Case-linked analysis of clinical trial enrollment among adolescents and young adults at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center.在一家美国国立癌症研究所指定的综合癌症中心对青少年和青年成人临床试验入组情况进行病例关联分析。
Cancer. 2015 Dec 15;121(24):4398-406. doi: 10.1002/cncr.29669. Epub 2015 Sep 22.
7
Assessment of enrollment characteristics for Children's Oncology Group (COG) upfront therapeutic clinical trials 2004-2015.评估儿童肿瘤学组(COG)2004-2015 年直接治疗临床试验的入组特征。
PLoS One. 2020 Apr 23;15(4):e0230824. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0230824. eCollection 2020.
8
Most children with cancer are not enrolled on a clinical trial in Canada: a population-based study.加拿大一项基于人群的研究表明,大多数患癌儿童未参加临床试验。
BMC Cancer. 2017 Jun 5;17(1):402. doi: 10.1186/s12885-017-3390-6.
9
Participation in pediatric oncology research protocols: Racial/ethnic, language and age-based disparities.参与儿科肿瘤学研究方案:基于种族/民族、语言和年龄的差异。
Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2015 Aug;62(8):1337-44. doi: 10.1002/pbc.25472. Epub 2015 Mar 8.
10
Low Enrollment of Adolescents and Young Adults Onto Cancer Trials: Insights From the Community Clinical Oncology Program.青少年和青年参加癌症试验的入组率低:来自社区临床肿瘤项目的见解。
J Oncol Pract. 2016 Apr;12(4):e388-95. doi: 10.1200/JOP.2015.009084. Epub 2016 Mar 29.

引用本文的文献

1
Insights From Diverse Perspectives on Social Media Messages to Inform Young Adults With Cancer About Clinical Trials: Focus Group Study.从不同视角洞察社交媒体信息,以告知癌症青年患者有关临床试验的情况:焦点小组研究
JMIR Form Res. 2025 Jan 20;9:e64265. doi: 10.2196/64265.
2
Challenges and limitations of clinical trials in the adolescent and young adult CNS cancer population: A systematic review.青少年和青年中枢神经系统癌症患者临床试验的挑战与局限:一项系统综述
Neurooncol Adv. 2023 Dec 10;6(1):vdad159. doi: 10.1093/noajnl/vdad159. eCollection 2024 Jan-Dec.
3
Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) vs pediatric patients: survival, risks, and barriers to enrollment.
青少年和青年成人(AYAs)与儿科患者:生存、风险和入组障碍。
Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2023 Dec 8;2023(1):581-586. doi: 10.1182/hematology.2023000507.
4
Trends in Pediatric Cancer Care in Florida From 1981-2020: Changing Patterns in a Growing and Increasingly Diverse Population.1981 - 2020年佛罗里达州儿科癌症护理趋势:在不断增长且日益多样化的人群中的变化模式
Cureus. 2023 Feb 16;15(2):e35061. doi: 10.7759/cureus.35061. eCollection 2023 Feb.
5
Loss to follow-up of minorities, adolescents, and young adults on clinical trials: A report from the Children's Oncology Group.临床试验中少数民族、青少年和青年成年人的失随访情况:来自儿童肿瘤学组的报告。
Cancer. 2023 May 15;129(10):1547-1556. doi: 10.1002/cncr.34701. Epub 2023 Feb 22.
6
Caught in the In-Between: Challenges in Treating Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer.处于两难境地:治疗青少年和青年癌症患者面临的挑战。
JCO Oncol Pract. 2021 Jun;17(6):299-301. doi: 10.1200/OP.21.00178. Epub 2021 Apr 29.
7
Racial/ethnic, socioeconomic, and geographic survival disparities in adolescents and young adults with primary central nervous system tumors.青少年和青年原发性中枢神经系统肿瘤患者的种族/民族、社会经济和地理生存差异。
Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2021 Jul;68(7):e28970. doi: 10.1002/pbc.28970. Epub 2021 Mar 11.
8
Assessment of enrollment characteristics for Children's Oncology Group (COG) upfront therapeutic clinical trials 2004-2015.评估儿童肿瘤学组(COG)2004-2015 年直接治疗临床试验的入组特征。
PLoS One. 2020 Apr 23;15(4):e0230824. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0230824. eCollection 2020.
9
Enrollment of adolescents and young adults onto SWOG cancer research network clinical trials: A comparative analysis by treatment site and era.SWOG 癌症研究网络临床试验中青少年和年轻成年人的入组:按治疗部位和时代的对比分析。
Cancer Med. 2020 Mar;9(6):2146-2152. doi: 10.1002/cam4.2891. Epub 2020 Feb 3.
10
Burden or Opportunity? Parent Experiences When Approached for Research in a Pediatric Intensive Care Unit.负担还是机遇?在儿科重症监护病房被邀请参与研究时家长的经历。
Ethics Hum Res. 2019 May;41(3):2-12. doi: 10.1002/eahr.500014.