↓ Skip to main content

Improving the pre-screening of eligible patients in order to increase enrollment in cancer clinical trials

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Improving the pre-screening of eligible patients in order to increase enrollment in cancer clinical trials
Published in
Trials, January 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13063-014-0535-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Boris Campillo-Gimenez, Camille Buscail, Oussama Zekri, Brigitte Laguerre, Elisabeth Le Prisé, Renaud De Crevoisier, Marc Cuggia

Abstract

BackgroundThe performance of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is often hindered by recruitment difficulties. This study aims to explore the pre-screening phase of four prostate cancer RCTs to identify the impact of a systematic pre-selection of eligible patients for RCT recruitment.MethodsThe pre-screening of four RCTs opened at the Comprehensive Cancer Center in Rennes was analyzed retrospectively (French Genitourinary Tumor Group (GETUG) 14, 15, 16, and 17). Data were extracted from electronic multidisciplinary cancer (MDC) reports and manually completed by physicians and medical secretaries. These data were the main source of information for clinicians to discuss treatment alternatives during MDC sessions. The pre-screening decisions made by the clinicians during these MDC meetings were compared with those made after a systematic review of the MDC reports by a clinical research assistant (CRA). Any inconsistencies in decisions between the CRA and the MDC physicians were corrected by the principal investigator (PI).ResultsThe pre-screening rate was 9.1% during the MDC meetings, while it was estimated to be 12.9% after the final review by the PI, and 29% after the systematic review by the CRA. The study showed that 77% and 67% of the MDC reports did not mention clinical and pathological Tumor, lymph node and metastasis classification of malignant tumors (TNM) staging, respectively, and that 35 of the CRA¿s 47 proposals rejected by the PI concerned implicit information (not specified in the MDC reports). Only one patient was proposed by the PI, and none by the CRA.ConclusionsThese results confirm that pre-screening could be improved by a systematic review of the medical reports. They also highlight the fact that missing data in electronic MDC reports leads to over-enrollment of non-eligible patients, but not to over-exclusion of eligible patients. Thus, our study confirms the potential gain in using semi-automated pre-selection of MDC reports, in order to avoid missing out on patients eligible for RCTs.Trial registrationThe trials evaluated in this study were previously registered with clinicaltrials.gov (registration number: NCT00104741 on 3 March 2005; NCT00104715 on 3 March 2005; NCT00423475 on 16 January 2007; and NCT00667069 on 24 April 2008).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 42 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 19%
Researcher 7 16%
Student > Bachelor 7 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 3 7%
Other 10 23%
Unknown 5 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 26%
Computer Science 7 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 7%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 7 16%