Patient information in phase 1 trials: A systematic review

被引:5
|
作者
Gad, Katrine Toubro [1 ]
Lassen, Ulrik [1 ]
Mau-Soerensen, Morten [1 ]
Hoybye, Mette Terp [2 ]
Johansen, Christoffer [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Copenhagen Univ Hosp, Rigshosp, Dept Oncol, Copenhagen, Denmark
[2] Elect Surg Ctr, Interdisciplinary Res Unit, Silkeborg, Denmark
[3] Danish Canc Soc, Res Ctr, Unit Survivorship, Copenhagen, Denmark
关键词
cancer; decision making; information; oncology; perception; phase; 1; trial; relatives; understanding; CANCER CLINICAL-TRIALS; INFORMED-CONSENT; DECISION-MAKING; ONCOLOGY TRIALS; THERAPEUTIC MISCONCEPTION; I TRIALS; PARTICIPATION; BENEFITS; COMMUNICATION; EXPECTATIONS;
D O I
10.1002/pon.4559
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Objective: To review what is known about cancer patients' decisions to enter a phase 1 trial and how they and their relatives perceive the information they receive when they are invited to participate. Methods: This systematic review is based on the principles of "preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses." A systematic search was performed in the PubMed, Embase, and PsycInfo databases, supplemented by a search for unpublished literature. Results: We identified 37 studies for inclusion in this review. Patients' decisions to participate in a phase 1 trial were influenced by the drug being tested, information procedures, physician-related factors, and the patient's individual approach to decision making. Patients have difficulties correctly repeating the purpose of a phase 1 trial. In several studies, most patients expressed expectations of personal benefit from participating. Studies performing analyses of the dialog demonstrated that the language of the physicians was incomplete. The relatives' perceptions of such information remain unexplored. Most studies had a comprehensive risk of bias. Conclusions: Patients' decisions regarding participation in phase 1 trials are based on more than the information of the trial. The way patients express the information they have been given could be limited by the applied methods for evaluating this variable. While relatives are expected to be resources for patients entering a phase 1 trial, this topic has not been investigated.
引用
收藏
页码:768 / 780
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Designing phase II trials in cancer: a systematic review and guidance
    Brown, S. R.
    Gregory, W. M.
    Twelves, C. J.
    Buyse, M.
    Collinson, F.
    Parmar, M.
    Seymour, M. T.
    Brown, J. M.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2011, 105 (02) : 194 - 199
  • [22] A systematic review of contemporary phase I trials in patients with lymphoma
    Griguolo, G.
    Zorzi, M. F.
    Pirosa, M. C.
    Treglia, G.
    Bertoni, F.
    Kuruvilla, J.
    Zucca, E.
    Stathis, A.
    CRITICAL REVIEWS IN ONCOLOGY HEMATOLOGY, 2022, 180
  • [23] Identifying patient values impacting the decision whether to participate in early phase clinical cancer trials: A systematic review
    van Lent, Liza G. G.
    Jabbarian, Lea J.
    Gurp, Jelle van
    Hasselaar, Jeroen
    Lolkema, Martijn P.
    van Weert, Julia C. M.
    van der Rijt, Carin C. D.
    de Jonge, Maja J. A.
    CANCER TREATMENT REVIEWS, 2021, 98
  • [24] Revisiting the ethics of phase 1 oncology trials in the era of precision medicine: A systematic review.
    Mackley, Michael Patrick
    Fernandez, Nicholas R.
    Fletcher, Benjamin
    Woolcott, Christy
    Fernandez, Conrad Vincent
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2019, 37 (15)
  • [25] Hope and meaning-making in phase 1 oncology trials: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative evidence on patient-participant experiences
    Escritt, Kate
    Mann, Mala
    Nelson, Annmarie
    Harrop, Emily
    TRIALS, 2022, 23 (01)
  • [26] Hope and meaning-making in phase 1 oncology trials: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative evidence on patient-participant experiences
    Kate Escritt
    Mala Mann
    Annmarie Nelson
    Emily Harrop
    Trials, 23
  • [27] Patient-reported outcomes in Hodgkin lymphoma trials: a systematic review
    Oliva, Esther Natalie
    Ionova, Tatyana
    Laane, Edward
    Csenar, Mario
    Schroer, Julia
    Behringer, Karolin
    Monsef, Ina
    Oeser, Annika
    Skoetz, Nicole
    Salek, Sam
    FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2024, 14
  • [28] The Effect of Practitioner Empathy on Patient Satisfaction A Systematic Review of Randomized Trials
    Keshtkar, Leila
    Madigan, Claire D.
    Ward, Andy
    Ahmed, Sarah
    Tanna, Vinay
    Rahman, Ismail
    Bostock, Jennifer
    Nockels, Keith
    Wang, Wen
    Gillies, Clare L.
    Howick, Jeremy
    ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2024, 177 (02) : 196 - 209
  • [29] Patient and public involvement in lifestyle randomized controlled trials: a systematic review
    Bouzalmate-Hajjaj, Amira
    Cano-Ibanez, Naomi
    Khan, Khalid Saeed
    Bueno-Cavanillas, Aurora
    Guijarro, Paloma Masso
    JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH-HEIDELBERG, 2023,
  • [30] Patient reported measures of informed consent for clinical trials: A systematic review
    Gillies, Katie
    Duthie, Alexander
    Cotton, Seonaidh
    Campbell, Marion K.
    PLOS ONE, 2018, 13 (06):