Boosting and broadening recruitment to UK cancer trials: towards a blueprint for action

V. Nanton, R. Bryan, Anne M Pope, Ana Hughes, Kieran Jefferson, James W F Catto, Allen Knight, J. Gallagher, H. Mintz, S. Pirrie, Wenyu Liu, A. Young, Prashant Patel, Nicholas D. James
{"title":"Boosting and broadening recruitment to UK cancer trials: towards a blueprint for action","authors":"V. Nanton, R. Bryan, Anne M Pope, Ana Hughes, Kieran Jefferson, James W F Catto, Allen Knight, J. Gallagher, H. Mintz, S. Pirrie, Wenyu Liu, A. Young, Prashant Patel, Nicholas D. James","doi":"10.1136/bmjonc-2023-000092","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recruitment and retention in cancer trials are long-standing issues, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The UK National Institute of Health Research and leading clinicians have emphasised the urgency to achieve and surpass prepandemic levels of participation.Data from a recent UK trial demonstrated the impact of COVID-19 and highlighted factors that limited recruitment. In response to this worldwide problem, studies have identified strategies for remediation at the levels of funding, the research environment, study design and trial team-related aspects, yet evidence of progress is lacking.Equality, diversity and inclusivity have become central to UK health and social policy during the 2000s. The need for greater inclusivity in trials has become a particular concern for cancer researchers and funders in the UK and in the USA, in recognition of potential bias in results. In the UK trials, the lack of standardised recording of ethnicity data renders interpretation difficult and caution is required in comparisons with the USA.Recently, the focus of concern has shifted away from the impact of deprivation and low socioeconomic status on trial participation. Barriers created by these factors and their frequent intersection with ethnicity should not be overlooked.The UK has adopted an advisory approach to broadening recruitment, publishing policy documents, guidance and toolkits. In the USA, by contrast, action on inclusion is increasingly mandated. Within the UK paradigm, the cancer research community is strongly encouraged to adopt a coordinated approach towards standardised digital data collection and embed and evaluate innovative, cocreated, locally relevant strategies.","PeriodicalId":72436,"journal":{"name":"BMJ oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjonc-2023-000092","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recruitment and retention in cancer trials are long-standing issues, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The UK National Institute of Health Research and leading clinicians have emphasised the urgency to achieve and surpass prepandemic levels of participation.Data from a recent UK trial demonstrated the impact of COVID-19 and highlighted factors that limited recruitment. In response to this worldwide problem, studies have identified strategies for remediation at the levels of funding, the research environment, study design and trial team-related aspects, yet evidence of progress is lacking.Equality, diversity and inclusivity have become central to UK health and social policy during the 2000s. The need for greater inclusivity in trials has become a particular concern for cancer researchers and funders in the UK and in the USA, in recognition of potential bias in results. In the UK trials, the lack of standardised recording of ethnicity data renders interpretation difficult and caution is required in comparisons with the USA.Recently, the focus of concern has shifted away from the impact of deprivation and low socioeconomic status on trial participation. Barriers created by these factors and their frequent intersection with ethnicity should not be overlooked.The UK has adopted an advisory approach to broadening recruitment, publishing policy documents, guidance and toolkits. In the USA, by contrast, action on inclusion is increasingly mandated. Within the UK paradigm, the cancer research community is strongly encouraged to adopt a coordinated approach towards standardised digital data collection and embed and evaluate innovative, cocreated, locally relevant strategies.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
促进和扩大英国癌症试验的招募工作:制定行动蓝图
癌症试验的招募和保留是一个长期存在的问题,而 COVID-19 的流行更加剧了这一问题。英国国家健康研究所和主要临床医生都强调了达到并超过流行前参与水平的紧迫性。最近英国的一项试验数据显示了 COVID-19 的影响,并强调了限制招募的因素。针对这一世界性问题,研究确定了在资金、研究环境、研究设计和试验团队相关方面的补救策略,但仍缺乏取得进展的证据。2000 年代,平等、多样性和包容性已成为英国卫生和社会政策的核心。由于认识到试验结果可能存在偏差,英国和美国的癌症研究人员和资助者特别关注试验中更大包容性的需求。在英国的试验中,由于缺乏对种族数据的标准化记录,因此很难对其进行解释,在与美国进行比较时也需要谨慎。这些因素造成的障碍及其与种族问题的频繁交集不容忽视。英国在扩大招募方面采取了咨询的方式,发布了政策文件、指南和工具包。与此相反,美国则越来越多地要求采取包容性行动。在英国的范例中,我们强烈鼓励癌症研究界采用协调的方法来实现标准化的数字数据收集,并嵌入和评估创新的、共同创造的、与当地相关的策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Health-related quality of life outcomes reporting associated with FDA approvals in haematology and oncology Potential of neutrophil-to-eosinophil ratio as a new prognostic tool for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma receiving first-line immuno-oncology combinations Does the regional use of intensive chemotherapy impact the outcome of adults with AML? Regional disparities in the use of intensive chemotherapy for AML in the Netherlands: does it influence survival? Research priorities to improve cancer care for people with intellectual disabilities across the cancer continuum
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1