Differences in cancer clinical trial activity and trial characteristics at metropolitan and rural trial sites in Victoria, Australia

Abstract

Objective

Cancer clinical trials (CCTs) provide access to emerging therapies and extra clinical care. We aimed to describe the volume and characteristics of CCTs available across Victoria, Australia, and identify factors associated with rural trial location.

Methods

Quantitative analysis of secondary data from Cancer Council Victoria's Clinical Trials Management Scheme dataset.

Design

A cross-sectional study design was used.

Setting

CCTs were available Victoria-wide in 2018.

Participants

There were 1669 CCTs and 5909 CCT participants.

Main Outcome Measures

Rural CCT location was assessed as a binary variable with categories of ‘yes’ (modified Monash [MM] categories 2–7) and ‘no’ (MM category 1). MM categories were determined from postcodes. The highest (‘least rural’) MM category was used for postcodes with multiple MM categories.

Results

Of 1669 CCTs, 168 (10.1%) were conducted in rural areas. Of 5909 CCT participants, 315 (5.3%) participated in rural CCTs. There were 526 CCTs (31.5%) with 1907 (32.3%) newly enrolled participants. Of 1892 newly enrolled participants with postcode data, 488 (25.8%) were rural residents. Of them, 368 (75.4%) participated in metropolitan CCTs. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis for all 1669 CCTs, odds of a rural rather than metropolitan CCT location were significantly (p-value <0.05) lower for early-phase than late-phase trials and non-solid than solid tumour trials but significantly (p-value <0.05) higher for non-industry than industry-sponsored trials.

Conclusions

In Victoria, 10% of CCTs are at rural sites. Most rural-residing CCT participants travel to metropolitan sites, where there are more late-phase, non-solid-tumour and industry-sponsored trials. Approaches to increase the volume and variety of rural CCTs should be considered.