“Developing a manual clinical trials screening process in a diverse southern gynecologic oncology practice”

IF 1.2 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Gynecologic Oncology Reports Pub Date : 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1016/j.gore.2024.101549
M. Klein , H. Pirzadah , Y. Magharehabed , A. Chapple , N. Nair , A. Jernigan , T. Castellano
{"title":"“Developing a manual clinical trials screening process in a diverse southern gynecologic oncology practice”","authors":"M. Klein ,&nbsp;H. Pirzadah ,&nbsp;Y. Magharehabed ,&nbsp;A. Chapple ,&nbsp;N. Nair ,&nbsp;A. Jernigan ,&nbsp;T. Castellano","doi":"10.1016/j.gore.2024.101549","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>There is no standard clinical trial screening process in gynecologic oncology. In our low resource, highly diverse gynecologic oncology patient population, we sought to create an equitable, adaptable, manual screening process.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Our objective is to describe our clinical trial screening process and success in improving trial enrollment. An Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved quality improvement (QI) project was implemented in July 2022 to evaluate trial access. Screenable events were defined. Potential patients were those with a screenable event: new patients or diagnoses, regimen changes, progressions, and recurrences. Events were categorized into screen positive or screened no trial available. Screen positives were further categorized as screen positive, enrollment failure events or enrollments. Data about patients were collected via weekly research team meetings. Monthly meetings occurred to review progress. The data were compared to trials available, number of patients with trail available, and those that enrolled. Reasons for enrollment fails were tracked.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Over time, “screen no trial available” (SNTA) rates stayed stable, but enrollment rates increased. Patient preference accounted for 32.8 % of enrollment failures (n = 42), pre-existing symptoms 23.4 % (n = 30), and location 21.1 % (n = 27). During increased employee turnover, there was a rise in enrollment fails due to staffing (n = 6, 4.7 %). We describe an effective process of clearly defining and tracking our patient population and ‘screenable events’ for which all patients are screened and offered trial participation if eligible.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>We show that we improved understanding of the patient population, built a clinical trial portfolio better matched to population served, exceeded national averages for enrolling patients on trials, and are improving number eligible.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12873,"journal":{"name":"Gynecologic Oncology Reports","volume":"57 ","pages":"Article 101549"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11699326/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gynecologic Oncology Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352578924002285","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

There is no standard clinical trial screening process in gynecologic oncology. In our low resource, highly diverse gynecologic oncology patient population, we sought to create an equitable, adaptable, manual screening process.

Methods

Our objective is to describe our clinical trial screening process and success in improving trial enrollment. An Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved quality improvement (QI) project was implemented in July 2022 to evaluate trial access. Screenable events were defined. Potential patients were those with a screenable event: new patients or diagnoses, regimen changes, progressions, and recurrences. Events were categorized into screen positive or screened no trial available. Screen positives were further categorized as screen positive, enrollment failure events or enrollments. Data about patients were collected via weekly research team meetings. Monthly meetings occurred to review progress. The data were compared to trials available, number of patients with trail available, and those that enrolled. Reasons for enrollment fails were tracked.

Results

Over time, “screen no trial available” (SNTA) rates stayed stable, but enrollment rates increased. Patient preference accounted for 32.8 % of enrollment failures (n = 42), pre-existing symptoms 23.4 % (n = 30), and location 21.1 % (n = 27). During increased employee turnover, there was a rise in enrollment fails due to staffing (n = 6, 4.7 %). We describe an effective process of clearly defining and tracking our patient population and ‘screenable events’ for which all patients are screened and offered trial participation if eligible.

Conclusions

We show that we improved understanding of the patient population, built a clinical trial portfolio better matched to population served, exceeded national averages for enrolling patients on trials, and are improving number eligible.
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
“在不同的南方妇科肿瘤学实践中开发人工临床试验筛选过程”。
目的:妇科肿瘤临床试验筛选没有标准流程。在我们的低资源,高度多样化的妇科肿瘤患者群体,我们试图创造一个公平的,适应性强的,人工筛选过程。方法:我们的目标是描述我们的临床试验筛选过程和成功提高试验入组率。机构审查委员会(IRB)批准的质量改进(QI)项目于2022年7月实施,以评估试验准入情况。定义了可筛选事件。潜在患者是那些具有筛查事件的患者:新患者或诊断,方案改变,进展和复发。事件分为筛查阳性和筛查无试验。筛查阳性进一步分类为筛查阳性、登记失败事件或登记。患者的数据通过每周的研究小组会议收集。每月举行会议审查进展情况。将这些数据与现有的试验、现有试验的患者数量和入组的患者数量进行比较。登记失败的原因被跟踪。结果:随着时间的推移,“无试验筛选”(SNTA)率保持稳定,但入组率上升。患者偏好占登记失败的32.8% (n = 42),既往症状占23.4% (n = 30),地点占21.1% (n = 27)。在员工流动率增加期间,由于人员配置导致的入学失败增加(n = 6,4.7 %)。我们描述了一个有效的过程,明确定义和跟踪我们的患者群体和“筛选事件”,所有患者都经过筛选,如果符合条件,可以参加试验。结论:我们表明,我们提高了对患者群体的了解,建立了一个更好地与所服务人群匹配的临床试验组合,超过了全国平均水平的试验入组患者,并且正在提高合格人数。
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
Gynecologic Oncology Reports
Gynecologic Oncology Reports OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
183
审稿时长
41 days
期刊介绍: Gynecologic Oncology Reports is an online-only, open access journal devoted to the rapid publication of narrative review articles, survey articles, case reports, case series, letters to the editor regarding previously published manuscripts and other short communications in the field of gynecologic oncology. The journal will consider papers that concern tumors of the female reproductive tract, with originality, quality, and clarity the chief criteria of acceptance.
期刊最新文献
Views on cervical cancer screening among female caregivers at the Uganda cancer Institute “Developing a manual clinical trials screening process in a diverse southern gynecologic oncology practice” A novel MXI1-NUTM2B fusion detected in an undifferentiated ovarian cancer Provider perspectives on caring for patients with limited English proficiency-a national survey of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology Cervicitis decidualis mimicking cervical cancer in pregnancy
×
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