The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Prospective Evaluation of Cancer Clinical Trial Accrual Patterns: Identifying Potential Barriers to Enrollment
Abstract
PURPOSE: Well-conducted cancer clinical trials are essential for improving patient outcomes. Unfortunately, only 3% of new cancer patients participate in clinical trials. Barriers to patient accrual in cancer clinical trials must be identified and overcome to increase patient participation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively tracked factors that potentially affected patient accrual into cancer clinical trials at the University of California Davis Cancer Center. Oncologists seeing new outpatients were asked to complete questionnaires regarding patient characteristics and the physician’s decision-making on patient eligibility, protocol availability, and patient opinions on participation. Statistical analysis was performed to correlate these parameters with subsequent protocol accrual. RESULTS: There were 276 assessable patients. At the initial visits, physicians did not consider clinical trials in 38% (105/276) of patients principally because of a perception of protocol unavailability and poor performance status. Physicians considered 62% (171/276) of patients for participation in clinical trials. Of these, only 53% (91/171) had an appropriate protocol available for site and stage of disease. Seventy-six of 90 patients (84%) with available protocols met eligibility criteria for a particular study. Only 39 of 76 patients (51%) agreed to participate in cancer clinical trials, for an overall accrual rate of 14% (39/276). The remainder (37/76, 49%) declined trial participation despite meeting eligibility criteria. The most common reasons were a desire for other treatment (34%), distance from the cancer center (13%), patient refusal to disclose reason (11%), and insurance denial (8%). Patients with private insurance were less likely to enroll in clinical trials compared to those with government-funded insurance (OR, 0.34; P = .03; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.9). CONCLUSION: Barriers to cancer clinical trial accrual can be prospectively identified and addressed in the development and conduct of future studies, which may potentially lead to more robust clinical trials enrollment. Investigation of patient perceptions regarding the clinical trials process and the role of third party–payers is warranted.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Barriers to recruiting underrepresented populations to cancer clinical trials: a systematic review
Ford, J. G., Howerton, M. W., Lai, G. Y., Gary, T. L., Bolen, S., Gibbons, M. C., Tilburt, J., Baffi, C., Tanpitukpongse, T. P., Wilson, R. F., et al. (2008) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.23157 · Cited by 1,083
Talarico, L., Chen, G., & Pazdur, R. (2004) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2004.02.175 · Cited by 727
The Role of Clinical Trial Participation in Cancer Research: Barriers, Evidence, and Strategies
Unger, J. M., Cook, E., Tai, E., & Bleyer, A. (2016) · American Society of Clinical Oncology Educational Book · doi:10.1200/edbk_156686 · Cited by 665
Adult cancer clinical trials that fail to complete: an epidemic?
Stensland, K. D., McBride, R. B., Latif, A., Wisnivesky, J., Hendricks, R., Roper, N., Boffetta, P., Hall, S. J., Oh, W. K., & Galsky, M. D. (2014) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/dju229 · Cited by 161
Fayter, D., McDaid, C., & Eastwood, A. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.12.013 · Cited by 112
Metadata
- Authors
- Lara, P. N., Higdon, R., Lim, N., Kwan, K., Tanaka, M., Lau, D. H. M., Wun, T., Welborn, J., Meyers, F. J., Christensen, S., O’Donnell, R., Richman, C., Scudder, S. A., Tuscano, J., Gandara, D. R., & Lam, K. S.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 2001-03-15
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1728-1733
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2226419169
- Cited by
- 588
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 12.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prospective Evaluation of Cancer Clinical Trial Accrual Patterns: Identifying Potential Barriers to Enrollment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2001.19.6.1728
- The paper
- Lara, P. N., Higdon, R., Lim, N., Kwan, K., Tanaka, M., Lau, D. H. M., Wun, T., Welborn, J., Meyers, F. J., Christensen, S., O’Donnell, R., Richman, C., Scudder, S. A., Tuscano, J., Gandara, D. R., & Lam, K. S. (2001). Prospective Evaluation of Cancer Clinical Trial Accrual Patterns: Identifying Potential Barriers to Enrollment. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2001.19.6.1728
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.