Abstract 3427
Background
Extensive research has demonstrated that patients considering early phase oncology trials do not appreciate the design or purpose of these trials and also harbour unrealistic expectations of the personal benefit they can expect from the trial. There have been few interventional studies examining the informed consent process in this setting and they have shown limited effectiveness. We aimed to use a qualitative methodology to understand the perspectives of key stakeholders and identify the areas of need and the potential opportunities for an intervention to improve our informed consent processes.
Methods
We used an experience-based co-design framework which consisted of a semi-structured interview script of ten key questions. Two trained interviewers performed interviews of three consultant medical oncologists, nine clinical fellows, two study managers, two clinical nurse specialists, two focus groups with four patients each and two regulatory officers. We also interviewed four members of our investigator-initiated sponsor team to obtain an understanding of the sponsor perspective. All audio interviews were transcribed, and thematic analysis was performed on the narrative text to extract core themes.
Results
Consistent themes raised by participants included 1. The core elements that participants need to comprehend prior to consenting are that trials are experiments and not treatment, the low prospect of benefit, potential toxicity and the significant time commitment. 2. Participant information sheets (PIS) are too long, too complex and the information is not provided in a patient centred manner. Sponsors were in strong support of shorter and more accessible PIS. 3. Digital media would be acceptable and useful but to be mindful of subgroups of patients who are not as comfortable with digital media.
Conclusions
There is widespread understanding that improvement is required in the length, design and style of participant information sheets for phase 1 oncology trials. Furthermore, digital media would be acceptable to all stakeholders but its development will require ongoing stakeholder engagement to ensure user acceptability.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
Drug Development Unit - Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton.
Funding
Cancer Research UK (CRUK), Experimental Cancer Medicine Centres (ECMC), National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Royal Marsden Biomedical Research Centre.
Disclosure
J. Lopez: Advisory / Consultancy: Genmab; Advisory / Consultancy: Novartis; Research grant / Funding (institution): Roche/Genentech; Research grant / Funding (institution): Basilea; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Basilea; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Roche/Genentech. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
3371 - Pulmonary Resectable Metastases of Osteosarcoma With Apatinib and CHemotherapy (PROACH):A Multi-Center Phase II Randomized Clinical Trial
Presenter: Qiyuan Bao
Session: Poster Display session 1
Resources:
Abstract
1666 - National Clinical-biological Prospective Cohort of Incident Cases of Aggressive Fibromatosis, AF (ALTITUDES)
Presenter: Thomas Ryckewaert
Session: Poster Display session 1
Resources:
Abstract
5531 - Health-related quality Of Life In patients with advanced Soft TIssue sarcomas treated with Chemotherapy: The HOLISTIC study
Presenter: Eugenie Younger
Session: Poster Display session 1
Resources:
Abstract
5568 - Assessing QUality of life and Experiences of diagnostic Trajectories of Sarcoma patients: The QUEST study protocol
Presenter: Vicky Soomers
Session: Poster Display session 1
Resources:
Abstract