Patient Understanding of Oncology Clinical Trial Endpoints in Direct-to-Consumer Television Advertising.

BACKGROUND: This study examined how people interpret overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and progression-free survival (PFS) endpoints in the context of direct-to-consumer television ads. Although there is little research on this topic, initial evidence suggests that people can misinterpret these endpoints. We hypothesized that understanding of ORR and PFS would be improved by adding a disclosure ("We currently do not know if [Drug] helps patients live longer") to ORR and PFS claims. METHODS: We conducted 2 online studies with US adults examining television ads for fictional prescription drugs indicated to treat lung cancer (N = 385) or multiple myeloma (N = 406). The ads included claims about OS, ORR with and without a disclosure, or PFS with and without a disclosure. In each experiment, we randomized participants to view 1 of 5 versions of a television ad. After viewing the ad twice, participants completed a questionnaire that measured understanding, perceptions, and other outcomes. RESULTS: In both studies, participants correctly differentiated between OS, ORR, and PFS via open-ended responses; however, participants in the PFS conditions (versus ORR conditions) were more likely to make incorrect inferences about OS. Supporting the hypothesis, adding a disclosure made expectations around living longer and quality-of-life improvements more accurate. CONCLUSION: Disclosures could help reduce the extent to which people misinterpret endpoints like ORR and PFS. More research is needed to establish best-practice recommendations for using disclosures to improve patient understanding of drug efficacy without changing their perception of the drug in unintended ways.

Physician Perceptions of the FDA's Breakthrough Therapy Designation: An Update.

The US Food and Drug Administration developed the Breakthrough Therapy designation to expedite the development and review of drugs that show a clear advantage over available therapy for serious conditions. Prior research has shown that physicians tend to misunderstand that a drug may receive a Breakthrough Therapy designation based on preliminary clinical evidence (eg, effect on a surrogate endpoint or intermediate clinical endpoint that is likely to predict clinical benefit). The objective of this article is to examine whether physicians' familiarity with and interpretation of the Breakthrough Therapy designation have changed since a survey on the topic was published in 2016. We replicated three of the questions in that study and explored beliefs that a Breakthrough Therapy designation automatically qualifies a drug for accelerated approval. We also draw comparisons by specialization (oncologists vs. primary care physicians). In general, physicians remain more likely than not to misunderstand the Breakthrough Therapy designation.

Physician Interpretation of Data of Uncertain Clinical Utility in Oncology Prescription Drug Promotion.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how physicians interpret data displays that depict preliminary or exploratory clinical data in physician-targeted sales aids for oncology drugs. Using three factorial experiments, we examined whether disclosures of data limitations and clinical uncertainty adequately communicate the limitations and practical utility of this type of data. SUBJECTS, MATERIALS, AND METHODS: The studies used a 2 (disclosure of data limitations: technical, nontechnical) × 2 (disclosure of clinical uncertainty: present, absent) + 1 (control: no disclosure) between-subjects experimental design to examine the impact of disclosures as they relate to presentations of preliminary or exploratory data in promotional communications for oncology products. In each experiment, we randomized oncologists and primary care physicians with oncology experience to view one version of a two-page sales aid. Following this exposure, physicians completed a web-based survey. The design was replicated in three concurrently conducted experiments using sales aids for different fictitious oncology drugs, each featuring one of three common data displays: a forest plot (n = 495), a Kaplan-Meier curve (n = 504), or a bar chart (n = 532). RESULTS: Results provide initial evidence that in some contexts disclosures can improve understanding of the clinical utility of certain information about a drug and the limitations of results presented in a data display. Disclosures can also temper perceptions of how much evidence is presented that supports a conclusion that the drug is an appropriate treatment. In terms of the language used in the disclosure of data limitations, physicians in all three experiments strongly preferred the nontechnical disclosures. CONCLUSION: The findings from the three experiments in this study suggest that disclosures have the potential to increase relevant knowledge, but more research is needed to establish best practice recommendations for using disclosures to convey contextual information relevant for interpreting data displays in promotional communications. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This article reports the results from three large, online experimental studies that address a growing concern that drug companies often share favorable clinical trial results with physicians in promotional materials that lack important context for physicians to interpret the data. This series of studies investigates whether strategic use of two types of disclosures (disclosure of data limitations and a disclosure of clinical uncertainty) improves understanding and reduces misinterpretations among physicians. The results from these studies help identify communication factors that impact how physicians critically appraise preliminary or exploratory clinical trial data to inform policy and regulatory efforts.

Genomic Sequencing for Newborn Screening: Results of the NC NEXUS Project.

Newborn screening (NBS) was established as a public health program in the 1960s and is crucial for facilitating detection of certain medical conditions in which early intervention can prevent serious, life-threatening health problems. Genomic sequencing can potentially expand the screening for rare hereditary disorders, but many questions surround its possible use for this purpose. We examined the use of exome sequencing (ES) for NBS in the North Carolina Newborn Exome Sequencing for Universal Screening (NC NEXUS) project, comparing the yield from ES used in a screening versus a diagnostic context. We enrolled healthy newborns and children with metabolic diseases or hearing loss (106 participants total). ES confirmed the participant's underlying diagnosis in 15 out of 17 (88%) children with metabolic disorders and in 5 out of 28 (∼18%) children with hearing loss. We discovered actionable findings in four participants that would not have been detected by standard NBS. A subset of parents was eligible to receive additional information for their child about childhood-onset conditions with low or no clinical actionability, clinically actionable adult-onset conditions, and carrier status for autosomal-recessive conditions. We found pathogenic variants associated with hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer in two children, a likely pathogenic variant in the gene associated with Lowe syndrome in one child, and an average of 1.8 reportable variants per child for carrier results. These results highlight the benefits and limitations of using genomic sequencing for NBS and the challenges of using such technology in future precision medicine approaches.

Expert and lay perspectives on burden, risk, tolerability, and acceptability of clinical interventions for genetic disorders.

PURPOSE: The Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen) Actionability Working Group (AWG) developed a semiquantitative scoring metric to rate clinical actionability of genetic disorders and associated genes in four domains: (1) severity of the outcome, (2) likelihood of the outcome, (3) effectiveness of the intervention to prevent/minimize the outcome, and (4) nature of the intervention with respect to burden, risk, tolerability, and acceptability to the patient. This study aimed to assess whether nature of the intervention scores assigned by AWG experts reflected lay perceptions of intervention burden, risk, tolerability, and acceptability given the subjectivity of this domain. METHODS: In July 2017, a general population sample of 1344 adults completed the study. Each participant was asked to read 1 of 24 plain language medical intervention synopses and answer questions related to its burden, risk, tolerability, and acceptability. We conducted three multilevel mixed model analyses predicting the perceived burden, perceived risk, and perceived overall nature of the intervention. RESULTS: As AWG nature of the intervention scores increased, lay perceptions of intervention burden and risk decreased, and perceptions of tolerability and acceptability increased. CONCLUSION: The findings show alignment between the ClinGen actionability scoring metric and lay perceptions of the nature of the intervention.

Fitting identity in the reasoned action framework: A meta-analysis and model comparison.

Several competing models have been put forth regarding the role of identity in the reasoned action framework. The standard model proposes that identity is a background variable. Under a typical augmented model, identity is treated as an additional direct predictor of intention and behavior. Alternatively, it has been proposed that identity measures are inadvertent indicators of an underlying intention factor (e.g., a manifest-intention model). In order to test these competing hypotheses, we used data from 73 independent studies (total N = 23,917) to conduct a series of meta-analytic structural equation models. We also tested for moderation effects based on whether there was a match between identity constructs and the target behaviors examined (e.g., if the study examined a "smoker identity" and "smoking behavior," there would be a match; if the study examined a "health conscious identity" and "smoking behavior," there would not be a match). Average effects among primary reasoned action variables were all substantial, rs = .37-.69. Results gave evidence for the manifest-intention model over the other explanations, and a moderation effect by identity-behavior matching.

Media Exposure and Genetic Literacy Skills to Evaluate Angelina Jolie's Decision for Prophylactic Mastectomy.

PURPOSE: To examine public preparedness to evaluate and respond to Angelina Jolie's well-publicized decision to have a prophylactic mastectomy. METHODS: A consumer panel (n = 1,008) completed an online survey in November 2013, reporting exposure to Jolie's story, confidence applying genomic knowledge to evaluate her decision, and ability to interpret provided genetic risk information (genetic literacy skills). Linear and logistic regressions tested mediating/moderating models of these factors in association with opinions regarding mastectomies. RESULTS: Confidence with genomics was associated with increased genetic literacy skills and increased media exposure, with a significant interaction between the two. Confidence was also associated with favoring mastectomies for women with BRCA mutations, mediating the relationship with media exposure. Respondents were more likely to form opinions about mastectomies if they had high genetic literacy skills. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that having higher genetic literacy skills may increase the public's ability to form opinions about clinical applications of genomic discovery. However, repeated media exposure to high-profile stories may artificially inflate confidence among those with low genetic literacy.