Disentangling the reasons why older adults do not readily participate in cancer trials: a socio-epidemiological mixed methods approach.

BACKGROUND: Few studies of the under-representation of older adults in cancer clinical trials (CTs) have encompassed the entire pathway from a trial being available in a cancer centre to the patient's invitation to participate and then agreement or refusal to participate. OBJECTIVES: The study's primary objective was to evaluate CT non-invitation and refusal rates. The secondary objectives were to identify factors associated with non-invitation and refusal and to assess experiences of CT participation from the patients' and professionals' perspectives. METHODS: Here, we used mixed methods and a socio-epidemiological approach to analyse reasons for the non-participation of eligible older patients with a solid cancer in cancer CTs in France. RESULTS: We found that non-invitation and low CT participation are mainly related to the patients' sociodemographic characteristics and living conditions (such as social isolation, being single, divorced or widowed, not having children and the absence of close family members) and the healthcare professionals' perceptions of insufficient informal support or a high homecare requirement. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that efforts to increase fair inclusion and the participation of older adults in CTs should target the physician-patient relationship, the medical profession and hospital funding, rather than the patient alone.

The Use of Telemedicine in Cancer Clinical Trials: Connect-Patient-to-Doctor Prospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine is currently being adopted for the management of patients in routine care. However, its use remains limited in the context of clinical trials. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of telemonitoring and patient-reported outcomes collection in the context of clinical trials. METHODS: The patients who were included in an interventional oncology clinical trial were eligible. The patients were registered with a digital tool to respond to a patient-reported outcomes questionnaire (ePRO) based on CTCAE (The Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, National Cancer Institute), version 5.0, personalized to their pathology and treatment. An algorithm evaluated the health status of the patient based on the reported adverse events, with a classification in 4 different states (correct, compromise, state to be monitored, or critical state). The main objective was to evaluate the feasibility of remote monitoring via a connected platform of patients included in a clinical trial. RESULTS: From July 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021, 39 patients were included. The median age was 71 years (range 41-94); 74% (n=29) were male, and 59% (n=23) had metastatic disease. Out of the 969 ePRO questionnaires completed over the course of the study, 77.0% (n=746) were classified as "correct," 10.9% (n=106) as "compromised," and 12.1% (n=117) as "to be monitored" or "critical." The median response time was 7 days (IQR 7-15.5), and 76% (25/33) of the patients were compliant. Out of the 35 patients who answered a satisfaction questionnaire, 95% (n=33) were satisfied or very satisfied with the tool, and 85% (n=30) were satisfied with their relationship with the health care team. There were 5 unscheduled hospitalizations during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Remote monitoring in clinical trials is feasible, with a high level of patient participation and satisfaction. It benefits patients, but it also ensures the high quality of the trial through the early management of adverse events and better knowledge of the tolerance profile of experimental treatments. This e-technology will likely be deployed more widely in our clinical trials.