What would be an adequate patient involvement in cancer clinical trials?

Question

(1) complains about the low patient and physician involvement in cancer clinical trials:

Of the 1.4 million patients with a new diagnosis of cancer in 2008 (ACS, 2008), it is estimated that no more than 5 percent of patients enrolled in clinical trials, with some estimates suggesting that less than 3 percent of patients enrolled in clinical trials (reviewed by ENACCT-CCPH, 2008). Likewise, reimbursement concerns, a lack of awareness of clinical trials, physician or patient preference for standard therapies, excessive regulatory burdens, and time constraints prevent many physicians from enrolling patients in clinical trials (C-Change and Coalition of Cancer Cooperative Groups, 2006; Mansour, 1994; Somkin et al., 2005).

What would be an adequate patient involvement in cancer clinical trials? I.e., in an ideal world, what percentage of patients should be enrolled in clinical trials?

(1) Mendelsohn, John, Harold L. Moses, and Sharyl J. Nass, eds. A National Cancer Clinical Trials System for the 21st Century:: Reinvigorating the NCI Cooperative Group Program. National Academies Press, 2010. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=10638934128167382656&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5

@Susan a statistically grounded answer doesn't seem impossible. — Franck Dernoncourt, Jun 16 '16 at 20:57
This seems more of a statistics question, asking about the validity of the sample size. Perhaps migrate to stat.SE? — Dave Liu, Jun 23 '16 at 07:34
@DaveL I think it's a bit more than statistical powers, as it would also depends on other things e.g. the number and coverage of medical treatments that need to be tested. — Franck Dernoncourt, Jun 23 '16 at 15:31

What would be an adequate patient involvement in cancer clinical trials?

0 Answers0