Enhancing the patient journey to clinical trial enrollment with navigation to optimize accrual: A pilot study for a pragmatic multicentre, stepped wedge, cluster randomized controlled trial (The CTN Pilot Trial).
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
11093 Background: Clinical trials are essential to the advancement of clinical therapies, yet accrual rates remain disappointing. Multiple challenges lead to less than 5% of cancer patients enrolled onto clinical trials. The Clinical Trials Navigator (CTN) program was established to assist patients and health care professionals identify appropriate clinical trials for patients. Methods: Between March 2019 to January 2024, a novel navigator-assisted clinical trials search program was offered to Canadian patients. Three non-medical navigators were trained to receive referrals, review medical information, and search five different clinical trial search engines. Eligibility criteria was scrutinized. A second review of the clinical trial list was conducted by two physicians. The final curated list of clinical trials was provided to patients and their oncologist. Results: A total of 373 patients were referred to the CTN program during the study period. A unique clinical trial search was performed for each patient yielding a median of only one potentially eligible trial per patient. Clinical trial enrolment occurred in 3.2% of patients in our database which translates to a 19% rate of successful enrolment of those referred to a trial by the CTN. Most patients (78%) were referred to clinical trial sites that conducted more than 100 clinical trials at any time. Compared to the Canadian cancer statistics, lung, lymphoma, pancreatic and brain cancers were overrepresented in referrals to the CTN program while prostate cancer was underrepresented. Type of cancer played a significant role in the likelihood of a successful referral (p < 0.01). Lung cancer was the most frequently reported cancer that resulted in referrals and breast cancer showed a lower frequency of referrals. The cancer type, stage and number of lines of prior therapy were not significantly associated with the patient enrollment onto a clinical trial. An increase in survival of referred patients from last analysis from 3.0 months to 5.3 months. Conclusions: The CTN program is a successful tool to identify clinical trials for cancer patients and can improve clinical trial accrual, as almost one fifth of patients (19%) who were referred to a clinical trial were enrolled. Ongoing iterative changes to the program to improve these metrics are underway and efforts to improve implementation of the CTN program across Canada are ongoing.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,044 | 0,048 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,008 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».