Differences in Baseline Characteristics and Outcomes at 1- and 2-Year Follow-up of Cancer Survivors Accrued via Self-Referral versus Cancer Registry in the FRESH START Diet and Exercise Trial

Abstract

Participant accrual to research studies is a challenge; oftentimes, advertisements are used to supplement cases ascertained through clinic caseloads and cancer registries. It is unknown, however, if cases ascertained through these two sources differ. In this study, we compared self-referred (n = 209) and registry-ascertained (n = 334) participants enrolled in FRESH START, a randomized controlled trial promoting a healthy diet and increased exercise among breast and prostate cancer survivors. The two groups were compared on baseline characteristics, adherence, attrition, and outcomes by study arm. Compared with participants enrolled from registries, self-referrals were significantly younger (54

Using registries to recruit subjects for clinical trials

“…From the references of all 10 papers, pearling identified 3 new papers - 2 were clinical trials [13, 14] and 1 disease-neutral registry [15] used to recruit subjects for clinical trials. One full paper [16] of an abstract [17] from the initial search was found.…”

“…Of these 25 citations, 14 are related to cancer (6 to breast cancer [10-14, 16,17], 2 to ovarian cancer [18-19], 1 to hematological cancer [20], 1 to prostate cancer[13], 1 to cancer genetics [21], 1 to histiocytosis [22], 1 to familial adenomatous polyposis [23], and 1 to colorectal cancer [24]), 3 to diabetes mellitus [25-27], 1 to stroke [28], 1 to asthma [29], 1 to celiac disease [30] and 5 are disease neutral [9, 15, 31-33]. …”

“…Of the registries related to breast cancer, 5 are state tumor registries in the US [10-13, 16, 17] and 1 in Canada [14]. One ovarian cancer trial used 13 local trust registers in the UK [18] and the other used a state cancer registry in the US [19].…”

“…One ovarian cancer trial used 13 local trust registers in the UK [18] and the other used a state cancer registry in the US [19]. The prostate cancer study used a state registry in the US [13]. The familial adenomatous polyposis trial used one hospital's registry in the UK [23].…”

“…Of the national registries, 1 is a national registry of the consortium of Clinical Translational Science Award (CTSA) centers in the US [9, 31], 1 is a national registry as part of the CTSA-industry partnership venture [33], and 1 is in Scotland [32]. Overall, 16 registries are in the US [9-13, 15-17, 19, 21, 24, 25, 28-31, 33], 4 in UK [18, 23, 27,32], 1 in Canada[14], 1 in Spain [22], 1 in Australia [20] and 1 involved many countries [26]. …”