Receptiveness and barriers to clinical trial participation for oncology patients from a public safety-net hospital.

Abstract

83 Background: Oncologic clinical trial enrollment is low, particularly in underserved populations. Increasing enrollment of public safety-net hospital patients is important to ensure representation of the general population and reduces cancer outcome disparities. To tailor clinical trial outreach, we sought to characterize attitudes towards trial participation of oncology patients at Olive View—UCLA Medical Center (OVMC), a public safety-net hospital in Los Angeles County. Methods: We developed a 39-question survey (Qualtrics, Provo, UT). It was administered via tablets to a convenience sample of patients in OVMC’s medical oncology clinic and infusion center during 2020—2021. The survey was offered to patients fluent in English or Spanish. Results: Of 165 patients who were offered the survey, 11 declined due to illiteracy in any language, 4 did not finish the survey. Median age was 54 (range: 20-81); 63% were female. The majority (76%) reported an annual income below $25,000; 39% did not complete high school. Self-identified ethnicity was Hispanic/Latino (73%), non-Hispanic White (12%), Asian-Pacific Islander (9%), and Black (4%). Based on a 5-point Likert scale of comfort speaking English, 48% had English proficiency (EP). Overall, 69% of patients expressed interest in trials. When considering participation, patients would seek advice from their physician (86%), family (32%), other medical staff (14%), alternative medicine practitioner (7%), friend (6%), or religious leader (4%). Concerns regarding trial participation were lack of knowledge regarding trials (47%), fear of side effects (43%), frequent visits (25%), cost (20%), transportation (14%), wage loss (9%), and inability to determine own treatment (4%). Patients found the following modalities useful for learning about trials: website (43%), paper handout (39%), video (37%), discussion with prior participants (34%). Patients with annual income > $25,000 were significantly more concerned about cost (33.3% v. 15.8%, p = 0.04) and treatment side effects (61.1% v. 36.8%, p = 0.02). EP patients were more likely to find a website (54.2% vs. 32.1%, p = 0.01) or discussion with prior participants (45.8% v. 23.1%, p < 0.01) helpful compared to low EP patients. Conclusions: There is considerable interest in oncologic clinical trials in this predominantly Hispanic/Latino population. This population had significant trust in physicians for guidance on trial enrollment, and had minimal concern for out-of-pocket cost, wage loss, or transportation issues. The majority of patients did not find additional informational resources helpful. Structural barriers rather than patient-level variables are likely the primary drivers of low oncologic trial enrollment. Future efforts should focus on improving access to appropriate trials and leveraging the physician-patient relationship for increasing trial participation.