Trial Participation in Neurodegenerative Diseases: Barriers and Facilitators A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

被引:4
|
作者
Weemering, Daphne N. [1 ]
Beelen, Anita [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Kliest, Tessa [1 ]
van Leeuwen, Lucie A. G. [1 ]
van den Berg, Leonard H.
van Eijk, Ruben P. A. [1 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Brain Ctr, Dept Neurol, Utrecht, Netherlands
[2] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Brain Ctr, Dept Rehabil Phys Therapy Sci & Sports, Utrecht, Netherlands
[3] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Ctr Excellence Rehabil Med, Brain Ctr, Utrecht, Netherlands
[4] Hoogstr Rehabil, Utrecht, Netherlands
[5] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Julius Ctr Hlth Sci & Primary Care, Biostat & Res Support, Utrecht, Netherlands
关键词
CLINICAL-TRIALS; DRUG TRIALS; PATIENT; CANCER; WILLINGNESS;
D O I
10.1212/WNL.0000000000209503
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and Objectives Clinical trials in neurodegenerative diseases often encounter selective enrollment and under-representation of certain patient populations. This delays drug development and substantially limits the generalizability of clinical trial results. To inform recruitment and retention strategies, and to better understand the generalizability of clinical trial populations, we investigated which factors drive participation. Methods We reviewed the literature systematically to identify barriers to and facilitators of trial participation in 4 major neurodegenerative disease areas: Alzheimer disease, Parkinson disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and Huntington disease. Inclusion criteria included original research articles published in a peer-reviewed journal and evaluating barriers to and/or facilitators of participation in a clinical trial with a drug therapy (either symptomatic or disease-modifying). The Critical Appraisal Skills Program checklist for qualitative studies was used to assess and ensure the quality of the studies. Qualitative thematic analyses were employed to identify key enablers of trial participation. Subsequently, we pooled quantitative data of each enabler using meta-analytical models. Results Overall, we identified 36 studies, enrolling a cumulative sample size of 5,269 patients, caregivers, and health care professionals. In total, the thematic analysis resulted in 31 unique enablers of trial participation; the key factors were patient-related (own health benefit and altruism), study-related (treatment and study burden), and health care professional-related (information availability and patient-physician relationship). When meta-analyzed across studies, responders reported that the reason to participate was mainly driven by (1) the relationship with clinical staff (70% of the respondents; 95% CI 53%-83%), (2) the availability of study information (67%, 95% CI 38%-87%), and (3) the use or absence of a placebo or sham-control arm (53% 95% CI 32%-72%). There was, however, significant heterogeneity between studies (all p < 0.001). Discussion We have provided a comprehensive list of reasons why patients participate in clinical trials for neurodegenerative diseases. These results may help to increase participation rates, better inform patients, and facilitate patient-centric approaches, thereby potentially reducing selection mechanisms and improving generalizability of trial results.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Facilitators and barriers to shared primary and specialist cancer care: a systematic review
    Lisy, Karolina
    Kent, Jennifer
    Piper, Amanda
    Jefford, Michael
    SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER, 2021, 29 (01) : 85 - 96
  • [22] Systematic literature review and meta-analysis
    Hughes, EG
    SEMINARS IN REPRODUCTIVE ENDOCRINOLOGY, 1996, 14 (02): : 161 - 169
  • [23] Barriers and facilitators to health technology adoption by older adults with chronic diseases: an integrative systematic review
    Bertolazzi, Alessia
    Quaglia, Valeria
    Bongelli, Ramona
    BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, 2024, 24 (01)
  • [24] A systematic review highlights threats to validity in studies of barriers to cancer trial participation
    Fayter, Debra
    McDaid, Catriona
    Eastwood, Alison
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2007, 60 (10) : 990 - 1001
  • [25] Trial Sequential Analysis in systematic reviews with meta-analysis
    Wetterslev, Jorn
    Jakobsen, Janus Christian
    Gluud, Christian
    BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2017, 17
  • [26] Barriers and facilitators towards colonoscopy: a qualitative systematic review
    Lim, Kia Teng
    Ng, Cheng Han
    Decruz, Glenn Moses
    Lim, Tian Zhi
    Devi, Kamala
    Tan, Ker-Kan
    Chong, Choon Seng
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER PREVENTION, 2021, 30 (03) : 232 - 238
  • [27] Barriers and facilitators to health screening in men: A systematic review
    Teo, Chin Hai
    Ng, Chirk Jenn
    Booth, Andrew
    White, Alan
    SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 2016, 165 : 168 - 176
  • [28] Systematic review of barriers and facilitators to clinical trial enrollment among adolescents and young adults with cancer: Identifying opportunities for intervention
    Siembida, Elizabeth J.
    Loomans-Kropp, Holli A.
    Trivedi, Neha
    O'Mara, Ann
    Sung, Lillian
    Tami-Maury, Irene
    Freyer, David R.
    Roth, Michael
    CANCER, 2020, 126 (05) : 949 - 957
  • [29] Enablers and barriers of clinical trial participation in adult patients from minority ethnic groups: a systematic review
    Garavito, German Andres Alarcon
    Gilchrist, Katie
    Ciurtin, Coziana
    Khanna, Sanjay
    Chambers, Pinkie
    Mcnally, Nick
    Merivale, Edward
    Carr, Edi
    Yu, Rosamund
    Vindrola-Padros, Cecilia
    TRIALS, 2025, 26 (01)
  • [30] Alterations in gut and genital microbiota associated with gynecological diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Zhou, Ziwei
    Feng, Yifei
    Xie, Lishan
    Ma, Song
    Cai, Zhaoxia
    Ma, Ying
    REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY AND ENDOCRINOLOGY, 2024, 22 (01)