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
  • [41] Acupuncture for obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Cho, S-H
    Lee, J-S
    Thabane, L.
    Lee, J.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBESITY, 2009, 33 (02) : 183 - 196
  • [42] Semaglutide and cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Nagendra, Lakshmi
    Harish, B. G.
    Sharma, Meha
    Dutta, Deep
    DIABETES & METABOLIC SYNDROME-CLINICAL RESEARCH & REVIEWS, 2023, 17 (09)
  • [43] Balantidiasis in humans: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    da Silva, Rayana Katylin Mendes
    Dib, Lais Verdan
    Amendoeira, Maria Regina
    Class, Camila Carvalho
    Pinheiro, Jessica Lima
    Fonseca, Ana Beatriz Monteiro
    Barbosa, Alynne da Silva
    ACTA TROPICA, 2021, 223
  • [44] Statins and cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Kuoppala, Jaana
    Lamminpaa, Anne
    Pukkala, Eero
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2008, 44 (15) : 2122 - 2132
  • [45] Rheumatoid meningitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Villa, Eduardo
    Sarquis, Teresita
    de Grazia, Jose
    Nunez, Rene
    Alarcon, Pablo
    Villegas, Rodrigo
    Guevara, Carlos
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY, 2021, 28 (09) : 3201 - 3210
  • [46] Transgender Phonosurgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Song, Tara Elena
    Jiang, Nancy
    OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD AND NECK SURGERY, 2017, 156 (05) : 803 - 808
  • [47] Endometriosis and cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Kvaskoff, Marina
    Mahamat-Saleh, Yahya
    Farland, Leslie, V
    Shigesi, Nina
    Terry, Kathryn L.
    Harris, Holly R.
    Roman, Horace
    Becker, Christian M.
    As-Sanie, Sawsan
    Zondervan, Krina T.
    Horne, Andrew W.
    Missmer, Stacey A.
    HUMAN REPRODUCTION UPDATE, 2021, 27 (02) : 393 - 420
  • [48] Epilepsy and syphilis: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Zhang, Chao
    Yue, Wei
    Hou, Shuping
    Cui, Wanzhen
    Xiang, Lei
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY VENEREOLOGY & LEPROLOGY, 2021, 87 (04) : 483 - 490
  • [49] Multilevel barriers and facilitators of communication in pediatric oncology: A systematic review
    Sisk, Bryan A.
    Harvey, Kieandra
    Friedrich, Annie B.
    Antes, Alison L.
    Yaeger, Lauren H.
    Mack, Jennifer W.
    DuBois, James M.
    PEDIATRIC BLOOD & CANCER, 2022, 69 (01)
  • [50] Drug repurposing: a systematic review on root causes, barriers and facilitators
    Krishnamurthy, Nithya
    Grimshaw, Alyssa A.
    Axson, Sydney A.
    Choe, Sung Hee
    Miller, Jennifer E.
    BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2022, 22 (01)