The challenge of equipoise: qualitative interviews exploring the views of health professionals and women with multiple ipsilateral breast cancer on recruitment to a surgical randomised controlled feasibility trial.
Equipoise
Mastectomy
Multiple ipsilateral breast cancer
Qualitative
Randomisation
Therapeutic mammoplasty
Journal
Pilot and feasibility studies
ISSN: 2055-5784
Titre abrégé: Pilot Feasibility Stud
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101676536
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 Feb 2022
28 Feb 2022
Historique:
received:
28
07
2021
accepted:
17
02
2022
entrez:
1
3
2022
pubmed:
2
3
2022
medline:
2
3
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
A multicentre feasibility trial (MIAMI), comparing outcomes and quality of life of women with multiple ipsilateral breast cancer randomised to therapeutic mammoplasty or mastectomy, was conducted from September 2018 to March 2020. The MIAMI surgical trial aimed to investigate recruitment of sufficient numbers of women. Multidisciplinary teams at 10 breast care centres in the UK identified 190 with MIBC diagnosis; 20 were eligible for trial participation but after being approached only four patients were recruited. A nested qualitative study sought to understand the reasons for this lack of recruitment. Interviews were conducted from November 2019 to September 2020 with 17 staff from eight hospital-based breast care centres that recruited and attempted to recruit to MIAMI; and seven patients from four centres, comprising all patients who were recruited to the trial and some who declined to take part. Interviews were audio-recorded, anonymised and analysed using thematic methods of building codes into themes and sub-themes using the process of constant comparison. Overarching themes of (1) influences on equipoise and recruitment and (2) effects of a lack of equipoise were generated. Within these themes, health professional themes described the barriers to recruitment as 'the treatment landscape has changed', 'staff preferences and beliefs' which influenced equipoise and patient advice; and how different the treatments were for patients. Patient themes of 'altruism and timing of trial approach', 'influences from consultants and others' and 'diagnostic journey doubts' all played a part in whether patients agreed to take part in the trial. Barriers to recruiting to breast cancer surgical trials can be significant, especially where there are substantial differences between the treatments being offered and a lack of equipoise communicated by healthcare professionals to patients. Patients can become overwhelmed by numerous requests for participation in research trials and inappropriate timing of trial discussions. Alternative study designs to the gold standard randomised control trial for surgical interventions may be required to provide the high-quality evidence on which to base practice. ISRCTN ( ISRCTN17987569 ) registered on April 20, 2018, and ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT03514654 ).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
A multicentre feasibility trial (MIAMI), comparing outcomes and quality of life of women with multiple ipsilateral breast cancer randomised to therapeutic mammoplasty or mastectomy, was conducted from September 2018 to March 2020. The MIAMI surgical trial aimed to investigate recruitment of sufficient numbers of women. Multidisciplinary teams at 10 breast care centres in the UK identified 190 with MIBC diagnosis; 20 were eligible for trial participation but after being approached only four patients were recruited. A nested qualitative study sought to understand the reasons for this lack of recruitment.
METHODS
METHODS
Interviews were conducted from November 2019 to September 2020 with 17 staff from eight hospital-based breast care centres that recruited and attempted to recruit to MIAMI; and seven patients from four centres, comprising all patients who were recruited to the trial and some who declined to take part. Interviews were audio-recorded, anonymised and analysed using thematic methods of building codes into themes and sub-themes using the process of constant comparison.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Overarching themes of (1) influences on equipoise and recruitment and (2) effects of a lack of equipoise were generated. Within these themes, health professional themes described the barriers to recruitment as 'the treatment landscape has changed', 'staff preferences and beliefs' which influenced equipoise and patient advice; and how different the treatments were for patients. Patient themes of 'altruism and timing of trial approach', 'influences from consultants and others' and 'diagnostic journey doubts' all played a part in whether patients agreed to take part in the trial.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Barriers to recruiting to breast cancer surgical trials can be significant, especially where there are substantial differences between the treatments being offered and a lack of equipoise communicated by healthcare professionals to patients. Patients can become overwhelmed by numerous requests for participation in research trials and inappropriate timing of trial discussions. Alternative study designs to the gold standard randomised control trial for surgical interventions may be required to provide the high-quality evidence on which to base practice.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
ISRCTN ( ISRCTN17987569 ) registered on April 20, 2018, and ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT03514654 ).
Identifiants
pubmed: 35227311
doi: 10.1186/s40814-022-01007-1
pii: 10.1186/s40814-022-01007-1
pmc: PMC8883693
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03514654']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
46Subventions
Organisme : research for patient benefit programme
ID : PB-PG-1215-20009
Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Front Oncol. 2016 Mar 29;6:74
pubmed: 27066455
Br J Surg. 2018 Nov;105(12):1607-1614
pubmed: 29926900
N Engl J Med. 2002 Oct 17;347(16):1233-41
pubmed: 12393820
Lancet Oncol. 2016 Aug;17(8):1158-1170
pubmed: 27344114
Br J Surg. 2015 Jan;102(1):45-56
pubmed: 25451179
BJS Open. 2018 Oct 18;3(1):48-55
pubmed: 30734015
Trials. 2014 Jan 06;15:5
pubmed: 24393291
Br J Surg. 2018 Apr;105(5):466-468
pubmed: 29412447
Trials. 2016 Sep 02;17(1):431
pubmed: 27590594
Lancet. 2009 Sep 26;374(9695):1097-104
pubmed: 19782875
Lancet Oncol. 2012 Apr;13(4):331-3
pubmed: 22373562
Lancet Oncol. 2012 Apr;13(4):412-9
pubmed: 22373563
Contemp Clin Trials. 2008 Sep;29(5):631-4
pubmed: 18397843
Bull Am Coll Surg. 2012 Dec;97(12):43-5
pubmed: 23301324
Clin Breast Cancer. 2018 Aug;18(4):e539-e554
pubmed: 29396079
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2017 Jul;164(2):445-450
pubmed: 28444532
Br J Surg. 2020 Jun;107(7):832-844
pubmed: 32073654
BMJ Open. 2013 Apr 11;3(4):
pubmed: 23585392
N Engl J Med. 2012 Jul 5;367(1):79-82
pubmed: 22762325
Ann Oncol. 2019 Oct 1;30(10):1541-1557
pubmed: 31373601
Acta Oncol. 2018 Jan;57(1):19-25
pubmed: 29168674
Trials. 2011 Mar 15;12:78
pubmed: 21406089
Future Oncol. 2019 Apr;15(11):1185-1191
pubmed: 30924355
Lancet. 2005 Dec 17;366(9503):2087-106
pubmed: 16360786
Ann Oncol. 2017 Aug 1;28(8):1700-1712
pubmed: 28838210
BMJ. 2010 Mar 19;340:c1066
pubmed: 20304934
Trials. 2016 Jan 19;17:35
pubmed: 26787177
BJS Open. 2018 May 22;2(4):162-174
pubmed: 30079385
Curr Oncol. 2019 Apr;26(2):e216-e225
pubmed: 31043830
N Engl J Med. 2002 Oct 17;347(16):1227-32
pubmed: 12393819
Lancet Oncol. 2018 Oct;19(10):e521-e533
pubmed: 30303126
Trials. 2018 Jan 19;19(1):50
pubmed: 29351790
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2020 Jun;32(6):382-389
pubmed: 32089356