Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Responding to a significant recruitment challenge within three nationwide psychoeducational trials for cancer patients

  • Published:
Journal of Cancer Survivorship Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

When faced with a significant recruitment challenge for three nationwide psychoeducational trials targeting prostate and breast cancer patients, the Cancer Information Service Research Consortium initiated outreach efforts to increase accrual. Recruitment is reported by major outreach strategy to inform the use of similar campaigns, either as primary recruitment efforts or to supplement “in-reach” recruitment within oncology settings.

Methods

During a 33-month period, recruitment was tracked from the National Cancer Institute’s Cancer Information Service (CIS), the American Cancer Society (ACS), Dr. Susan Love Research Foundation’s Love/Avon Army of Women (AOW), Internet advertising, press releases, radio/television interviews, recruitment materials in community venues, and outreach to churches and cancer support organizations.

Results

Across projects, the majority (89 %) of recruited participants (N = 2,134) was obtained from the CIS (n = 901, 19 months of recruitment), AOW (n = 869, 18 months), and ACS (n = 123, 12 months). Other efforts showed minimal gain in recruitment.

Conclusions

Cancer information programs (e.g., CIS and ACS) and registries of individuals willing to participate in cancer-related research (e.g., AOW) can represent exceptional resources for outreach recruitment of cancer patients, especially when the eligibility criteria are highly restrictive. However, these resources do not yield samples representative of the larger population of adults diagnosed with cancer, and conclusions from such trials must be tempered accordingly.

Implications for cancer survivors

Inadequate recruitment to randomized controlled trials limits the creation of useful interventions for cancer survivors. By enrolling in cancer registries and taking part in research, cancer survivors can contribute to the development of effective resources for the survivor population.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. IOM (Institute of Medicine). Transforming clinical research in the united states: challenges and opportunities: workshop summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  2. IOM (Institute of Medicine). Public engagement and clinical trials: new models and disruptive technologies: workshop summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  3. IOM (Institute of Medicine). A national cancer clinical trials system for the 21st century: reinvigorating the NCI cooperative group program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Goodwin PJ, Leszcz M, Quirt G, et al. Lessons learned from enrollment in the BEST study—a multicenter, randomized trial of group psychosocial support in metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53(1):47–55.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Sears SR, Stanton AL, Kwan L, et al. Recruitment and retention challenges in breast cancer survivorship research. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2003;12(10):1087–90.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Snyder DC, Morey MC, Sloane R, et al. Reach out to ENhancE Wellness in Older Cancer Survivors (RENEW): design, methods and recruitment challenges of a home-based exercise and diet intervention to improve physical function among long-term survivors of breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer. Psycho-Oncology. 2009;18(4):429–39.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Mertens AC, Cotter KL, Foster BM, et al. Improving health care for adult survivors of childhood cancer: Recommendations from a delphi panel of health policy experts. Health Policy. 2004;69(2):169–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Fredman SJ, Baucom DH, Gremore TM, et al. Quantifying the recruitment challenges with couple-based interventions for cancer: applications to early-stage breast cancer. Psycho-Oncology. 2009;18(6):667–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Boyd NR, Sutton C, Orleans CT, et al. Quit Today! A targeted communications campaign to increase use of the Cancer Information Service by African American smokers. Prev Med. 1998;27(5):S50–60.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Campbell MK, Hudson MA, Resnicow K, et al. Church-based health promotion interventions: evidence and lessons learned. Annu Rev Public Health. 2007;28:213–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Drake BF, Shelton R, Gilligan T, et al. A church-based intervention to promote informed decision-making for prostate cancer screening among African-American men. J Natl Med Assoc. 2010;102(3):164–71.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Davis DT, Bustamante A, Brown CP, et al. The urban church and cancer control: a source of social influence in minority communities. Public Health Reports. 1994;109(4):500–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Gilliss CL, Lee KA, Gutierrez Y, et al. Recruitment and retention of healthy minority women into community-based longitudinal research. J Womens Health Gend Based Med. 2001;10(1):77–85.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Paskett ED, Reeves KW, McLaughlin JM, et al. Recruitment of minority and underserved populations in the United States: the centers for population health and health disparities experience. Contemp Clin Trials. 2008;29:847–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gordon JS, Akers L, Severson HH, et al. Successful participant recruitment strategies for an online smokeless tobacco cessation program. Nicotine Tobacco Res. 2006;8 Suppl 1:S35–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Carroll J, Yancey A, Spring B, et al. What are successful recruitment and retention strategies for underserved populations? Examining physical activity interventions in primary care and community settings. Transl Behav Med. 2011;1(2):234–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. McKay HG, Danaher GB, Seeley RJ, et al. Comparing two web-based smoking cessation programs: randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2008;10(5):e40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Burns EK, Levinson AH. Reaching Spanish-speaking smokers: state-level evidence of untapped potential for quitline utilization. Am J Public Health. 2010;100:S165–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Farrelly MC, Hussin A, Bauer UE. Effectivenss and cosst effectiveness of television, radio and print advertisements in promoting the New York smokers’ quitline. Tob Control. 2007;16 Suppl 1:i21–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Mosbaek CH, Austin DF, Stark MJ, et al. The association between advertising and calls to a tobacco quitline. Tob Control. 2007;16(Suppl1):i24–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Wetter DW, Mazas C, Daza P, et al. Reaching and treating Spanish-speaking smokers through the National Cancer Institute’s Cancer Information Service. A randomized controlled trial. Cancer. 2007;109 Suppl 2:406–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Glasgow RE, Nelson CC, Kearney KA, et al. Reach, engagement, and retention in an Internet-based weight loss program in a multi-site randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2007;9(2):e11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Stoy DB, Curtis RC, Dameworth KS, et al. The successful recruitment of elderly black subjects in a clinical trial. The CRISP experience. J Natl Med Assoc. 1995;87:280–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Coleman EA, LaCroix AZ, Allen C, et al. Recruiting African American older adults for a community-based health promotion intervention: which strategies are effective? Am J Prev Med. 1997;13 Suppl 6:51–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Lewis CE, George V, Fouad M, et al. Recruitment strategies in the Women’s Health Trial: feasibility study in minority populations. Control Clin Trials. 1998;19(5):461–76.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Marcus AC, Morra ME, Bettinghaus E, et al. The Cancer Information Service Research Consortium: an emerging laboratory for cancer control research. Prev Med. 1998;27(5):S3–S15.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Marcus AC, Morra ME, Bright MA, et al. The CIS model for collaborative research in health communications: a brief retrospective from the current generation of research. J Health Commun. 2005;10:235–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Marcus AC, Diefenbach MA, Stanton AL, et al. Cancer patient and survivor research from the Cancer Information Service Research Consortium: a preview of three large randomized trials and initial lessons learned. J Health Commun. 2013. doi:10.1080/10810730.2012.743629

  29. Wen K-Y, Miller SM, Stanton A, et al. The development and preliminary testing of a multimedia patient-provider survivorship communication module for breast cancer survivors. Patient Educ Couns. 2012;88:344–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Personal Communication, Dr. Susan Love. For more information about Love/Avon Army of Women. Available from www.armyofwomen.org.

  31. For more information about the National Black Church Initiative. Available from www.natlblackchurch.com.

  32. American Cancer Society. Cancer facts and figures. Atlanta (GA): American Cancer Society; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Curry L, Jackson J. Recruitment and retention of diverse ethnic and racial groups in health research. An evolving science. In: Curry L, Jackson J, editors. The science of inclusion: recruiting and retaining racial and ethnic elders in health research. Washington (DC): The Gerontological Society of America; 2003. p. 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Rosner B. Fundamentals of biostatistics. 7th ed. Boston, MA: Brooks/Cole; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Ashing-Giwa K, Ganz PA. Effect of timed incentives on subject participation in a study of long-term breast cancer survivors: are there ethnic differences? J Natl Med Assoc. 2000;92:528–32.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Satia JA, Galanko JA, Rimer BK. Methods and strategies to recruit African Americans into cancer prevention surveillance studies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2005;14(3):718–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Brown DR, Fouad MN, Basen-Engquist K, Tortolero-Luna G. Recruitment and retention of minority women in cancer screening, prevention, and treatment trials. Ann Epidemiol. 2000;10(8)(suppl 1):S13–21.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Zhu K, Hunter S, Bernard LJ, et al. Recruiting elderly African Amearican women in cancer prevention and control studies: a multifaceted approach and its effectiveness. J Natl Med Assoc. 2000;92:169–75.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Blumenthal DS, Sung J, Coates R, Williams J, Liff J. Recruitment and retention of subjects for a longitudinal cancer prevention study in an inner-city black community. Health Serve Res. 1995;30:195–205.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Shavers VL, Lynch CF, Burmeister LF. Racial differences in factors that influence the willingness to participate in medical research studies. Ann Epidemiol. 2002;12:248–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Swanson GM, Ward AJ. Recruitng minorities into clinical trials: toward a participant-friendly system. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995;87(23):1747–59.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Cooley ME, Sarna L, Brown JK, et al. Challenges of recruitment and retention in multisite clinical research. Cancer Nursing. 2003;26(5):376–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge those who collaborated in promoting recruitment to the three CISRC studies, especially the ACS and the Dr. Susan Love Research Foundation’s Love/Avon AOW Program. Special thanks are extended to the NCI’s Cancer Information Service (CIS) and to the cancer information specialists and management staff at the three participating CIS contact centers who were indispensable collaborators in this research, as well as to the counselors of the Cancer Information and Counseling Line, University of Colorado at Denver, who helped deliver the project 3 callback intervention. Also gratefully acknowledged is the NCI-funded Survey Research Shared Resource of the University of Colorado Cancer Center who staffed the CISRC recruitment call center, and conducted all telephone follow-up interviews pursuant to this research. A similar acknowledgment is extended to the NCI-funded Behavioral Research Core of the Fox Chase Cancer Center, who led the design and development team for the three CISRC multimedia programs, and to Mr. Kevin Durr of Notsoldseparately.com, who also collaborated in the design and production of the multimedia programs, as well as designing the CISRC websites and Internet pay-per-click campaigns. Finally, we salute and thank the many cancer patients and survivors who voluntarily gave of their time and effort to make this research possible.

Funding

This research was supported by grant 5P01CA057586 from the NCI of the National Institutes of Health.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of Psychology and Psychiatry/Biobehavioral Sciences, Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California Los Angeles, 1285 Franz Hall, Box 951563, Los Angeles, CA, 90095-1563, USA

    Annette L. Stanton

  2. Morra Communications, Milford, CT, USA

    Marion E. Morra

  3. Fox Chase/Temple Health, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Suzanne M. Miller, Linda Fleisher & Kuang-Yi Wen

  4. Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA

    Michael A. Diefenbach & Nihal E. Mohamed

  5. Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA

    Rosemarie Slevin Perocchia

  6. Denver Health and Hospital Authority, Denver, CO, USA

    Peter C. Raich

  7. University of Colorado Cancer Center, University of Colorado, Denver, CO, USA

    Zung Vu Tran & Alfred C. Marcus

  8. American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA, USA

    Roshini George

  9. Office of Public Information and Resource Management, Office of Communications and Education, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA

    Mary Anne Bright

Authors
  1. Annette L. Stanton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marion E. Morra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael A. Diefenbach
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Suzanne M. Miller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Rosemarie Slevin Perocchia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Peter C. Raich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Linda Fleisher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Kuang-Yi Wen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Zung Vu Tran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Nihal E. Mohamed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Roshini George
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Mary Anne Bright
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Alfred C. Marcus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Annette L. Stanton.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Stanton, A.L., Morra, M.E., Diefenbach, M.A. et al. Responding to a significant recruitment challenge within three nationwide psychoeducational trials for cancer patients. J Cancer Surviv 7, 392–403 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-013-0282-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-013-0282-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation