Oral Presentation Clinical Oncology Society of Australia Annual Scientific Meeting 2022

Improving access to cancer clinical trials for patients from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) backgrounds – results of a national survey, part 3 - solutions (#77)

Abhijit Pal 1 2 3 , Ben Smith 4 5 , Jordan Cohen 6 , Christie Allan 7 , Deme Karikios 3 8 , Frances Boyle 3 9
  1. School of Medicine, Western Sydney University, Liverpool, NSW, Australia
  2. Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool, NSW, Australia
  3. Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
  4. Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research, Sydney, NSW, Australia
  5. South West Sydney Clinical Campuses, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
  6. Department of Medical Oncology, Liverpool Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia
  7. Cancer Council Victoria, Victoria
  8. Medical Oncology, Nepean Hospital, Kingswood, New South Wales, Australia
  9. Medical Oncology, Mater Hospital, North Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

Aims

National and international research consistently demonstrates that patients with cancer from CALD backgrounds are significantly underrepresented in clinical trials. We performed a national survey of the Australian cancer clinical trials workforce to determine barriers and preferred solutions to address this inequity. This abstract reports preferred solutions.  

Methods

A 15-item online survey containing both closed and open-ended purpose-designed questions was created using REDCap.  The survey was emailed to members of the Clinical Oncology Society of Australia (COSA), Medical Oncology Group of Australia (MOGA), national cancer cooperative trial groups, and promoted via Twitter. Free text entries were qualitatively analysed using NVivo Version 12. 

Results

91 respondents completed the survey – most were from NSW (53%) or Victoria (31%). The majority were directly involved in trial recruitment (87%) and were clinicians (68%).

The most favoured solutions to improving CALD recruitment to trials from a list of 8 pre-determined possibilities were: 1) provision of trial navigators to support patients from CALD backgrounds; and 2) provision of multilingual pamphlets explaining the rationale and purpose of cancer clinical trials, which were both preferred by 24% of participants.

Qualitative analysis of free-text responses identified frequently proposed solutions at the

- Site level (i.e. easier access to interpreters, interpreters trained in explaining clinical trials and translated generic clinical trial material for patient education)

- Sponsor level (i.e. translated participant information sheet and consent form and ensuring trial protocols are not exclusionary)

- Government level (i.e. community education regarding cancer clinical trials targeting CALD communities and specific Medicare item numbers for trial consultations with CALD patients)

 Conclusions

This national survey of the Australian cancer clinical trials workforce articulates the preferred solutions for addressing inequity in CALD recruitment. All solutions proposed by survey respondents require resourcing, which is the key challenge in achieving genuine progress in this area.