Factors affecting older African American women's decisions to join the PLCO Cancer Screening Trial

Graduate School of Public Health, 217 Parran Hall, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15261, USA.
Journal of Clinical Oncology (Impact Factor: 18.43). 01/2006; 23(34):8730-8. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2004.00.9571
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The purpose of this study is to describe the factors associated with the decisions of older African American women to join the PLCO (Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian) Cancer Screening Trial when recruited.
African American women between ages 55 and 74 years who were never diagnosed with a PLCO cancer were eligible for our study. Two methods of recruitment were used. First, mailings were sent to a random sample of women describing the PLCO followed by a telephone call to determine interest in the PLCO. If women were not interested in PLCO but consented to participate in our study, they were interviewed immediately. Second, we followed up with African American women who responded to mass mailings sent out before the start of our study by the Pittsburgh PLCO office. Women completed an interview about their cancer and clinical trial knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors. The responses of women who joined the PLCO Trial are contrasted with the responses of women who did not join.
Numerous factors were associated with the decision of older African American women to join the PLCO, including perceptions of cancer prevention and detection, the experience of having a loved one with cancer, knowledge of and experience with clinical trials, and beliefs regarding the benefits and risks of clinical trial participation.
Minority recruitment to cancer clinical trials could be increased by designing interventions focused on individual, organizational, and community needs.

13 Reads
  • Source
    • "Other factors, not integrated in the above models, have been described, such as awareness for issues concerning CRC, colonoscopy screening, information on the symptoms of CRC (Gorin 2005; Soler-Michel et al 2005), health system barriers (Denberg et al 2005; Ogedegbe et al 2005; Dujoncquoy et al 2006), sociodemographic factors, personal medical history (Champion 1984; Jacobs 2002; Gorin 2005; Trauth et al 2005), as well as attitudes towards health, family medical history, experience of cancer (Jacobs 2002; Trauth et al 2005), and fatalistic attitudes in relation to cancer (Powe 1995, 1997). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To characterize determining factors for compliance with colonoscopy recommendations in the familial screening of colorectal cancer through exploration of individual psychosociological factors and issues relating to patient/physician/sibling communication. A qualitative approach involving a review of the literature and interviews with general practitioners, specialists, patients, and their siblings. A confrontation of the content of interviews with data from the literature made it possible to confirm the relevance of classic prevention models, the Health Belief Model and the Theory of Planned Behavior in the French cultural and healthcare environments, as well as their ability to identify the main individual factors liable to motivate or to discourage familial screening. The family network plays a decisive part in the transmission of information from the patient towards siblings. Physicians have expectations relating to communication aids and backup. This study above all highlights the difficulty in determining who is best suited to giving information to the patient, and when and how to relay this information to first-degree relatives. In view of the many difficulties in establishing interaction between patient, physician and siblings that is liable to lead on to efficient screening, we propose the study of the usefulness of a health-counseling intervention aimed to tailor and follow-up the delivery of screening information to the first-degree relatives.
    Patient Preference and Adherence 02/2008; 2:47-55. · 1.68 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "— — Patient barrier: Intervention characteristics Brown and Topcu, 2003 27 — Patient barriers: African American older age; lower income — Diener-West, 2001 31 — Patient barriers: Age; living near treatment center — Ford, 2004 33 — Patient barriers: Unlisted telephone number; age — Grann, 2005 35 — Patient barriers: SES; African American race — Gross, 2005 40 — Patient Barriers: SES (reside in high poverty zip code) — Gross, 2005 39 — Patient barriers: Poverty; study design barriers: no. of comorbid conditions — Gross, 2005 37 — Study design barriers: Comorbidity exclusion; age exclusion — Gross and Krumholz, 2005 38 — Provider barriers: Index of managed care competition — Kemeny, 2003 45 — Patient barriers: Age; study design barriers: disease stage, no. of comorbidities — Lara, 2005 51 Patient barriers: Lack of education about clinical trials Patient barriers: Race (African American or Asian); age (18–24 y); income < $25,000 — Martel, 2004 57 — Provider barriers: Referral source (ie, surgeons) — Melisko, 2005 59 — — Patient barriers: Transportation; time commitment; loss of income; loss of control Murthy, 2004 63 — Patient barriers: Race (African American; Hispanic) — Sateren, 2002 5 — Patient barriers: Lack/inadequate health insurance; being a black man aged 30–59 y; Asian adults and Latino/Hispanic adults — Simon, 2004 71 — Patient barriers: Lack/inadequate health insurance — Thornquist, 1991 74 — Patient barriers: Age (50–54 y; 65–69 y) — Trauth, 2005 75 Patient barriers: Lack of knowledge about origins of cancer; lack of education about clinical trials — — Twelves, 1998 76 — Patient barriers: Age — "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Racial and ethnic minorities, older adults, rural residents, and individuals of low socioeconomic status are underrepresented among participants in cancer-related trials. The authors conducted a systematic review to determine the barriers to participation of underrepresented populations in cancer-related trials. Their search included English-language publications that reported original data on the recruitment of underrepresented groups to cancer treatment or prevention trials between 1966 and December 2005 in multiple electronic databases. They also hand-searched titles in 34 journals from January 2003 to December 2005 and they examined reference lists for eligible articles. Titles and abstracts were reviewed to identify relevant studies. Data on barriers to participation were synthesized both qualitatively and based on statistically significant associations with trial enrollment. Of 5257 studies that were cited, 65 studies were eligible for inclusion in the current analysis, including 46 studies on recruitment into cancer therapeutic trials, 15 studies on recruitment into prevention trials, and 4 studies on recruitment into both prevention and treatment trials. Numerous factors were reported as barriers to participation in cancer-related trials. However, only 20 of the studies reported statistically significant associations between hypothesized barriers and enrollment. The available evidence had limitations in quality regarding representativeness, justification of study methods, the reliability and validity of data-collection methods, potential for bias, and data analysis. The results indicated that underrepresented populations face numerous barriers to participation in cancer-related trials. The current systematic review highlighting the literature on recruitment of underrepresented populations to cancer trials and may be used as the evidence base toward developing an agenda for etiologic and intervention research to reduce the disparities in participation in cancer-related trials. Cancer 2008. © 2007 American Cancer Society.
    Cancer 01/2008; 112(2):228 - 242. DOI:10.1002/cncr.23157 · 4.89 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Lung carcinoma is the most commonly diagnosed cancer and the leading cause of cancer deaths in the US. It accounts for 12% of all cancers diagnosed worldwide, making it the most common malignancy, other than nonmelanoma skin cancer. A new focus has emerged involving the role of race and ethnicity in lung carcinoma. Current health statistics data demonstrate striking disparities, which are most evident between African American patients and their white counterparts. This disparity is greatest among male patients, where statistically significant differences are seen not only in lung cancer incidence and risk, but also in survival and treatment outcomes. Several hypotheses that attempt to explain this disparity include genetic, cultural and socioeconomic differences, in addition to differences in tobacco use and exposure. Current evidence does not clearly identify the reasons for this observed disparity, or the role the aforementioned factors play in the development and overall outcomes of people with lung cancer in these populations. This disease continues to pose a considerable public health burden and more research is needed to improve understanding of the disparity of lung carcinoma statistics among African Americans. This review summarizes the existing body of knowledge regarding lung carcinoma in African Americans and attempts to identify promising areas for future investigation and intervention.
    Cancer 06/2001; 91(12):2476 - 2482. DOI:10.1002/1097-0142(20010615)91:12<2476::AID-CNCR1283>3.0.CO;2-Z · 4.89 Impact Factor
Show more


13 Reads
Available from