The Role of Surrogate Patients in Cancer Clinical Trials
Author Information
Author(s): W.J. Mackillop, M.J. Palmer, B. O'Sullivan, G.K. Ward, R. Steele, G. Dotsikas
Primary Institution: Queen's University
Hypothesis
Can the opinions of expert surrogate patients influence the ethical acceptability of clinical trials?
Conclusion
Lay people often cannot discern the differences in acceptability of clinical trials that are clear to experts.
Supporting Evidence
- 50% of lay people consented to a surgical trial compared to 64% of expert surrogates.
- 69% of doctors believed new trials should be evaluated by expert surrogates.
- After learning doctors' opinions, the consent rate for the chemotherapy trial dropped significantly.
Takeaway
Doctors and lay people were asked if they would join cancer trials, and many lay people didn't understand the risks as well as the doctors did.
Methodology
Surveys were conducted with doctors and lay people regarding their willingness to participate in clinical trials and their understanding of the trials' acceptability.
Potential Biases
Potential bias due to the non-random selection of lay participants and the influence of the framing of questions.
Limitations
The sample of lay people was not a random cross-section of society, which may limit the generalizability of the findings.
Participant Demographics
The survey included 400 lay people, with two-thirds being women, and a mix of ages and educational backgrounds.
Statistical Information
P-Value
p<0.0001
Statistical Significance
p<0.05
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website