Author(s)
Goodman, Phyllis JHartline, Jo Ann
Tangen, Catherine M
Crowley, John J
Minasian, Lori M
Klein, Eric A
Cook, Elise D
Darke, Amy K
Arnold, Kathryn B
Anderson, Karen
Yee, Monica
Meyskens, Frank L
Baker, Laurence H
Keywords
Medicine and Health SciencesAdult
Aged
Aged
80 and over
Canada: epidemiology
Clinical Trials Data Monitoring Committees
Cohort Studies
Data Collection
Dietary Supplements
Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
Endpoint Determination
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
National Cancer Institute (U.S.)
Placebos: administration & dosage
Prostatic Neoplasms: epidemiology
prevention & control
Puerto Rico: epidemiology
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Research Design
Selenium: administration & dosage
United States: epidemiology
Vitamin E: administration & dosage
alpha tocopherol
selenium
article
cancer grading
cancer incidence
cancer prevention
employment
follow up
genetic association
human
informed consent
leadership
long term exposure
male
medical documentation
medical education
observational study
prevention study
priority journal
prostate cancer
publication
randomized controlled trial (topic)
reimbursement
Adult
Aged
Aged
80 and over
Canada
Clinical Trials Data Monitoring Committees
Cohort Studies
Data Collection
Dietary Supplements
Drug Toxicity
Endpoint Determination
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
National Cancer Institute (U.S.)
Placebos
Prostatic Neoplasms
Puerto Rico
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Research Design
Selenium
United States
Vitamin E
Full record
Show full item recordOnline Access
http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/7cw46484Abstract
The Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT) was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled prostate cancer prevention study funded by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and conducted by the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG). A total of 35,533 men were assigned randomly to one of the four treatment groups (vitamin E + placebo, selenium + placebo, vitamin E + selenium, and placebo + placebo). The independent Data and Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC) recommended the discontinuation of study supplements because of the lack of efficacy for risk reduction and because futility analyses demonstrated no possibility of benefit of the supplements to the anticipated degree (25% reduction in prostate cancer incidence) with additional follow-up. Study leadership agreed that the randomized trial should be terminated but believed that the cohort should be maintained and followed as the additional follow-up would contribute important information to the understanding of the biologic consequences of the intervention. Since the participants no longer needed to be seen in person to assess acute toxicities or to be given study supplements, it was determined that the most efficient and cost-effective way to follow them was via a central coordinated effort. A number of changes were necessary at the local Study Sites and SELECT Statistical Center to transition to following participants via a Central Coordinating Center. We describe the transition process from a randomized clinical trial to the observational Centralized Follow-Up (CFU) study. The process of transitioning SELECT, implemented at more than 400 Study Sites across the United States, Canada, and Puerto Rico, entailed many critical decisions and actions including updates to online documents such as the SELECT Workbench and Study Manual, a protocol amendment, reorganization of the Statistical Center, creation of a Transition Committee, development of materials for SELECT Study Sites, development of procedures to close Study Sites, and revision of data collection procedures and the process by which to contact participants. At the time of the publication of the primary SELECT results in December 2008, there were 32,569 men alive and currently active in the trial. As of 31 December 2011, 17,761 participants had been registered to the CFU study. This number is less than had been anticipated due to unforeseen difficulties with local Study Site institutional review boards (IRBs). However, from this cohort, we estimate that an additional 580 prostate cancer cases and 215 Gleason 7 or higher grade cancers will be identified. Over 109,000 individual items have been mailed to participants. Active SELECT ancillary studies have continued. The substantial SELECT biorepository is available to researchers; requests to use the specimens are reviewed for feasibility and scientific merit. As of April 2012, 12 proposals had been approved. The accrual goal of the follow-up study was not met, limiting our power to address the study objectives satisfactorily. The CFU study is also dependent on a number of factors including continued funding, continued interest of investigators in the biorepository, and the continued contribution of the participants. Our experience may be less pertinent to investigators who wish to follow participants in a treatment trial or participants in prevention trials in other medical areas. Extended follow-up of participants in prevention research is important to study the long-term effects of the interventions, such as those used in SELECT. The approach taken by SELECT investigators was to continue to follow participants centrally via an annual questionnaire and with a web-based option. The participants enrolled in the CFU study represent a large, well-characterized, generally healthy cohort. The CFU has enabled us to collect additional prostate and other cancer endpoints and longer follow-up on the almost 18,000 participants enrolled. The utility of the extensive biorepository that was developed during the course of the SELECT is enhanced by longer follow-up.Date
2013-02-12Type
ArticleIdentifier
oai:qt7cw46484oai:qt7cw46484
http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/7cw46484
Collections
Related items
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
-
Moving a randomized clinical trial into an observational cohort.Goodman, Phyllis J; Hartline, Jo Ann; Tangen, Catherine M; Crowley, John J; Minasian, Lori M; Klein, Eric A; Cook, Elise D; Darke, Amy K; Arnold, Kathryn B; Anderson, Karen; et al. (eScholarship, University of California, 2013-02-12)The Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT) was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled prostate cancer prevention study funded by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and conducted by the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG). A total of 35,533 men were assigned randomly to one of the four treatment groups (vitamin E + placebo, selenium + placebo, vitamin E + selenium, and placebo + placebo). The independent Data and Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC) recommended the discontinuation of study supplements because of the lack of efficacy for risk reduction and because futility analyses demonstrated no possibility of benefit of the supplements to the anticipated degree (25% reduction in prostate cancer incidence) with additional follow-up. Study leadership agreed that the randomized trial should be terminated but believed that the cohort should be maintained and followed as the additional follow-up would contribute important information to the understanding of the biologic consequences of the intervention. Since the participants no longer needed to be seen in person to assess acute toxicities or to be given study supplements, it was determined that the most efficient and cost-effective way to follow them was via a central coordinated effort.A number of changes were necessary at the local Study Sites and SELECT Statistical Center to transition to following participants via a Central Coordinating Center. We describe the transition process from a randomized clinical trial to the observational Centralized Follow-Up (CFU) study.The process of transitioning SELECT, implemented at more than 400 Study Sites across the United States, Canada, and Puerto Rico, entailed many critical decisions and actions including updates to online documents such as the SELECT Workbench and Study Manual, a protocol amendment, reorganization of the Statistical Center, creation of a Transition Committee, development of materials for SELECT Study Sites, development of procedures to close Study Sites, and revision of data collection procedures and the process by which to contact participants.At the time of the publication of the primary SELECT results in December 2008, there were 32,569 men alive and currently active in the trial. As of 31 December 2011, 17,761 participants had been registered to the CFU study. This number is less than had been anticipated due to unforeseen difficulties with local Study Site institutional review boards (IRBs). However, from this cohort, we estimate that an additional 580 prostate cancer cases and 215 Gleason 7 or higher grade cancers will be identified. Over 109,000 individual items have been mailed to participants. Active SELECT ancillary studies have continued. The substantial SELECT biorepository is available to researchers; requests to use the specimens are reviewed for feasibility and scientific merit. As of April 2012, 12 proposals had been approved.The accrual goal of the follow-up study was not met, limiting our power to address the study objectives satisfactorily. The CFU study is also dependent on a number of factors including continued funding, continued interest of investigators in the biorepository, and the continued contribution of the participants. Our experience may be less pertinent to investigators who wish to follow participants in a treatment trial or participants in prevention trials in other medical areas.Extended follow-up of participants in prevention research is important to study the long-term effects of the interventions, such as those used in SELECT. The approach taken by SELECT investigators was to continue to follow participants centrally via an annual questionnaire and with a web-based option. The participants enrolled in the CFU study represent a large, well-characterized, generally healthy cohort. The CFU has enabled us to collect additional prostate and other cancer endpoints and longer follow-up on the almost 18,000 participants enrolled. The utility of the extensive biorepository that was developed during the course of the SELECT is enhanced by longer follow-up.
-
Educational inequality in cancer mortality: a record linkage study of over 35 million ItaliansAlicandro, G. and Frova, L. and Sebastiani, G. and El Sayed, I. and Boffetta, P. and La Vecchia, C. (2017)Purpose: Large studies are needed to evaluate socioeconomic inequality for site-specific cancer mortality. We conducted a longitudinal census-based national study to quantify the relative inequality in cancer mortality among educational levels in Italy. Methods: We linked the 2011 Italian census with the 2012 and 2013 death registries. Educational inequality in overall cancer and site-specific cancer mortality were evaluated by computing the mortality rate ratio (MRR). Results: A total of 35,708,445 subjects aged 30–74 years and 147,981 cancer deaths were registered. Compared to the lowest level of education (none or primary school), the MRR for all cancers in the highest level (university) was 0.57 (95% CI 0.55; 0.58) in men and 0.84 (95% CI 0.81; 0.87) in women. Higher education was associated with reduced risk of mortality from lip, oral cavity, pharynx, oesophagus, stomach, colon and liver in both sexes. Higher education (university) was associated with decreased risk of lung cancer in men (MRR: 0.43, 95% CI 0.41; 0.46), but not in women (MRR: 1.00, 95% CI 0.92; 1.10). Highly educated women had a reduced risk of mortality from cervical cancer than lower educated women (MRR: 0.39, 95% CI 0.27; 0.56), but they had a similar risk for breast cancer (MRR: 1.01, 95% CI 0.94; 1.09). Conclusions: Education is inversely associated with total cancer mortality, and the association was stronger in men. Different patterns and trends in tobacco smoking in men and women account for at least most of the gender differences. © 2017, Springer International Publishing AG.
-
Pilot randomised controlled trial of a radiation therapist-led educational intervention for breast cancer patients prior to commencing radiotherapyHalkett, Georgia K B; O'Connor, M; Aranda, S; Jefford, M; Shaw, Therese M; York, D; Spry, N; Taylor, M; Schofield, P (Research Online, 2013-01-01)Purpose: Although patients receive information prior to commencing radiotherapy, they often experience anxiety and distress. We conducted a pilot randomised controlled trial to determine whether a radiation therapist led psycho-educational intervention for breast cancer patients prior to radiotherapy is likely to be effective in reducing radiotherapy-related concerns, patient anxiety and depression. Methods: The intervention comprised two face-to-face consultations with a radiation therapist (one prior to radiation planning and the other prior to treatment). Patients completed surveys at baseline, prior to treatment planning and on the first day of treatment. Outcome measures included the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Radiation Therapy Related Patient Concerns and Radiation Therapy Knowledge Scales. Results: One hundred and twenty two patients completed baseline measures. Fifty-eight patients received usual care, and 64 received the intervention. After the first consultation, patient anxiety was significantly lower in the intervention group (p = 0.048), as were concerns about radiotherapy (p = 0.001). There were no differences between groups for depression. Patient knowledge for the intervention group was higher after the first consultation (p < 0.001). Conclusion: This intervention is likely to be effective in reducing patient anxiety and concerns and increasing knowledge. Future research is required to test this intervention with a larger population.