Acceptability of cancer chemoprevention trials: impact of the design

Abstract

Background: Chemoprevention could significantly reduce cancer burden. Assessment of efficacy and risk/benefit balance is at best achieved through randomized clinical trials. Methods: At a periodic health examination center 1463 adults were asked to complete a questionnaire about their willingness to be involved in different kinds of preventive clinical trials. Results: Among the 851 respondents (58.2%), 228 (26.8%) agreed to participate in a hypothetical chemoprevention trial aimed at reducing the incidence of lung cancer and 116 (29.3%) of 396 women agreed to a breast cancer chemoprevention trial. Randomization would not restrain participation (acceptability rate: 87.7% for lung cancer and 93.0% for breast cancer). In these volunteers, short-term trials (1 year) reached a high level of acceptability: 71.5% and 73.7% for lung and breast cancer prevention respectively. In contrast long-term trials (5 years or more) were far less acceptable: 9.2% for lung cancer (OR=7.7 CI95% 4.4-14.0) and 10.5 % for breast cancer (OR=6.9 CI95% 3.2-15.8). For lung cancer prevention, the route of administration impacts on acceptability with higher rate 53.1% for a pill vs. 7.9% for a spray (OR=6.7 CI95% 3.6-12.9). Conclusion: Overall healthy individuals are not keen to be involved in chemo-preventive trials, the design of which could however increase the acceptability rate.