OBJECTIVE: Good Clinical Practices (GCP) are essential for patient-centric research. The standard bioethics and GCP training emphasizing a \"one-size-fits-all\" approach may not adequately equip ethics committee members, especially the lay and social scientist members, towards their critical role in reviewing clinical trials and related documentation. This article explores a patient-centered, patient advocates-driven training program focused on raising awareness about research ethics and GCP among patients, advocates and ethics committee members.
METHODS: A patient advocates-driven program called Patient Advocates for Clinical Research (PACER) conducted trainings focused on GCP for patient-centric research for patients, advocates and ethics committee members. Pre- and post-workshop questionnaires were used to assess the participants\' knowledge of GCP.
RESULTS: The workshop was attended by 116 participants. Of these 91 consented to participate in questionnaire evaluation that assessed participants\' knowledge on ethics committee (EC) functionality, research ethics and data confidentiality. Pre-workshop evaluations highlighted knowledge gaps. Only 16.5% were familiar with the primary ethical consideration for vulnerable populations and 69.2% were knowledgeable about data governance. Post-workshop evaluations demonstrated significant overall response improvement of 5.4% (𝜒2=13.890; p<0.001). The understanding of ethical considerations for vulnerable populations rose by 15.4% (p=0.007), and knowledge of data privacy regulations improved by 11.0% (p=0.041).
CONCLUSIONS: The workshop under PACER initiative highlighted the knowledge gaps in understanding the EC functionality, research ethics and data confidentiality. The workshop effectively fostered participants\' understanding of ethical research practices.

OBJECTIVE: The Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC)/European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) Patient Antiemetic Guideline Committee aimed to (1) adapt the updated evidence-based, clinical guidelines to patient-centered antiemetic guidelines and (2) develop patient education materials and statements.
METHODS: The MASCC 2023 Patient Antiemetic Guidelines were created and reviewed by antiemetic experts and patient advocates by incorporating the 2023 MASCC/ESMO antiemetic guidelines into patient-friendly language. Patient Education Statements were developed based on current literature and by utilizing an expert modified Delphi consensus (≥ 75% agreement). Patient advocate/focus group input and patient survey results were further integrated into Patient-Centered Antiemetic Guidelines and Education Statements.
RESULTS: Patient-Centered Antiemetic Guidelines were created using patient-friendly language and visual slides. Patient-friendly language was also utilized to communicate the Educational Statements. Key content categories identified for the Educational Statements included the following: nausea/vomiting definitions, causes, risk factors, categories, complications, accompanying symptoms, prophylactic antiemetic treatment, general management, when to call/what to ask the healthcare team, what caregivers can do, and available resources. All identified content met the ≥ 75% expert agreement threshold. Fifteen (15) items demonstrated 100% agreement, 11 items achieved ≥ 90% agreement, and three content items demonstrated 80 ~ 82% agreement.
CONCLUSIONS: The inaugural MASCC 2023 Patient Antiemetic Guidelines can help patients and caregivers understand the prevention of nausea and vomiting related to their cancer treatment. Educational Statements provide further patient information. Educating patients on how to utilize guideline antiemetics and the education statements can contribute improvements in the control of anticancer treatment-related nausea and vomiting.

UNASSIGNED: To elicit perspectives of people with persistent pain about their experiences working with pain management professionals and services as patient advocates and to consider implications for current models of involving patients in service development and research.
UNASSIGNED: reflexive thematic analysis from a critical realist perspective.
UNASSIGNED: Online interviews were conducted individually with 10 participants who had acted as patient advocates in the field of persistent pain. Participants were recruited through purposive and snowball sampling. Data were analysed and organised into themes and are presented descriptively.
UNASSIGNED: The relationship between patient advocates and the organisations they help is conceptualised as \'an unequal partnership\'. Participants described positive and affirming experiences with individual health professionals and research teams (Respect). This often occurred within a context of inflexible organisational policies that presented barriers to participation including a lack of financial compensation and expectation to work to inflexible deadlines. As a result, patient advocates could experience a lack of value attributed to their experiences and voices (unmet needs from institutions).
UNASSIGNED: People with personal experience of engaging with services for persistent pain are in a strong position to contribute to service improvement. Although this contribution is recognised as valuable, it appears to be devalued by organisational barriers. Organisational policies around payment may lead to a lack of representation of those experiencing higher levels of disadvantage. As a result, services and policy makers may be missing out on insights that could be important for service development.

UNASSIGNED: Epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (EHE) is an ultra-rare, vascular sarcoma with clinical presentation ranging from an indolent to an aggressive form. Over 50% of patients present with metastatic disease, requiring systemic therapy, although no systemic therapies are specifically approved for EHE. Retrospective evidence supports the activity of mTOR inhibitors (e.g. sirolimus), although available only off-label. EHE patients and advocates are therefore working to support approval of effective treatments by collecting data on patient perspectives and experiences.
UNASSIGNED: In February 2023, the EHE Rare Cancer Charity (UK) and The EHE Foundation (US), with other advocates, conducted a survey of perspectives and experiences of EHE patients regarding the use and accessibility of sirolimus. The survey consisted of 20 questions designed for individuals undergoing treatment, those who had been treated, or had never been treated with the drug. Widely promoted within the patient community, the online survey categorized patients into three cohorts for the analysis: liver transplant patients, non-transplant patients who had ever taken sirolimus and sirolimus-naïve non-transplant patients.
UNASSIGNED: The survey evaluated data from 129 patient responses from 21 countries, mostly from USA, UK, Australia, and Canada (70%). The liver transplant, sirolimus and non-sirolimus cohorts were 16%, 25% and 59%, respectively. In the sirolimus group 66% reported treatment durations exceeding one year, with 16% exceeding five years, indicating the drug\'s efficacy. In the non-sirolimus group, the drug was not available for 42% and for 11% sirolimus was available but not selected for treatment because of its off-label status. Overall, 87% of all patients across all cohorts expressed the importance of the drug\'s availability as hugely or very important.
UNASSIGNED: The survey responses highlight the activity of sirolimus for EHE and the importance of securing a label extension for the drug delivering equitable access to this treatment for patients.

Early-onset colorectal cancer (age under 50 years) (EOCRC) is an entity of undeniable importance, both because of its growing incidence, and the population it affects. Other current reviews emphasize the essential points regarding the clinical management and knowledge of its molecular bases. However, we intend to go one step further. With the increased significance of patient participation and disease experience in mind, we have integrated the voice of the patient to show the weaknesses and the needs, and next steps in the advancement of knowledge and management of EOCRC. This integrative review of the different perspectives, clinical, research and the patients themselves, can therefore be defined as an integrative needs assessment. Hence, this may be a first step in working towards an essential homogeneity of definitions and action.

Musculoskeletal sarcomas are rare cancers that as the whole family of sarcomas pose several challenges at different levels, ranging from medical knowledge to clinical research and policymaking. Addressing these challenges, necessarily calls for the inclusion of patient perspective inside the decision-making processes of every area that contributes to treatment improvement, from the provision of high-quality services by healthcare organisations to research issues. Without patient-provided inputs to inform decisions, the current paradigm of patient-centred care makes no sense and sounds at the least irrational if not unethical. Putting PROMs on \"centre stage\" in cancer research and care, could allow to build a truly Evidence Based Advocacy (EBA) and therefore to empower Evidence Based Medicine (EBM).

The drug development process is a long and arduous one, especially for rare diseases. Patient and patient representatives can and should be involved in this process from an early stage, since they have the perspective of living with a disease on a daily basis and can best identify which symptoms are the largest burden and which benefits would be more important to them. In this perspective, we outline how patients can be involved optimally in drug development. We outline success factors such as finding the right partners, bilateral education, having realistic expectations, and an open and honest dialog with all stakeholders.

Introduction: There is a dire need for research regarding the implications of opioid use during pregnancy on fetal and childhood development to better inform both medical practice and policy. The Healthy Brain and Child Development Study will examine brain and behavioral development from birth through the first decade of life. Due to large scope and anticipated complexity of this initiative, an 18-month planning phase was implemented across 28 sites across the nation. A core element of the Phase I initiative involved the development of Stakeholder Advisory Committees to inform the next phase of the initiative. Methods: Phase I stakeholder meetings were conducted at Oregon Health and Science University, New York University Langone Medical Center, the University of Pittsburgh, and the University of Vermont to better understand perspectives and inform upcoming research. Despite differences in the structure of the stakeholder meetings by site, the overarching goals for the meetings included establishing relationships, gathering input, and learning about research engagement. Documents from each meeting were reviewed for location, duration, attendees, common research themes, and pertinent suggestions for improving research approaches. Results: All stakeholders had high levels of interest in research for pregnant people with substance use disorders and agreed on research priorities including collaboration, connection, communication, and support. Different stakeholders offered unique perspectives on various aspects of study design and themes that emerged through meetings. Discussion: Overall, there was excitement about the research, especially the opportunity to include the voices of people with lived experience; collaboration between providers, peer support specialists, patients, and others; and excitement around contributing to research that could elucidate new and pertinent findings in the realm of addiction medicine and child development. Sites also found that there is mistrust between people with substance use disorder and the medical system, and this could be addressed by including people with lived experience on the research team, forming connections, communicating clearly, training the research team in implicit bias, and practicing trauma-informed care. In conclusion, these stakeholder meetings provided valuable information for structuring upcoming studies; however, researchers would have benefitted from more time and more opportunities for in-person connection.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。