Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2010 Feb;7(1):90-9.
doi: 10.1177/1740774509357227.

Impact of supplemental site grants to increase African American accrual for the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial

Elise D Cook  1 , Kathryn B Arnold, John A Hermos, Worta McCaskill-Stevens, Sarah Moody-Thomas, Jeffrey L Probstfield, Sandra J Hamilton, Russell D Campbell, Karen B Anderson, Lori M Minasian
Affiliations

Impact of supplemental site grants to increase African American accrual for the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial

Elise D Cook et al. Clin Trials. 2010 Feb.

Abstract

Background: African American accrual to prevention trials at rates representative of the disease burden experienced by this population requires additional resources and focused efforts.

Purpose: To describe the rationale, context, and criteria for selection of sites that received Minority Recruitment Enhancement Grants (MREGs) to increase African American recruitment to the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT). To determine if African American accrual was higher among the 15 MREG sites when compared with similar nonawarded sites.

Methods: Changes in African American accrual at sites that received MREGs are compared with changes in a group of 15, frequency-matched, nonawarded sites using a quasi-experimental, post hoc analysis. Successful and unsuccessful recruitment strategies reported by the MREG sites are described.

Results: The increased number of African American participants accrued per month at MREG sites post-funding was higher than the change at comparison sites by a factor of 3.38 (p = 0.004, 95% CI: 1.51-7.57). An estimated 602 additional African American participants were recruited at MREG sites due to MREG funding, contributing to the overall 14.9% African American recruitment. Successful recruitment strategies most reported by MREG sites included increasing staff, transportation resources, recruiting through the media, mailings, and prostate cancer screening clinics during off-hours.

Limitations: Comparison sites were chosen retrospectively, not by randomization. Although comparison sites were selected to be similar to MREG sites with regard to potential confounding factors, it is possible that unknown factors could have biased results. Cost-effective analyses were not conducted.

Conclusions: MREG sites increased African American accrual in the post-funding period more than comparison sites, indicating MREG funding enhanced the sites' abilities to accrue African American participants. Targeted grants early in the accrual period may be a useful multi-site intervention to increase African American accrual for a prevention study where adequate African American representation is essential.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00006392.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Cumulative SELECT Accrual for MREG and Non-MREG Study Sites
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. American Cancer Society: Cancer Facts and Figures 2007. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society; 2007. [last accessed 12/14/2007]. http://www.cancer.org/downloads/STT/CAFF2007PWSecured.pdf.
    1. American Cancer Society: Cancer Facts and Figures for African American 2007–2008. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society; 2007. [last accessed 12/14/2007]. http://www.cancer.org/downloads/STT/CAFF2007AAacspdf2007.pdf.
    1. Ries LAG, Melbert D, Krapcho M, et al. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute; [Last accessed 12/14/2007]. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2004. http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2004/, based on November 2006 SEER data submission, posted to the SEER web site, 2007.
    1. Thompson IM, et al. Phase III prostate cancer prevention trials: are the costs justified? J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(32):8161–8164. - PubMed
    1. Feigl P, et al. Design of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) Control Clin Trials. 1995;16(3):150–163. - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data