Home-run trials for rare cancers: giving the right drug(s) to the right patients at the right time and in the right place
Adashek & Kurzrock
The finding, in our words
Decentralised and site-less trial designs enable broader participation in rare cancer studies by mitigating travel burdens for underserved and rural populations.
A paraphrase to the Library’s standard, never the abstract. The source is one link away and is always the authority.
Ten decentralised cancer trials run across 47 Veterans Affairs medical centres enrolled 134 patients, nearly a third of them rural and a fifth from minority groups, matching the population the VA's tele-oncology service already reaches. The authors' own caveat stands: remote conduct widened access, and not every trial design can be run this way.
Friedman et al., Journal of the National Cancer Institute (paywalled) · source ↗
This review suggests that decentralised clinical trials in oncology can improve patient participation and equity but face significant regulatory, logistical and digital hurdles. It concludes that these trials offer a flexible model dependent on specific clinical contexts rather than a universal replacement for conventional methods.
Gentile et al., Critical reviews in oncology/hematology (paywalled) · source ↗
Hybrid decentralized oncology trials are feasible in community hospitals beyond traditional networks, reducing logistical and financial burdens and enabling rapid initiation and patient referrals within three months.
A nationwide survey of 194 professionals across 140 Japanese hospitals found that geographic and logistical barriers limit access to comprehensive genomic profiling and genotype-matched trials, with over half of eligible patients declining participation due to travel distance; most institutions support telemedicine for consent and results and view DCTs as essential to improve equitable access.
Taniguchi et al., International journal of clinical oncology · source ↗