Advocacy and Patient Involvement in Clinical Trials

Living reference work entry


Patient engagement in research and clinical trials has evolved over time. Patients are no longer simply passive research subjects but are increasingly being integrated into research teams and protocol review teams to help design, implement, and disseminate clinical trial findings. While potential barriers exist for meaningful patient engagement, mechanisms and methods to effectively engage patients and advocacy groups are evolving, and resources and best practices are continually being developed to assist researchers and patients. Additionally, legislation and regulatory guidance are being instituted to promote patient engagement and ensure it is a routine process for clinical trial development. Developing patient-centered clinical trial designs has led to development of innovative clinical trial infrastructures and statistical methods. Patient advocates and organizations are also increasingly developing their own data sources and clinical trials, which represent unique opportunities for researchers to partner with patient groups to rapidly advance drug development.


Patient advocacy Drug development Patient engagement Patient-Centered clinical trials 


  1. Anderson M, McCleary KK (2016) On the path to a science of patient input. Sci Transl Med 8:1–6. Scholar
  2. Bakkar N, Kovalik T, Lorenzini I et al (2018) Artificial intelligence in neurodegenerative disease research: use of IBM Watson to identify additional RNA-binding proteins altered in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Acta Neuropathol 135:227–247. Scholar
  3. Bombak AE, Hanson HM (2017) A critical discussion of patient engagement in research. J Patient Cent Res Rev 4:39–41. Scholar
  4. Bottomley A, Pe M, Sloan J et al (2018) Moving forward toward standardizing analysis of quality of life data in randomized cancer clinical trials. Clin Trials 15:624–630. Scholar
  5. Chhatre S, Jefferson A, Cook R et al (2018) Patient-centered recruitment and retention for a randomized controlled study. Trials 19:205. Scholar
  6. Comis RL, Miller JD, Aldigé CR et al (2003) Public attitudes toward participation in cancer clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 21:830–835. Scholar
  7. Davis K, Schoenbaum SC, Audet AM (2005) A 2020 vision of patient-centered primary care. J Gen Intern Med 20:953–957. Scholar
  8. Domecq JP, Prutsky G, Elraiyah T et al (2014) Patient engagement in research: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res 14:1–9. Scholar
  9. FDA (2018) FDA voices: perspectives from FDA experts. Accessed 12 Nov 2018
  10. FDA-NIH Biomarker Working Group (2016) BEST (Biomarkers, EndpointS, and other Tools) Resource [Internet]. Food and Drug Administration (US), Silver Spring; Co-published by National Institutes of Health (US), BethesdaGoogle Scholar
  11. Fergusson D, Monfaredi Z, Pussegoda K et al (2018) The prevalence of patient engagement in published trials: a systematic review. Res Involv Engagem 4:17. Scholar
  12. Hanley B, Truesdale A, King A et al (2001) Involving consumers in designing, conducting, and interpreting randomised controlled trials: questionnaire survey. BMJ 322:519–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hearld KR, Hearld LR, Hall AG (2017) Engaging patients as partners in research: factors associated with awareness, interest, and engagement as research partners. SAGE Open Med 5:205031211668670. Scholar
  14. Helwick C (2018) Beat AML trial seeking to change treatment paradigm. [Internet] The ASCO PostGoogle Scholar
  15. Hohman R, Shea M, Kozak M et al (2015) Regulatory decision-making meets the real world. Sci Transl Med 7:313fs46. Scholar
  16. Kaitin K (2013) 89% of trials meet enrollment, but timelines slip, half of sites under-enroll. Tufts Cent Study Drug Dev Impact Rep 15:1–4Google Scholar
  17. Kim J, Singh H, Ayalew K et al (2018) Use of pro measures to inform tolerability in oncology trials: implications for clinical review, IND safety reporting, and clinical site inspections. Clin Cancer Res 24:1780–1784. Scholar
  18. Kluetz PG, O’Connor DJ, Soltys K (2018) Incorporating the patient experience into regulatory decision making in the USA, Europe, and Canada. Lancet Oncol 19:e267–e274. Scholar
  19. Kuehn CM (2018) Patient experience data in US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory decision making: a policy process perspective. Ther Innov Regul Sci 52:661–668. Scholar
  20. Manganiello M, Anderson M (2011) Back to basics: HIV/AIDS advocacy as a model for catalyzing change. AIDS 1–29.
  21. Mullins CD, Vandigo J, Zheng Z, Wicks P (2014) Patient-centeredness in the design of clinical trials. Value Health 17:471–475. Scholar
  22. PCORI (2018) The value of engagement. Accessed 12 Nov 2018
  23. Schwartz L, Woloshin S (2015) FDA and the media: lessons from Tysabri about communicating uncertainty. NAM Perspect 5.
  24. Smith SK, Selig W, Harker M et al (2015) Patient engagement practices in clinical research among patient groups, industry, and academia in the United States: a survey. PLoS One 10:e0140232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tinetti ME, Basch E (2013) Patients’ responsibility to participate in decision making and research. JAMA 309:2331–2332. Scholar
  26. TransCelerate (2018) Patient experience. Accessed 12 Nov 2018
  27. Unger JM, Cook E, Tai E, Bleyer A (2016) The role of clinical trial participation in cancer research: barriers, evidence, and strategies. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book 35:185–198. Scholar
  28. Vroom E (2012) Is more involvement needed in the clinical trial design & endpoints? Orphanet J Rare Dis 7:A38. Scholar
  29. Woodcock J, LaVange LM (2017) Master protocols to study multiple therapies, multiple diseases, or both. N Engl J Med 377:62–70. Scholar

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Friends of Cancer ResearchWashingtonUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Winifred Werther
    • 1
  1. 1.Director, Center for Observational ResearchAmgen Inc.South San FranciscoUSA

Personalised recommendations