This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Cartmel, B. Articles by Alberts, D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Cartmel, B. Articles by Alberts, D.

Predictors of Inactivation and Reasons for Participant Inactivation during a Skin Cancer Chemoprevention Study¹

University of Arizona Cancer Center and the Arizona Health Sciences Center, Tucson, Arizona 85724-5024

Maintaining good compliance is a major challenge in long-term cancer chemoprevention trials. Minimizing the number of inactive participants during a trial is an important factor in maximizing compliance. Identifying reasons for and predictors of inactivation is the first step in being able to reduce participant inactivation. In this skin cancer chemoprevention trial, the 2,297 participants were randomized to receive 25,000 IU of retinol daily or a placebo. Median follow-up time was 3.8 years. The reason for inactivation was determined for each participant who stopped taking the study capsules. Six hundred and seventy-seven (29.7%) participants became inactive during the 5-year study. There was no significant difference between the number of participants inactivating by treatment group or sex. The most common reasons for inactivation were illness of subject, spouse, or a close relative (18.6%) and experience of a clinical symptom consistent with vitamin A ingestion (17.1%). Participants in the vitamin A group (10.1%) more frequently cited symptoms coded as "not consistent with vitamin A" as the reason for inactivation compared with those in the placebo group [5.4% (P < 0.05)]. The inactivation rate was highest in the first month of the trial and declined thereafter. A low education level (hazard ratio, 1.59) and unmarried status (hazard ratio, 1.29) were the only significant predictors of inactivation. These findings may be useful in developing targeted strategies to decrease inactivation and thereby increase compliance in future chemoprevention trials. However, these findings need to be confirmed because published research in this area is very limited.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. H. Partridge, J. Avorn, P. S. Wang, and E. P. Winer Adherence to Therapy With Oral Antineoplastic Agents J Natl Cancer Inst, May 1, 2002; 94(9): 652 - 661. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]