Margaret Klein
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Margaret Klein has a total of 13 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
A. Chapple
Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, School of Public Health, Division of Biostatistics, New Orleans, LA, United States
1 shared publicationA. Jernigan
Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, New Orleans, LA, United States
1 shared publication- Amelia Jernigan
LSU Health New Orleans, New Orleans, LA, United States
1 shared publication - Andrew Genius Chapple
Division of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA 70112, USA
1 shared publication H. Pirzadah
MS3, The Louisiana State University - New Orleans School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, United States
1 shared publication- Humza Pirzadah
New Orleans School of Medicine, Louisiana State University, New Orleans, LA 70112, USA
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
PENTAGON (Predicting Clinical Trials in Gynecologic Oncology): A Retrospective Study Assessing Study Design Factors That Affect Enrollment in Gynecologic Cancer Trials
Objective: Clinical trials are the cornerstone of medical innovation and set the standard for medical care. Cancer clinical trials drive critical innovation and availability of new treatments. However, obstacles to successful recruitment and participation of patients in clinical trials still significantly limit their success. Our objective is to evaluate trial enrollment trends according to both patient and trial demographics/features for those who have sought care at our multi-center, mixed-setting Gynecologic Oncology practice, allowing for us to describe specific trial criteria designs that are negatively associated with diverse enrollment or lack of enrollment completion on cancer clinical trials. Methods: An IRB-approved, retrospective cohort study was completed to evaluate patients who screened positive for a clinical trial through the Gynecologic Oncology practice’s manual screening process. We looked at how trial characteristics affect enrollment success. Results: After adjustment, there were no significant differences between patient factors and enrollment status. Higher rates of enrollment were seen among Asian patients and patients whose race was reported as “unknown” (>50%, p = 0.125). There was a drastic, unadjusted estimated increase in enrollment for Medicaid patients compared to patients with other insurance types (55.2% vs. 32%, p = 0.031), but multivariable logistic regression showed that insurance status (Medicaid vs. others) lost significance, p = 0.148. Patients with Stage I cancer accounted for 42.1% of patients enrolled, and enrollment rates were higher than for other cancer stages (p = 0.087). There was a significant increase in enrollment likelihood if the trial did not exclude subjects with prior cancer (50.0% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.046). Conclusions: We demonstrated equitable trial enrollment across different races and insurance statuses and were able to identify criteria that lend itself towards higher rates of enrollment. These findings can be used to tailor cancer trial portfolios to a diverse patient catchment.
Open AccessPENTAGON (Predicting Clinical Trials in Gynecologic Oncology): A Retrospective Study Assessing Study Design Factors That Affect Enrollment in Gynecologic Cancer Trials
Objective: Clinical trials are the cornerstone of medical innovation and set the standard for medical care. Cancer clinical trials drive critical innovation and availability of new treatments. However, obstacles to successful recruitment and participation of patients in clinical trials still significantly limit their success. Our objective is to evaluate trial enrollment trends according to both patient and trial demographics/features for those who have sought care at our multi-center, mixed-setting Gynecologic Oncology practice, allowing for us to describe specific trial criteria designs that are negatively associated with diverse enrollment or lack of enrollment completion on cancer clinical trials. Methods: An IRB-approved, retrospective cohort study was completed to evaluate patients who screened positive for a clinical trial through the Gynecologic Oncology practice’s manual screening process. We looked at how trial characteristics affect enrollment success. Results: After adjustment, there were no significant differences between patient factors and enrollment status. Higher rates of enrollment were seen among Asian patients and patients whose race was reported as “unknown” (>50%, p = 0.125). There was a drastic, unadjusted estimated increase in enrollment for Medicaid patients compared to patients with other insurance types (55.2% vs. 32%, p = 0.031), but multivariable logistic regression showed that insurance status (Medicaid vs. others) lost significance, p = 0.148. Patients with Stage I cancer accounted for 42.1% of patients enrolled, and enrollment rates were higher than for other cancer stages (p = 0.087). There was a significant increase in enrollment likelihood if the trial did not exclude subjects with prior cancer (50.0% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.046). Conclusions: We demonstrated equitable trial enrollment across different races and insurance statuses and were able to identify criteria that lend itself towards higher rates of enrollment. These findings can be used to tailor cancer trial portfolios to a diverse patient catchment.
- Open Access
- 3 December 2024
- Published by Elsevier in Gynecologic Oncology Reports
- Vol. 57, 101549
“Developing a manual clinical trials screening process in a diverse southern gynecologic oncology practice”
- 3 December 2024
- Published by Elsevier in Gynecologic Oncology Reports
- Vol. 57, 101549
Open Access“Developing a manual clinical trials screening process in a diverse southern gynecologic oncology practice”