Reviewing inclusivity of the UK bladder and head and neck oncology trial portfolio through eligibility criteria: a scoping review.

[BACKGROUND] In clinical trials, eligibility criteria define a population who may benefit from the intervention without incurring undue safety risks. Despite their value, overly stringent eligibility criteria may pose barriers to inclusive recruitment. They may disproportionately exclude groups of people more likely to be diagnosed at later cancer stages, or have specific co-morbidities which can be associated with socio-demographic or ethnic background. The National Institute for Health and Care Research Innovations in Clinical Trial Design and Delivery for the Under-served (NIHR-INCLUDE) guidance highlighted several groups of people who may be underserved by clinical research. The aim of this review was to assess eligibility criteria in bladder and head and neck oncology trials and consider their potential impact on potentially underserved groups.

[METHODS] This scoping review included multi-centre, interventional, phase II and III trials in bladder or head and neck cancer, which recruited UK participants between 2013 and 2023. Trials were identified via searches of ClinicalTrials.gov, the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) registry, and NIHR Clinical Portfolio Management System (CPMS). Trials' eligibility criteria were categorised and analysed narratively. Trial parameters (recruitment period, funding type, and whether they were of investigational medicinal products (IMPs)) were cross-tabulated with common exclusion criteria using Fisher's exact test.

[RESULTS] Thirty-eight bladder and 30 head and neck cancer trials met the selection criteria. Twenty-eight out of 68 (41%) had non-commercial sponsors. Fifty-six out of 68 (82%) were of IMPs. Forty-one out of 68 (60%) were industry-funded. Fifty-one out of 68 (75%) were for locally advanced, metastatic, or recurrent disease. Common exclusion criteria relating to pregnancy, performance status, HIV status, and cognitive ability may disproportionately impact some underserved groups suggested by the NIHR-INCLUDE guidance.

[CONCLUSIONS] This review highlights common exclusion criteria which may disproportionately exclude underserved groups from UK bladder and head and neck oncology trials. To facilitate accessibility to oncology trials, sponsors and triallists should consider how potentially underrepresented groups may be safely included during development of eligibility criteria.