Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 17, 2026

Preparation of Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cell Pellets and Plasma from a Single Blood Draw at Clinical Trial Sites for Biomarker Analysis
Published on: March 20, 2021
Effect of a Volunteer-Led Precision-Medicine Multilevel Intervention on Patient-Reported Outcomes, Receipt of
Mikalah Thomas1, Madhuri Agrawal2, Millie Das2,3
1Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA.
Purpose:
We developed and tested whether a multilevel intervention in which a trained volunteer (1) educated patients and (2) alerted clinicians if biomarker results were unavailable improved patient knowledge of precision medicine (primary outcome) and secondary outcomes including patient activation, satisfaction with decision making, molecular testing, and time to treatment more than usual care alone (control group).
Methods:
Between April 15, 2023, and May 20, 2024, we enrolled veterans age >18 years with any stage of non-small cell lung cancer. Participants completed assessments at random assignment and 1-month follow-up and were followed for 6 months. We reviewed electronic health records for molecular testing and time to treatment and compared all outcomes using regression models.
Results:
Of the 75 screened, 46 were eligible and participated. All were male (100%); the mean age (standard deviation [SD]) was 76.3 (5.54) years; 31 (67.4%) were Hispanic or Latino, two (4.4%) Asian, 11 (23.9%) Black, one (2.2%) Native Hawaiian, and 32 (69.6%) White. Knowledge, activation, and satisfaction increased more in the intervention than in the control (mean [SD]: knowledge 2.30 [0.97] v 1.16 [1.15], mean difference over time, 0.25 [95% CI, 0.19 to 0.29], P < .001); mean [SD] activation 46.7 [11.3] v 37.6 [9.26], mean difference over time, 9.28 [95% CI, 3.42 to 15.14], P < .001; mean [SD] satisfaction 34.7 [1.49] v 24.8 [8.67], mean difference over time, 13.9 [95% CI, 3.50 to 24.41], P = .009, respectively). There were no differences in molecular testing (intervention: 95.6% v control: 86.9%, odds ratio, 3.30, 95% CI, 0.32 to 34.9, P = .30). Time to treatment was lower in the intervention by mean (SD) 1.35 (0.58) months (95% CI, 0.19 to 2.53, P = .02).
Conclusion:
This approach may improve veteran lung cancer care.
Related Concept Videos
Bioavailability Study Design: Healthy Subjects Versus Patients
Combination Therapies and Personalized Medicine
The combination of the drug acetazolamide and sulforaphane is a good example of combination therapy to treat cancer. The cells in the interior of a large tumor often die due to the hypoxic and...
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Blinding
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...

