Are the clinical trials in lung cancer an advantage for patients in developing countries?

e20523 Background: Clinical trials are critical to developing new drugs. This study examined the characteristics of patients diagnosed with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) and who wanted to participate in clinical trials. This study aims to compare the outcomes of patients who enrolled in clinical trials or not. Methods: The data of the patients who applied to Ankara Yildirim Beyazit University Medical Oncology Department to participate in the first-line treatment-related clinical trials in mNSCLC were retrospectively reviewed. Survival outcomes of patients included in clinical trials (CT) and patients who signed informed consent for clinical trials but could not enroll (standard treatment-ST) were compared. Results: Data from 155 patients who applied to participate in clinical trials were analyzed. Patients who died during the screening process and who lacked systemic treatment information were excluded (n = 14). While 55.3% (n = 78) of the patients participated in the clinical trials, 44.7% (n = 63) could not. Not meeting the inclusion criteria (pathological and clinical) was the most common reason for screen-fail. At a median follow-up of 29 months, median overall survival was 17.1 months (95%CI, 15.1 to 19.1) in the CT group and 9.6 months (95%CI, 7.1 to 12.1) in the ST group (p = 0.015). Median progression-free survival was 11.6 (95% CI, 5.9 - 17.4) and 5.4 (95% CI, 3.7 - 7.2) months, respectively (p = 0.014). Conclusions: Being able to take part in clinical trials is not unfavorable, and it may even improve survival for patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC), particularly in areas of the world where access to novel and effective treatments is limited.