Daniel E Spratt1, Tiffany Chan2, Levi Waldron2, Corey Speers1, Felix Y Feng1, Olorunseun O Ogunwobi3, Joseph R Osborne4. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 2. School of Public Health, City University of New York, Hunter College, New York. 3. Department of Biological Sciences, City University of New York, Hunter College, New York4Department of Medicine, Cornell University, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York. 4. Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Although poorly understood, there is heterogeneity in the molecular biology of cancer across race and ethnicities. The representation of racial minorities in large genomic sequencing efforts is unclear, and could have an impact on health care disparities. OBJECTIVE: To determine the racial distribution among samples sequenced within The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and the deficit of samples needed to detect moderately common mutational frequencies in racial minorities. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a retrospective review of individual patient data from TCGA data portal accessed in July 2015. TCGA comprises samples from a wide array of institutions primarily across the United States. Samples from 10 of the 31 currently available tumor types were analyzed, comprising 5729 samples from the approximately 11 000 available. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Using the estimated median somatic mutational frequency, the samples needed beyond TCGA to detect a 10% and 5% mutational frequency over the background somatic mutation frequency were calculated for each tumor type by racial ethnicity. RESULTS: Of the 5729 samples, 77% (n = 4389) were white, 12% (n = 660) were black, 3% (n = 173) were Asian, 3% (n = 149) were Hispanic, and less than 0.5% combined were from patients of Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, Alaskan Native, or American Indian decent. This overrepresents white patients compared with the US population and underrepresents primarily Asian and Hispanic patients. With a somatic mutational frequency of 0.7 (prostate cancer) to 9.9 (lung squamous cell cancer), all tumor types from white patients contained enough samples to detect a 10% mutational frequency. This is in contrast to all other racial ethnicities, for which group-specific mutations with 10% frequency would be detectable only for black patients with breast cancer. Group-specific mutations with 5% frequency would be undetectable in any racial minority, but detectable in white patients for all cancer types except lung (adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma) and colon cancer. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: It is probable, but poorly understood, that ethnic diversity is related to the pathogenesis of cancer, and may have an impact on the generalizability of findings from TCGA to racial minorities. Despite the important benefits that continue to be gained from genomic sequencing, dedicated efforts are needed to avoid widening the already pervasive gap in health care disparities.
IMPORTANCE: Although poorly understood, there is heterogeneity in the molecular biology of cancer across race and ethnicities. The representation of racial minorities in large genomic sequencing efforts is unclear, and could have an impact on health care disparities. OBJECTIVE: To determine the racial distribution among samples sequenced within The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and the deficit of samples needed to detect moderately common mutational frequencies in racial minorities. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a retrospective review of individual patient data from TCGA data portal accessed in July 2015. TCGA comprises samples from a wide array of institutions primarily across the United States. Samples from 10 of the 31 currently available tumor types were analyzed, comprising 5729 samples from the approximately 11 000 available. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Using the estimated median somatic mutational frequency, the samples needed beyond TCGA to detect a 10% and 5% mutational frequency over the background somatic mutation frequency were calculated for each tumor type by racial ethnicity. RESULTS: Of the 5729 samples, 77% (n = 4389) were white, 12% (n = 660) were black, 3% (n = 173) were Asian, 3% (n = 149) were Hispanic, and less than 0.5% combined were from patients of Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, Alaskan Native, or American Indian decent. This overrepresents white patients compared with the US population and underrepresents primarily Asian and Hispanic patients. With a somatic mutational frequency of 0.7 (prostate cancer) to 9.9 (lung squamous cell cancer), all tumor types from white patients contained enough samples to detect a 10% mutational frequency. This is in contrast to all other racial ethnicities, for which group-specific mutations with 10% frequency would be detectable only for black patients with breast cancer. Group-specific mutations with 5% frequency would be undetectable in any racial minority, but detectable in white patients for all cancer types except lung (adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma) and colon cancer. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: It is probable, but poorly understood, that ethnic diversity is related to the pathogenesis of cancer, and may have an impact on the generalizability of findings from TCGA to racial minorities. Despite the important benefits that continue to be gained from genomic sequencing, dedicated efforts are needed to avoid widening the already pervasive gap in health care disparities.
Authors: Nick Thatcher; Alex Chang; Purvish Parikh; José Rodrigues Pereira; Tudor Ciuleanu; Joachim von Pawel; Sumitra Thongprasert; Eng Huat Tan; Kristine Pemberton; Venice Archer; Kevin Carroll Journal: Lancet Date: 2005 Oct 29-Nov 4 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Tanya Keenan; Beverly Moy; Edmund A Mroz; Kenneth Ross; Andrzej Niemierko; James W Rocco; Steven Isakoff; Leif W Ellisen; Aditya Bardia Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-09-14 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Kosj Yamoah; Michael H Johnson; Voleak Choeurng; Farzana A Faisal; Kasra Yousefi; Zaid Haddad; Ashley E Ross; Mohammed Alshalafa; Robert Den; Priti Lal; Michael Feldman; Adam P Dicker; Eric A Klein; Elai Davicioni; Timothy R Rebbeck; Edward M Schaeffer Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-07-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Alice T Shaw; Dong-Wan Kim; Kazuhiko Nakagawa; Takashi Seto; Lucio Crinó; Myung-Ju Ahn; Tommaso De Pas; Benjamin Besse; Benjamin J Solomon; Fiona Blackhall; Yi-Long Wu; Michael Thomas; Kenneth J O'Byrne; Denis Moro-Sibilot; D Ross Camidge; Tony Mok; Vera Hirsh; Gregory J Riely; Shrividya Iyer; Vanessa Tassell; Anna Polli; Keith D Wilner; Pasi A Jänne Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-06-01 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Michael S Lawrence; Petar Stojanov; Craig H Mermel; James T Robinson; Levi A Garraway; Todd R Golub; Matthew Meyerson; Stacey B Gabriel; Eric S Lander; Gad Getz Journal: Nature Date: 2014-01-05 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Cathy Samayoa; Jasmine Santoyo-Olsson; Cristian Escalera; Anita L Stewart; Carmen Ortiz; Leticia Márquez-Magaña; Aday Urias; Nayeli Gonzalez; Silvia A Cervantes; Alma Torres-Nguyen; Lorenia Parada-Ampudia; Anna M Nápoles Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2020-03 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Franklin W Huang; Juan Miguel Mosquera; Andrea Garofalo; Coyin Oh; Maria Baco; Ali Amin-Mansour; Bokang Rabasha; Samira Bahl; Stephanie A Mullane; Brian D Robinson; Saud Aldubayan; Francesca Khani; Beerinder Karir; Eejung Kim; Jeremy Chimene-Weiss; Matan Hofree; Alessandro Romanel; Joseph R Osborne; Jong Wook Kim; Gissou Azabdaftari; Anna Woloszynska-Read; Karen Sfanos; Angelo M De Marzo; Francesca Demichelis; Stacey Gabriel; Eliezer M Van Allen; Jill Mesirov; Pablo Tamayo; Mark A Rubin; Isaac J Powell; Levi A Garraway Journal: Cancer Discov Date: 2017-05-17 Impact factor: 39.397