Literature DB >> 31415071

Disparity of Race Reporting and Representation in Clinical Trials Leading to Cancer Drug Approvals From 2008 to 2018.

Jonathan M Loree1, Seerat Anand2, Arvind Dasari2, Joseph M Unger3, Anirudh Gothwal4, Lee M Ellis, Gauri Varadhachary2, Scott Kopetz2, Michael J Overman2, Kanwal Raghav2.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Representative racial/ethnic participation in research, especially in clinical trials that establish standards of care, is necessary to minimize disparities in outcomes and to uphold societal equity in health care.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the frequency of race reporting and proportional race representation in trials supporting US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) oncology drug approvals. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Database study of all reported trials supporting FDA oncology drug approvals granted between July 2008 and June 2018. Primary reports of trials were obtained from PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov. Food and Drug Administration approvals were identified using the FDA archives. The US population-based cancer estimates by race were calculated using National Cancer Institute-Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results and US Census databases. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcomes were the proportion of trials reporting race and the proportion of patients by race participating in trials. Secondary outcomes included race subgroup analyses reporting and gaps between race proportion in trials and the US population. Descriptive statistics, Fisher exact, and χ2 tests were used to analyze the data. Proportions and odds ratios (OR) with 95% CIs were reported.
RESULTS: Among 230 trials with a total of 112 293 participants, 145 (63.0%) reported on at least 1 race, 18 (7.8%) documented the 4 major races in the United States (white, Asian, black, and Hispanic), and 58 (25.2%) reported race subgroup analyses. Reporting on white, Asian, black, and Hispanic races was included in 144 (62.6%), 110 (47.8%), 88 (38.2%), and 23 (10.0%) trials, respectively. Between July 2008 and June 2013 vs July 2013 and June 2018, the number of trials reporting race (45 [56.6%] vs 100 [67.1%]; OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.93-2.87; P = .09) and race subgroup analysis (13 [16.1%] vs 45 [30.2%]; OR, 2.26, 95% CI, 1.16-4.67; P = .03) changed minimally and varied across races. Whites, Asians, blacks, and Hispanics represented 76.3%, 18.3%, 3.1% and 6.1% of trial participants, respectively, and the proportion for each race enrolled over time changed nominally (blacks, 3.6% vs 2.9% and Hispanics, 5.3% vs 6.7%) from July 2008 to June 2013 vs July 2013 to June 2018. Compared with their proportion of US cancer incidence, blacks (22% of expected) and Hispanics (44% of expected) were underrepresented compared with whites (98% of expected) and Asians (438% of expected). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Race and race subgroup analysis reporting occurs infrequently, and black and Hispanic races are consistently underrepresented compared with their burden of cancer incidence in landmark trials that led to FDA oncology drug approvals. Enhanced minority engagement is needed in trials to ensure the validity of results and reliable benefits to all.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 31415071      PMCID: PMC6696743          DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.1870

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Oncol        ISSN: 2374-2437            Impact factor:   31.777


  73 in total

1.  Diverse populations and enrollment in pediatric cancer clinical trials: Challenges and opportunities.

Authors:  Paula Aristizabal
Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer       Date:  2020-04-28       Impact factor: 3.167

2.  How subgroup analyses can miss the trees for the forest plots: A simulation study.

Authors:  Michael Webster-Clark; John A Baron; Michele Jonsson Funk; Daniel Westreich
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2020-06-19       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  Prostate Cancer: Community Education and Disparities in Diagnosis and Treatment.

Authors:  Bradley Carthon; Hannah C Sibold; Shannon Blee; Rebecca D Pentz
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2021-03-22

4.  Validation of a Mortality Composite Score in the Real-World Setting: Overcoming Source-Specific Disparities and Biases.

Authors:  Michelle H Lerman; Benjamin Holmes; Daniel St Hilaire; Mary Tran; Matthew Rioth; Vinod Subramanian; Alissa M Winzeler; Thomas Brown
Journal:  JCO Clin Cancer Inform       Date:  2021-04

5.  Disparities in Genetic Testing and Care among Black women with Hereditary Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Sonya Reid; Sydney Cadiz; Tuya Pal
Journal:  Curr Breast Cancer Rep       Date:  2020-05-19

6.  Participation of Black Americans in Cancer Clinical Trials: Current Challenges and Proposed Solutions.

Authors:  Muhammad Awidi; Samer Al Hadidi
Journal:  JCO Oncol Pract       Date:  2021-05

7.  Building Toward Antiracist Cancer Research and Practice: The Case of Precision Medicine.

Authors:  Jacob N Stein; Marjory Charlot; Samuel Cykert
Journal:  JCO Oncol Pract       Date:  2021-05

8.  Apples and Oranges? Considerations for EHR-Based Analyses Aggregating Data From Interventional Clinical Trials and Point-of-Care Encounters in Oncology.

Authors:  Jessica A Lavery; Margaret K Callahan; Katherine S Panageas
Journal:  JCO Clin Cancer Inform       Date:  2021-01

9.  Incorporating health equity into value assessment: frameworks, promising alternatives, and future directions.

Authors:  Vakaramoko Diaby; Askal Ali; Aram Babcock; Joseph Fuhr; Dejana Braithwaite
Journal:  J Manag Care Spec Pharm       Date:  2021-09

10.  Recommendations on eliminating racial disparities in multiple myeloma therapies: a step toward achieving equity in healthcare.

Authors:  Nicole Gormley; Lola Fashoyin-Aje; Trevan Locke; Joseph M Unger; Richard F Little; Ajay Nooka; Khalid Mezzi; Mihaela Popa-McKiver; Rachel Kobos; Yelak Biru; Tiffany H Williams; Kenneth C Anderson
Journal:  Blood Cancer Discov       Date:  2021-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.