Cargando…

Analysis of Female Participant Representation in Registered Oncology Clinical Trials in the United States from 2008 to 2020

BACKGROUND: Female underrepresentation in oncology clinical trials can result in outcome disparities. We evaluated female participant representation in US oncology trials by intervention type, cancer site, and funding. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were extracted from the publicly available Aggregate...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Perera, Nirosha D, Bellomo, Tiffany R, Schmidt, Walker M, Litt, Henry K, Shyu, Margaret, Stavins, MaKenna A, Wang, Max M, Bell, Alexander, Saleki, Massoud, Wolf, Katherine I, Ionescu, Ruxandra, Tao, Jacqueline J, Ji, Sunjong, O’Keefe, Ryan M, Pun, Matthew, Takasugi, Jordan M, Steinberg, Jecca R, Go, Ronald S, Turner, Brandon E, Mahipal, Amit
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10243778/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36848266
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oncolo/oyad009
_version_ 1785054495795838976
author Perera, Nirosha D
Bellomo, Tiffany R
Schmidt, Walker M
Litt, Henry K
Shyu, Margaret
Stavins, MaKenna A
Wang, Max M
Bell, Alexander
Saleki, Massoud
Wolf, Katherine I
Ionescu, Ruxandra
Tao, Jacqueline J
Ji, Sunjong
O’Keefe, Ryan M
Pun, Matthew
Takasugi, Jordan M
Steinberg, Jecca R
Go, Ronald S
Turner, Brandon E
Mahipal, Amit
author_facet Perera, Nirosha D
Bellomo, Tiffany R
Schmidt, Walker M
Litt, Henry K
Shyu, Margaret
Stavins, MaKenna A
Wang, Max M
Bell, Alexander
Saleki, Massoud
Wolf, Katherine I
Ionescu, Ruxandra
Tao, Jacqueline J
Ji, Sunjong
O’Keefe, Ryan M
Pun, Matthew
Takasugi, Jordan M
Steinberg, Jecca R
Go, Ronald S
Turner, Brandon E
Mahipal, Amit
author_sort Perera, Nirosha D
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Female underrepresentation in oncology clinical trials can result in outcome disparities. We evaluated female participant representation in US oncology trials by intervention type, cancer site, and funding. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were extracted from the publicly available Aggregate Analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov database. Initially, 270,172 studies were identified. Following the exclusion of trials using Medical Subject Heading terms, manual review, those with incomplete status, non-US location, sex-specific organ cancers, or lacking participant sex data, 1650 trials consisting of 240,776 participants remained. The primary outcome was participation to prevalence ratio (PPR): percent females among trial participants divided by percent females in the disease population per US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program data. PPRs of 0.8-1.2 reflect proportional female representation. RESULTS: Females represented 46.9% of participants (95% CI, 45.4-48.4); mean PPR for all trials was 0.912. Females were underrepresented in surgical (PPR 0.74) and other invasive (PPR 0.69) oncology trials. Among cancer sites, females were underrepresented in bladder (odds ratio [OR] 0.48, 95% CI 0.26-0.91, P = .02), head/neck (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.29-0.68, P < .01), stomach (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.23-0.70, P < .01), and esophageal (OR 0.40 95% CI 0.22-0.74, P < .01) trials. Hematologic (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.09-1.82, P < .01) and pancreatic (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.46-3.26, P < .01) trials had higher odds of proportional female representation. Industry-funded trials had greater odds of proportional female representation (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.09-1.82, P = .01) than US government and academic-funded trials. CONCLUSIONS: Stakeholders should look to hematologic, pancreatic, and industry-funded cancer trials as exemplars of female participant representation and consider female representation when interpreting trial results.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10243778
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102437782023-06-07 Analysis of Female Participant Representation in Registered Oncology Clinical Trials in the United States from 2008 to 2020 Perera, Nirosha D Bellomo, Tiffany R Schmidt, Walker M Litt, Henry K Shyu, Margaret Stavins, MaKenna A Wang, Max M Bell, Alexander Saleki, Massoud Wolf, Katherine I Ionescu, Ruxandra Tao, Jacqueline J Ji, Sunjong O’Keefe, Ryan M Pun, Matthew Takasugi, Jordan M Steinberg, Jecca R Go, Ronald S Turner, Brandon E Mahipal, Amit Oncologist Health Outcomes and Economics of Cancer Care BACKGROUND: Female underrepresentation in oncology clinical trials can result in outcome disparities. We evaluated female participant representation in US oncology trials by intervention type, cancer site, and funding. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were extracted from the publicly available Aggregate Analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov database. Initially, 270,172 studies were identified. Following the exclusion of trials using Medical Subject Heading terms, manual review, those with incomplete status, non-US location, sex-specific organ cancers, or lacking participant sex data, 1650 trials consisting of 240,776 participants remained. The primary outcome was participation to prevalence ratio (PPR): percent females among trial participants divided by percent females in the disease population per US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program data. PPRs of 0.8-1.2 reflect proportional female representation. RESULTS: Females represented 46.9% of participants (95% CI, 45.4-48.4); mean PPR for all trials was 0.912. Females were underrepresented in surgical (PPR 0.74) and other invasive (PPR 0.69) oncology trials. Among cancer sites, females were underrepresented in bladder (odds ratio [OR] 0.48, 95% CI 0.26-0.91, P = .02), head/neck (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.29-0.68, P < .01), stomach (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.23-0.70, P < .01), and esophageal (OR 0.40 95% CI 0.22-0.74, P < .01) trials. Hematologic (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.09-1.82, P < .01) and pancreatic (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.46-3.26, P < .01) trials had higher odds of proportional female representation. Industry-funded trials had greater odds of proportional female representation (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.09-1.82, P = .01) than US government and academic-funded trials. CONCLUSIONS: Stakeholders should look to hematologic, pancreatic, and industry-funded cancer trials as exemplars of female participant representation and consider female representation when interpreting trial results. Oxford University Press 2023-02-27 /pmc/articles/PMC10243778/ /pubmed/36848266 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oncolo/oyad009 Text en © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.
spellingShingle Health Outcomes and Economics of Cancer Care
Perera, Nirosha D
Bellomo, Tiffany R
Schmidt, Walker M
Litt, Henry K
Shyu, Margaret
Stavins, MaKenna A
Wang, Max M
Bell, Alexander
Saleki, Massoud
Wolf, Katherine I
Ionescu, Ruxandra
Tao, Jacqueline J
Ji, Sunjong
O’Keefe, Ryan M
Pun, Matthew
Takasugi, Jordan M
Steinberg, Jecca R
Go, Ronald S
Turner, Brandon E
Mahipal, Amit
Analysis of Female Participant Representation in Registered Oncology Clinical Trials in the United States from 2008 to 2020
title Analysis of Female Participant Representation in Registered Oncology Clinical Trials in the United States from 2008 to 2020
title_full Analysis of Female Participant Representation in Registered Oncology Clinical Trials in the United States from 2008 to 2020
title_fullStr Analysis of Female Participant Representation in Registered Oncology Clinical Trials in the United States from 2008 to 2020
title_full_unstemmed Analysis of Female Participant Representation in Registered Oncology Clinical Trials in the United States from 2008 to 2020
title_short Analysis of Female Participant Representation in Registered Oncology Clinical Trials in the United States from 2008 to 2020
title_sort analysis of female participant representation in registered oncology clinical trials in the united states from 2008 to 2020
topic Health Outcomes and Economics of Cancer Care
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10243778/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36848266
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oncolo/oyad009
work_keys_str_mv AT pereraniroshad analysisoffemaleparticipantrepresentationinregisteredoncologyclinicaltrialsintheunitedstatesfrom2008to2020
AT bellomotiffanyr analysisoffemaleparticipantrepresentationinregisteredoncologyclinicaltrialsintheunitedstatesfrom2008to2020
AT schmidtwalkerm analysisoffemaleparticipantrepresentationinregisteredoncologyclinicaltrialsintheunitedstatesfrom2008to2020
AT litthenryk analysisoffemaleparticipantrepresentationinregisteredoncologyclinicaltrialsintheunitedstatesfrom2008to2020
AT shyumargaret analysisoffemaleparticipantrepresentationinregisteredoncologyclinicaltrialsintheunitedstatesfrom2008to2020
AT stavinsmakennaa analysisoffemaleparticipantrepresentationinregisteredoncologyclinicaltrialsintheunitedstatesfrom2008to2020
AT wangmaxm analysisoffemaleparticipantrepresentationinregisteredoncologyclinicaltrialsintheunitedstatesfrom2008to2020
AT bellalexander analysisoffemaleparticipantrepresentationinregisteredoncologyclinicaltrialsintheunitedstatesfrom2008to2020
AT salekimassoud analysisoffemaleparticipantrepresentationinregisteredoncologyclinicaltrialsintheunitedstatesfrom2008to2020
AT wolfkatherinei analysisoffemaleparticipantrepresentationinregisteredoncologyclinicaltrialsintheunitedstatesfrom2008to2020
AT ionescuruxandra analysisoffemaleparticipantrepresentationinregisteredoncologyclinicaltrialsintheunitedstatesfrom2008to2020
AT taojacquelinej analysisoffemaleparticipantrepresentationinregisteredoncologyclinicaltrialsintheunitedstatesfrom2008to2020
AT jisunjong analysisoffemaleparticipantrepresentationinregisteredoncologyclinicaltrialsintheunitedstatesfrom2008to2020
AT okeeferyanm analysisoffemaleparticipantrepresentationinregisteredoncologyclinicaltrialsintheunitedstatesfrom2008to2020
AT punmatthew analysisoffemaleparticipantrepresentationinregisteredoncologyclinicaltrialsintheunitedstatesfrom2008to2020
AT takasugijordanm analysisoffemaleparticipantrepresentationinregisteredoncologyclinicaltrialsintheunitedstatesfrom2008to2020
AT steinbergjeccar analysisoffemaleparticipantrepresentationinregisteredoncologyclinicaltrialsintheunitedstatesfrom2008to2020
AT goronalds analysisoffemaleparticipantrepresentationinregisteredoncologyclinicaltrialsintheunitedstatesfrom2008to2020
AT turnerbrandone analysisoffemaleparticipantrepresentationinregisteredoncologyclinicaltrialsintheunitedstatesfrom2008to2020
AT mahipalamit analysisoffemaleparticipantrepresentationinregisteredoncologyclinicaltrialsintheunitedstatesfrom2008to2020