ReviewESMO open2020
Gender and sex disparity in cancer trials.
Review in ESMO open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Landscape of clinical trials in cancer cachexia: assessment of trends from 1995-2024.BMC cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Age- and gender-based social inequalities in palliative care for cancer patients: a systematic literature review.Frontiers in public health · 2024Pooled it
- Effectiveness of Single-Tablet Combination Therapy in Improving Adherence and Persistence and the Relation to Clinical and Economic Outcomes.Journal of health economics and outcomes research · 2024Pooled it
- Adherence to Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Women in Spain: Evidence from the 2023 Spanish Health Survey.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- Female underrepresentation and adverse events reporting biases in lung cancer clinical trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of the National Cancer Center · 2026Article
- Comparison of survival outcomes between kidney transplant and dialysis in patients with previous cancer.Chinese medical journal · 2026Observational
- Sex-Based Disparities in Interval Time to Receipt of Surgical Treatment of Invasive Lung Cancer in Tennessee.Research square · 2026Article
- Multiple Primary Cancer Incidence by County-Level Smoking Prevalence among U.S. Cancer Survivors.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026Article
- Sex Disparity in Cancer and Non-cancer Mortality among Korean Cancer Survivors.Journal of cancer prevention · 2025Article
- Potential for Algorithmic Bias in Clinical Decision Instrument Development.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Impact of treatment history on drug resistance of metastatic colorectal cancer organoids.iScience · 2025Article
- Diversity and inclusivity in oncology: A narrative review and orientation for institutional measures in Germany.Translational oncology · 2025Review
- Gender Disparity in Enrollment in Clinical Trials for Hairy Cell Leukemia Treatments in the Last 40 Years.EJHaem · 2025Article
- Childcare Barriers and Appointment Nonadherence Among Women in a Safety-Net Health System.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Clinical characteristics and prognostic factors analysis of patients stricken with double primary breast and ovarian cancer based on the SEER database.Gland surgery · 2025Article
- Disparities in US Lung Cancer Clinical Trial Enrollment.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2024Article
- SexAnnoDB, a knowledgebase of sex-specific regulations from multi-omics data of human cancers.Biology of sex differences · 2024Article
- Descriptive Analysis of Adverse Events Reported for New Multiple Myeloma Medications Using FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) Databases from 2015 to 2022.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Equitable inclusion of diverse populations in oncology clinical trials: deterrents and drivers.ESMO open · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study population within phase III clinical trials leading to approval of new cancer agents should ideally more closely mirror the population who will ultimately receive these agents. Although the number of females participating in clinical trials has increased over the past several decades, females are still under-represented in preclinical studies, in early phase clinical trials and even in some later phase cancer clinical trials. In the USA, this is particularly true for women from minority populations and elderly women. In this review, we review gender and sex disparities in cancer trials, the reasons for these disparities, the barriers to clinical trial enrolment and ways to improve diversity in cancer clinical trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.