ArticleJAMA network open2021
Racial and Ethnic Disparities Among Participants in Precision Oncology Clinical Studies.
Article in JAMA network open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 126 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
126 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Lifestyle interventions with dietary strategies after breast cancer diagnosis: a systematic review.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Exploring Racial Disparities in Awareness and Perceptions of Oncology Clinical Trials: Cross-Sectional Analysis of Baseline Data From the mychoice Study.JMIR cancer · 2024Trial
- Age, Body Mass Index, Tumor Subtype, and Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Breast Cancer Survival.JAMA network open · 2023Trial
- Guideline concordance of stage IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer treatment in the Australian setting.Internal medicine journal · 2026Article
- Pre-existing Comorbidities as Potential Risk Modifiers for New-Onset Myocarditis and Pericarditis following mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination in Males Aged 18-30 in the United States: A Disproportionality Analysis using VAERS Spontaneous Reporting Data.Drugs - real world outcomes · 2026Article
- Findings from the 2025 AMCP Foundation Symposium: Health Optimization 2.0.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2026Article
- Participant Heterogeneity in the Prostate Cancer Biobank of the NRG: An Obstacle to Broadening the Reach of Precision Oncology.JCO precision oncology · 2026Article
- Molecular Tumor Board-Directed Treatment for Patients with Advanced-Stage Solid Tumors: A Case-Control Real-World Study.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Observational
- Article
- Consideration of Enrollment Rates of Asian, Asian Pacific Islander, and Hispanic Patients in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Trials.Targeted oncology · 2026Article
- Patient and Provider Experiences With Precision Oncology: Qualitative Descriptive Study at the Department of Veterans Affairs.JMIR cancer · 2026Article
- Mitigating Algorithmic Bias in Cancer Site Classification Models.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2026Article
- Convergence of machine learning and genomics for precision oncology.Nature reviews. Cancer · 2026Review
- Virtual deliberation on genetics research: report-out of key themes from Diné (Navajo) research & healthcare professionals.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
- MRI-based texture analysis for breast cancer subtype classification in a multi-ethnic population.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Article
- Putative breast cancer risk variants from populations of South Asian ancestry are under-represented in public variant classification databases.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2026Article
- Strategies to build trustworthiness and increase diversity in colorectal cancer biospecimen research: a multi-phase, multi-site qualitative study.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
- Regional, demographic and temporal trends in anemia and malignant cancer-related mortality in U.S. older adults: a nationwide CDC WONDER analysis (1999-2020).Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
66 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Precision oncology is revolutionizing cancer care, allowing for personalized treatments to improve outcomes. Cancer research has benefitted from well-designed studies incorporating precision medicine objectives, but it is unclear if these studies are representative of the diverse cancer population. Objective: To evaluate racial and ethnic representation in breast, prostate, lung, and colorectal cancer studies incorporating precision oncology objectives in the Clinicaltrials.gov registry and compare with the incidence of these cancer types in racial and ethnic minority groups in the US population. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study identified US-based breast, prostate, lung, and colorectal cancer studies incorporating precision oncology objectives for reporting of race and ethnicity. The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results and US Census databases were used to determine cancer incidence by race and ethnicity, linked with cancer type and median year of enrollment for each trial. Data were collected and analyzed between December 2020 and April 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: The expected number of participants per study by each racial and ethnic group was calculated based on the corresponding US-based proportion. Under- and overrepresentation was defined as the ratio of the actual number of enrolled cases to the expected number of cases for each trial by cancer type. Ratios above 1 indicated overrepresentation while a ratio below 1 indicated underrepresentation. Random-effects meta-analysis of representation ratios of individual trials was performed to weigh each individual study. Results: Of 93 studies encompassing 5867 enrollees with race and ethnicity data; 4826 participants (82.3%) were non-Hispanic White, 587 (10.0%) were Black, and 238 (4.1%) were Asian. Per observed-to-expected ratios, White participants were overrepresented in all studies, with a ratio of 1.35 (95% CI, 1.30-1.37), as well as Asian participants, with a ratio of 1.46 (95% CI, 1.28-1.66), while Black participants (ratio, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.45-0.54), Hispanic participants (ratio, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.20-0.28), and American Indian and Alaskan Native participants (ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.24-0.78) were underrepresented. By individual cancer site, White participants were consistently overrepresented in all studies, while Black and Hispanic participants were underrepresented. Conclusions and Relevance: This analysis found that precision oncology studies for breast, lung, prostate, and colorectal cancers vastly underrepresent racial and ethnic minority populations relative to their cancer incidence in the US population. It is imperative to increase diversity among enrollees so that all individuals may benefit from cancer research breakthroughs and personalized treatments.
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.