SynthesisCancer causes & control : CCC2022
Race reporting and disparities regarding clinical trials in bladder cancer: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Cancer causes & control : CCC, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring Racial Disparities in Awareness and Perceptions of Oncology Clinical Trials: Cross-Sectional Analysis of Baseline Data From the mychoice Study.JMIR cancer · 2024Trial
- Representation in robotic surgery randomised controlled trials: a systematic review.BMJ connections surgery · 2026Article
- The role of social, economic, and medical marginalization in cancer clinical trial participation inequities: A systematic review.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Review
- Meta-Analysis of Age, Sex, and Race Disparities in the Era of Contemporary Urothelial Carcinoma Treatment.Cancers · 2024Review
- Mitochondrial reprogramming by activating OXPHOS via glutamine metabolism in African American patients with bladder cancer.JCI insight · 2024Article
- Racial Differences in the Detection Rate of Bladder Cancer Using Blue Light Cystoscopy: Insights from a Multicenter Registry.Cancers · 2024Article
- Diversity, equity, and inclusion in genitourinary clinical trials leading to FDA novel drug approval: An assessment of the FDA center for drug evaluation and research drug trials snapshot.Current problems in cancer · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 12 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo systematically review the literature to investigate racial disparities among bladder cancer clinical trial enrollees.
methodsA systematic review was conducted using Ovid, MEDLINE® to identify clinical trials between 1970 and 2020. Articles were reviewed and were included if they assessed race in their outcomes reporting among bladder cancer patients enrolled in clinical trials. The review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statement.
resultsWe identified 544 clinical trials meeting our initial search criteria, with only 24 (4.4%) studies reporting racial demographic data. Enrollees were largely Caucasian (81-98%), with a strikingly small proportion of enrolled patients consisting of African-Americans (2-8%) and Hispanics (2-5%). Only one of the studies reported results on the efficacy and safety/tolerability of the tested treatment separately for racial groups and performed analyses stratified by race.
conclusionRace is poorly studied in bladder cancer clinical trials. Trial cohorts may not reflect multicultural populations. The potential association between race and efficacy, safety or tolerability of the tested interventions is unknown. Given the up to twofold increase in bladder cancer-specific death among African-Americans, further research is needed to address the impact of race in clinical trials, while encompassing socioeconomic factors and disease risk factor exposures.
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.