Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37151163›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2023

Investigating potential disparities in clinical trial eligibility and enrollment at an NCI-designated comprehensive cancer center.

Monica A Patel, Jennifer L Shah, Floyd John Brinley, Paul H Abrahamse, Christine M Veenstra, Anne F Schott

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Monica A PatelDepartment of Medicine, Division of Hematology, Medical Oncology, and Palliative Care, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Jennifer L ShahDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3847-8865
Floyd John BrinleyBio-techne: ProteinSimple Inc, San Jose, California, USA.
Paul H AbrahamseDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Christine M VeenstraDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9947-7156
Anne F SchottDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
University of Michigan · USProteinSimple (United States) · USUniversity of Wisconsin System · US

Funding

XenograftP30CA046592 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI THEODORE S LAWRENCE · 1988 to 2026
$178.2M
ONCOLOGY RESEARCH TRAINING GRANTT32CA009357 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI Qing Li · 1987 to 2026
$8.6M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA046592NCI NIH HHS T32 CA009357
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough barriers to trial accrual are well-reported, few studies have explored trial eligibility and trial offers as potential drivers of disparities in cancer clinical trial enrollment.

methodsWe identified patients with gastrointestinal (GI) or head/neck (HN) malignancies who were seen as new patients at the University of Michigan Health Rogel Cancer Center in 2016. By exhaustive review of the electronic medical record, we assessed the primary outcomes: (1) eligibility for, (2) documented offer of, and (3) enrollment in a clinical trial. All 41 of the clinical trials available to these patients were considered. Independent variables included clinical and non-clinical patient-related factors. We assessed associations between these variables and the primary outcomes using multivariable regression.

resultsOf 1446 patients, 43% were female, 15% were over age 75, 6% were Black. 305 (21%) patients were eligible for a clinical trial. Among eligible patients, 154 (50%) had documentation of a trial offer and 90 (30%) enrolled. Among the GI cohort, bivariate analyses demonstrated that older age was associated with decreased trial eligibility. Bivariate analyses also demonstrated that Black race was associated with increased trial offer. After adjustment, patients 75 or older were less likely to be eligible for a clinical trial in the GI cohort; however, we found no significant associations between race and any of the outcomes after adjustment. Among eligible GI patients, we found no significant associations between non-clinical factors and enrollment. Among the HN cohort, bivariate analyses demonstrated that female sex, older age, Black race, and unpartnered marital status were associated with decreased likelihood of trial offer; however, we found no significant associations between race, age, and marital status and any of the outcomes after adjustment. We found no significant associations between non-clinical factors and eligibility after adjustment; however, women were less likely to be offered and to enroll in a clinical trial in the HN cohort.

conclusionFactors associated with eligibility, documented offer, and enrollment differed between disease site cohorts at our institution. Future work is needed to ensure the equitable inclusion of women and elderly patients in clinical trials.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicNeoplasmsPatient SelectionAgedBlack or African AmericanFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMaleclinical trialsdisparitiespatient eligibilitytrial enrollment

Identifiers

PMID37151163
PMCPMC10278521
OpenAlexW4375844494

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.