ArticleJournal of racial and ethnic health disparities2024
Disparities in US Lung Cancer Clinical Trial Enrollment.
Article in Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- How exclusion criteria can hinder eligibility for lung cancer studies among different racial and ethnic groups.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors in a diverse patient population: a single-institution experience.Ecancermedicalscience · 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
- The status quo and influencing factors of clinical research nurses' participation in preoperative blood sampling in patients with pulmonary nodules.Journal of research in nursing : JRN · 2024Article
- Predictors of willingness to participate in COVID-19 clinical trials among Black and Latino adults.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDisparities within clinical trial enrollment are well-documented, reducing the generalizability of results. Although nearly 30 years have passed since Congress passed the NIH Revitalization Act to encourage the participation of minoritized populations in clinical trials, these patients continue to be underrepresented. This study aimed to investigate lung cancer clinical trial enrollment disparities for race/ethnicity, sex, and age.
methodsWe queried the National Institutes of Health: US National Library of Medicine database of clinical trials for all US-based lung cancer clinical trials completed between 2004 and 2021 and collected data on race and ethnicity, gender, and age breakdown. This data was compared to Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database data. Independent sample t-tests and Kruskal-Wallis's approach were used to analyze the data.
resultsOf 311 eligible trials with exclusive US enrollment, 136 (44%) reported race and ethnicity breakdown for the patient cohort representing 9869 patients. Hispanic, Non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska Native, Non-Hispanic Black, and Non-Hispanic Unreported participants were underrepresented (p = 0.001, p = 0.005, p = 0.014, p = 0.002, respectively). Non-Hispanic White participants were overrepresented (p = 0.018). Disparities worsened from 2017 to 2021 for Hispanic patients (p = 0.03). No significant differences were found for sex or age.
conclusionsDisparities for clinical lung cancer trial enrollment have not shown statistically significant improvement since 2004, and representation remains unequal, especially for racial and ethnic minorities.
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.