ArticleJCO oncology practice2024
Racial and Ethnic Inequities at the Practice and Physician Levels in Timely Next-Generation Sequencing for Patients With Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Treated in the US Community Setting.
Article in JCO oncology practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of Characteristics and Outcomes of Patients With Metastatic Prostate Cancer With and Without Next-Generation Sequencing Testing.JCO oncology practice · 2026Article
- Survival Determinants and Sociodemographic Disparities in Early-Onset Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- A rising tide lifts all boats in the personalized cancer care continuum for mNSCLC: bridging inequities in NGS fosters equity in targeted treatment.The oncologist · 2025Article
- Targeted Therapeutic Approaches for the Treatment of Cancer: The Future Is Bright.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Article
- Increasing the Impact and Value of Laboratory Medicine Through Effective and AI-Assisted Communication.EJIFCC · 2025Review
- Disparities in Next-Generation Genetic Sequencing Among Individuals with Cancer.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRacial/ethnic inequities in next-generation sequencing (NGS) were examined for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) at the practice and physician levels to inform policies to improve equitable quality of care.
methodsThis retrospective study used a nationwide electronic health record-derived deidentified database for patients with aNSCLC diagnosed between April 2018 and March 2022 in the community setting. Timely NGS was an NGS result between initial diagnosis and ≤60 days after advanced diagnosis. We studied how inequities were driven by (1) non-Latinx Black (Black) and Latinx patient under-representation at high testing practices versus (2) Black and Latinx patients being tested at lower rates than non-Latinx White (White) patients, even at the same practice. We defined these two concepts as across inequity and within inequity, respectively, with total inequity as their summation. Mean percentage point inequities were estimated using a Bayesian approach.
resultsA total of 12,045 patients (9,981 White; 1,528 Black; 536 Latinx) met study criteria. At the practice level, versus White patients, the mean percentage point difference in NGS testing total inequity was 7.49 for Black and 8.26 for Latinx. Within- and across-practice inequities contributed to total inequity in NGS testing for Black (48%
conclusionWithin-practice, across-practice, and across-physician inequities were main contributors to total inequity in NGS testing, requiring a suite of interventions to effectively address inequities.
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.