SynthesisJournal of the National Cancer Institute2024
Racial and ethnic disparities in genomic testing among lung cancer patients: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 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.
- Clinical harm from failure to deploy personalized medicine for patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2026Article
- Access to Guideline-Concordant Oncology Genomic Testing: A Qualitative Study of Black Cancer Patients and Oncology Providers.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- 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
- Equity and Opportunities in Lung Cancer Care-Addressing Disparities, Challenges, and Pathways Forward.Cancers · 2025Review
- Exploring Demographic Representation and Reporting in Lung Cancer Clinical Trials with Canadian Sites from 2013 to 2023.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Review
- Genetic Profiling of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in Moroccan Patients by Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
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
Abstract
backgroundRacial and ethnic disparities in genomic testing could exacerbate disparities in access to precision cancer therapies and survival-particularly in the context of lung cancer where genomic testing has been recommended for the past decade. However, prior studies assessing disparities in genomic testing have yielded mixed results.
methodsWe conducted a systemic review to examine racial and ethnic disparities in the use of genomic testing among lung cancer patients in the United States. Two comprehensive searches in PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were conducted (September 2022, May 2023). Original studies that assessed rates of genomic testing by race or ethnicity were included. Findings were narratively synthesized by outcome.
resultsThe search yielded 2739 unique records, resulting in 18 included studies. All but 1 study were limited to patients diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer. Diagnosis years ranged from 2007 to 2022. Of the 18 studies, 11 found statistically significant differences in the likelihood of genomic testing by race or ethnicity; in 7 of these studies, testing was lower among Black patients compared with White or Asian patients. However, many studies lacked adjustment for key covariates and included patients with unclear eligibility for testing.
conclusionsA majority of studies, though not all, observed racial and ethnic disparities in the use of genomic testing among patients with lung cancer. Heterogeneity of study results throughout a period of changing clinical guidelines suggests that minoritized populations-Black patients in particular-have faced additional barriers to genomic testing, even if not universally observed at all institutions.
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.