ArticleThe Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2025
Gender, race, and ethnicity in lung cancer clinical trial participation: Analysis of 253,845 patients from 2002 to 2021.
Article in The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLung cancer remains the greatest cause of cancer-related death, and multiple large studies have identified persistent racial disparities in lung cancer outcomes. In this study, we used public recording of lung cancer data on clinicaltrials.gov to sample age, gender, racial, and ethnic characteristics of participants in lung cancer clinical trials.
methodsClinicalTrials.gov, a US federal government repository of clinical trials, was queried for the term "lung cancer" and several related terms. A list of all studies matching these criteria was generated, and information regarding age, gender, ethnicity, and racial breakdown of participants was analyzed. Studies that did not report results to ClinicalTrials.gov or had at least one non-US site were excluded. Hypothesis testing was performed with the Student t test and χ
resultsRates of minority (ie, nonwhite) and female participation in US lung cancer clinical trials have increased significantly (P < .01) over the 20-year period from 2002 to 2021 but still do not represent parity with lung cancer incidence. Subset analysis by intervention offered did not show any significant differences in race, gender, or ethnic participation between studies that offered surgical intervention and those involving noninvasive interventions. National Institutes of Health-funded studies do not appear to have recruited any Hispanic participants, as assessed by reporting on ClinicalTrials.gov. The rates of race and ethnicity reporting also increased significantly over the study period.
conclusionsOur data demonstrate that there are persistent but improving racial and ethnic disparities in lung cancer clinical trials. Limitations of this study include poor reporting of results on clinicaltrials.gov. These findings demonstrate significant progress in the recruitment of minority participation, but also identify a significant role for policy changes to align participation with lung cancer incidence.
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.