ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute2025
The role of regional and practice trial sites in nonrepresentative randomized cancer trial enrollment.
Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Diversity, equity, and inclusion as scientific rigor: progress during challenging times.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Representative trials are critical to advancing cancer treatment, yet little is known about how geographic siting contributes to nonrepresentative enrollment. Using patient-level data, we determined how the choice of trial-enrolling regions and practices impacts representativeness. We created a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare cohort of people aged 65 years and older with lung, breast, pancreatic, or renal cancer (2014-2019). We identified randomized cancer drug trial participants and determined their prevalence by advanced age (those aged 75 years and older), sex, race, ethnicity, and rural residence in the full cohort, trial-enrolling regions, trial-enrolling practices, and trials. The choice of region and practice contributed to more than 50% of the underenrollment of Black, Hispanic, and rural patients. Cancer trials enrolled 45% fewer Black patients than expected with proportional representation. Trial recruitment in regions and practices with proportionately fewer Black patients accounted for 27% and 35% of this disparity, respectively. These findings suggest that diversifying cancer trials requires changing the regions and practices referring and enrolling patients.
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.