Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Meta-analysis of sex and racial subgroup participation rates and differential treatment effects for trials in solid tumor malignancies leading to US Food and Drug Administration registration between 2010 and 2021.
Wilson, Brooke E; Nadler, Michelle B; Desnoyers, Alexandra; Booth, Christopher M; Amir, Eitan.
Afiliação
  • Wilson BE; Department of Oncology, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
  • Nadler MB; Division of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen's Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
  • Desnoyers A; School of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
  • Booth CM; Department of Medical Oncology, Princess Margaret Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
  • Amir E; Centre des Maladies du Sein Deschênes-Fabia, Hôpital Saint-Sacrement, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Quebec-Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.
Cancer ; 130(2): 276-286, 2024 01.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37751315
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

The lack of sociodemographic diversity in clinical trials limits the generalizability of results. The authors examined participation rates and effect modification by sex and race in oncology trials.

METHODS:

The authors extracted outcome data stratified by sex and race for registration trials supporting US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval (2010-2021). Effect modification by race and sex was examined using quantitative and qualitative methods. A random-effects meta-analysis and pairwise comparison of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) outcomes was conducted by sex and race.

RESULTS:

Ninety-five trials with 123 end points and 54,365 patients provided information on sex. Trial patients were more often male (n = 35,482; 65% vs. 56% male patients in US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results [SEER] data), although the proportion of male patients was similar after adjusting by tumor type (60% in FDA data vs. 58% in SEER data). There was no difference in pooled outcomes among male versus female patients (PFS hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-1.07; p = .89; OS hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.93-1.07; p = .90). In total, 111 trials including 74,217 patients provided information on race, and 68% of patients identified as White, compared with 72.3% in US SEER incidence data. Black patients were under-represented compared with US SEER incidence data, although ethnicity was poorly reported throughout the data set. In the authors' network meta-analysis by race, there were no statistically significant differences in PFS or OS outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS:

No significant differences in PFS or OS outcomes were identified when the analyses were stratified by sex or race. Certain racial minorities remain under-represented, and clearer reporting of race and ethnicity is needed. Representation of female patients in FDA trials is similar to that in SEER data after adjusting for tumor type.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias Tipo de estudo: Qualitative_research / Systematic_reviews Limite: Female / Humans / Male País/Região como assunto: America do norte Idioma: En Revista: Cancer Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias Tipo de estudo: Qualitative_research / Systematic_reviews Limite: Female / Humans / Male País/Região como assunto: America do norte Idioma: En Revista: Cancer Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article