RESUMO
We analyzed the inclusion of sex and/or gender (S/G) in Head and Neck Cancer (HNC) clinical studies, through inspecting ClinicalTrials.gov (AACT) and the mention of Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) on a specific subgroup, namely oral cavity, larynx and oropharynx. Only 5% of HNC studies mention S/G as a planned analytical variable. Proportionally more observational studies treated S/G as an analytical variable than interventional studies (10% vs 5%, P-value ≤ 0.001), 8% of studies that mentioned S/G involved more than 100 subjects while 4% less than 100 (P-value ≤ 0.001). In randomized protocols, S/G was mentioned more in studies with a planned sample of more than 100 patients and including HPV status (P-value < 0.05). Small controlled studies have lower mention of S/G as an analytical variable than uncontrolled studies (4% and 10%, respectively among studies with less than 100 subjects). Significantly greater mention of S/G as an analytical variable is observed in controlled and randomized studies with a sample size greater than 100 subjects. HPV was mentioned in only 18% of oral cavity-larynx-oropharynx studies. Interventional studies do not regularly account for S/G during HNC study design. Thus, although fundamental, in studies concerning HNC the S/G variable is often not considered. In trials published in scientific journals (P-value = 0.01) and in more recent clinical trials (P-value = 0.002), S/G is taken more into account suggesting an increasing awareness on its importance. However, the need to systematically include S/G in study design clearly emerges, to better highlight sex-related differences in disease incidence and prognosis and best imbue science and medicine with the proper biological and cultural differences.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: In 2009, in a European survey, around a quarter of Europeans reported witnessing discrimination or harassment at their workplace. The parity committee from the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) designed a questionnaire survey to investigate forms of discrimination with respect to country, gender and ethnicity among medical professionals in hospitals and universities carrying out activities in the clinical microbiology (CM) and infectious diseases (ID) fields. DESIGN: The survey consisted of 61 questions divided into five areas (sociodemographic, professional census and environment, leadership and generic) and ran anonymously for nearly 3 months on the ESCMID website. SUBJECTS: European specialists in CM/ID. RESULTS: Overall, we included 1274 professionals. The majority of respondents (68%) stated that discrimination is present in medical science. A quarter of them reported personal experience with discrimination, mainly associated with gender and geographic region. Specialists from South-Western Europe experienced events at a much higher rate (37%) than other European regions. The proportion of women among full professor was on average 46% in CM and 26% in ID. Participation in high-level decision-making committees was significantly (>10 percentage points) different by gender and geographic origin. Yearly gross salary among CM/ID professionals was significantly different among European countries and by gender, within the same country. More than one-third of respondents (38%) stated that international societies in CM/ID have an imbalance as for committee member distribution and speakers at international conferences. CONCLUSIONS: A quarter of CM/ID specialists experienced career and research discrimination in European hospitals and universities, mainly related to gender and geographic origin. Implementing proactive policies to tackle discrimination and improve representativeness and balance in career among CM/ID professionals in Europe is urgently needed.