Recent trends of "manels": gender representation among invited panelists at an international oncology conference.

BACKGROUND: Gender disparities in academic medicine are a long-acknowledged concern, particularly at medical conferences. We investigated gender representation and prevalence of "manels" (all-men panels) among invited speakers at the 2018-2021 American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meetings. METHODS: Using American Society of Clinical Oncology online programs, 2018-2021 faculty information was obtained, including perceived or self-reported gender, medical specialty, session type, and topic. Primary outcomes were percentage of manels and proportion of women panelists over time; women representation among specialties and topics were evaluated. Cochran-Armitage and Fisher's exact tests were used to analyze trends in proportion of manels and women representation over time and to compare each session type, topic, or specialty with other categories combined, respectively. RESULTS: During 2018-2021, there were 670 sessions, 81 of which (12.1%) were manels. Among 2475 panelists, 1181 (47.7%) were women. Over time, the percentage of manels significantly decreased from 17.4% in 2018 to 9.9% in 2021 (P = .030). The highest proportion of manels was observed for leadership or special sessions (17.1%, P = .419). Women panelists were underrepresented for the topics of genitourinary cancers (38.6%, P = .029) and translational or preclinical sciences (36.7%, P < .001). There was a positive trend toward improved women representation among translational or preclinical sciences (27.4% in 2018 vs 41.8% in 2021, P = .031) but not among genitourinary cancers (41.1% in 2018 vs 40.7% in 2021, P = .969). CONCLUSIONS: The number of women panelists increased during the study period, with a corresponding decrease in the proportion of manels, specifically in education and leadership or special sessions. Ongoing underrepresentation of women in genitourinary cancers and translational or preclinical topics underscores the importance of annual meeting organizers continuing to strive for diverse gender representation.

Racial and ethnic disparities in a real-world precision oncology data registry.

Biorepositories enable precision oncology research by sharing clinically annotated genomic data, but it remains unknown whether these data registries reflect the true distribution of cancers in racial and ethnic minorities. Our analysis of Project Genomics Evidence Neoplasia Information Exchange (GENIE), a real-world cancer data registry designed to accelerate precision oncology discovery, indicates that minorities do not have sufficient representation, which may impact the validity of studies directly comparing mutational profiles between racial/ethnic groups and limit generalizability of biomarker discoveries to all populations.

Association of the USPSTF Grade D Recommendation Against Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening With Prostate Cancer-Specific Mortality.

Importance: The 2012 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) Grade D recommendation against prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for all men has been controversial, with data documenting a shift to a higher stage of disease at diagnosis. The association between the Grade D recommendation and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) among contemporary cohorts, however, is unclear. Objective: To evaluate PCSM rates between 1999 and 2019, comparing trends in rates before and after the change in the 2012 USPSTF screening guideline to assess its association with PCSM. Exposure: The 2012 USPSTF Grade D recommendation against PSA screening for all men. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Wide-ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research maintained by the National Center for Health Statistics to collect data on cause of death for all individuals who died of prostate cancer in the US from 1999 to 2019. Analysis was performed from January to August 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Trends in PCSM rates were calculated from 1999 to 2012 and from 2014 to 2019, with a washout year of 2013, using linear regression, with year and binary indicator of pre-2013 and post-2013 status as interaction terms. Trends were further analyzed by age, race and ethnicity, urbanization category, and US Census region. Other measures included diagnosis of localized or metastatic prostate cancer and overall cancer mortality. Results: A total of 618 095 patients died of prostate cancer in the US from 1999 to 2019. Age-adjusted PCSM decreased linearly at a rate of -0.273 per 100 000 population per year from 1999 to 2012 and stalled at a rate of -0.009 per 100 000 per year from 2014 to 2019 (P < .001). This finding was significant among men aged 60 years or older, especially among men aged 60 to 69 years, men aged 80 years or older, and among Black men. Men aged 60 to 64 years had a decreasing, age-adjusted PCSM rate of -0.0088 per 100 000 population per year prior to 2013 followed by an increasing rate of 0.0014 per 100 000 per year. Men aged 65 to 69 years had a decreasing, age-adjusted PCSM rate of -0.024 per 100 000 population per year prior to 2013 followed by an increasing rate of 0.0011 per 100 000 population per year. Men aged 80 years or older had the largest absolute difference between rates before and after 2013 compared with all other age groups, with a difference of 0.06 for men aged 80 to 84 years and 0.07 for men 85 aged years or older. Black men had a decreasing, age-adjusted PCSM rate of -0.700 per 100 000 population per year prior to 2013 followed by a flattened rate of -0.091 per 100 000 population per year. Changes were observed across races and ethnicities, urbanization categories, and US Census regions and were accompanied by increased diagnoses of metastatic disease, which are inconsistent with mortality trends across all malignant neoplasms. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study using comprehensive PCSM data through 2019 demonstrated decreasing PCSM rates that flattened or increased after the 2012 USPSTF Grade D recommendation, suggesting that decreased PSA screening may be a factor associated with this change. This change was seen across ages, races and ethnicities, urbanization categories, and US Census regions. The updated 2018 USPSTF guideline supporting shared decision-making may reverse these trends in the coming years.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities Among Participants in Precision Oncology Clinical Studies.

Importance: Precision oncology is revolutionizing cancer care, allowing for personalized treatments to improve outcomes. Cancer research has benefitted from well-designed studies incorporating precision medicine objectives, but it is unclear if these studies are representative of the diverse cancer population. Objective: To evaluate racial and ethnic representation in breast, prostate, lung, and colorectal cancer studies incorporating precision oncology objectives in the Clinicaltrials.gov registry and compare with the incidence of these cancer types in racial and ethnic minority groups in the US population. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study identified US-based breast, prostate, lung, and colorectal cancer studies incorporating precision oncology objectives for reporting of race and ethnicity. The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results and US Census databases were used to determine cancer incidence by race and ethnicity, linked with cancer type and median year of enrollment for each trial. Data were collected and analyzed between December 2020 and April 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: The expected number of participants per study by each racial and ethnic group was calculated based on the corresponding US-based proportion. Under- and overrepresentation was defined as the ratio of the actual number of enrolled cases to the expected number of cases for each trial by cancer type. Ratios above 1 indicated overrepresentation while a ratio below 1 indicated underrepresentation. Random-effects meta-analysis of representation ratios of individual trials was performed to weigh each individual study. Results: Of 93 studies encompassing 5867 enrollees with race and ethnicity data; 4826 participants (82.3%) were non-Hispanic White, 587 (10.0%) were Black, and 238 (4.1%) were Asian. Per observed-to-expected ratios, White participants were overrepresented in all studies, with a ratio of 1.35 (95% CI, 1.30-1.37), as well as Asian participants, with a ratio of 1.46 (95% CI, 1.28-1.66), while Black participants (ratio, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.45-0.54), Hispanic participants (ratio, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.20-0.28), and American Indian and Alaskan Native participants (ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.24-0.78) were underrepresented. By individual cancer site, White participants were consistently overrepresented in all studies, while Black and Hispanic participants were underrepresented. Conclusions and Relevance: This analysis found that precision oncology studies for breast, lung, prostate, and colorectal cancers vastly underrepresent racial and ethnic minority populations relative to their cancer incidence in the US population. It is imperative to increase diversity among enrollees so that all individuals may benefit from cancer research breakthroughs and personalized treatments.