Increasing Racial and Ethnic Diversity in Cancer Clinical Trials: An American Society of Clinical Oncology and Association of Community Cancer Centers Joint Research Statement

Racial and Ethnic Inequities in US Oncology Clinical Trial Participation From 2017 to 2022

Importance

There is increasing recognition from regulatory agencies that racial and ethnic representation in clinical trials is inadequate and linked to health inequities. The extent of racial inequities in clinical trial participation is unclear because prior studies have synthesized enrollment data from published trials, which often do not report participant race and ethnicity.

Objective

To evaluate racial and ethnic inequities in oncology clinical trial participation in a contemporary cohort of patients with cancer before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study used a nationwide electronic health record-derived deidentified database, which includes data for approximately 280 US cancer clinics (approximately 800 sites of care). The study included Latinx, non-Latinx Black (hereinafter, Black), and non-Latinx White (reference; hereinafter, White) patients aged 18 years or older who had been diagnosed with advanced non-small cell lung cancer, metastatic colorectal cancer, metastatic breast cancer, multiple myeloma, or metastatic pancreatic cancer between January 1, 2017, and June 30, 2022 (follow-up through December 31, 2022). Data analysis was performed between August 1, 2022, and February 7, 2023.

Exposures

Electronic health record-documented race and ethnicity.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcome was oncology trial participation (ie, receipt of a clinical study drug). Stratified cause-specific hazard models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for likelihood of participation. Participation was assessed overall, by cancer type, and by period of diagnosis (2017-2019 vs 2020-2022).

Results

Of the 50 411 patients in this study, 28 878 (57.3%) were women and 21 533 (42.7%) were men. Black and Latinx patients were younger than White patients, with a median age of 65 (IQR, 57-72), 64 (IQR, 54-73), and 68 (IQR, 60-76) years, respectively. Oncology trial participation was lower among Black patients (307 of 6912 [4.4%]) and Latinx patients (166 of 3973 [4.2%]) relative to White patients (2858 of 39 526 [7.2%]) over the entire study period. Inequities in participation were observed across the 5 cancer types studied, with notably large inequities observed among Black patients (HR, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.36-0.81]) and Latinx patients (HR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.27-0.77]) with metastatic pancreatic cancer. Moreover, inequities between Black and White patients in terms of participation widened among those diagnosed in the COVID-19 era (2020-2022: HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.40-0.60] vs 1.00 [95% CI, 0.93-1.09]) relative to those diagnosed before the pandemic (2017-2019: HR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.53-0.70] vs 1 [reference]).

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this cohort study suggest that oncology trial participation was lower among Black and Latinx patients relative to White patients across all 5 cancer types examined. These findings, including potentially widening inequities in the COVID-19 era, support the need for regulatory guidance to improve enrollment of participants from historically excluded racial and ethnic populations in clinical trials.

Disparities in clinical trial participation in ovarian cancer: A real-world analysis

BACKGROUND

Significant disparities exist in clinical trial participation in non-gynecologic cancers, but little is known about disparities in ovarian cancer trial participation. Our objective was to examine patient, sociodemographic (race/ethnicity, insurance), cancer, and health system factors associated with clinical trial participation in ovarian cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer diagnosed from 2011 to 2021, using a real-world electronic health record derived database, representing around 800 sites of care in US academic and community practices. We used multivariable Poisson regression modeling to analyze the association of ever participating in an ovarian cancer clinical drug trial with patient, sociodemographic, health system, and cancer factors.

RESULTS

Of the 7540 patients with ovarian cancer, 5.0% (95% CI 4.5-5.5) ever participated in a clinical drug trial. Patients of Hispanic or Latino ethnicity were 71% less likely to participate in clinical trials (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.13-0.61) than non-Hispanic patients, and patients whose race was unknown or other than Black or White were 40% less likely to participate in clinical trials (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.52-0.89). Patients who had Medicaid insurance were 51% less likely (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.28-0.87) and those with Medicare were 32% (RR 0.48-0.97) less likely to participate in clinical trials than privately-insured patients.

CONCLUSION

In this national cohort study, only 5% of patients with ovarian cancer participated in clinical drug trials. Interventions are needed to decrease race, ethnicity, and insurance disparities in clinical trial participation.

Implementing a PROACTive Care Pathway to Empower and Support Survivors of Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

Optimal comprehensive survivorship care is insufficiently delivered. To increase patient empowerment and maximize the uptake of multidisciplinary supportive care strategies to serve all survivorship needs, we implemented a proactive survivorship care pathway for patients with early breast cancer at the end of primary treatment phase.

METHODS

Pathway components included (1) a personalized survivorship care plan (SCP), (2) face-to-face survivorship education seminars and personalized consultation for supportive care referrals (Transition Day), (3) a mobile app delivering personalized education and self-management advice, and (4) decision aids for physicians focused on supportive care needs. A mixed-methods process evaluation was performed according to the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework including administrative data review, pathway experience survey (patient, physician, and organization), and focus group. The primary objective was patient-perceived satisfaction with the pathway (predefined progression criteria for pathway continuation ≥70%).

RESULTS

Over 6 months, 321 patients were eligible for the pathway and received a SCP and 98 (30%) attended the Transition Day. Among 126 patients surveyed, 77 (66.1%) responded. 70.1% received the SCP, 51.9% attended the Transition Day, and 59.7% accessed the mobile app. 96.1% of patients were very or completely satisfied with the overall pathway, whereas perceived usefulness was 64.8% for the SCP, 90% for the Transition Day, and 65.2% for the mobile app. Pathway implementation seemed to be positively experienced by physicians and the organization.

CONCLUSION

Patients were satisfied with a proactive survivorship care pathway, and the majority reported that its components were useful in supporting their needs. This study can inform the implementation of survivorship care pathways in other centers.

Leveraging retooled clinical research infrastructure for Clinical Research Management System implementation at a large Academic Medical Center

Quality clinical research is essential for health care progress and is the mission of academic health centers. Yet ensuring quality depends on an institution's ability to measure, control, and respond to metrics of trial performance. Uninformed clinical research provides little benefit to health care, drains institutional resources, and may waste participants' time and commitment. Opportunities for ensuring high-quality research are multifactorial, including training, evaluation, and retention of research workforces; operational efficiencies; and standardizing policies and procedures. Duke University School of Medicine has committed to improving the quality and informativeness of our clinical research enterprise through investments in infrastructure with significant focus on optimizing research management system integration as a foundational element for quality management. To address prior technology limitations, Duke has optimized Advarra's OnCore for this purpose by seamlessly integrating with the IRB system, electronic health record, and general ledger. Our goal was to create a standardized clinical research experience to manage research from inception to closeout. Key drivers of implementation include transparency of research process data and generating metrics aligned with institutional goals. Since implementation, Duke has leveraged OnCore data to measure, track, and report metrics resulting in improvements in clinical research conduct and quality.

Equitable Access to Clinical Trials: How Do We Achieve It?

The mismatch between the study populations participating in oncology clinical trials and the composition of the targeted cancer population requires urgent amelioration. Regulatory requirements can mandate that trial sponsors enroll diverse study populations and ensure that regulatory revue prioritizes equity and inclusivity. A variety of projects directed at increasing accrual of underserved populations to oncology clinical trials emphasize best practices: broadened eligibility requirements for trials, simplification of trial procedures, community outreach through patient navigators, decentralization of clinical trial procedures and institution of telehealth, and funding to offset costs of travel and lodging. Substantial improvement will require major changes in culture in the educational and professional practice, research, and regulatory communities and will require major increases in public, corporate, and philanthropic funding.

Increasing Racial and Ethnic Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in Cancer Treatment Trials: Evaluation of an ASCO-Association of Community Cancer Centers Site Self-Assessment

Clinical trial participants do not reflect the racial and ethnic diversity of people with cancer. ASCO and the Association of Community Cancer Centers collaborated on a quality improvement study to enhance racial and ethnic equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) in cancer clinical trials. The groups conducted a pilot study to examine the feasibility, utility, and face validity of a two-part clinical trial site self-assessment to enable diverse types of research sites in the United States to (1) review internal data to assess racial and ethnic disparities in screening and enrollment and (2) review their policies, programs, procedures to identify opportunities and strategies to improve EDI. Overall, 81% of 62 participating sites were satisfied with the assessment; 82% identified opportunities for improvement; and 63% identified specific strategies and 74% thought the assessment had potential to help their site increase EDI. The assessment increased awareness about performance (82%) and helped identify specific strategies (63%) to increase EDI in trials. Although most sites (65%) were able to provide some data on the number of patients that consented, only two sites were able to provide all requested trial screening, offering, and enrollment data by race and ethnicity. Documenting and evaluating such data are critical steps toward improving EDI and are key to identifying and addressing disparities more broadly. ASCO and Association of Community Cancer Centers will partner with sites to better understand their processes and the feasibility of collecting screening, offering, and enrollment data in systematic and automated ways.

Clinical Trial Site Perspectives and Practices on Study Participant Diversity and Inclusion

Clinical trial participant populations fail to adequately represent target populations that drugs are intended to serve. Improving racial and ethnic diversity of clinical trial participants is essential for generalizable, quality clinical research results and ensuring social and medical equity. Site-level clinical research professionals (CRPs) have unique insights on diversity improvement strategies for clinical trial enrollment. A survey was distributed to current CRPs working at clinical research sites in the United States to describe current practices and perceptions of the impact these practices have on participant diversity. Subsequently, descriptive quantitative analysis and inductive content analysis were performed. For the practices surveyed, there are discrepancies between frequency of use and perceived impact on diversity enrollment. Common current practices include phone-based or telemedicine study visits, electronic/digital data collection, and participant compensation. However, we report travel reimbursement and services, translated documents and translator services, and adequate participant compensation as most impactful on diverse enrollment. A multistakeholder approach is necessary to enhance diversity and inclusion (D&I) of study participants. Besides large-scale solutions such as countering community distrust, actionable steps are needed by sponsors and study sites to improve D&I of trial participants. Study leadership at the sponsor, contract research organization (CRO), and site-level should create diversity plans prior to study start, and CRO and sponsor budgets should consider D&I strategies during study planning. Planning should incorporate strategies to improve D&I including adequate participant compensation, translated documents and translator services, and travel reimbursements.

Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in Radiation Oncology: A Bibliometric Analysis and Critical Review

The promotion of equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) is being increasingly pursued in health care, both in general and within radiation oncology. Because bibliometrics is a powerful tool to reveal the scientific literature on a specific topic during a certain timespan, a systematic bibliometric analysis of the documents published on EDI in radiation oncology was performed, aiming at exploring common patterns in research and emerging trends, tracking collaborations and networks, and anticipating future directions in clinical research. Standard descriptive statistics and bibliometric techniques were used in the analysis. A collaboration network and thematic map were generated from the data. Four domains were represented: (1) motor themes, including themes well developed and important for the structuring of the research field; (2) niche themes, representing the isolated topics that do not share important external links with other themes; (3) emerging themes, referring to still weakly developed topics; and (4) basic themes, including the essential topics. EDI in the profession of radiation oncology is essential to ensure that the workforce delivering radiation oncology care both draws from the full talent pool of human capital and delivers the highest quality science and clinical care to all patients. The burgeoning literature on EDI in radiation oncology suggests that a large and growing cohort of scholars within radiation oncology are dedicated to addressing these important challenges.

Diversity and transparency in gynecologic oncology clinical trials

PURPOSE

Clinical trials advance the standard of care for patients. Patients enrolled in trials should represent the population who would benefit from the intervention in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to assess whether clinical trials enrolling patients with gynecologic cancers report racial and ethnic participant composition and to examine the level of diversity in clinical trials.

METHODS

Using ClinicalTrials.gov, we identified clinical trials enrolling patients with ovarian, uterine/endometrial, cervical, vaginal, and vulvar cancers from 1988 to 2019. Race and ethnicity data were extracted from participant demographics. Descriptive statistics on race, ethnicity, cancer type, location, study status, and sponsor type were calculated. Among trials which reported race and/or ethnicity, sub-analyses were performed on composition of race and ethnicity by funding source, location, and completed study status.

RESULTS

A total of 1,882 trials met inclusion criteria; only 179 trials (9.5%) reported race information. Of these, the racial distribution of enrollees was 66.9% White, 8.6% Asian, 8.5% Black/African American, 0.4% Indian/Alaskan Native, 0.1% Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, 1.0% more than one race, and 14.5% unknown. Only 100 (5.3%) trials reported ethnicity. Except for trials enrolling patients with cervical cancer which enrolled 65.2% White and 62.1% Non-Hispanic/Latino/a patients, enrollees in trials for other gynecologic cancers were over 80% White and 88% Non-Hispanic/Latino/a. Industry funded trials enrolled higher proportions of White (68.4%) participants than non-industry funded trials (57.5%). Domestic trials report race (11.5%) and ethnicity (7.6%) at higher rates than international trials (6.9% and 2.3%, respectively). Reporting of race (1.7% vs. 13.9%) and ethnicity (1.7% vs. 11.1%) has increased over time for patients enrolled in 2000 vs. 2018.

CONCLUSION

Less than 10% of trials enrolling patients with gynecologic malignancies report racial/ethnic participant composition on ClinicalTrials.gov. Accurate reporting of participant race/ethnicity is imperative to ensuring minority representation in clinical trials.

Impact of obesity, lifestyle factors and health interventions on breast cancer survivors

The incidences of both breast cancer and obesity are rising in the UK. Obesity increases the risk of developing breast cancer in the postmenopausal population and leads to worse outcomes in those of all ages treated for early-stage breast cancer. In this review we explore the multifactorial reasons behind this association and the clinical trial evidence for the benefits of physical activity and dietary interventions in the early and metastatic patient groups. As more people with breast cancer are cured, and those with metastatic disease are living longer, cancer survivorship is becoming increasingly important. Therefore, ensuring the long-term implications of cancer and cancer treatment are addressed is vital. Although there remains a lack of definitive evidence that deliberate weight loss after a diagnosis of breast cancer reduces disease recurrence, a number of studies have reported benefits of weight loss and of physical activity. However, the limited data currently available mean that clinicians remain unclear on the optimal lifestyle advice to give their patients. Further high-quality research is needed to provide this evidence base, which will be required to optimise clinical care and for the commissioning of lifestyle interventions in the UK in breast cancer survivors.

An Assessment of the Feasibility and Utility of an ACCC-ASCO Implicit Bias Training Program to Enhance Racial and Ethnic Diversity in Cancer Clinical Trials

PURPOSE

Cancer trial participants do not reflect the racial and ethnic diversity in the population of people with cancer in the United States. As a result of multiple system-, patient-, and provider-level factors, including implicit bias, cancer clinical trials are not consistently offered to all potentially eligible patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

ASCO and ACCC evaluated the utility (pre- and post-test knowledge changes) and feasibility (completion rates, curriculum satisfaction metrics, survey questions, and interviews) of a customized online training program combined with facilitated peer-to-peer discussion designed to help research teams identify their own implicit biases and develop strategies to mitigate them. Discussion focused on (1) specific elements of the training modules; (2) how to apply lessons learned; and (3) key considerations for developing a facilitation guide to support peer-to-peer discussions in cancer clinical research settings. We evaluated discussion via a qualitative assessment.

RESULTS

Participant completion rate was high: 49 of 50 participating cancer programs completed training; 126 of 129 participating individuals completed the training (98% response rate); and 119 completed the training and evaluations (92% response rate). Training increased the mean percentage change in knowledge scores by 19%-45% across key concepts (eg, causes of health disparities) and increased the mean percentage change in knowledge scores by 10%-31% about strategies/actions to address implicit bias and diversity concerns in cancer clinical trials. Knowledge increases were sustained at 6 weeks. Qualitative evaluation validated the utility and feasibility of facilitated peer-to-peer discussion.

CONCLUSION

The pilot implementation of the training program demonstrated excellent utility and feasibility. Our evaluation affirms that an online training designed to raise awareness about implicit bias and develop strategies to mitigate biases among cancer research teams is feasible and can be readily implemented in cancer research settings.

Project Optimus, an FDA initiative: Considerations for cancer drug development internationally, from an academic perspective

Modern cancer therapeutics are increasingly targeted, bringing the promise of new and improved activity, alongside better tolerability. However, while many are indeed resulting in dramatic improvements in disease control and patient survival, short- and long-term tolerability has not always accompanied it. The choice of dose and schedule is often in the upper range of the therapeutic window, driven by the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) model of previous cytotoxic agents. There is increasing recognition that this needs to change, by taking a more holistic approach to determine the optimal dose for desired biological effects and tolerability early in clinical development. In the US, the FDA's Oncology Centre of Excellence is addressing this via the Project Optimus initiative: aiming to reform dose optimisation studies so that they can demonstrate the most appropriate dose selection. Early clinical development will need to demonstrate the dose-exposure, -pharmacodynamic, -toxicity and -activity relationships, including randomised evaluations for dose selection. Regulatory agencies outside the US are similarly exploring this. Along with Australia, Brazil, Canada, Israel, Singapore and Switzerland, the UK participates in Project Orbis, a collaborative program with the FDA to accelerate patient access to new cancer medicines through coordinated regulatory review. Close alignment with Project Optimus will be important internationally and will require changes across industry, including for academic units and small biotech. We discuss our perspective on the implications, and opportunities, for early phase oncology trials as a uniquely charity-funded drug development facility, the Centre for Drug Development within the Cancer Research UK charity.

Addressing multilevel barriers to clinical trial participation among Black and White men with prostate cancer through the PACCT study

BACKGROUND

Cancer clinical trial participation is low and inequitable. Partnering Around Cancer Clinical Trials (PACCT) addressed systemic and interpersonal barriers through an observational study of eligibility and an intervention to improve patient-physician communication and trial invitation rates.

METHODS

Physicians at two comprehensive cancer centers and Black and White men with prostate cancer participated. Patients were followed for 2 years to determine whether they became potentially eligible for an available therapeutic trial. Potentially eligible patients were randomized to receive a trials-focused Question Prompt List or usual care. Patient-physician interactions were video-recorded. Outcomes included communication quality and trial invitation rates. Descriptive analyses assessed associations between sociodemographic characteristics and eligibility and effects of the intervention on outcomes.

RESULTS

Only 44 (22.1%) of participating patients (n = 199) became potentially eligible for an available clinical trial. Patients with higher incomes were more often eligible (>$80,000 vs. <$40,000, adjusted OR = 6.06 [SD, 1.97]; $40,000-$79,000 vs. <$40,000, adjusted OR = 4.40 [SD, 1.81]). Among eligible patients randomized to the intervention (n = 19) or usual care (n = 25), Black patients randomized to the intervention reported participating more actively than usual care patients, while White intervention patients reported participating less actively (difference, 0.41 vs. -0.34). Intervention patients received more trial invitations than usual care patients (73.7% vs. 60.0%); this effect was greater for Black (80.0% vs. 30.0%) than White patients (80.0% vs. 66.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest the greatest enrollment barrier is eligibility for an available trial, but a communication intervention can improve communication quality and trial invitation rates, especially for eligible Black patients.

Physicians' use of plain language during discussions of prostate cancer clinical trials with patients

OBJECTIVE

This study described physicians' use of plain language during patient-physician cancer clinical trial discussions.

METHODS

Video-recorded clinical interactions and accompanying transcripts were taken from a larger study of communication and clinical trials (PACCT). Interactions (n = 25) were selected if they included invitations to participate in a clinical trial. We used descriptive, qualitative discourse analysis, a method that identifies language patterns at or above the sentence level. We first excerpted discussions of clinical trials, then identified instances of plain language within those discussions. Finally, we inductively coded those instances to describe physicians' plain language practices.

RESULTS

The analysis identified four plain language practices. Lexical simplification replaced medical terminology with simpler words. Patient-centered definition named, categorized, and explained complex medical terminology. Metaphor explained medical terminology by comparing it with known concepts. Finally, experience-focused description replaced medical terminology with descriptions of patients' potential physical experiences.

CONCLUSION

These plain language practices hold promise as part of effective information exchange in discussions of cancer clinical trials. Testing is needed to identify patient preferences and the extent to which these practices address patient health literacy needs.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Pending further testing, these plain language practices may be integrated into physician clinical trial and other communication training.

Disparities in access to novel systemic therapies in patients with urinary tract cancer: Propagating access, policies and resources uniformly

After several decades of therapeutic stagnation, the treatment of patients with urothelial carcinoma has met a revolutionary wave, anticipated by the advent of immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and followed by newer therapeutic options in the post-ICI setting. These achievements were made in a very short time-frame, thus making the treatment of this disease particularly susceptible to geographical health disparity due to the differences in healthcare systems and approval processes of the regulatory authorities. Furthermore, additional barriers to access innovative care are represented by a limited coverage of clinical trials availability, that is consistent in focusing on selected geographical areas, across trials and clinical settings. Here, we present the current picture of new drug approvals in urothelial carcinoma worldwide, and we also focus our considerations onto the spectrum of ongoing trial inclusion possibilities, trying to understand what are the current gaps in clinical research and routine practice, identifying a way to move forward.

Clinical Outcomes and Immune Markers by Race in a Phase I/II Clinical Trial of Durvalumab Concomitant with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Early-Stage TNBC

PURPOSE

The incidence of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is higher among Black or African American (AA) women, yet they are underrepresented in clinical trials. To evaluate safety and efficacy of durvalumab concurrent with neoadjuvant chemotherapy for stage I-III TNBC by race, we enrolled additional AA patients to a Phase I/II clinical trial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Our study population included 67 patients. The primary efficacy endpoint was pathologic complete response (pCR; ypT0/is, N0) rate. χ2 tests were used to evaluate associations between race and baseline characteristics. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess association between race and overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS). Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate associations between race and pCR, immune-related adverse events (irAE) and recurrence.

RESULTS

Twenty-one patients (31%) self-identified as AA. No significant associations between race and baseline tumor stage (P = 0.40), PD-L1 status (0.92), and stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (sTIL) count (P = 0.57) were observed. pCR rates were similar between AA (43%) and non-AA patients (48%; P = 0.71). Three-year EFS rates were 78.3% and 71.4% in non-AA and AA patients, respectively [HR, 1.451; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.524-4.017; P = 0.474]; 3-year OS was 87% and 81%, respectively (HR, 1.72; 95% CI, 0.481-6.136; P = 0.405). The incidence of irAEs was similar between AA and non-AA patients and no significant associations were found between irAEs and pathologic response.

CONCLUSIONS

pCR rates, 3-year OS and EFS after neoadjuvant immunotherapy and chemotherapy were similar in AA and non-AA patients. Toxicities, including the frequency of irAEs, were also similar.

What proportion of patients with stage 3 ovarian cancer are potentially cured following intraperitoneal chemotherapy? Analysis of the long term (≥10 years) survivors in NRG/GOG randomized clinical trials of intraperitoneal and intravenous chemotherapy in stage III ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE

Patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) alive without progression at a landmark time-point of 10 years from diagnosis are likely cured. We report the proportion of patients with Stage III EOC who were long-term disease-free survivors (LTDFS≥10 years) following either intraperitoneal (IP) or intravenous (IV) chemotherapy as well as the predictors of LTDFS.

METHODS

Data from 3 mature NRG/GOG trials (104, 114, 172) were analyzed and included demographics, clinicopathologic details, route of administration, and survival outcomes of patients living ≥10 years assessed according to the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox regression survival analysis was performed to evaluate independent prognostic predictors of LTDFS.

RESULTS

Of 1174 patients randomized, 10-year overall survival (OS) was 26% (95% CI, 23-28%) and LTDFS ≥10 years was 18% (95% CI, 16-20%). Patients with LTDFS ≥10 years had a median age of 54.6 years (p < 0.001). Younger age (p < 0.001) was the only independent prognostic factor for LTDFS≥10 years on multivariate Cox analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 18% of patients were LTDFS ≥10 years. They form the tail end of the survival curve and are likely cured. Our results provide a comparative benchmark to evaluate the impact of PARP inhibitors in 1st line maintenance trials on survival outcomes.