Sex bias in basic science and translational otolaryngology research

Sociodemographic reporting in videomics research: a review of practices in otolaryngology - head and neck surgery

OBJECTIVE

To assess reporting practices of sociodemographic data in Upper Aerodigestive Tract (UAT) videomics research in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (OHNS).

STUDY DESIGN

Narrative review.

METHODS

Four online research databases were searched for peer-reviewed articles on videomics and UAT endoscopy in OHNS, published since January 1, 2017. Title and abstract search, followed by a full-text screening was performed. Dataset audit criteria were determined by the MINIMAR reporting standards for patient demographic characteristics, in addition to gender and author affiliations.

RESULTS

Of the 57 studies that were included, 37% reported any sociodemographic information on their dataset. Among these studies, all reported age, most reported sex (86%), two (10%) reported race, and one (5%) reported ethnicity and socioeconomic status. No studies reported gender. Most studies (84%) included at least one female author, and more than half of the studies (53%) had female first/senior authors, with no significant differences in the rate of sociodemographic reporting in studies with and without female authors (any female author: p = 0.2664; first/senior female author: p > 0.9999). Most studies based in the US reported at least one sociodemographic variable (79%), compared to those in Europe (24%) and in Asia (20%) (p = 0.0012). The rates of sociodemographic reporting in journals of different categories were as follows: clinical OHNS: 44%, clinical non-OHNS: 40%, technical: 42%, interdisciplinary: 10%.

CONCLUSIONS

There is prevalent underreporting of sociodemographic information in OHNS videomics research utilizing UAT endoscopy. Routine reporting of sociodemographic information should be implemented for AI-based research to help minimize algorithmic biases that have been previously demonstrated.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

Vocal Fold Injury Produces Similar Biomechanical Outcomes in Male and Female Rabbits

OBJECTIVE

Sex differences in response to trauma and physiologic stressors have been identified in numerous organ systems but have not yet been defined in the larynx. The objective of this study was to develop an endoscopic vocal fold injury model in rabbits and to compare structural and functional outcomes between male and female subjects.

STUDY DESIGN

Basic science study.

METHODS

Two male and two female rabbits underwent unilateral endoscopic cordectomy. Animals were intubated with a size 3-0 neonatal endotracheal tube, and laryngoscopy was performed with a 4 mm Hopkins rod telescope. While visualizing, a 2 mm cupped forceps grasped and resected the mid-membranous portion of the right true vocal fold. Larynges were then harvested after 8weeks. Excised larynx phonation with high-speed videography and kymography was used to assess vibrational quality. Tissue elastic (Young's) modulus was measured by indentation.

RESULTS

Injured larynges phonated with fundamental frequencies between 237-415 Hz. In both males and females, the scarred vocal fold exhibited an increased Young's modulus compared to the contralateral nonoperated vocal fold. There were no notable differences in glottal closure pattern or vocal fold oscillation symmetry between sexes.

CONCLUSION

We have demonstrated a model for vocal fold scarring in rabbits. Vibrational and structural outcomes were similar between the examined male and female larynges.

Sex and human papillomavirus in oropharyngeal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

While the presence of human papillomavirus (HPV) is known to affect the outcomes of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC), there is a significant gap in research regarding the potential sex-based differences. This systematic review-metanalysis (SR-MA) aims to evaluate if sex is a prognostic factor in HPV-associated OPSCC.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. COCHRANE Library, CINAHL, PubMed, and Scopus were searched for English-language articles from 1966 to October 2023. Studies with multivariable analysis of overall survival (OS) based on sex were included. Adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) with a 95 % confidence interval (CI) were presented for the reported outcome. A meta-analysis of single means, proportions, and aHRs with a 95 % CI was conducted.

RESULTS

This SR-MA included 24 studies (n = 101,574). The proportion of female patients was 16.6 % [15.4 %-17.8 %]. A meta-analysis of all included studies with OS showed no significant difference in survival between male and female patients. In US-based studies, no significant difference in OS is observed between male and female patients. International studies reported a better OS for female patients (aHR = 0.68, 95 % CI, 0.48-0.95).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggests that sex does not represent a significant prognostic factor for patients affected by HPV associated OPSCC. When stratified by geographic location, findings suggests that female patients from the US with HPV OPSCC have similar OS than male patients but in international studies it suggests male patients have worse OS.

Finding the Potholes in Academic Career Pathways for Underrepresented Groups in Otolaryngology

OBJECTIVE

To assess inequities in representation among ranks and odds of promotion by race in academic otolaryngology.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

US academic medical centers.

METHODS

Demographic data was collected for medical students, residents, and faculty in the Association of American Medical Colleges and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education databases for the academic year 2020 to 2021. The rank equity index (REI) was used to make pairwise comparisons between ranks to determine groups' representation between levels. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) demonstrating the likelihood that an individual of a particular rank/race would advance in their academic career were determined.

RESULTS

Representation comparing medical students with full professors for black, Latine, and Asian otolaryngologists was below parity (REI: 0.27, 0.85, 0.85, respectively). Black (OR: 0.20, CI: 0.15, 0.26), Latine (OR: 0.61, CI: 0.50, 0.75), and Asian (OR: 0.62, CI: 0.55, 0.71) medical students all faced lower odds of becoming otolaryngology residents compared to their white counterparts. Similar findings occurred when comparing resident and assistant professor representation. American Indian/Alaskan Native (AIAN) and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (NHPI) REIs and ORs could not be assessed as only 1 self-reported AIAN and no NHPI faculty are present in the studied data.

CONCLUSION

Underrepresented in Medicine and Asian physicians faced worsening representation at each rung of the academic otolaryngology ladder. The greatest losses occurred when medical students transitioned to residents and residents transitioned to assistant professors. AIAN and NH faculty were absent in otolaryngology, indicating vital targets for recruitment efforts.

Making a 'sex-difference fact': Ambien dosing at the interface of policy, regulation, women's health, and biology

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) 2013 decision to lower recommended Ambien dosing for women has been widely cited as a hallmark example of the importance of sex differences in biomedicine. Using regulatory documents, scientific publications, and media coverage, this article analyzes the making of this highly influential and mobile 'sex-difference fact'. As we show, the FDA's decision was a contingent outcome of the drug approval process. Attending to how a contested sex-difference fact came to anchor elite women's health advocacy, this article excavates the role of regulatory processes, advocacy groups, and the media in producing perceptions of scientific agreement while foreclosing ongoing debate, ultimately enabling the stabilization of a binary, biological sex-difference fact and the distancing of this fact from its conditions of construction.

Research on Women's Health: Ready for the Future

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Office of Research on Women's Health (ORWH) was established in 1990. With the completion of the office's 30th anniversary year, we look back and recount some of the key events and overall zeitgeist that led to ORWH's formation, and how it became the focal point at the nation's primary biomedical research agency for coordinating research on science to improve the health of women. We discuss ORWH's mission and signature programs and the bold vision that drives the NIH-wide strategic, interdisciplinary, and collaborative approach to research on women's health and efforts to promote women in biomedical careers. Also discussed are several of the many scientific advances in research on the health of women, policy innovations and their effects, and career advancements made by women in medicine and related scientific fields. We also highlight key challenges for the health of women, the need to continue pushing for equity in biomedical research careers, and NIH's approach to addressing these problems to ensure progress for the next 30 years and beyond.

Sex-based Differences in Hearing Loss: Perspectives From Non-clinical Research to Clinical Outcomess

INTRODUCTION

It is estimated over 466 million people worldwide have disabling hearing loss, and untreated hearing loss is associated with poorer health outcomes. The influence of sex as a biological variable on hearing loss is not well understood, especially for differences in underlying mechanisms which are typically elucidated through non-clinical research. Although the inclusion of sex as a biological variable in clinical studies has been required since 1993, sex reporting has only been recently mandated in National Institutes of Health funded non-clinical studies.

OBJECTIVE

This article reviews the literature on recent non-clinical and clinical research concerning sex-based differences in hearing loss primarily since 1993, and discusses implications for knowledge gaps in the translation from non-clinical to clinical realms.

CONCLUSIONS

The disparity between sex-based requirements for non-clinical versus clinical research may inhibit a comprehensive understanding of sex-based mechanistic differences. Such disparities may play a role in understanding and explaining clinically significant sex differences and are likely necessary for developing robust clinical treatment options.

Sex bias and omission in neuroscience research is influenced by research model and journal, but not reported NIH funding

Neuroscience research has historically demonstrated sex bias that favors male over female research subjects, as well as sex omission, which is the lack of reporting sex. Here we analyzed the status of sex bias and omission in neuroscience research published across six different journals in 2017. Regarding sex omission, 16% of articles did not report sex. Regarding sex bias, 52% of neuroscience articles reported using both males and females, albeit only 15% of articles using both males and females reported assessing sex as an experimental variable. Overrepresentation of the sole use of males compared to females persisted (26% versus 5%, respectively). Sex bias and omission differed across research models, but not by reported NIH funding status. Sex omission differed across journals. These findings represent the latest information regarding the complex status of sex in neuroscience research and illustrate the continued need for thoughtful and informed action to enhance scientific discovery.

The radiotherapy cancer patient: female inclusive, but male dominated

Background: The sex-neutral language used in preclinical and clinical research intends to be inclusive of both the female and the male population, but the practice of data pooling prevents the detection of the impact of sex on cancer biology and response to medications and treatment. This study aimed to examine the consideration of sex as biological variable in the evaluation of radiation therapy in preclinical and clinical studies.Methods: Preclinical and clinical studies published over a 12-month period were reviewed for the reporting of cells, animal or patient sex and the inclusion of sex as a biological variable in both study design and data analysis.Results: A total of 321 articles met the inclusion criteria: 41 (13%) preclinical and 280 (87%) clinical studies. Two articles reported separate outcome data for males and females. Where the sex of participants was stated (230/280 (82%), 81% reported a larger number of male participants, compared to females. Less than half (45%) of studies used sex as a variable in data analysis. Sex disparity was not dependent on study location but may be more prominent in certain cancer sites. In preclinical studies, sex was at best stated in those reporting on animals (48% of studies).Conclusion: Referring to a radiotherapy cancer patient, the literature is female inclusive, but a gap does exist when it comes to consideration of sex in data analysis. The pooled analysis of female and male data could introduce statistical biases and prevent the identification of key sex-specific biological subtilities that do affect radiation responses.

Benefits of a factorial design focusing on inclusion of female and male animals in one experiment

Disease occurrence, clinical manifestations, and outcomes differ between men and women. Yet, women and men are most of the time treated similarly, which is often based on experimental data over-representing one sex. Accounting for persisting sex bias in biomedical research is the misconception that the analysis of sex-specific effects would double sample size and costs. We designed an analysis to test the potential benefits of a factorial study design in the context of a study including male and female animals. We chose a 2 × 2 factorial design approach to study the effect of treatment, sex, and an interaction term of treatment and sex in a hypothetical situation. We calculated the sample sizes required to detect an effect of a given magnitude with sufficient power and under different experimental setups. We demonstrated that the inclusion of both sexes in experimental setups, without testing for sex effects, requires no or few additional animals in our scenarios. These experimental designs still allow for the exploration of sex effects at low cost. In a confirmatory instead of an exploratory design, we observed an increase in total sample sizes by 33%, at most. Since the complexities associated with this mathematical model require statistical expertise, we generated and provide a sample size calculator for planning factorial design experiments. For the inclusion of sex, a factorial design is advisable, and a sex-specific analysis can be performed without excessive additional effort. Our easy-to-use calculation tool provides help in designing studies with both sexes and addresses the current sex bias in preclinical studies. KEY MESSAGES: • Both sexes should be included into animal studies. • Exploratory study of sex effects can be conducted with no or small increase in animal number. • Confirmatory analysis of sex effects requires maximum 33% more animals per study. • Our calculation tool supports the design of studies with both sexes.