Racialising genetic risk: assumptions, realities, and recommendations

Exploring discrimination and racism in healthcare: a qualitative phenomenology study of Dutch persons with migration backgrounds

OBJECTIVE

To explore and characterise the discrimination and racism experienced in healthcare from the perspective of Dutch patients with a migration background.

DESIGN

This was a qualitative phenomenological study incorporating an inductive thematic analysis of the answers provided to a free form online survey. Descriptive and differential analyses were conducted for the closed-ended questions.

SETTING

This study used an online survey distributed in Dutch about experiences of discrimination and racism in healthcare to the general population in the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

The survey was completed by 188 participants (Mage=39.89, SDage=10.2). Of whom 80 (Mage=37.92, SDage=10.87) met the eligibility criteria for thematic analysis (ie, has a migration background or a relative with a migration background and experienced discrimination in healthcare based on their background) and were thus included in the analysis.

RESULTS

From the total sample, women, relative to men, were 2.31 times more likely to report experiencing healthcare discrimination (OR=2.31; 95% CI 1.23 to 4.37). The majority of the participants (60.1%) had a Moroccan or Turkish background. Six themes were identified relating to experienced discrimination in healthcare based on one's migration background: (1) explicit discrimination, (2) prejudice, (3) not being taken seriously, (4) discriminatory behaviour, (5) language barriers and (6) pain attribution to cultural background. Some participants reported that their attire or religion was linked to their migration background, thus contributing to their experiences of discrimination.

CONCLUSION

Dutch patients with a migration background may experience discrimination based on their ethnic identity or other factors related to their backgrounds, such as their faith, culture and skin colour. Discrimination manifests as intersectional and may take different forms (eg, discrimination based on the intersection between race and gender). Therefore, healthcare discrimination may increase health inequities and lead to unequal access to healthcare services. Implicitly or explicitly discriminating against patients is immoral, unethical, illegal and hazardous for individual and public health. Further research on the magnitude of discrimination in healthcare and its relation to health is needed.

Clinicians' perspectives on race-specific guidelines for hypertensive treatment

Despite the general consensus that there is no biological basis to race, racial categorization is still used by clinicians to guide diagnosis and treatment plans for certain diseases. In medicine, race is commonly used as a rough proxy for unmeasured social, environmental, and genetic factors. The American College of Cardiology's Eighth Joint National Committee's (JNC 8) guidelines for the treatment of hypertension provide race-specific medication recommendations for Black versus non-Black patients, without strong evidence for race-specific physiological differences in drug response. Clinicians practicing family or geriatric medicine (n = 21) were shown a video of a mock hypertensive patient with genetic ancestry test results that could be viewed as discordant with their phenotype and self-identified race. After viewing the videos, we conducted in-depth interviews to examine how clinicians value and prioritize different cues about race -- namely genetic ancestry data, phenotypic appearance, and self-identified racial classifications - when making treatment decisions in the context of race-specific guidelines, particularly in situations when patients claim mixed-race or complex racial identities. Results indicate that clinicians inconsistently follow the race-specific guidelines for patients whose genetic ancestry test results do not match neatly with their self-identified race or phenotypic features. However, many clinicians also emphasized the importance of clinical experience, side effects, and other factors in their decision making. Clinicians' definitions of race, categorization of the patient's race, and prioritization of racial cues greatly varied. The existence of the race-specific guidelines clearly influences treatment decisions, even as clinicians' express uncertainty about how to incorporate consideration of a patient's genetic ancestry. In light of widespread debate about removal of race from medical diagnostics, researchers should revisit the clinical justification for maintaining these race-specific guidelines. Based on our findings and prior studies indicating a lack of convincing evidence for biological differences by race in medication response, we suggest removing race from the JNC 8 guidelines to avoid risk of perpetuating or exacerbating health disparities in hypertension.

Understanding the inclusion and participation of adults from Black African Diaspora Communities (BAFDC) in health and care research in the UK: a realist review protocol

INTRODUCTION

People from Black African Diaspora Communities (BAFDC) experience poorer health outcomes, have many long-term conditions and are persistently under-represented in health and care research. There is limited focus on programmes, or interventions that support inclusion and participation of people from BAFDC in research. Through coproduction, this realist review seeks to provide a programme theory explaining what context and mechanisms may be required, to produce outcomes that facilitate inclusion and participation for people from BAFDC in health and care research, in the UK.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A group of people from BAFDC with lived and professional experience, representing all levels of the health and care research system, will coproduce a realist review with a team of African-Caribbean, white British and white British of Polish origin health and care researchers. They will follow Pawson's five steps: (1) shaping the scope of the review; (2) searching for evidence; (3) document selection and appraisal; (4) data extraction and (5) data synthesis. The coproduction group will help to map the current landscape, identifying key issues that may inhibit or facilitate inclusion. Data will be extracted, analysed and synthesised following realist logic analysis, identifying and explaining how context and mechanisms are conceptualised in the literature and the types of contextual factors that exist and impact on inclusion and participation. Findings will be reported in accordance with Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis Evolving Standards .

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The coproduction group will agree an ethical approach considering accountability, responsibility and power dynamics, by establishing a terms of reference, taking a reflexive approach and coproducing an ethical framework. Findings will be disseminated to BAFDC and the research community through arts-based methods, peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations, agreeing a coproduced strategy for dissemination. Ethical review is not required.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42024517124.

The epidemiology of Parkinson's disease

The epidemiology of Parkinson's disease shows marked variations in time, geography, ethnicity, age, and sex. Internationally, prevalence has increased over and above demographic changes. There are several potential reasons for this increase, including the decline in other competing causes of death. Whether incidence is increasing, especially in women or in many low-income and middle-income countries where there is a shortage of high-quality data, is less certain. Parkinson's disease is more common in older people and men, and a variety of environmental factors have been suggested to explain why, including exposure to neurotoxic agents. Within countries, there appear to be ethnic differences in disease risk, although these differences might reflect differential access to health care. The cause of Parkinson's disease is multifactorial, and involves genetic and environmental factors. Both risk factors (eg, pesticides) and protective factors (eg, physical activity and tendency to smoke) have been postulated to have a role in Parkinson's disease, although elucidating causality is complicated by the long prodromal period. Following the establishment of public health strategies to prevent cardiovascular diseases and some cancers, chronic neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson's disease and dementia are gaining a deserved higher priority. Multipronged prevention strategies are required that tackle population-based primary prevention, high-risk targeted secondary prevention, and Parkinson's disease-modifying therapies for tertiary prevention. Future international collaborations will be required to triangulate evidence from basic, applied, and epidemiological research, thereby enhancing the understanding and prevention of Parkinson's disease at a global level.

Considerations, Caveats, and Suggestions for the Use of Polygenic Scores for Social and Behavioral Traits

Polygenic scores (PGS) are increasingly being used for prediction of social and behavioral traits, but suffer from many methodological, theoretical, and ethical concerns that profoundly limit their value. Primarily, these scores are derived from statistical correlations, carrying no inherent biological meaning, and thus may capture indirect effects. Further, the performance of these scores depends upon the diversity of the reference populations and the genomic panels from which they were derived, which consistently underrepresent minoritized populations, leading to poor fit when applied to diverse groups. There is also inherent danger of eugenic applications for the information gained from these scores, and general risk of misunderstandings that could lead to stigmatization for underrepresented groups. We urge extreme caution in use of PGS particularly for social/behavioral outcomes fraught for misinterpretation, with potential harm for the minoritized groups least likely to benefit from their use.

Race-Specific Spirometry Equations Do Not Improve Models of Dyspnea and Quantitative Chest CT Phenotypes

BACKGROUND

Race-specific spirometry reference equations are used globally to interpret lung function for clinical, research, and occupational purposes, but inclusion of race is under scrutiny.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does including self-identified race in spirometry reference equation formation improve the ability of predicted FEV1 values to explain quantitative chest CT abnormalities, dyspnea, or Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) classification?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Using data from healthy adults who have never smoked in both the National Health and Nutrition Survey (2007-2012) and COPDGene study cohorts, race-neutral, race-free, and race-specific prediction equations were generated for FEV1. Using sensitivity/specificity, multivariable logistic regression, and random forest models, these equations were applied in a cross-sectional analysis to populations of individuals who currently smoke and individuals who formerly smoked to determine how they affected GOLD classification and the fit of models predicting quantitative chest CT phenotypes or dyspnea.

RESULTS

Race-specific equations showed no advantage relative to race-neutral or race-free equations in models of quantitative chest CT phenotypes or dyspnea. Race-neutral reference equations reclassified up to 19% of Black participants into more severe GOLD classes, while race-neutral/race-free equations may improve model fit for dyspnea symptoms relative to race-specific equations.

INTERPRETATION

Race-specific equations offered no advantage over race-neutral/race-free equations in three distinct explanatory models of dyspnea and chest CT scan abnormalities. Race-neutral/race-free reference equations may improve pulmonary disease diagnoses and treatment in populations highly vulnerable to lung disease.

Socioeconomic status significantly impacts childhood cancer survival in South Africa

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Significantly discrepant survival rates have been documented in single disease childhood cancer cohorts in South Africa; those from higher socioeconomic groups were shown to have a significantly lower risk of death than those from less affluent households. This study aimed to determine the impact of socioeconomic status (SES) on childhood cancer survival using pooled South African data.

METHODS

Five databases spanning January 2000 to December 2021 were interrogated. SES status was assigned based on a public sector annual household income classification. H0 households (formally unemployed) received free healthcare. H1, H2 and H3 (annual income > United States Dollar [USD] 19,000) households paid for healthcare relative to their income. The Spearman test assessed correlations between SES and disease stage in patients with solid tumours. Hazard ratios were determined using Cox regression modelling. The Kaplan-Meier procedure estimated overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

A total of 1598 children were eligible for analysis; 1269 had a solid tumour with a negative correlation between SES and stage (Spearman rho = -.178; p < .001). Patients with solid tumours and lower SES showed proportionately higher numbers of stage III and IV disease (p < .01). This proportion decreased with higher SES categories. In the multivariate analyses adjusted for sex, age, tumour type and stage, higher SES was associated with lower mortality risk (p < .001), indicating that the impact of SES on survival was in excess of any effect that could be explained by lower stage disease alone. There was a strong positive correlation between race and SES (Fisher's exact tests, p < .001) across all groups and all SES strata. Five-year OS was 85.3% in children from H3 households versus 46.3% in children from H0 households (p < .001).

CONCLUSION

SES significantly impacts childhood cancer survival for children with solid tumours in South Africa. SES is a robust surrogate for race in South Africa as a prognostic metric of disease outcome in childhood cancer. Advocacy to increase social support for impoverished patients is essential to achieve equitable improvements in outcomes treated with standardised national treatment guidelines.

The value of standards for health datasets in artificial intelligence-based applications

Artificial intelligence as a medical device is increasingly being applied to healthcare for diagnosis, risk stratification and resource allocation. However, a growing body of evidence has highlighted the risk of algorithmic bias, which may perpetuate existing health inequity. This problem arises in part because of systemic inequalities in dataset curation, unequal opportunity to participate in research and inequalities of access. This study aims to explore existing standards, frameworks and best practices for ensuring adequate data diversity in health datasets. Exploring the body of existing literature and expert views is an important step towards the development of consensus-based guidelines. The study comprises two parts: a systematic review of existing standards, frameworks and best practices for healthcare datasets; and a survey and thematic analysis of stakeholder views of bias, health equity and best practices for artificial intelligence as a medical device. We found that the need for dataset diversity was well described in literature, and experts generally favored the development of a robust set of guidelines, but there were mixed views about how these could be implemented practically. The outputs of this study will be used to inform the development of standards for transparency of data diversity in health datasets (the STANDING Together initiative).

Reimagining Medical Education Toward Antiracist Praxis

Medicine has a longstanding history of racism that promulgates existing health inequities. Current medical education, largely based on the biomedical framework, omits critical discourse on racism and White supremacy, which continue to harm individuals and communities of color. Such ahistorical and apolitical orientation inadequately trains learners to identify and address racism in clinical practice. Although curricula on racial health disparities, social determinants of health, cultural competency, and implicit bias have been operationalized by several medical schools, they do not identify the racism embedded in systems of care, nor do they provide transformative steps toward true health equity and justice. As such, this article proposes bold radical frameworks as the foundation for reimagining medical education in the United States. Founded on critical race theory, abolition, and decolonization, the authors provide a view of an antiracist medical education, one that highlights the history and legacy of racism in medicine and positions medical trainees and practicing physicians as active agents in medicine's antiracist transformation.

Living kidney donors with HIV: experience and outcomes from a case series by the HOPE in Action Consortium

Background

Living kidney donation is possible for people living with HIV (PLWH) in the United States within research studies under the HIV Organ Policy Equity (HOPE) Act. There are concerns that donor nephrectomy may have an increased risk of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in PLWH due to HIV-associated kidney disease and antiretroviral therapy (ART) nephrotoxicity. Here we report the first 3 cases of living kidney donors with HIV under the HOPE Act in the United States.

Methods

Within the HOPE in Action Multicenter Consortium, we conducted a prospective study of living kidney donors with HIV. Pre-donation, we estimated the 9-year cumulative incidence of ESRD, performed genetic testing of apolipoprotein L1 (APOL1), excluding individuals with high-risk variants, and performed pre-donation kidney biopsies (HOPE Act requirement). The primary endpoint was ≥grade 3 nephrectomy-related adverse events (AEs) in year one. Post-donation, we monitored glomerular filtration rate (measured by iohexol/Tc-99m DTPA [mGFR] or estimated with serum creatinine [eGFR]), HIV RNA, CD4 count, and ART.

Findings

There were three donors with two-four years of follow-up: a 35 year-old female, a 52 year-old male, and a 47 year-old male. Pre-donation 9-year estimated cumulative incidence of ESRD was 3.01, 8.01, and 7.76 per 10,000 persons, respectively. In two donors with APOL1 testing, no high-risk variants were detected. Biopsies from all three donors showed no kidney disease. Post-donation, two donors developed nephrectomy-related ≥grade 3 AEs: a medically-managed ileus and a laparoscopically-repaired incisional hernia. GFR declined from 103 to 84 mL/min/1.73 m2 at four years (mGFR) in donor 1, from 77 to 52 mL/min/1.73 m2 at three years (eGFR) in donor 2, and from 65 to 39 mL/min/1.73 m2 at two years (eGFR) in donor 3. HIV RNA remained <20 copies/mL and CD4 count remained stable in all donors.

Interpretation

The first three living kidney donors with HIV under the HOPE Act in the United States have had promising outcomes at two-four years, providing proof-of-concept to support living donation from PLWH to recipients with HIV.

Funding

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health.

Embedded racism: Inequitable niche construction as a neglected evolutionary process affecting health

Racial health disparities are a pervasive feature of modern experience and structural racism is increasingly recognized as a public health crisis. Yet evolutionary medicine has not adequately addressed the racialization of health and disease, particularly the systematic embedding of social biases in biological processes leading to disparate health outcomes delineated by socially defined race. In contrast to the sheer dominance of medical publications which still assume genetic 'race' and omit mention of its social construction, we present an alternative biological framework of racialized health. We explore the unifying evolutionary-ecological principle of niche construction as it offers critical insights on internal and external biological and behavioral feedback processes environments at every level of the organization. We Integrate insights of niche construction theory in the context of human evolutionary and social history and phenotype-genotype modification, exposing the extent to which racism is an evolutionary mismatch underlying inequitable disparities in disease. We then apply ecological models of niche exclusion and exploitation to institutional and interpersonal racial constructions of population and individual health and demonstrate how discriminatory processes of health and harm apply to evolutionarily relevant disease classes and life-history processes in which socially defined race is poorly understood and evaluated. Ultimately, we call for evolutionary and biomedical scholars to recognize the salience of racism as a pathogenic process biasing health outcomes studied across disciplines and to redress the neglect of focus on research and application related to this crucial issue.

Redressing the Harms of Race-Based Kidney Function Estimation

This Viewpoint emphasizes the urgency of abolishing race-based medical practices and explains how they have unjustly contributed to racial inequities in clinical care and health outcomes.