Diversity and Inclusion in Pancreatic Cancer Clinical Trials

Trends in pancreatic cancer mortality in the United States 1999-2020: a CDC database population-based study

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic cancer is a significant public health concern and a leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. This study aimed to investigate pancreatic cancer mortality trends and disparities in the United States (US) from 1999 to 2020.

METHODS

Data were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) Wide-Ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research database. Mortality rates were age-adjusted and standardized to the year 2000 US population. Joinpoint regression was used to analyze temporal trends in age-adjusted mortality rates (AAMRs) by sociodemographic and geographic variables.

RESULTS

Between 1999 and 2020, pancreatic cancer led to a total of 810,628 deaths in the US, an average mortality of nearly 39,000 deaths per year. The AAMR slightly increased from 10.6 in 1999 to 11.1 in 2020, with an associated annual percent change (APC) of 0.2. Mortality rates were highest among individuals aged 65 and older. Black individuals experienced the highest overall pancreatic cancer-related AAMR at 13.8. Despite this, Black individuals experienced a decreasing mortality trend over time (APC -0.2) while White individuals experienced an increasing trend in mortality (APC 0.4). Additionally, individuals residing in rural areas experienced steeper rates of mortality increase than those living in urban areas (APC 0.6 for rural vs -0.2 for urban). White individuals in urban and rural populations experienced an increase in mortality, while Black individuals in urban environments experienced a decrease in mortality, and Black individuals in rural environments experienced stable mortality trends.

CONCLUSIONS

Mortality from pancreatic cancer continues to increase in the US, with racial and regional disparities identified in minorities and rural-dwelling individuals. These disparate findings highlight the importance of ongoing efforts to understand and address pancreatic cancer treatment and outcomes disparities in the US, and future studies should further investigate the underlying etiologies of these disparities and potential for novel therapies to reduce the mortality.

Age, Race, Ethnicity, and Sex of Participants in Clinical Trials Focused on Chronic Pain

There is limited data on equitable inclusion in chronic pain trials. We aimed to 1) identify the frequency of reporting age, race, ethnicity, and sex in clinical trials targeting chronic pain, and 2) compare sociodemographic representation to the United States (US) population. We examined US-based intervention trials for chronic pain initiated between 2007 and 2021 and registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. We 1) assessed the frequency of reporting each demographic variable, 2) compared representation with US population estimates, and 3) explored change in reporting over time. Of 501 clinical trials, the frequency of reporting was as follows: 36.9% reported older adults, 54.3% reported race, 37.4% reported ethnicity, and 100% reported sex. Rates of race and ethnicity reporting increased, but older adult age reporting decreased over time (ps < .00001). Compared to 2020 US population estimates, there was an equitable representation of older adults, under-representation of individuals identifying as American Indian or Alaska Native (.8% vs .6%), Asian (5.6% vs 2.9%), Black or African American (12.6% vs 12.2%), with more than one race (2.9% vs 1.2%), and Hispanic/Latino (16.9% vs 14.1%). There was an over-representation of individuals identifying as Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (.2% vs .5%) or White (70.4% vs 72.9%), and of females (50.8% vs 68.4%). Some representation rates varied by chronic pain condition. Reporting of older adult age, race, and ethnicity was low in chronic pain trials in ClinicalTrials.gov, reinforcing the need for adhering to reporting guidelines. Representation varied across trials compared with US population data, particularly among those identifying as Hispanic/Latino and certain minority racial groups. PERSPECTIVE: Despite initiatives to increase the reporting of demographic information, doing so in clinical pain trials is far from ubiquitous. Moreover, efforts to improve diversity in these trials continue to be insufficient. Indeed, Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) remain under-represented in clinical pain trials.

Expanding access to genetic testing for pancreatic cancer

Among individuals with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) 5-10% have a pathogenic germline variant (PGV) in a PDAC susceptibility gene. Guidelines recommend genetic testing among all individuals with PDAC. Additionally, at-risk relatives of PDAC patients benefit from their own genetic education, risk assessment, and testing. Multigene panel testing (MGPT) can identify individuals with inherited cancer risk who can benefit from early cancer surveillance and risk reduction strategies. This manuscript discusses various healthcare delivery models for MGPT including traditional in-person genetic counseling, novel integrated in-person infrastructures, telemedicine genetics care via telephone- or video-visits and direct-to-consumer testing. Barriers and facilitators to care on the individual, provider, and system level are also outlined including specific considerations for historically marginalized communities.

Potential Health Disparities in the Early Detection and Prevention of Pancreatic Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic cancer remains one of the deadliest cancers in the United States. Some types of pancreatic cysts, which are being detected more frequently and often incidentally on imaging, have the potential to develop into pancreatic cancer and thus provide a valuable window of opportunity for cancer interception. Although racial disparity in pancreatic cancer has been described, little is known regarding health disparities in pancreatic cancer prevention. In the present study, we investigate potential health disparities along the continuum of care for pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

The racial and ethnic composition of pancreatic patients at high-volume centers in Indiana were evaluated, representing patients undergoing surgery for pancreatic cancer (n=390), participating in biobanking (972 pancreatic cancer patients and 1984 patients with pancreatic disease), or being monitored for pancreatic cysts at an early detection center (n=1514). To assess racial disparities and potential differences in decision-making related to pancreatic cancer prevention and early detection, an exploratory online survey was administered through a volunteer registry (n=708).  Results: We show that despite comprising close to 10% or 30% of the Indiana or Indianapolis population, respectively, African Americans make up only about 4-5% of our study cohorts consisting of patients undergoing pancreatic surgery or participating in biobanking and early detection. Analysis of online survey results revealed that given the hypothetical situation of being diagnosed with a pancreatic cyst or pancreatic cancer, the vast majority of respondents (>90%) would agree to undergo surveillance or surgery, respectively, regardless of race. Only a minority (3-12%) acknowledged any significant transportation, financial, or emotional barriers that would impact a decision to undergo surveillance or surgery. This suggests that the observed racial disparities may be due in part to the existence of other barriers that lie upstream of this decision point.

CONCLUSION

Racial disparities exist not only for pancreatic cancer but also at earlier points along the continuum of care such as prevention and early detection. To our knowledge, this is the first study to document racial disparity in the management of patients with pancreatic cysts who are at risk of developing pancreatic cancer. Our results suggest that improving access to information and care for such at-risk individuals may lead to more equitable outcomes.

Trends in Racial and Gender Diversity Among Complex General Surgical Oncology Fellowship Trainees

BACKGROUND

This study examines trends in racial and gender diversity of trainees within Complex General Surgical Oncology Fellowships, and compares the racial and gender proportions of trainees across different fields to assess potential barriers to increasing diversity within surgical oncology training programs.

METHODS

Accredited Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) data were queried to identify surgical trainees between 2013 and 2021. Trainees were identified based on self-reported race and gender and were stratified based on residency type and fellowship program type if applicable. Chi-square tests were used to assess differences between groups and trends.

RESULTS

A significantly lower proportion of individuals who are underrepresented in medicine (URMs) trained in surgical oncology fellowships (8.9%) compared with both the overall trainee pool (12.8%) and general surgery residency programs (13.1%) [p < 0.05]. There was no significant increase in URM representation in surgical oncology fellowships across the study period. Furthermore, there was a significantly lower proportion of females training in surgical oncology fellowships (38.6%) compared with the overall trainee pool (45.6%) [p < 0.05]. Despite a significant increase in female representation in general surgery residency and other surgical fellowships, there was no significant increase in female representation in surgical oncology fellowships across the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identifies disparities in gender and racial minority representation within ACGME-accredited Complex General Surgical Oncology Fellowship training programs. While steps have been taken to expand diversity, more needs to be done to combat the systemic barriers that both racial minorities and women face during their training.

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.

Drug Delivery Strategies for the Treatment of Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic cancer is fast becoming a global menace and it is projected to be the second leading cause of cancer-related death by 2030. Pancreatic adenocarcinomas, which develop in the pancreas' exocrine region, are the predominant type of pancreatic cancer, representing about 95% of total pancreatic tumors. The malignancy progresses asymptomatically, making early diagnosis difficult. It is characterized by excessive production of fibrotic stroma known as desmoplasia, which aids tumor growth and metastatic spread by remodeling the extracellular matrix and releasing tumor growth factors. For decades, immense efforts have been harnessed toward developing more effective drug delivery systems for pancreatic cancer treatment leveraging nanotechnology, immunotherapy, drug conjugates, and combinations of these approaches. However, despite the reported preclinical success of these approaches, no substantial progress has been made clinically and the prognosis for pancreatic cancer is worsening. This review provides insights into challenges associated with the delivery of therapeutics for pancreatic cancer treatment and discusses drug delivery strategies to minimize adverse effects associated with current chemotherapy options and to improve the efficiency of drug treatment.

Clinical Features and Outcomes of Patients with Pancreaticobiliary Malignancies in Los Angeles County and Their Association with CA 19-9 Levels

Although CA 19-9 is a commonly used tumor marker in the management of PBMs, the literature describing outcomes in patients with PBMs who have undetectable or low (hereinafter “low”) CA 19-9 levels remains scarce. In this study, we sought to compare clinical features and outcomes in patients with PBMs and low CA 19-9 levels to those with normal and elevated CA 19-9 levels. Methods: We retrospectively collected data on patients with biopsy-confirmed PBMs and stratified patients into categories based on their CA 19-9 level at diagnosis. Survival curves were estimated for patients in each of the three aforementioned CA 19-9 groups using the Kaplan–Meier method and compared using a Cox proportional hazards regression model. Results: Of the 283 patients identified, 23 (8.1%) had low, 70 (24.7%) had normal, and 190 (67.1%) had elevated CA 19-9 levels. After controlling for sex, age, BMI, the presence of metastases at the time of diagnosis, and treatment with curative intent, the hazard ratio for death in the elevated CA 19-9 group compared to the low CA 19-9 group was 1.993 (95% CI 1.089–3.648; p = 0.025). Conclusion: The elevated CA 19-9 level compared to the low CA 19-9 level and the presence of metastases were associated with an increased hazard of death, while treatment with curative intent was associated with a decreased hazard of death.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of germline BRCA mutations in pancreatic cancer patients identifies global and racial disparities in access to genetic testing

BACKGROUND

Germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations (gBRCAm) can inform pancreatic cancer (PC) risk and treatment but most of the available information is derived from white patients. The ethnic and geographic variability of gBRCAm prevalence and of germline BRCA (gBRCA) testing uptake in PC globally is largely unknown.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We carried out a systematic review and prevalence meta-analysis of gBRCA testing and gBRCAm prevalence in PC patients stratified by ethnicity. The main outcome was the distribution of gBRCA testing uptake across diverse populations worldwide. Secondary outcomes included: geographic distribution of gBRCA testing uptake, temporal analysis of gBRCA testing uptake in ethnic groups, and pooled proportion of gBRCAm stratified by ethnicity. The study is listed under PROSPERO registration number #CRD42022311769.

RESULTS

A total of 51 studies with 16 621 patients were included. Twelve of the studies (23.5%) enrolled white patients only, 10 Asians only (19.6%), and 29 (56.9%) included mixed populations. The pooled prevalence of white, Asian, African American, and Hispanic patients tested per study was 88.7%, 34.8%, 3.6%, and 5.2%, respectively. The majority of included studies were from high-income countries (HICs) (64; 91.2%). Temporal analysis showed a significant increase only in white and Asians patients tested from 2000 to present (P < 0.001). The pooled prevalence of gBRCAm was: 3.3% in white, 1.7% in Asian, and negligible (<0.3%) in African American and Hispanic patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Data on gBRCA testing and gBRCAm in PC derive mostly from white patients and from HICs. This limits the interpretation of gBRCAm for treating PC across diverse populations and implies substantial global and racial disparities in access to BRCA testing in PC.

Eligibility Criteria Perpetuate Disparities in Enrollment and Participation of Black Patients in Pancreatic Cancer Clinical Trials

PURPOSE

Clinical trials determine safety and efficacy of cancer therapeutics and establish standards of care. Minority patient participation in cancer clinical trials is dismal. We aimed to determine the impact of eligibility criteria on disparities in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) clinical trial candidacy.

METHODS

Traditional PDAC trial eligibility criteria were obtained from ClinicalTrials.gov. Patients with PDAC who sought care at Virginia Commonwealth University Health from 2010 to 2019 were included. Clinical data were obtained from billing codes and discrete values in the electronic medical record. Eligibility criteria differences between racial groups were determined using chi-squared tests and unconditional maximum likelihood-based odds ratios.

RESULTS

Among 676 patients, most identified as Black or White race (42.5% and 51.6%, respectively). Using traditional criteria, Black patients were more likely to be ineligible for participation compared with White patients (42.4% v 33.2%, P = .023) secondary to hypoalbuminemia (14.1% v 7.9%, P = .023), HIV (3.1% v 0.3%, P = .010), hepatitis B (1.7% v 0%, P = .043), and hepatitis C (9.1% v 3.4%, P = .005). Black patients were also numerically more likely to be ineligible because of renal dysfunction, recent coronary stenting, and uncontrolled diabetes mellitus. Prior cancer treatment excluded fewer Black than White patients (9.1% v 14.0%, P = .072), most attributable to lower rates of neoadjuvant chemotherapy received. Strategic eligibility criteria revisions could equalize ineligibility rates between Black and White patients (26.8% v 24.8%, P = .581).

CONCLUSION

Traditional eligibility criteria differentially exclude Black patients from participating in PDAC clinical trials. These criteria perpetuate disparities, limit generalizability, and are often not medically justifiable. Revised criteria may improve participant diversity, without compromising safety or study results.

Factors associated with inability to return to intended oncologic treatment in pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Return to Intended Oncologic Treatment (RIOT) has been proposed as a quality metric in the care of cancer patients. We sought to define factors associated with inability to RIOT in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients.

METHODS

The NCDB was queried for patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy for pathologic stage IB, IIA, or IIB PDAC from 2010 to 2016. Multivariable binary logistic regression models identified factors associated with failure to RIOT, and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox multivariable regression models demonstrated the impact of failure to RIOT on survival.

RESULTS

Increasing age (p < .001), Hispanic race (p = .002), pathological stage IB (p = .004) and IIA (p = .001) as compared to IIB, increasing hospital stay (p < .001), and open surgical approach (p = .024) were associated with increased risk of inability to RIOT. Male sex (p < .001), Charlson-Deyo scores of 0 (p < .001) and 1 (p = .001) as compared to >2, negative surgical margins (p = .048), receiving care at academic institutions (p = .001), and increasing institutional case volume (p = .001) were associated with improved odds of RIOT.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient features can impact RIOT and should be considered when designing multi-modality treatment strategies.

Enrollment Matters: The Reality of Disparity and Pursuit of Equity in Clinical Trials

SUMMARY

Disparities in clinical trial enrollment persist, fortified by the foundation and historical ideologies undergirding clinical cancer research. The scientific community has an ethical responsibility to seize the current moment to deconstruct and reconstruct these paradigms for more equitable research.

Inclusion and diversity in clinical trials: Actionable steps to drive lasting change

BACKGROUND

Improving diversity in clinical trials is essential in order to produce generalizable results. Although the importance of representation has become increasingly recognized, identifying strategies to approach this work remains elusive. This article reviews the proceedings of a multi-stakeholder conference about the current state of diversity in clinical trials and outlines actionable steps for improvement.

METHODS

Conference attendees included representatives from the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), National Institutes of Health (NIH), practicing clinical investigators, pharmaceutical and device companies, community-based organizations, data analytics companies, and patient advocacy groups. At this virtual event, attendees were asked to consider key questions around best practices for engagement of underrepresented populations.

RESULTS

Community engagement is an integral part of recruitment and retention of underrepresented groups. Decentralization of sites and use of digital tools can enhance the accessibility of clinical research. Finally, improving representation among investigators and clinical research staff may translate to diverse clinical trial participants.

CONCLUSION

Improving diversity in clinical trials is an ethical and scientific imperative, which requires a multifaceted approach.