Enrollment of Individuals From Racial and Ethnic Minority Groups in Gynecologic Cancer Precision Oncology Trials

Clinical research in endometrial cancer: consensus recommendations from the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup

The Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) Endometrial Cancer Consensus Conference on Clinical Research (ECCC) was held in Incheon, South Korea, Nov 2-3, 2023. The aims were to develop consensus statements for future trials in endometrial cancer to achieve harmonisation on design elements, select important questions, and identify unmet needs. All 33 GCIG member groups participated in the development, refinement, and finalisation of 18 statements within four topic groups, addressing adjuvant treatment in high-risk disease; treatment for metastatic and recurrent disease; trial designs for rare endometrial cancer subgroups and special circumstances; and specific methodology and adaptation for trials in low-resource settings. In addition, eight areas of unmet need were identified. This was the first GCIG Consensus Conference to include patient advocates and an expert on inclusion, diversity, equity, and access to take part in all aspects of the process and output. Four early-career investigators were also selected for participation, ensuring that they represented different GCIG member groups and regions. Unanimous consensus was obtained for 16 of the 18 statements, with 97% concordance for the remaining two. Using the described methodology from previous Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conferences, this conference did not require even one minority statement. The high acceptance rate following active involvement in the preparation, discussion, and refinement of the statements by all representatives confirmed the consensus progress within a global academic setting, and the expectation that the ECCC will lead to greater harmonisation, actualisation, inclusion, and resolution of unmet needs in clinical research for individuals living with and beyond endometrial cancer worldwide.

Race, Ethnicity, and Sex Representation Trends Among Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery Fellowship Trainees and Graduates

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To study the race, ethnicity, and sex representation and annual trends of AAGL FMIGS fellows and graduates.

DESIGN

A retrospective cross-sectional study.

SETTING

AAMC databases were queried for demographic information between 2011 and 2023.

PATIENTS/SUBJECTS

AAGL FMIGS fellows and graduates.

INTERVENTIONS

N/A MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Descriptive statistical analysis and the actual-to-expected (AE) ratio of each race, ethnicity, and sex were performed. AE ratio was calculated by dividing the 13-year average actual percentage of FMIGS trainees and graduates by the expected percentage based demographics of OBGYN residents and the US general population. 477 fellows graduated or were in training between 2011 and 2023; race and ethnicity information was obtained for 347 (72.7%) individuals, and sex information was available for 409 (85.7%). Representation of females ranged from 66.7% in 2017 to 93.3% in 2022. There was a significantly increasing slope for the representation of females (+1.3% per year; 95% CI 0.00-0.03; p = .027). Compared to their distribution among US OBGYN residents, White fellows' representation was lower [AE ratio, 95% CI 0.60 (0.44-0.81)] and of Asian fellows was higher [AE ratio, 95% CI 2.17 (1.47-3.21)]. Female fellows' representation was lower than expected [AE ratio, 95% CI 0.68 (0.48-0.96)] compared to their distribution among US OBGYN residents. Compared to the general US population, White fellows [AE ratio, 95% CI 0.65 (0.48-0.87)] and Hispanic fellows [AE ratio, 95% CI 0.53 (0.34-0.83)] representation was lower. Asian fellows' representation was higher compared to the general US population [AE ratio, 95% CI 5.87 (3.48-9.88)].

CONCLUSION

White and Hispanic fellows' representation was lower than expected, while Asian fellows' representation was higher in AAGL-accredited FMIGS programs. Female representation increased throughout the years, but overall, female fellows' representation was lower than expected compared to their distribution among OBGYN residents. These findings may help develop equitable recruitment strategies for FMIGS programs and reduce health disparities within complex gynecology.

Under-Representation and Under-Reporting of Minoritized Racial and Ethnic Groups in Clinical Trials on Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors

PURPOSE

Minoritized racial/ethnic groups are historically under-represented in cancer clinical trials, which may be exacerbated in recent trials on immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). We examined the representation and reporting of the racial/ethnic composition of participants in clinical trials on ICIs.

METHODS

We examined English full-text trials on ICIs published from 2007 to 2022. Information on trial characteristics and racial/ethnic composition of participants was extracted from published papers or ClinicalTrials.gov. Differences in participation by publication year, ICI agent, and cancer site were analyzed. Enrollment-incidence ratio (EIR) was calculated to compare the proportion of minoritized racial/ethnic group patients in US-based trials against age-adjusted cancer incidence data available for the US population. An EIR > 1 signified over-representation, whereas an EIR <1 signified under-representation.

RESULTS

Of the 471 trials examined, racial composition was unreported in 146 (31%), whereas Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity was unreported in 278 (59%). Only 30 (6%) trials reported race/ethnicity-specific results. In US-only trials (n = 174), White patients were over-represented (EIR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.17 to 1.22]), whereas Hispanic/Latinx patients were the most under-represented (EIR, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.24 to 0.48]), followed by Black/African American patients (EIR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.54 to 0.79]). Subgroup analyses consistently indicated over-representation of White patients across publication years (EIR, 1.19-1.24), ICI classes (EIR, 1.16-1.23), and cancer sites (EIR, 1.11-1.31), whereas Hispanic/Latinx patients were consistently under-represented. An upward trend of trial representation and reporting was observed for all minoritized racial/ethnic groups over time (trend P values ≤.05).

CONCLUSION

Disparities in the representation and reporting of minoritized racial/ethnic groups persist in recent trials on ICIs, necessitating collaborative efforts for improved diversity and equitable cancer treatment access.

Racial and ethnic disparities in reproductive medicine in the United States: a narrative review of contemporary high-quality evidence

There has been increasing debate around how or if race and ethnicity should be used in medical research-including the conceptualization of race as a biological entity, a social construct, or a proxy for racism. The objectives of this narrative review are to identify and synthesize reported racial and ethnic inequalities in obstetrics and gynecology (ob/gyn) and develop informed recommendations for racial and ethnic inequity research in ob/gyn. A reproducible search of the 8 highest impact ob/gyn journals was conducted. Articles published between January 1, 2010 and June 30, 2023 containing keywords related to racial and ethnic disparities, bias, prejudice, inequalities, and inequities were included (n=318). Data were abstracted and summarized into 4 themes: 1) access to care, 2) adherence to national guidelines, 3) clinical outcomes, and 4) clinical trial diversity. Research related to each theme was organized topically under the headings i) obstetrics, ii) reproductive medicine, iii) gynecologic cancer, and iv) other. Additionally, interactive tables were developed. These include data on study timeline, population, location, and results for every article. The tables enable readers to filter by journal, publication year, race and ethnicity, and topic. Numerous studies identified adverse reproductive outcomes among racial and ethnic minorities as compared to white patients, which persist despite adjusting for differential access to care, socioeconomic or lifestyle factors, and clinical characteristics. These include higher maternal morbidity and mortality among Black and Hispanic/Latinx patients; reduced success during fertility treatments for Black, Hispanic/Latinx, and Asian patients; and lower survival rates and lower likelihood of receiving guideline concordant care for gynecological cancers for non-White patients. We conclude that many racial and ethnic inequities in ob/gyn cannot be fully attributed to patient characteristics or access to care. Research focused on explaining these disparities based on biological differences incorrectly reinforces the notion of race as a biological trait. More research that deconstructs race and assesses efficacy of interventions to reduce these disparities is needed.

Clinical Trial Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To study racial and ethnic disparities in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in minimally invasive gynecologic surgery (MIGS).

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Online review of all published MIGS RCTs in high-impact journals from 2012 to 2023.

PATIENTS

Journals included all first quartile obstetrics and gynecology journals, as well as The New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet, The British Medical Journal, and The Journal of the American Medical Association. The National Institutes of Health's PubMed and the ClinicalTrials.gov websites were queried using the following search terms from the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology's certifying examination bulletin 2022 to obtain relevant trials: adenomyosis, adnexal surgery, abnormal uterine bleeding, cystectomy, endometriosis, fibroids, gynecology, hysterectomy, hysteroscopy, laparoscopy, leiomyoma, minimally invasive gynecology, myomectomy, ovarian cyst, and robotic surgery.

INTERVENTIONS

The US Census Bureau data were used to estimate the expected number of participants. We calculated the enrollment ratio (ER) of actual to expected participants for US trials with available race and ethnicity data.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A total of 352 RCTs were identified. Of these, race and/or ethnicity data were available in 65 studies (18.5%). We analyzed the 46 studies that originated in the United States, with a total of 4645 participants. Of these RCTs, only 8 (17.4%) reported ethnicity in addition to race. When comparing published RCT data with expected proportions of participants, White participants were overrepresented (70.8% vs. 59.6%; ER, 1.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.52-1.81), as well as Black or African American participants (15.4% vs. 13.7%; ER, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.03-1.29). Hispanic (6.7% vs. 19.0%; ER, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.27-0.35), Asian (1.7% vs. 6.1%; ER, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.20-0.34), Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (0.1% vs. 0.3%; ER, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.06-0.74), and Indian or Alaska Native participants (0.2% vs. 1.3%; ER, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.08-0.32) were underrepresented. When comparing race/ethnicity proportions in the 20 states where the RCTs were conducted, Black or African American participants were underrepresented.

CONCLUSION

In MIGS RCTs conducted in the United States, White and Black or African American participants are overrepresented compared with other races, and ethnicity is characterized in fewer than one-fifth of trials. Efforts should be made to improve racial and ethnic recruitment equity and reporting in future MIGS RCTs.

Underrepresentation of racial and ethnic minority groups in gynecologic oncology: An analysis of over 250 trials

OBJECTIVE

To describe the participation of racial and ethnic minority groups (REMGs) in gynecologic oncology trials.

METHODS

Gynecologic oncology studies registered on ClinicalTrials.gov between 2007 and 2020 were identified. Trials with published results were analyzed based on reporting of race/ethnicity in relation to disease site and trial characteristics. Expected enrollment by race/ethnicity was calculated and compared to actual enrollment, adjusted for 2010 US Census population data.

RESULTS

2146 gynecologic oncology trials were identified. Of published trials (n = 252), 99 (39.3%) reported race/ethnicity data. Recent trials were more likely to report these data (36% from 2007 to 2009; 51% 2013-2015; and 53% from 2016 to 2018, p = 0.01). Of all trials, ovarian cancer trials were least likely to report race/ethnicity data (32.1% vs 39.3%, p = 0.011). Population-adjusted under-enrollment for Blacks was 7-fold in ovarian cancer, Latinx 10-fold for ovarian and 6-fold in uterine cancer trials, Asians 2.5-fold in uterine cancer trials, and American Indian and Alaska Native individuals 6-fold in ovarian trials. Trials for most disease sites have enrolled more REMGs in recent years - REMGs made up 19.6% of trial participants in 2007-2009 compared to 38.1% in 2016-2018 (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Less than half of trials that published results reported race/ethnicity data. Available data reveals that enrollment of REMGs is significantly below expected rates based on national census data. These disparities persisted even after additionally adjusting for population size. Despite improvement in recent years, additional recruitment of REMGs is needed to achieve more representative and equitable participation in gynecologic cancer clinical trials.

A review of racial disparities in ovarian cancer and clinical trials

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Ovarian cancer ranks fifth in mortality among women with cancer and accounts for more death compared to any other gynecological cancers. This review summarizes the most recent literature on disparities in ovarian cancer as well as within recent clinical trials.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies have identified a notable disparity in genetic testing utilization, disease stage at the time of diagnosis, and adherence to treatment guidelines between Black women and their White counterparts, ultimately leading to increased mortality rates among Black women from ovarian cancer. Additionally, there is an underreporting of race in clinical trials and those that do report race demonstrate significant racial disparities within trial participants with the majority of participants being White.

SUMMARY

It is imperative that we address the significant racial disparities within ovarian cancer and clinical trials to establish a framework of equitable healthcare provision. Multiple determinants, such as implicit bias, provider mistrust, accessibility hurdles, and socioeconomic influences, appear to contribute to the current disparities faced by women of color. Further investigation is warranted, encompassing a deeper understanding of diverse patient perspectives and identifying barriers to receiving optimal care and participating in clinical trials.

An absence of translated consent forms limits oncologic clinical trial enrollment for limited English proficiency participants

OBJECTIVES

A lack of diversity amongst participants in cancer clinical trials has raised scrutiny over the past decade. Patients with limited English proficiency (LEP) are further excluded. One modifiable reason for low LEP participation is a lack of non-English consent forms.

METHODS

We queried the clinical trials registry database at an academic hospital serving a predominantly Spanish-speaking patient population. Clinical trials related to gynecology oncology were evaluated for the availability of fully translated Spanish consent forms, the racial and ethnic identification of enrolled patients, and the number of signed Spanish consents. Enrolment data was compared before and after 2019, when institutional financial support for document translation was withdrawn.

RESULTS

Sixteen gynecologic oncology clinical trials were opened between 2014 and 2022, with 10 trials enrolling 128 patients. Eight trials opened prior to 2019, all with fully translated consent forms. Seven of these trials enrolled 99 participants, 70% of whom identified as Hispanic and 60% who signed a Spanish consent. Eight trials opened after 2019 and one had a fully translated consent form. Three of the trials enrolled 29 participants, with 10% of subjects identifying as Hispanic and none signing a Spanish consent form.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a decrease in fully translated clinical trial consent forms for gynecologic oncology studies following the loss of subsidized translation services in our single institution with a predominantly LEP population. This correlated with a decrease in enrollment of Hispanic subjects. To increase enrollment of diverse participants, including those with LEP, simple actions such as fully translating consent forms would help maintain equity in research conduct and improve clinical outcomes through trial involvement.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Clinical Trial Enrollment Among Women With Gynecologic Cancer

Importance

Racial and ethnic disparities in clinical trial enrollment are unjust and hinder development of new cancer treatments.

Objective

To examine the association of race and ethnicity with clinical trial enrollment among women with endometrial, ovarian, or cervical cancer.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study used data from the National Cancer Database, a hospital-based cancer registry, and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER), a population-based cancer registry. Population-based race and ethnicity-specific proportions for each cancer site were derived from SEER. Participants included women with an endometrial, ovarian, or cervical cancer diagnosed from 2004 to 2019. Analyses were performed from February 2 to June 14, 2023.

Exposure

Race and ethnicity were categorized as American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, Black, Hispanic (any race), Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, White, and other (not defined in the National Cancer Database).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcomes were the odds of clinical trial enrollment and representation in clinical trials compared with the US population. Multivariable-adjusted logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs for associations of race and ethnicity with clinical trial enrollment within the National Cancer Database sample. Participation-to-prevalence ratios (PPRs) according to diagnosis period (2004-2011 vs 2012-2019) were calculated by dividing the race and ethnicity-specific percentage of clinical trial participants in the study sample by the percentage of racial and ethnic groups in SEER.

Results

Among 562 592 patients with gynecologic cancer (mean [SD] age at diagnosis, 62.9 [11.3] years), 1903 were American Indian/Alaska Native, 18 680 were Asian, 56 421 were Black, 38 145 were Hispanic, 1453 were Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, 442 869 were White, and 3121 were other race and ethnicity. Only 548 (<1%) were enrolled in clinical trials. Compared with White women, clinical trial enrollment was lower for Asian (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.25-0.78), Black (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.50-0.99), and Hispanic (OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.33-0.83) women. Compared with the US population, White women were adequately or overrepresented for all cancer types (PPRs ≥1.1), Black women were adequately or overrepresented for endometrial and cervical cancers (PPRs ≥1.1) but underrepresented for ovarian cancer (PPR ≤0.6), and Asian and Hispanic women were underrepresented among all 3 cancer types (PPRs ≤0.6).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort of patients with gynecologic cancer, clinical trial enrollment was lower among certain minoritized racial and ethnic groups. Continued efforts are needed to address disparate clinical trial enrollment among underrepresented groups.

Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in Ovarian Cancer

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is a treatment modality that aims to target the main site of tumor dissemination in ovarian cancer, the peritoneum, by combining the benefits of intraperitoneal chemotherapy with the synergistic effects of hyperthermia all during a single administration at the time of cytoreductive surgery. High-quality evidence currently only supports the use of HIPEC with cisplatin at the time of interval cytoreduction after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for stage III epithelial ovarian cancer. Many questions remain, including HIPEC's role at other timepoints in ovarian cancer treatment, who are optimal candidates, and specifics of HIPEC protocols. This article reviews the history of normothermic and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in ovarian cancer and evidence regarding HIPEC implementation and patient outcomes. Additionally, this review explores details of HIPEC technique and perioperative care, cost considerations, complication and quality of life data, disparities in HIPEC use, and unresolved issues.

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.