Willingness of Latinx and African Americans to Participate in Nontherapeutic Trials: It Depends on Who Runs the Research

Racial and ethnic representation in peripheral artery disease randomized clinical trials

Clinical trial enrollment provides various benefits to study participants including early access to novel therapies that may potentially alter the trajectory of disease states. Trial sponsors benefit from enrolling demographically diverse trial participants enabling the trial outcomes to be generalizable to a larger proportion of the community at large. Despite these and other well-documented benefits, clinical trial enrollment for Black and Hispanic Americans as well as women continues to be low. Specific disease states such as peripheral artery disease (PAD) have a higher prevalence and clinical outcomes are relatively worse in Black Americans compared with non-Hispanic white Americans. The recruitment process for PAD clinical trials can be costly and challenging and usually comes at the expense of representation. Participant willingness and trust, engagement, and socioeconomic status play essential roles in the representation of under-represented minority (URM) groups. Despite the contrary belief, URM groups such as Blacks and Hispanics are just as willing to participate in a clinical trial as non-Hispanic Whites. However, financial burdens, cultural barriers, and inadequate health literacy and education may impede URMs' access to clinical trials and medical care. Clinical trials' enrollment sites often pose transportation barriers and challenges that negatively impact creating a diverse study population. Lack of diversity among a trial population can stem from the stakeholder level, where corporate sponsors of academic readers do not consider diversity in clinical trials a priority due to false cost-benefit assumptions. The funding source may also impact the racial reporting or the results of a given trial. Industry-based trials have always been criticized for over-representing non-Hispanic White populations, driven by the desire to reach high completion rates with minimum financial burdens. Real efforts are warranted to ensure adequate minorities' representation in the PAD clinical trials and to the process toward the ultimate goal of developing more durable and effective PAD treatments that fit the needs of real-world populations.

A cross-sectional survey of clinical trials knowledge, participation, and perspectives in an underserved community of Washington, DC

The inclusion of participants from underrepresented and underserved groups is lagging in dermatology clinical trials. Through dissemination of a pilot survey at a community skin health fair, knowledge, participation, and perspectives of clinical trials were evaluated in an urban, medically underserved community in Washington, DC. Clinical trial-related questions were derived from the Health Information National Trends Survey 5 Cycle 4. This cross-sectional survey analyzed responses from 39/55 attendees (71% response rate). Most respondents were female (23/37 [62.2%]), between the ages of 25 and 54 (19/38, [50.0%]), and self-identified as non-white (35/39 [89.7%]) with a majority self-identifying as Black (16/31 [41%]). Most respondents self-reported knowing "little" to "nothing" about clinical trials (26/35 [74.3%]), and even more were unaware of the federal resource clinicaltrials.gov (30/37 [81.1%]). Few respondents discussed clinical trials as a treatment option with their healthcare provider (8/35 [22.9%]), yet having a discussion was significantly correlated with clinical trial participation (p = 0.0302). Self-reported level of knowledge was not significantly associated with participation in a clinical trial (p = 0.3035). Healthcare providers were the preferred first source of clinical trial information, followed by an internet search. Respondents rarely cited mistrust or skepticism as a barrier to participation (2/34 [5.9%]). Subjective positive healthcare experiences were significantly correlated to positive expectations with clinical trial participation (p = 0.0242). The findings of this study suggest the essential role healthcare providers, including dermatologists, play in clinical trial education and recruitment of underrepresented populations, and that patient mistrust may be present but is a rarely cited barrier to clinical trial participation.

The HealthStreet Cancer Survivor Cohort: a Community Registry for Cancer Research

PURPOSE

This report describes a cancer survivor cohort from a community engagement program and compares characteristics and willingness to participate in health research between the cancer survivors and non-cancer community members.

METHODS

Among 11,857 members enrolled in HealthStreet at the University of Florida (10/2011-03/2020), 991 cancer survivors were identified and 1:1 matched to control members without cancer on sex, age, and zip code. Demographics, body weight, height, social determinants of health, history of cancer, and willingness to participate in research were recorded by Community Health Workers as a part of the baseline Health Needs Assessment.

RESULTS

Among the cancer survivors, 71.6% were female and 19.2% lived in rural areas with a mean age of 56.7 years in females and 60.8 years in males. At baseline, 44.7% received a cancer diagnosis within 5 years, while 15.8%, more than 20 years. Cancer survivors (vs. matched non-cancer controls) were less likely to be Black (31.1% vs. 63.6%) but more likely to be divorced, separated, or widowed (49.5% vs. 41.2%), be normal/underweight (34.0% vs. 25.6%) and have health insurance (80.0% vs. 68.6%; all p < 0.05). Cancer survivors versus matched controls reported higher rates of ever being in a health research study (32.4% vs. 24.9%) and interest in participating in studies ranging from minimal risk to greater-than-minimal risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer survivors from this community engagement program agnostic to cancer types and treatment are diverse in geography, race, and social determinants of health and can be a valuable resource for observational, interventional, and biospecimen research in cancer survivorship.

Trust and Biomedical Research Engagement of Minority and Under-Represented Communities in Mississippi, USA

Trust is critical to the development and maintenance of effective research collaborations and community engagement. The purpose of this study was to assess the current attitudes and level of trust pertaining to health research among residents of Central Mississippi, the priority health region for the Research Centers in Minority Institutions (RCMI) Center for Health Disparities Research (RCHDR) at Jackson State University. The cross-sectional study was conducted from November 2021 to April 2022. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics carried out by SPSS statistical software. A total of 146 participants responded to the survey. The participants were predominately African American (99%) and female (75%). Historical research studies, the researchers' qualities, and potential benefits from participation were factors affecting the level of trust in the research process. Ninety percent (n = 131) expressed that it was important to be involved in the research process, and 98.5% (n = 144) agreed that discussing the research findings with the participants was important for establishing trust in the research process. While trust in the research process does not guarantee participation, trust is a precursor for those who decide to engage in health disparities research. Key findings will be integrated into the RCHDR research agenda to foster further development and implementation of innovative community-based participatory research toward the control and/or prevention of diseases that disproportionately affect minority and under-represented populations in Mississippi.

Promoting Inclusive Recruitment: a Qualitative Study of Black Adults' Decision to Participate in Genetic Research

Underrepresentation of Black individuals in genetic research is a longstanding issue. There are well-documented strategies to improve the enrollment of Black participants; however, few studies explore these strategies-as well as the barriers and facilitators for participation-by sampling Black people who have previously participated in genetic research. This study explores the decision-making process of Black adults who have participated in genetic research to identify best practices in the recruitment of Black subjects in genetic research. We conducted 18 semi-structured interviews with Black adults with prior research participation in genetic studies housed at an urban academic medical center in the United States of America (USA). An online survey was conducted with the participants to gather demographic data and information on prior research participation. Trust in research was ascertained with the Corbie-Smith Distrust in Clinical Research Index. Two participants scored high levels of distrust using the validated index. Using thematic content analysis, 4 themes emerged from the interviews: (1) Participants are active players in health system, (2) information is power, and transparency is key, (3) therapeutic alliances and study characteristics facilitate participation, and (4) race pervades the research process. The decision to participate in genetic research for the participants in our study was prompted by participants' internal motivations and facilitated by trust in their doctor, trust in the institution, and ease of participation. Most participants viewed their enrollment in genetic research in the context of their own racial identity and the history of medical racism in the USA.

Cancer Prevention and Diagnosis Knowledge among Spanish-speaking Older Latino/as Residing in Tampa, Florida

Objective

Cancer remains the leading cause of death among Latino/as in the United States, and advancing age is a major risk factor for developing most cancer types. Given the growing population of Latino/as immigrants aged ≥60 years and the current lack of relevant data, this study aims to understand the cancer prevention and perception of cancer diagnosis among older Latinos to ensure that they receive effective prevention, intervention, and psychosocial care.

Method

A survey exploring attitudes about cancer was developed and administered in Spanish. Using convenience sampling, 168 individuals identifying as Latino/as were surveyed in Tampa, Florida. Descriptive analysis was conducted to understand study population characteristics. Frequencies were assessed to understand the participants' responses to cancer-related attitude questions. The effects of age, country of origin, length of stay in the United States, and marital status on the participants' cancer-related attitudes were assessed using logistic regression.

Results

The mean age of the study participants was 67.9 years, 34.5% were male, and the mean length of stay in the United States was 25.8 years. In total, 29% and 24.4% of the participants knew that breast cancer and prostate cancer, respectively, can be diagnosed early. Individuals with an elementary education were less likely to have sufficient knowledge of cancer prevention and diagnosis. Additionally, 93.5% of the population was aware that tobacco use can lead to cancer, and 84.5% knew that exposure to tobacco smoke can affect both the smoker and their family.

Conclusion

Older Latino/as possess knowledge about cancer causes yet lack knowledge regarding cancer prevention and diagnosis, potentially creating barriers and causing them to avoid treatment. Focusing on cancer-related health education among older Latino/as is a step toward appropriate and equitable cancer care.

Rural-Urban Disparities in Cancer Outcomes: Opportunities for Future Research

Cancer care disparities among rural populations are increasingly documented and may be worsening, likely because of the impact of rurality on access to state-of-the-art cancer prevention, diagnosis, and treatment services, as well as higher rates of risk factors such as smoking and obesity. In 2018, the American Society of Clinical Oncology undertook an initiative to understand and address factors contributing to rural cancer care disparities. A key pillar of this initiative was to identify knowledge gaps and promote the research needed to understand the magnitude of difference in outcomes in rural vs nonrural settings, the drivers of those differences, and interventions to address them. The purpose of this review is to describe continued knowledge gaps and areas of priority research to address them. We conducted a comprehensive literature review by searching the PubMed (Medline), Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases for studies published in English between 1971 and 2021 and restricted to primary reports from populations in the United States and abstracted data to synthesize current evidence and identify continued gaps in knowledge. Our review identified continuing gaps in the literature regarding the underlying causes of rural-urban disparities in cancer outcomes. Rapid advances in cancer care will worsen existing disparities in outcomes for rural patients without directed effort to understand and address barriers to high-quality care in these areas. Research should be prioritized to address ongoing knowledge gaps about the drivers of rurality-based disparities and preventative and corrective interventions.

Healthcare Access in Rural Alabama: Patients' Perspective on Access and Utilization

OBJECTIVES

Increasing healthcare access is a Healthy People 2030 priority. This study examined healthcare access from the residents' perspective in the two most rural counties in the United States and compared the findings with data from the 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) in rural and urban counties in Alabama.

METHODS

We conducted an in-person population-based survey using cluster sampling within census tracts assessing health insurance coverage, having a usual primary care provider, having had a routine healthcare visit within the past year, and barriers to care.

RESULTS

Among the 395 participants, 81.4% indicated having health insurance coverage, which was slightly lower than the BRFSS data for rural (87.6%) and urban counties in Alabama (87%); 89.6% of respondents indicated having a usual primary care provider compared with 84.3% of rural and 77.2% of urban residents; and 83.2% of participants indicated having had a routine healthcare visit in the last year compared with 77.3% of rural and 77.6% of urban residents. These indicators varied significantly across age, sex, and educational attainment and were consistent with BRFSS findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare access, as indicated by health insurance coverage and healthcare utilization, among residents in the two most rural US counties is comparable to access among rural and urban Alabamians. Primary care is a highly used resource in rural areas, and further research should characterize other social/behavioral factors that may explain the poor health outcomes seen in rural areas. In addition, BRFSS data continue to offer a reliable picture of healthcare access in rural areas.

Recommendations to encourage participation of individuals from diverse backgrounds in psychiatric genetic studies

We present innovative research practices in psychiatric genetic studies to ensure representation of individuals from diverse ancestry, sex assigned at birth, gender identity, age, body shape and size, and socioeconomic backgrounds. Due to histories of inappropriate and harmful practices against marginalized groups in both psychiatry and genetics, people of certain identities may be hesitant to participate in research studies. Yet their participation is essential to ensure diverse representation, as it is incorrect to assume that the same genetic and environmental factors influence the risk for various psychiatric disorders across all demographic groups. We present approaches developed as part of the Eating Disorders Genetics Initiative (EDGI), a study that required tailored approaches to recruit diverse populations across many countries. Considerations include research priorities and design, recruitment and study branding, transparency, and community investment and ownership. Ensuring representation in participants is costly and funders need to provide adequate support to achieve diversity in recruitment in prime awards, not just as supplemental afterthoughts. The need for diverse samples in genetic studies is critical to minimize the risk of perpetuating health disparities in psychiatry and other health research. Although the EDGI strategies were designed specifically to attract and enroll individuals with eating disorders, our approach is broadly applicable across psychiatry and other fields.

A Framework for Equitable Partnerships to Promote Cancer Prevention and Control in Rural Settings

Rural populations continue to experience persistent cancer disparities compared with urban populations particularly in cancers that can be prevented or detected early through screening and vaccination. Although the National Cancer Institute and the larger cancer research community have identified rural community partnerships as the foundation for reducing the disparities, we have identified limited application of community-based participatory research in cancer prevention and control research. Guided by the Community-Based Participatory Research Conceptual Model and our collective experience, we provide a framework for a community-cancer center partnership that focuses on promoting health equity. In this commentary, we articulate that the partnership process must foster capacity for communities and cancer centers, strive for rural representation in clinical trials and biobanking, build a pipeline for dissemination and implementation research, and create a bidirectional flow of knowledge between communities and academic institutions. Authentic partnerships with rural communities should be the ultimate goal of cancer centers, and the process described in this commentary can serve as an initial platform to build capacity and continue to strive toward that goal.

Collective Care Amid US Individualism Through COVID-19 Vaccine Trial Participation

We analyze interviews with participants in a COVID-19 vaccine trial to show how Americans navigate conflicting discourses of individual rights and collective responsibility by using individual health behavior to care for others. We argue that interviewees drew on ideologies of "collective biology" - understanding themselves as parts of bio-socially interrelated groups affected by any member's behavior - to hope their participation would aid collectives cohering around kinship, sex, age, race and ethnicity. Benefits (protecting family, representing one's group in vaccine development and modeling vaccine acceptance) existed alongside drawbacks (strife, reifying groups), to illustrate the ambivalence of caregiving amid inequality.