• SKIP TO CONTENT
  • SKIP NAVIGATION
  • Patient Resources
    • COVID-19 Patient Resource Center
    • Clinical Trials
    • Search Clinical Trials
    • Patient Notification System
    • What is Clinical Research?
    • Volunteering for a Clinical Trial
    • Understanding Informed Consent
    • Useful Resources
    • FDA Approved Drugs
  • Professional Resources
    • Research Center Profiles
    • Clinical Trial Listings
    • Market Research
    • FDA Approved Drugs
    • Training Guides
    • Books
    • eLearning
    • Events
    • Newsletters
    • White Papers
    • SOPs
    • eCFR and Guidances
  • White Papers
  • Trial Listings
  • Advertise
  • COVID-19
  • iConnect
  • Sign In
  • Create Account
  • Sign Out
  • My Account
Home » Oncology Trials Need to Make More Progress on Diversity, Study Finds

Oncology Trials Need to Make More Progress on Diversity, Study Finds

January 9, 2023

A cross-sectional study of 25 novel oncology drug/biologic sponsors has found “substantial room for improvement” on trial diversity for many of the sponsors, many of which represent the highest ranks of industry.

Researchers from Yale, Stanford and Bioethics International assessed sponsors of novel oncology therapeutics approved by the FDA between 2012 and 2017 to help develop a metric for measuring the fair inclusion of women, older adults (age 65 and up) and racial/ethnic minority groups in pivotal trials.

The study, published in BMJ, evaluated sponsors, their trials and their products on diversity efforts using three measures: transparency (public reporting of participant age, sex and racial/ethnic identity), representation (whether trial participant demographics represented more than 80 percent of the U.S. patient population for the condition) and fair inclusion (the average transparency and representation scores overall and for each demographic group).

Just one sponsor — United Therapeutics — earned perfect fair inclusion marks across the board.

Seven sponsors received top-tier “gold” ratings for scoring in the top quarter of the group: Puma Biotechnology, Sanofi and Takeda (all 89 percent); Amgen and Bristol Myers Squibb (both 88 percent); and Eli Lilly and Merck KGaA (both 87 percent).

Five — Otsuka, Pfizer, Johnson and Johnson, Gilead and Eisai — received “silver” ratings for scoring above the median company score but below the top quarter. The remainder, which scored beneath the median company score, were considered “unrated.”

Drilling down into the study findings, several diversity gaps became apparent. Of the 25 companies, all reported on participant gender, but only 14 (56 percent) were found to adequately represent women in their pivotal trials, while 13 (52 percent) were found to fairly include women.

Just six companies (24 percent) transparently reported ethnic/racial minority identity data, four (16 percent) adequately represented minority groups, and just one sponsor (4 percent) was found to fairly include these patients in their pivotal oncology trials.

Specifically, none of the companies adequately represented Latinx patients, while only four (16 percent) of the companies adequately represented Black patients. Asian patients were better represented but their numbers were still low, being adequately represented by 12 (48 percent) of the companies, according to the analysis.

Inclusion of older adult patients was also found seriously wanting. Ten (40 percent) of the sponsors transparently reported participant age, six (24 percent) adequately represented older adults and five (20 percent) fairly included this population in their pivotal trials, the researchers found.

“Although a few sponsors have done well, most have substantial room for improvement with regards to their inclusion of older adults and racially and ethnically minoritized patients and, to a lesser extent women, in cancer pivotal trials,” the researchers concluded.

Read the full study findings here: https://bit.ly/3QiROtB.

 

To view more CenterWatch Weekly stories, click here.

Upcoming Events

  • 16Feb

    Fundamentals of FDA Inspection Management: Reduce Anxiety, Increase Inspection Success

  • 21May

    WCG MAGI Clinical Research Conference – 2023 East

Featured Products

  • Spreadsheet Validation: Tools and Techniques to Make Data in Excel Compliant

    Spreadsheet Validation: Tools and Techniques to Make Data in Excel Compliant

  • Surviving an FDA GCP Inspection

    Surviving an FDA GCP Inspection: Resources for Investigators, Sponsors, CROs and IRBs

Featured Stories

  • SurveywBlueBackground-360x240.png

    Sites Name Tech Acceptance as Essential Factor in Selection of Sponsors, Survey Finds

  • TrendsInsights2023-360x240.png

    WCG Clinical Research Trends and Insights for 2023, Part Two

  • TimeMoneyEffort-360x240.png

    Time is Money and So Is Effort, Budgeting Experts Say

  • TrendsInsights2023A-360x240.png

    WCG Clinical Research Trends and Insights for 2023, Part Three

Standard Operating Procedures for Risk-Based Monitoring of Clinical Trials

The information you need to adapt your monitoring plan to changing times.

Learn More Here
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Do Not Sell or Share My Data

Footer Logo

300 N. Washington St., Suite 200, Falls Church, VA 22046, USA

Phone 617.948.5100 – Toll free 866.219.3440

Copyright © 2023. All Rights Reserved. Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing