Representation of women in clinical trials supporting FDA-approval of contemporary cancer therapies

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY International Journal of Cancer Pub Date : 2024-08-19 DOI:10.1002/ijc.35110
Sujay Kalathoor, Sanam Ghazi, Beryl Otieno, Melissa A. Babcook, Sunnia Chen, Neha Nidhi, Junu Bae, Jovan Pierre-Charles, Khadijah Breathett, Sula Mazimba, Amber Johnson, LaPrincess Brewer, Selma Mohammed, Rebecca R. Carter, Janice M. Bonsu, Mussammat Ferdousi, Onaopepo Kola-Kehinde, Eric McLaughlin, Jonathan Brammer, Patrick Ruz, Sarah Khan, Bismarck Odei, Darrion Mitchell, Lai Wei, Prem Patel, Electra D. Paskett, Daniel Addison
{"title":"Representation of women in clinical trials supporting FDA-approval of contemporary cancer therapies","authors":"Sujay Kalathoor,&nbsp;Sanam Ghazi,&nbsp;Beryl Otieno,&nbsp;Melissa A. Babcook,&nbsp;Sunnia Chen,&nbsp;Neha Nidhi,&nbsp;Junu Bae,&nbsp;Jovan Pierre-Charles,&nbsp;Khadijah Breathett,&nbsp;Sula Mazimba,&nbsp;Amber Johnson,&nbsp;LaPrincess Brewer,&nbsp;Selma Mohammed,&nbsp;Rebecca R. Carter,&nbsp;Janice M. Bonsu,&nbsp;Mussammat Ferdousi,&nbsp;Onaopepo Kola-Kehinde,&nbsp;Eric McLaughlin,&nbsp;Jonathan Brammer,&nbsp;Patrick Ruz,&nbsp;Sarah Khan,&nbsp;Bismarck Odei,&nbsp;Darrion Mitchell,&nbsp;Lai Wei,&nbsp;Prem Patel,&nbsp;Electra D. Paskett,&nbsp;Daniel Addison","doi":"10.1002/ijc.35110","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Contemporary anticancer therapies frequently have different efficacy and side effects in men and women. Yet, whether women are well-represented in pivotal trials supporting contemporary anticancer drugs is unknown. Leveraging the Drugs@FDA database, clinicaltrials.gov, MEDLINE, and publicly available FDA-drug-reviews, we identified all pivotal (phase II and III) non-sex specific trials supporting FDA-approval of anticancer drugs (1998–2018). Observed-enrollment-rates were compared to expected-population-rates derived from concurrent US-National-Cancer-Institute's Surveillance-Epidemiology-and-End-Results (SEER) reported rates and US-Census databases. Primary outcome was the proportional representation of women across trials, evaluated by a participation-to-prevalence ratio (PPR), according to cancer type. Secondary outcome was the report of any sex-specific analysis of efficacy and/or safety, irrespective of treatment-arm. Overall, there were 148 trials, enrolling 60,216 participants (60.5 ± 4.0 years, 40.7% female, 79.1% biologic, targeted, or immune-based therapies) evaluating 99 drugs. Sex was reported in 146 (98.6%) trials, wherein 40.7% (24,538) were women, compared to 59.3% (35,678) men (<i>p</i> &lt; .01). Altogether, women were under-represented in 66.9% trials compared to the proportional incidence of cancers by respective disease type; weight-average PPR of 0.91 (relative difference: -9.1%, <i>p</i> &lt; .01). Women were most under-represented in gastric (PPR = 0.63), liver (PPR = 0.71), and lung (PPR = .81) cancer trials. Sex-based safety data was reported in 4.0% trials. There was no association between adequate female enrollment and drug efficacy (HR: 0.616 vs. 0.613, <i>p</i> = .96). Over time, there was no difference in the percentage of women recruited into clinical trials. Among pivotal clinical trials supporting contemporary FDA-approved cancer drugs, women were frequently under-represented and sex-specific-efficacy and safety-outcomes were commonly not reported.</p>","PeriodicalId":180,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Cancer","volume":"155 11","pages":"1958-1968"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ijc.35110","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijc.35110","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Contemporary anticancer therapies frequently have different efficacy and side effects in men and women. Yet, whether women are well-represented in pivotal trials supporting contemporary anticancer drugs is unknown. Leveraging the Drugs@FDA database, clinicaltrials.gov, MEDLINE, and publicly available FDA-drug-reviews, we identified all pivotal (phase II and III) non-sex specific trials supporting FDA-approval of anticancer drugs (1998–2018). Observed-enrollment-rates were compared to expected-population-rates derived from concurrent US-National-Cancer-Institute's Surveillance-Epidemiology-and-End-Results (SEER) reported rates and US-Census databases. Primary outcome was the proportional representation of women across trials, evaluated by a participation-to-prevalence ratio (PPR), according to cancer type. Secondary outcome was the report of any sex-specific analysis of efficacy and/or safety, irrespective of treatment-arm. Overall, there were 148 trials, enrolling 60,216 participants (60.5 ± 4.0 years, 40.7% female, 79.1% biologic, targeted, or immune-based therapies) evaluating 99 drugs. Sex was reported in 146 (98.6%) trials, wherein 40.7% (24,538) were women, compared to 59.3% (35,678) men (p < .01). Altogether, women were under-represented in 66.9% trials compared to the proportional incidence of cancers by respective disease type; weight-average PPR of 0.91 (relative difference: -9.1%, p < .01). Women were most under-represented in gastric (PPR = 0.63), liver (PPR = 0.71), and lung (PPR = .81) cancer trials. Sex-based safety data was reported in 4.0% trials. There was no association between adequate female enrollment and drug efficacy (HR: 0.616 vs. 0.613, p = .96). Over time, there was no difference in the percentage of women recruited into clinical trials. Among pivotal clinical trials supporting contemporary FDA-approved cancer drugs, women were frequently under-represented and sex-specific-efficacy and safety-outcomes were commonly not reported.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
妇女在支持 FDA 批准当代癌症疗法的临床试验中的代表性。
当代抗癌疗法对男性和女性的疗效和副作用往往不同。然而,在支持当代抗癌药物的关键性试验中,女性是否具有充分的代表性还不得而知。利用 Drugs@FDA 数据库、clinicaltrials.gov、MEDLINE 和公开的 FDA 药物评论,我们确定了所有支持 FDA 批准抗癌药物的关键性(II 期和 III 期)非性别特定试验(1998-2018 年)。我们将观察到的注册率与同时从美国国家癌症研究所的 "监测-流行病学-最终结果"(SEER)报告率和美国人口普查数据库中得出的预期人口比例进行了比较。主要结果是根据癌症类型,通过参与率与患病率之比(PPR)评估女性在各项试验中的比例。次要结果是对疗效和/或安全性的性别特异性分析报告,与治疗臂无关。总体而言,共有 148 项试验,60216 名参与者(60.5 ± 4.0 岁,40.7% 为女性,79.1% 为生物、靶向或免疫疗法)参与了 99 种药物的评估。146项(98.6%)试验报告了性别,其中女性占40.7%(24,538人),男性占59.3%(35,678人)(p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
13.40
自引率
3.10%
发文量
460
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Cancer (IJC) is the official journal of the Union for International Cancer Control—UICC; it appears twice a month. IJC invites submission of manuscripts under a broad scope of topics relevant to experimental and clinical cancer research and publishes original Research Articles and Short Reports under the following categories: -Cancer Epidemiology- Cancer Genetics and Epigenetics- Infectious Causes of Cancer- Innovative Tools and Methods- Molecular Cancer Biology- Tumor Immunology and Microenvironment- Tumor Markers and Signatures- Cancer Therapy and Prevention
期刊最新文献
Peritoneal lavage fluid minimal residual cancer cells detection for early prediction of peritoneal metastasis in gastric cancer: A multi-cohort validation study. Comments on "Evaluating ChatGPT's recommendations for systematic treatment decisions in recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: Perspectives from experts and junior doctors". Comments on "Risk factors for low-risk prostate cancer: A retrospective cohort study within the FinRSPC trial". Th17 cells favor migration and invasiveness of cervical cancer cells under hypoxia in an IGF2BP2-dependent manner. Unraveling glymphatic disruption in brain tumors: Insights from perivascular space network analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1