Race and Ethnicity Representation in Phase 2/3 Oncology Clinical Trial Publications: A Systematic Review.

Importance: The five 1997 Office of Management and Budget races in the US include American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Black or African American, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and White, with Hispanic ethnicity. Despite the Affordable Care Act mandating Office of Management and Budget-based collecting and reporting standards, race and ethnicity publishing in medical journals is inconsistent, despite being necessary to achieve health equity. Objective: To quantify race and ethnicity reporting rates and calculate representation quotients (RQs) in published oncology clinical trials. Evidence Review: In this systematic review, PubMed and Embase were queried for phase 2/3 clinical trials of the 6 most common noncutaneous solid cancers, published between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2022, in 4 high-impact journals. Trial characteristics were recorded. The RQs for each race and ethnicity were calculated by dividing the percent of representation in each clinical trial publication by the percent of year-matched, site-specific incident cancers in the US, compared with Kruskal-Wallis tests with Bonferroni correction (BC). Reporting was compared between journal publications and ClinicalTrials.gov. Findings: Among 1202 publications evaluated, 364 met inclusion criteria: 16 JAMA, 241 Journal of Clinical Oncology, 19 Lancet, and 88 New England Journal of Medicine. Publications included 268 209 patients (171 132 women [64%]), with a median of 356 (IQR, 131-800) patients per publication. Reported race and ethnicity included American Indian or Alaska Native in 52 (14%) publications, Asian in 196 (54%), Black or African American in 215 (59%), Hispanic in 67 (18%), Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander in 28 (8%), and White in 254 (70%). Median RQ varied across race (P < .001 BC), with 1.04 (IQR, 0.09-4.77) for Asian, 0.98 (IQR, 0.86-1.06) for White, 0.42 (IQR, 0.12-0.75) for Black or African American, and 0.00 (IQR, 0.00-0.00) for both American Indian or Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander patients. Sensitivity analyses showed similar findings on subset analysis for US-only clinical trials. There was significantly less race and ethnicity reporting in the clinical trial publications compared with ClinicalTrials.gov documentation for American Indian or Alaska Native (14% vs 45%; P < .001 per McNemar χ2 test with continuity correction [MC]) and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (8% vs 43%; P < .001 MC). Conclusions and Relevance: While most phase 2/3 oncology clinical trials published in high-impact journals report race and ethnicity, most did not report American Indian or Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander racial categories. Our findings support a call to action for consistent journal policies and transparent race and ethnicity reporting, in alignment with Affordable Care Act-concordant race and ethnicity federal reporting requirements.

Broadening Eligibility Criteria and Diversity among Patients for Cancer Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Certain populations have been historically underrepresented in clinical trials. Broadening eligibility criteria is one approach to inclusive clinical research and achieving enrollment goals. How broadened trial eligibility criteria affect the diversity of eligible participants is unknown. METHODS: Using a nationwide electronic health record-derived deidentified database, we identified a retrospective cohort of patients diagnosed with 22 cancer types between April 1, 2013 and December 31, 2022 who received systemic therapy (N=235,234) for cancer. We evaluated strict versus broadened eligibility criteria using performance status and liver, kidney, and hematologic function around first line of therapy. We performed logistic regression to estimate odds ratios for exclusion by strict criteria and their association with measures of patient diversity, including sex, age, race or ethnicity, and area-level socioeconomic status (SES); estimated the impact of broadening criteria on the number and distribution of eligible patients; and performed Cox regression to estimate hazard ratios for real-world overall survival (rwOS) comparing patients meeting strict versus broadened criteria. RESULTS: When applying common strict cutoffs for eligibility criteria to patients with complete data and weighting each cancer type equally, 48% of patients were eligible for clinical trials. Female (odds ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25 to 1.35), older (age 75+ vs. 18 to 49 years old: odds ratio, 3.04; 95% CI, 2.85 to 3.24), Latinx (odds ratio, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.39 to 1.54), non-Latinx Black (odds ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.16), and lower-SES patients were more likely to be excluded using strict eligibility criteria. Broadening criteria increased the number of eligible patients by 78%, with the strongest impact for older, female, non-Latinx Black, and lower-SES patients. Patients who met only broadened criteria had worse rwOS versus those with strict criteria (hazard ratio, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.27 to 1.34). CONCLUSIONS: Data-driven evaluation of clinical trial eligibility criteria may optimize the eligibility of certain historically underrepresented groups and promote access to more inclusive trials. (Sponsored by Flatiron Health.).

Racial and Ethnic Inequities in Cancer Care Continuity During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Those With SARS-CoV-2.

Importance: Racially and ethnically minoritized US adults were disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and experience poorer cancer outcomes, including inequities in cancer treatment delivery. Objective: To evaluate racial and ethnic disparities in cancer treatment delays and discontinuations (TDDs) among patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2 during different waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used data from the American Society of Clinical Oncology Survey on COVID-19 in Oncology Registry (data collected from April 2020 to September 2022), including patients with cancer also diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 during their care at 69 US practices. Racial and ethnic differences were examined during 5 different waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States based on case surge (before July 2020, July to November 2020, December 2020 to March 2021, April 2021 to February 2022, and March to September 2022). Exposures: Race and ethnicity. Main Outcomes and Measures: TDD was defined as any cancer treatment postponed more than 2 weeks or cancelled with no plans to reschedule. To evaluate TDD associations with race and ethnicity, adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) were estimated using multivariable Poisson regression, accounting for nonindependence of patients within clinics, adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, comorbidities, cancer type, cancer extent, and SARS-CoV-2 severity (severe defined as death, hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, or mechanical ventilation). Results: A total of 4054 patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2 were included (143 [3.5%] American Indian or Alaska Native, 176 [4.3%] Asian, 517 [12.8%] Black or African American, 469 [11.6%] Hispanic or Latinx, and 2747 [67.8%] White; 2403 [59.3%] female; 1419 [35.1%] aged 50-64 years; 1928 [47.7%] aged ≥65 years). The analysis focused on patients scheduled (at SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis) to receive drug-based therapy (3682 [90.8%]), radiation therapy (382 [9.4%]), surgery (218 [5.4%]), or transplant (30 [0.7%]), of whom 1853 (45.7%) experienced TDD. Throughout the pandemic, differences in racial and ethnic inequities based on case surge with overall TDD decreased over time. In multivariable analyses, non-Hispanic Black (third wave: aPR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.31-1.85) and Hispanic or Latinx (third wave: aPR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.13-1.62) patients with cancer were more likely to experience TDD compared with non-Hispanic White patients during the first year of the pandemic. By 2022, non-Hispanic Asian patients (aPR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.08-2.12) were more likely to experience TDD compared with non-Hispanic White patients, and non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native patients were less likely (aPR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.16-0.89). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2, racial and ethnic inequities existed in TDD throughout the pandemic; however, the disproportionate burden among racially and ethnically minoritized patients with cancer varied across SARS-CoV-2 waves. These inequities may lead to downstream adverse impacts on cancer mortality among minoritized adults in the United States.

Equitable inclusion of diverse populations in oncology clinical trials: deterrents and drivers.

The burden of cancer exerts a disproportionate impact across different regions and population subsets. Disease-specific attributes, coupled with genetic and socioeconomic factors, significantly influence cancer treatment outcomes. Precision oncology promises the development of safe and effective options for specific ethnic phenotypes and clinicodemographic profiles. Currently, clinical trials are concentrated in resource-rich geographies with younger, healthier, white, educated, and empowered populations. Vulnerable and marginalized people are often deprived of opportunities to participate in clinical trials. Despite consistent endeavors by regulators, industry, and other stakeholders, factors including diversity in trial regulations and patient and provider-related cultural, logistic, and operational barriers limit the inclusiveness of clinical trials. Understanding and addressing these constraints by collaborative actions involving regulatory initiatives, industry, patient advocacy groups, community engagement in a culturally sensitive manner, and designing and promoting decentralized clinical trials are vital to establishing a clinical research ecosystem that promotes equity in the representation of population subgroups.

Plant-based dietary patterns and mortality from all causes, cardiovascular disease, and cancer: The Multiethnic Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Plant-based dietary patterns have been associated with lower risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), some cancers, and related mortality in U.S. POPULATIONS: However, the quality of plant foods has rarely been considered in the association between plant-based diets and mortality, especially in a population with various racial and ethnic backgrounds. We investigated whether the adherence to plant-based dietary patterns and the healthiness of plant foods are associated with mortality from all causes, CVD, and cancer and evaluated how the association varies by race and ethnicity. METHODS: A total of 144,729 African American, Japanese American, Latino, Native Hawaiian, and White men and women who participated in the Multiethnic Cohort Study (1993-2019) were included. Cox models were used to estimate HR and 95% CI of mortality from all causes, CVD, and cancer across quintiles of three plant-based diet scores: overall plant-based diet index (PDI), healthful plant-based diet index (hPDI), and unhealthful plant-based diet index (uPDI). RESULTS: Over an average 21 years of follow-up, we identified 65,087 deaths, including 18,663 from CVD and 16,171 from cancer. Comparing the highest versus lowest quintiles, greater scores of PDI and hPDI were associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality in both men (HR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.82-0.89 for PDI; HR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.85-0.91 for hPDI; both P for trend <0.0001) and women (HR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.86-0.93 for PDI; HR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.83-0.89 for hPDI; both P for trend <0.0001). An increased risk of all-cause mortality with uPDI was observed only in women (HR = 1.11, 95% CI: 1.07-1.15, P for trend <0.0001; P for heterogeneity by sex = 0.019). A similar trend was shown for CVD mortality with a significant increase in risk with uPDI for both men and women. PDI was associated with a lower risk of cancer mortality in men (HR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.80-0.92, P for trend <0.0001), while neither hPDI nor uPDI was associated in either sex. Compared with the other racial and ethnic groups within each sex, the association of uPDI with all-cause mortality was stronger in White men (P for heterogeneity by race and ethnicity = 0.009) and weaker in Latino women (P for heterogeneity = 0.002). CONCLUSION: A healthy plant-based dietary pattern emphasizing the quality of plant foods was associated with a lower risk of all-cause and CVD mortality in both men and women, although the magnitude of the associations varied across racial and ethnic groups.

Scoping Review of Barriers and Facilitators to Recruitment of Black People With Cancer in Biospecimen-Based Research.

The increasing focus on precision medicine to optimize cancer treatments and improve cancer outcomes is an opportunity to consider equitable engagement of people racialized as Black or African American (B/AA) in biospecimen-based cancer research. B/AA people have the highest cancer incidence and mortality rates compared with all other racial and ethnic groups in the United States, yet are under-represented in biospecimen-based research. A narrative scoping review was conducted to understand the current literature on barriers, facilitators, and evidence-based strategies associated with the engagement of B/AA people with cancer in biospecimen research. Three comprehensive searches of MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and Scopus were conducted. Of 770 studies generated by the search, 10 met all inclusion criteria for this review. The most frequently reported barriers to engagement of B/AA people in biospecimen research were lack of biospecimen research awareness, fear of medical harm, and violation of personal health information privacy, resource constraints, and medical mistrust. Key facilitators included previous exposure to research, knowledge about underlying genetic causes of cancer, and altruism. Recommended strategies to increase participation of B/AA people in biospecimen-based research included community engagement, transparent communication, workforce diversity, education and training, and research participant incentives. Inclusion of B/AA people in biospecimen-based research has the potential to advance the promise of precision oncology for all patients and reduce racial disparities in cancer outcomes.

Characterizing Cancer Burden in the American Indian Population in North Carolina.

BACKGROUND: The American Indian (AI) population in North Carolina has limited access to the Indian Health Service. Consequently, cancer burden and disparities may differ from national estimates. We describe the AI cancer population and examine AI-White disparities in cancer incidence and mortality. METHODS: We identified cancer cases diagnosed among adult AI and White populations between 2014 and 2018 from the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry. We estimated incidence and mortality rate ratios (IRR and MRR) by race. In addition, between the AI and White populations, we estimated the ratio of relative frequency differences [RRF, with 95% confidence limits (CL)] of clinical and sociodemographic characteristics. Finally, we evaluated the geographic distribution of incident diagnoses among AI populations. RESULTS: Our analytic sample included 2,161 AI and 204,613 White individuals with cancer. Compared with the White population, the AI population was more likely to live in rural areas (48% vs. 25%; RRF, 1.89; 95% CL, 1.81-1.97) and to have Medicaid (18% vs. 7%; RRF, 2.49; 95% CL, 2.27-2.71). Among the AI population, the highest age-standardized incidence rates were female breast, followed by prostate and lung and bronchus. Liver cancer incidence was significantly higher among the AI population than White population (IRR, 1.27; 95% CL, 1.01-1.59). AI patients had higher mortality rates for prostate (MRR, 1.72; CL, 1.09-2.70), stomach (MRR, 1.82; 95% CL, 1.15-2.86), and liver (MRR, 1.70; 95% CL, 1.25-2.33) cancers compared with White patients. CONCLUSIONS: To reduce prostate, stomach, and liver cancer disparities among AI populations in North Carolina, multi-modal interventions targeting risk factors and increasing screening and treatment are needed. IMPACT: This study identifies cancer disparities that can inform targeted interventions to improve outcomes among AI populations in North Carolina.

Toward Equitable Precision Oncology: Monitoring Racial and Ethnic Inclusion in Genomics and Clinical Trials.

PURPOSE: Ethnic diversity in cancer research is crucial as race/ethnicity influences cancer incidence, survival, drug response, molecular pathways, and epigenetic phenomena. In 2018, we began a project to examine racial/ethnic diversity in cancer research, with a commitment to review these disparities every 4 years. This report is our second assessment, detailing the present state of racial/ethnic diversity in cancer genomics and clinical trials. METHODS: To study racial/ethnic inclusion in cancer genomics, we extracted ethnic records from all data sets available at cBioPortal (n = 125,128 patients) and cancer-related genome-wide association studies (n = 28,011,282 patients) between 2018 and 2022. Concerning clinical trials, we selected studies related to breast cancer (n = 125,518 patients, 181 studies), lung cancer (n = 34,329 patients, 119 studies), and colorectal cancer (n = 40,808 patients, 105 studies). RESULTS: In cancer genomics (N = 28,136,410), 3% of individuals lack racial/ethnic registries; tumor samples were collected predominantly from White patients (89.14%), followed by Asian (7%), African American (0.55%), and Hispanic (0.21%) patients and other populations (0.1%). In clinical trials (N = 200,655), data on race/ethnicity are missing for 60.14% of the participants; for individuals whose race/ethnicity was recorded, most were characterized as White (28.33%), followed by Asian (7.64%), African (1.79), other ethnicities (1.37), and Hispanic (0.73). Racial/ethnic representation significantly deviates from global ethnic proportions (P ≤ .001) across all data sets, with White patients outnumbering other ethnic groups by a factor of approximately 4-6. CONCLUSION: Our second update on racial/ethnic representation in cancer research highlights the persistent overrepresentation of White populations in cancer genomics and a notable absence of racial/ethnic information across clinical trials. To ensure more equitable and effective precision oncology, future efforts should address the reasons behind the insufficient representation of ethnically diverse populations in cancer research.

Utilising the CREATE quality appraisal tool to analyse Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples' involvement and reporting of cancer research in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander involvement in research focusing on cancer experiences using an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander quality appraisal tool (the QAT). METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples' experiences associated with cancer, recently published elsewhere. We then appraised articles for the inclusion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander-led research, community consultation, and involvement. RESULTS: 91 articles were appraised. A lack of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander-led research and consultation was reported in the majority of articles, only 10 (11%) demonstrated success across seven (50%) or more questions of the QAT. CONCLUSIONS: This review underscores the need for anti-racist research and publication practices that actively engage Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and researchers. This approach is vital to enhance cancer outcomes within these communities. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: To advance and prioritise appropriate involvement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in cancer research, the onus must be on 'systems owners,' including academic journals and institutions, to require and report genuine engagement as standard practice. Researchers will produce higher-calibre research with a strengths-based focus, advancing the cause of equitable research.

Universal Tobacco Screening and Opt-Out Treatment Referral Strategy Among Patients Diagnosed With Cancer by Race and Ethnicity.

This quality improvement study examines whether a universal screening and opt-out referral model could promote racial and ethnic equity in access and use of tobacco treatment among patients with cancer.

Analysis and Optimization of Equitable US Cancer Clinical Trial Center Access by Travel Time.

Importance: Racially minoritized and socioeconomically disadvantaged populations are currently underrepresented in clinical trials. Data-driven, quantitative analyses and strategies are required to help address this inequity. Objective: To systematically analyze the geographical distribution of self-identified racial and socioeconomic demographics within commuting distance to cancer clinical trial centers and other hospitals in the US. Design, Setting, and Participants: This longitudinal quantitative study used data from the US Census 2020 Decennial and American community survey (which collects data from all US residents), OpenStreetMap, National Cancer Institute-designated Cancer Centers list, Nature Index of Cancer Research Health Institutions, National Trial registry, and National Homeland Infrastructure Foundation-Level Data. Statistical analyses were performed on data collected between 2006 and 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Population distributions of socioeconomic deprivation indices and self-identified race within 30-, 60-, and 120-minute 1-way driving commute times from US cancer trial sites. Map overlay of high deprivation index and high diversity areas with existing hospitals, existing major cancer trial centers, and commuting distance to the closest cancer trial center. Results: The 78 major US cancer trial centers that are involved in 94% of all US cancer trials and included in this study were found to be located in areas with socioeconomically more affluent populations with higher proportions of self-identified White individuals (+10.1% unpaired mean difference; 95% CI, +6.8% to +13.7%) compared with the national average. The top 10th percentile of all US hospitals has catchment populations with a range of absolute sum difference from 2.4% to 35% from one-third each of Asian/multiracial/other (Asian alone, American Indian or Alaska Native alone, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander alone, some other race alone, population of 2 or more races), Black or African American, and White populations. Currently available data are sufficient to identify diverse census tracks within preset commuting times (30, 60, or 120 minutes) from all hospitals in the US (N = 7623). Maps are presented for each US city above 500 000 inhabitants, which display all prospective hospitals and major cancer trial sites within commutable distance to racially diverse and socioeconomically disadvantaged populations. Conclusion and Relevance: This study identified biases in the sociodemographics of populations living within commuting distance to US-based cancer trial sites and enables the determination of more equitably commutable prospective satellite hospital sites that could be mobilized for enhanced racial and socioeconomic representation in clinical trials. The maps generated in this work may inform the design of future clinical trials or investigations in enrollment and retention strategies for clinical trials; however, other recruitment barriers still need to be addressed to ensure racial and socioeconomic demographics within the geographical vicinity of a clinical site can translate to equitable trial participant representation.

Exploring genetic associations of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis with extraintestinal cancers in European and East Asian populations.

Background: Previous studies have reported associations of Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) with the risks of extraintestinal cancers, but the causality remains unclear. Methods: Using genetic variations robustly associated with CD and UC extracted from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) as instrumental variables. Nine types of extraintestinal cancers of European and Asian populations were selected as outcomes. We used the inverse variance weighted method as the primary approach for two-sample Mendelian randomization analysis. Sensitivity analyses were carried out to evaluate the reliability of our findings. Results: In the European population, we found that CD showed a potential causal relationship with pancreatic cancer (OR: 1.1042; 95% CI: 1.0087-1.2088; P=0.0318). Meanwhile, both CD (outliers excluded: OR: 1.0208; 95% CI: 1.0079-1.0339; P=0.0015) and UC (outliers excluded: OR: 1.0220; 95% CI: 1.0051-1.0393; P=0.0108) were associated with a slight increase in breast cancer risk. Additionally, UC exhibited a potential causal effect on cervical cancer (outliers excluded: OR: 1.1091; 95% CI: 1.0286-1.1960; P=0.0071). In the East Asian population, CD had significant causal effects on pancreatic cancer (OR: 1.1876; 95% CI: 1.0741-1.3132; P=0.0008) and breast cancer (outliers excluded: OR: 0.9452; 95% CI: 0.9096-0.9822; P=0.0040). For UC, it exhibited significant causal associations with gastric cancer (OR: 1.1240; 95% CI: 1.0624-1.1891; P=4.7359×10-5), bile duct cancer (OR: 1.3107; 95% CI: 1.0983-1.5641; P=0.0027), hepatocellular carcinoma (OR: 1.2365; 95% CI: 1.1235-1.3608; P=1.4007×10-5) and cervical cancer (OR: 1.3941; 95% CI: 1.1708-1.6599; P=0.0002), as well as a potential causal effect on lung cancer (outliers excluded: OR: 1.1313; 95% CI: 1.0280-1.2449; P=0.0116). Conclusions: Our study provided evidence that genetically predicted CD may be a risk factor for pancreatic and breast cancers in the European population, and for pancreatic cancer in the East Asian population. Regarding UC, it may be a risk factor for cervical and breast cancers in Europeans, and for gastric, bile duct, hepatocellular, lung, and cervical cancers in East Asians. Therefore, patients with CD and UC need to emphasize screening and prevention of site-specific extraintestinal cancers.

Traditional Mexican dietary pattern and cancer risk among women of Mexican descent.

PURPOSE: To examine the association of a traditional Mexican diet score with risk of total, breast, and colorectal cancer among women of Mexican ethnic descent in the Women's Health Initiative (WHI). METHODS: Participants were WHI enrollees who self-identified as being of Mexican descent. Data from food frequency questionnaires self-administered at study baseline were used to calculate the MexD score, with higher scores indicating greater adherence to an a priori-defined traditional Mexican diet (high in dietary fiber, vegetables, and legumes). Incident cancers were self-reported by participants from 1993 to 2020 and adjudicated by trained physicians. We used multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Among 2,343 Mexican descent women (median baseline age: 59 years), a total of 270 cancers (88 breast, 37 colorectal) occurred during a mean follow-up of 14.4 years. The highest tertile of MexD score was associated with a lower risk of all-cancer incidence (HR: 0.67; 95% CI 0.49-0.91; p-trend: 0.01) and colorectal cancer (HR: 0.38; 95% CI 0.14-0.998; p-trend < 0.05), with each unit increase in the MexD score associated with a 6% lower risk of all-cancer incidence (HR: 0.94; 95% CI 0.88-0.99). There was no statistically significant association with risk of breast cancer. CONCLUSION: Consumption of a traditional Mexican diet was associated with a significantly lower risk of all-cancer incidence and colorectal cancer. Confirmation of these findings in future studies is important, given the prevalence of colorectal cancer and a growing U.S. population of women of Mexican descent.

Systematic Review of Interventions Addressing Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Cancer Care and Health Outcomes.

PURPOSE: Cancer health disparities result from complex interactions among socioeconomic, behavioral, and biological factors, disproportionately affecting marginalized racial and ethnic groups. The objective of this review is to synthesize existing evidence on interventions addressing racial or ethnic disparities in cancer-related health care access and clinical outcomes. METHODS: A comprehensive search of Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection was conducted from database inception to February 23, 2023. Controlled vocabulary and keywords helped to identify studies on cancer-related disparities and interventions in adults age 18 years or older. Two reviewers followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis reporting guidelines. Study quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tool. RESULTS: Of 7,526 screened studies, 34 met the inclusion criteria involving 24,134 participants. Most studies focused on breast cancer (n = 17) and Hispanic/Latino populations (n = 10) and enrolled participants primarily from community-based sites (n = 19). Twenty-one studies examined patient-centered outcomes, such as health-related quality of life and psychological well-being, while 15 studies assessed process-of-care outcomes, such as timeliness of care. Most studies followed a community-based participatory research framework. Five patient-centered outcome studies reported a positive intervention effect, often combining cancer education with psychological well-being interventions. Among the 15 process-of-care outcome studies, nine reported positive effects, with the majority (n = 8) being navigation-based interventions. CONCLUSION: This systematic review emphasizes the vital role of community partnerships in addressing racial and ethnic disparities in oncology care and highlights the need for standardized approaches in intervention research because of the heterogeneity of studied interventions. Furthermore, the prevailing emphasis on breast cancer and Hispanic populations indicates the need for future investigations into other priority demographic groups.

African American and Hispanic Cancer Survivors' and Caregivers' Experiences in Nebraska.

Racial and ethnic minority populations experience poorer cancer outcomes compared to non-Hispanic White populations, but qualitative studies have typically focused on single subpopulations. We explored experiences, perceptions, and attitudes toward cancer care services across the care continuum from screening through treatment among African American and Hispanic residents of Nebraska to identify unique needs for education, community outreach, and quality improvement. We conducted four focus groups (N = 19), April-August 2021 with people who were aged 30 or older and who self-identified as African American or Hispanic and as cancer survivors or caregivers. Sessions followed a structured facilitation guide, were audio recorded and transcribed, and were analyzed with a directed content analysis approach. Historical, cultural, and socioeconomic factors often led to delayed cancer care, such as general disuse of healthcare until symptoms were severe due to mistrust and cost of missing work. Obstacles to care included financial barriers, transportation, lack of support groups, and language-appropriate services (for Hispanic groups). Knowledge of cancer and cancer prevention varied widely; we identified a need for better community education about cancer within the urban Hispanic community. Participants had positive experiences and a sense of hope from the cancer care team. African American and Hispanic participants shared many similar perspectives about cancer care. Our results are being used in collaboration with national and regional cancer support organizations to expand their reach in communities of color, but structural and cultural barriers still need to be addressed.

Ethnic disparities in cancer mortality in the capital and northeast of the State of São Paulo, Brazil 2001-17.

PURPOSE: There is a paucity of studies investigating cancer disparities in groups defined by ethnicity in transitioning economies. We examined the influence of ethnicity on mortality for the leading cancer types in São Paulo, Brazil, comparing patterns in the capital and the northeast of the state. METHODS: Cancer deaths were obtained from a Brazilian public government database for the Barretos region (2003-2017) and the municipality of São Paulo (2001-2015). Age-standardized rates (ASR) per 100,000 persons-years, by cancer type and sex, for five self-declared racial classifications (white, black, eastern origin (Asian), mixed ethnicity (pardo), and indigenous Brazilians), were calculated using the world standard population. RESULTS: Black Brazilians had higher mortality rates for most common cancer types in Barretos, whereas in São Paulo, white Brazilians had higher rates of mortality from breast, colorectal, and lung cancer. In both regions, lung cancer was the leading cause of cancer death among white, black, and pardo Brazilians, with colorectal cancer deaths leading among Asian Brazilians. Black and pardo Brazilians had higher cervical cancer mortality rates than white Brazilians. CONCLUSION: There are substantial disparities in mortality from different cancers in São Paulo according to ethnicity, pointing to inequities in access to health care services.

Black cancer patients navigating a health-care system of racial discrimination.

BACKGROUND: Exposure to racial discrimination may exacerbate disparities throughout the cancer care continuum. Therefore, we explored how experiences of racial discrimination in the health-care setting manifest for Black cancer patients and how it contributes to racial disparities in cancer care. METHODS: This qualitative analysis used semistructured in-depth interviews with Black cancer survivors not on active treatment from May 2019 to March 2020. All interviews were audio recorded, professionally transcribed, and uploaded into Dedoose software for analysis. We identified major themes and subthemes that highlight exposure to racial discrimination and its consequences for Black cancer patients when receiving cancer care. RESULTS: Participants included 18 Black cancer survivors, aged 29-88 years. Most patients experienced racial discrimination when seeking care. Participants experienced racial discrimination from their interactions with health-care staff, medical assistants, front desk staff, and health insurance administrators. Exposure to overt racial discrimination in the health-care setting was rooted in racial stereotypes and manifested through verbal insults such as physicians using phrases such as "you people." These experiences impacted the ability of the health-care delivery system to demonstrate trustworthiness. Patients noted "walking out" of their visit and not having their health issues addressed. Despite experiences with racial discrimination, patients still sought care out of necessity believing it was an inevitable part of the Black individual experience. CONCLUSION: We identified that exposure to racial discrimination in the health-care setting is pervasive, affects health-seeking behaviors, and degrades the patient-clinician relationship, which may likely contribute to racial disparities in cancer care.