RESUMO
Background: The research community has historically failed to enroll diverse groups of participants in dementia clinical trials. A unique aspect of dementia care research is the requirement of a study partner, who can attest to the care recipient's clinical and functional capacity. The aim of this study is to assess racial and ethnic differences and the importance of various trial considerations among dementia caregivers, in their decision to participate in clinical research as study partners. Method: We embedded a vignette about a hypothetical dementia clinical trial in a nationally representative survey of U.S. dementia caregivers, oversampling non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic caregivers. Dementia caregivers were asked about their willingness to participate in the trial with their care recipient and rated the importance of nine considerations in hypothetical decisions to participate. Caregiver demographic characteristics were analyzed as predictors of trial participation in a base demographic model. In a second reasons model caregiver demographic characteristics and the rated importance of the nine considerations were separately analyzed as predictors; both models used survey-weighted logistic regression. Result: The sample consisted of 610 dementia caregivers, including 156 non-Hispanic Black and 122 Hispanic caregiver participants. In the base demographic model, hypothetical trial participation was negatively associated with older caregiver age (OR (odds ratio) = 0.72, p = < 0.001). In the reasons model, the rated importance of a social responsibility to help others by participating in research was significantly associated with participation (OR = 1.56, p = 0.049), while the importance of the possibility of the care recipient experiencing serious side effects was negatively associated with participation (OR = 0.51, p = 0.003). In both models there was no significant difference in hypothetical participation between non-Hispanic Black and non-Hispanic White caregivers, or between Hispanic and non-Hispanic White caregivers. Conclusion: Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black dementia caregivers were not less likely than non-Hispanic White dementia caregivers to participate in a hypothetical dementia clinical trial. Our study suggests that failures to recruit diverse populations in dementia clinical research are not attributable to less willingness among members of underrepresented groups but may instead reflect structural barriers and historic exclusion from trial participation.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Socioeconomic status (SES) is known to affect presentations and outcomes in pituitary neuroendocrine tumor resections, but there is a paucity of literature examining its impact specifically on patients with prolactinomas, who may be treated medically or surgically. The authors sought to determine whether SES was associated with differences in treatment choice or outcomes for prolactinoma patients. METHODS: The authors retrospectively reviewed patient records at a high-volume academic pituitary center for prolactinoma diagnoses. Patients were split into medically and surgically treated cohorts. Race, ethnicity, insurance status, primary care physician (PCP) status, and zip code-based income data were collected and examined as socioeconomic covariates. Outcomes of interest included pretreatment likelihood of surgical cure, medical versus surgical treatment allocation, and posttreatment remission rates. RESULTS: The authors analyzed 568 prolactinoma patients (351 medically treated and 217 surgically treated). Patients receiving surgery were more likely to have Medicaid or private insurance (p < 0.001) and have lower incomes (p < 0.001) than medically treated patients. Lower-income surgical patients were more likely to require surgical intervention for an indication such as tumor decompression than higher-income patients (p = 0.023). Surgical patients with a PCP had a higher estimated likelihood of surgical cure (p = 0.008), while no SES-based differences in surgical remission likelihood existed in the medical cohort. After surgery, surgical patients who achieved remission had significantly higher income than those who did not (p < 0.001). Other SES factors were not associated with surgical remission, and among medically treated patients, remission rates were not affected by any SES factor. Income was inversely related to prolactinoma size in both cohorts (surgical, p < 0.001; medical, p = 0.005) but was associated more prominently in surgical patients (surgical, -0.65 mm per $10,000; medical, -0.37 mm per $10,000). CONCLUSIONS: While surgical prolactinoma patients were prone to income and PCP-related disparities, no SES disparities were found among medically treated patients. Income had a more pronounced association with tumor size in the surgical cohort and likely contributed to the increased need for surgical intervention seen in low-income surgical patients. Addressing socioeconomic healthcare disparities is needed among surgical prolactinoma patients to increase rates of early presentation and improve the outcomes of low-SES populations.
