Perspectives on under-representation of minority patients (pts) in clinical trials.

Abstract

e18521 Background: About 40% of the US population are from minority groups. Minority pts are under-represented in oncology clinical trials, which limits the applicability of results to the general population and perpetuates poor relationships between healthcare systems and minority communities. This assessment investigated underlying causes of this lack of minority representation in clinical trials and proposes plans to promote diversity. Methods: To better understand the limited inclusion of under-represented pts in oncology clinical trials, 10 specialists in cancer care were selected to provide their perspectives. Specialists were chosen because of their experience enrolling minority pts in clinical trials and met virtually in Dec 2020 via Within3, a secure digital communication platform, to discuss obstacles faced in recruiting minority pts and potential strategies to address these concerns. Specificity and alignment in responses were achieved through software analytics and follow-up queries. Results: The 10 specialists identified as Asian (10%), Black (30%), White (50%), and Hispanic (10%), and began practicing medicine in the 1980s-2010s. All are involved in clinical research and treat a range of minority pts in both urban and suburban settings. Most specialists (8/10) reported treating > 20 minority pts with cancer annually. However, few specialists (2/10) reported that > 20% of their minority pts have enrolled in clinical trials. Specialists agreed that minority pts experience barriers to participation in clinical research, including lack of trust in the healthcare system, materials in their native languages, financial support, minority investigators involved in clinical trials, and accessible study sites. The specialists proposed strategies that could be implemented to increase minority enrollment. These included study sites where minority populations live and industry funded outreach and educational efforts in minority communities. If sites are more accessible, this can reduce time and financial pressures associated with study participation. The specialists recommended that studies be designed to be more supportive of minority populations, specifically regarding inclusion and exclusion criteria and reimbursement of costs. They also advised that increased diversity among clinical researchers and allied personnel may increase the ability of the clinical team to connect with pts and assist in building trust in their communities. Finally, they emphasized the importance of providing informed consent forms and study materials in pts’ native languages. Conclusions: While challenges exist to increasing diversity in oncology clinical studies, a broad consortium of clinical specialists agreed that they can be addressed by community outreach and education, making study sites more accessible, availability of study materials in pts’ native languages, and improving diversity of clinical teams.