Skip to main content

Bias in cancer trials

For many years I served on NHS research ethics committees.  One aspect of clinical trials that always concerned us was how representative any trial was of the population.  This matters a great deal, as biased samples may give erroneous results or miss results that are of crucial importance  

Now, new research has revealed bias and stereotyping among clinical and research professionals who recruit patients to enrol in cancer clinical trials. The findings are published online in CANCER, a peer-reviewed journal of the American Cancer Society (ACS).



It is important to include diverse patients in clinical trials to ensure that the results will apply to patients in the general population.

One form of bias is in the selection of those on the trail.  The proportion of racial and ethnic minorities participating in cancer clinical trials is persistently lower than the proportion of minorities in the U.S. population at large.  This has the potential for giving a false perspective.

So, does bias by healthcare and research professionals help explain why racial and ethnic minorities are not adequately represented in clinical trials? 

A team led by Dr Raegan W. Durant, of the University of Alabama at Birmingham, conducted interviews of cancer centre leaders, principal investigators of clinical trials, referring clinicians, and research staff at five U.S. cancer centres. A total of 91 individuals were interviewed.

Five prominent themes emerged from the interviews:

  1. Respondents noted language barriers and other factors that made communication with potential minority clinical trial participants difficult.
  2. Several respondents stated that they did not perceive potential minority patients to be ideal study candidates after they were screened for cancer clinical trials.
  3. Some respondents described clinicians’ time constraints and negative perceptions of minority study participants as challenges.
  4. When respondents discussed clinical trials with minority patients, they often addressed misconceptions to build trust.
  5. For some respondents, race was perceived as irrelevant when screening and recruiting potential minority participants for clinical trials.

Dr Soumya Niranjan, the first author of the report states that,

“Examples of the stereotypes we observed included perceptions that African Americans were less knowledgeable about cancer research studies, less likely to participate due to altruism, or simply less likely to complete all facets of the research study,”  

These and other examples of bias based on stereotypes of potential minority participants raise concerns that non-whites may be offered fewer opportunities to participate in cancer research studies.

Dr Niranjan also noted that even when research and healthcare professionals use race-neutral stances during clinical trial recruitment, this approach may overlook some of the well-established methods of engaging and recruiting potential minority participants in a culturally tailored manner. 

The authors make clear that not all healthcare professionals and research is biased. Still, the findings do indicate that more care needs to be taken in ensuring clinical trials are sufficiently representative of the population, or whether a particular section of the community needs to be targeted. 

Only by acknowledging the bias can it bet better identified in trials. 

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services.

It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared.

Utilitarian ethics considers the balan…

Keir Starmer has a lot to offer

The Labour Party is in the process of making a decision that will decide whether it can recover from the defeat in 2019 General Election.  All the candidates have much to offer and are making their case well.

No doubt for some the decision will be difficult.  Others may well have made up their minds on the simple binary of Left-wing-Right-wing.

The choice should be whoever is best placed to pull the party together.  Someone who can form a front bench of all talents and across the spectrum in the party.

That is what Harold Wilson did in the 1960s.  His government included Roy Jenkins on the right and Barbar Castle on the left; it included Crossman and Crossland, and Tony Benn with Jim Callaghan.  It presented a formidable team.

Keir Starmer brings to the top table a formidable career outside politics, having been a human rights lawyer and then Director of Public Prosecutions.   He is a man of integrity and commitment who believes in a fairer society where opportunities are more widel…

No evidence for vaccine link with autism

Public health bodies are worried that an alarming drop in childhood vaccinations is leading to a resurgence of diseases in childhood that we had all but eradicated.  Misinformation and scare stories about the harmful effects of vaccines abound on the internet and in social media.  Where they are based on 'science', it is highly selective, and often reliance is placed on falsehoods. 
Conspiracy theories also abound - cover-ups, deception, lies. As a result, too many parents are shunning vaccinations for their children.  So, what does the published, peer-reviewed literature tell us about vaccincations? Are they safe and effective, or are there long term harmful effects? 
A new report now provides some of the answers.

New evidence published in the Cochrane Library today finds MMR, MMRV, and MMR+V vaccines are effective and that they are not associated with increased risk of autism.

Measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella (also known as chickenpox) are infectious diseases caused by …