Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Undercutting efforts of precision medicine: roadblocks to minority representation in breast cancer clinical trials

  • Review
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Precision (or personalized) medicine holds great promise in the treatment of breast cancer. The success of personalized medicine is contingent upon inclusivity and representation for minority groups in clinical trials. In this article, we focus on the roadblocks for the African American demographic, including the barriers to access and enrollment in breast oncology trials, the prevailing classification of race and ethnicity, and the need to refine monolithic categorization by employing genetic ancestry mapping tools for a more accurate determination of race or ethnicity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Saini G et al (2020) Quadruple-negative breast cancer: an uneven playing field. JCO Glob Oncol 6:233–237

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Nazha B et al (2019) Enrollment of racial minorities in clinical trials: old problem assumes new urgency in the age of immunotherapy. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book 39:3–10

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Phan VH et al (2009) Ethnic differences in drug metabolism and toxicity from chemotherapy. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 5(3):243–257

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Clements JM et al (2020) Disparities in diabetes-related multiple chronic conditions and mortality: the influence of race. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 159:107984

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Zilbermint M et al (2019) Genetics of hypertension in African Americans and others of African descent. Int J Mol Sci 20(5):1081

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Carnethon MR et al (2017) American Heart Association Council on Epidemiology and Prevention; Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young; Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing; Council on Clinical Cardiology; Council on Functional Genomics and Translational Biology; and Stroke Council. Cardiovascular Health in African Americans: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 136(21):e393–e423

  7. Goff LM et al (2020) Ethnic distinctions in the pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes: a focus on black African-Caribbean populations. Proc Nutr Soc 79(2):184–193

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Marshall MC Jr (2005) Diabetes in African Americans. Postgrad Med J 81(962):734–740

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. National Institutes of Health. NIH policy and guidelines on the inclusion of women and minorities as subjects in clinical research. https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/women_min/guidelines.htm. Accessed 11 May 2021

  10. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA Safety and Innovation Act of 2012. https://www.fda.gov/RegulatoryInformation/LawsEnforcedbyFDA/SignificantAmendmentstotheFDCAct/FDASIA/default.htm. Accessed 11 May 2021

  11. https://www.asco.org/practice-policy/policy-issues-statements/asco-in-action/asco-accc-join-forces-increase-participation. Accessed 11 May 2021

  12. Chen MS Jr et al (2014) Twenty years post-NIH Revitalization Act: enhancing minority participation in clinical trials (EMPaCT): laying the groundwork for improving minority clinical trial accrual: renewing the case for enhancing minority participation in cancer clinical trials. Cancer 120(Suppl 7):1091–1096

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Geller SE et al (2018) The more things change, the more they stay the same: a study to evaluate compliance with inclusion and assessment of women and minorities in randomized controlled trials. Acad Med 93(4):630–635

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2018) Drug Trials Snapshots Summary Report https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/InformationOnDrugs/UCM630226.pdf. Accessed 11 May 2021

  15. Wendler D et al (2006) Are racial and ethnic minorities less willing to participate in health research? PLoS Med 3(2):e19

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Katz RV et al (2007) Willingness of minorities to participate in biomedical studies: confirmatory findings from a follow-up study using the Tuskegee Legacy Project Questionnaire. J Natl Med Assoc 99(9):1052–1060

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Unger JM et al (2016) Patient income level and cancer clinical trial participation: a prospective survey study. JAMA Oncol 2(1):137–139

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Data from Economic Policy Institute. https://www.epi.org/blog/new-census-data-show-strong-2015-earnings-growth-across-the-board-with-black-and-hispanic-workers-seeing-the-fastest-growth/. Accessed 11 May 2021

  19. Borno HT et al (2018) At what cost to clinical trial enrollment? A retrospective study of patient travel burden in cancer clinical trials. Oncologist 23(10):1242–1249

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Sharrocks K et al (2014) The impact of socioeconomic status on access to cancer clinical trials. Br J Cancer 111(19):1684–1687

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Baquet CR et al (2002) Health disparities research–A model for conducting research on cancer disparities: characterization and reduction. J Assoc Acad Minor Phys 13(2):33–40

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. https://apps.bostonglobe.com/spotlight/boston-racism-image-reality/series/hospitals/. Accessed 11 May 2021

  23. Largent EA et al (2020) Paying clinical trial participants: legal risks and mitigation strategies. J Clin Oncol 38(6):532–537

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Robson M et al (2017) Olaparib for metastatic breast cancer in patients with a germline BRCA mutation. N Engl J Med 377(6):523–533

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Litton JK et al (2018) Talazoparib in patients with advanced breast cancer and a germline BRCA mutation. N Engl J Med 379(8):753–763

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hall MJ et al (2009) BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in women of different ethnicities undergoing testing for hereditary breast-ovarian cancer. Cancer 115(10):2222–2233

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Pal T et al (2015) A high frequency of BRCA mutations in young black women with breast cancer residing in Florida. Cancer 121(23):4173–4180

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Friebel TM et al (2019) BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic sequence variants in women of African origin or ancestry. Hum Mutat 40(10):1781–1796

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Kim ES et al (2017) Broadening eligibility criteria to make clinical trials more representative: American society of clinical oncology and friends of cancer research joint research statement. J Clin Oncol 35(33):3737–3744

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Wallington SF et al (2016) Enrolling minority and underserved populations in cancer clinical research. Am J Prev Med 50(1):111–117

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/08/20/smartphones-help-blacks-hispanics-bridge-some-but-not-all-digital-gaps-with-whites/. Accessed 02 May 2021

  32. Darmawan I et al (2020) The role of social media in enhancing clinical trial recruitment: scoping review. J Med Internet Res 22(10):e22810

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Topolovec-Vranic J, Natarajan K (2016) The use of social media in recruitment for medical research studies: a scoping review. J Med Internet Res 18(11):e286

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. https://www.mesm.com/media/1343/using-social-media-for-clinical-trial-recruitment.pdf. Accessed 04 May 2021

  35. Thompson MA, O’Regan RM (2018) Social media and clinical trials: the pros and cons gain context when the patient is at the center. Cancer 124(24):4618–4621

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Frew PM et al (2015) Results of a community randomized study of a faith-based education program to improve clinical trial participation among African Americans. Int J Environ Res Public Health 13(1):ijerph13010041

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Wieland ML et al (2021) Community-engaged approaches for minority recruitment into clinical research: a scoping review of the literature. Mayo Clin Proc 96(3):733–743

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Bodenheimer T (2000) Uneasy alliance–clinical investigators and the pharmaceutical industry. N Engl J Med 342(20):1539–1544

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Dogan S, Yamamoto-Ibusuki M, Andre F (2018) Funding sources of practice-changing trials. Ann Oncol 29(4):1063–1065

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Sparano JA et al (2018) Adjuvant chemotherapy guided by a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 379(2):111–121

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Ashing K et al (2014) Occurrence of comorbidities among African-American and Latina breast cancer survivors. J Cancer Surviv 8(2):312–318

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Carnethon MR et al (2017) Cardiovascular health in African Americans: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 136(21):e393–e423

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Goff LM et al (2019) Ethnic distinctions in the pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes: a focus on black African-Caribbean populations. Proc Nutr Soc 79:184

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Zarin DA et al (2016) Trial reporting in ClinicalTrials.gov—the final rule. N Engl J Med 375(20):1998–2004

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. De Angelis C et al (2004) Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. N Engl J Med 351(12):1250–1261

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. DeVito NJ, Bacon S, Goldacre B (2020) Compliance with legal requirement to report clinical trial results on ClinicalTrials.gov: a cohort study. Lancet 395(10221):361–369

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Ginther DK et al (2011) Race, ethnicity, and NIH research awards. Science 333(6045):1015–1019

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Hoppe TA et al (2019) Topic choice contributes to the lower rate of NIH awards to African-American/blackscientists. Sci Adv 5(10):eaaw7238

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-selects-first-scholars-pioneering-program-enhance-diversity-within-house-research-program. Accessed 11 May 2021

  50. Mervis J (2020) NIH hopes “cluster hiring” will improve diversity. Science 367(6479):726

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Zhang F, Finkelstein J (2019) Inconsistency in race and ethnic classification in pharmacogenetics studies and its potential clinical implications. Pharmgenomics Pers Med 12:107–123

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-20-031.html. Accessed 11 May 2021

  53. Jackson FLC (1993) Evolutionary and political economic influences on biological diversity in African-Americans. J Black Stud 23:539–560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Ulmer C, McFadden B, Nerenz DR (2009) Race, ethnicity, and language data: standardization for health care quality improvement. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  55. Griffith DM et al (2011) Ethnicity, nativity, and the health of American Blacks. J Health Care Poor Underserved 22(1):142–156

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Vespa J, Armstrong DM, Medina L (2018) U.S. Census Bureau. Demographic turning points for the United States: population projections for 2020 to 2060. U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2020/demo/p25-1144.pdf. Accessed 01 May 2021

  57. Rius M, Darling JA (2014) How important is intraspecific genetic admixture to the success of colonising populations? Trends Ecol Evol 29(4):233–242

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Goetz LH et al (2014) Admixture and clinical phenotypic variation. Hum Hered 77(1–4):73–86

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Palmer JR et al (2013) Genetic susceptibility loci for subtypes of breast cancer in an African American population. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 22(1):127–134

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Yang JJ et al (2011) Ancestry and pharmacogenomics of relapse in acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Nat Genet 43(3):237–241

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Ramos E et al (2012) Why personalized medicine will fail if we stay the course. Per Med 9(8):839–847

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Kittles RA et al (2007) Race, skin color and genetic ancestry: implications for biomedical research on health disparities. Calif J Health Promot 5:9–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Kao WH et al (2008) MYH9 is associated with nondiabetic end-stage renal disease in African Americans. Nat Genet 40(10):1185–1192

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Nalls MA et al (2008) Admixture mapping of white cell count: genetic locus responsible for lower white blood cell count in the Health ABC and Jackson Heart studies. Am J Hum Genet 82(1):81–87

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Batai K, Kittles RA (2013) Race, genetic ancestry, and health. Race Soc Probl 5(2):81–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Yang N et al (2005) Examination of ancestry and ethnic affiliation using highly informative diallelic DNA markers: application to diverse and admixed populations and implications for clinical epidemiology and forensic medicine. Hum Genet 118(3–4):382–392

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Via M, Ziv E, Burchard EG (2009) Recent advances of genetic ancestry testing in biomedical research and direct to consumer testing. Clin Genet 76(3):225–235

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Shriner D (2017) Overview of admixture mapping. Curr Protoc Hum Genet 94:1231–1238

    Google Scholar 

  69. Kaseniit KE et al (2020) Genetic ancestry analysis on >93,000 individuals undergoing expanded carrier screening reveals limitations of ethnicity-based medical guidelines. Genet Med 8:134

    Google Scholar 

  70. Esposito U et al (2018) Ancient ancestry informative markers for identifying fine-scale ancient population structure in Eurasians. Genes (Basel) 9(12):625

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Kidd KK et al (2014) Progress toward an efficient panel of SNPs for ancestry inference. Forensic Sci Int Genet 10:23–32

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Bettaieb A et al (2017) Precision medicine in breast cancer: reality or utopia? J Transl Med 15(1):139

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  73. Ding YC et al (2019) Molecular subtypes of triple-negative breast cancer in women of different race and ethnicity. Oncotarget 10(2):198–208

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  74. Davis M et al (2018) AR negative triple negative or “quadruple negative” breast cancers in African American women have an enriched basal and immune signature. PLoS ONE 13(6):e0196909

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  75. Lehmann BD et al (2011) Identification of human triple-negative breast cancer subtypes and preclinical models for selection of targeted therapies. J Clin Investig 121(7):2750–2767

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  76. Perou CM et al (2000) Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 406(6797):747–752

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Burstein MD et al (2015) Comprehensive genomic analysis identifies novel subtypes and targets of triple-negative breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 21(7):1688–1698

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Lehmann BD et al (2016) Refinement of triple-negative breast cancer molecular subtypes: implications for neoadjuvant chemotherapy selection. PLoS ONE 11(6):e0157368

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  79. Spratt DE et al (2016) Racial/ethnic disparities in genomic sequencing. JAMA Oncol 2(8):1070–1074

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  80. Morris GJ et al (2007) Differences in breast carcinoma characteristics in newly diagnosed African-American and Caucasian patients: a single-institution compilation compared with the National Cancer Institute’s Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Cancer 110(4):876–884

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was supported by a grant from the National Cancer Institutes of Health (R01CA239120) to RA.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, Georgia State University, 100 Piedmont Ave, Atlanta, GA, 30303, USA

    Geetanjali Saini & Ritu Aneja

  2. Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA

    Keerthi Gogineni

  3. Division of Health Equities, Department of Population Sciences, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA, 91010, USA

    Rick A. Kittles

Authors
  1. Geetanjali Saini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Keerthi Gogineni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rick A. Kittles
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ritu Aneja
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

GS and RA conceptualized, and designed the review. GS wrote the first draft. RA, KG and RK participated in review and editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ritu Aneja.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Saini, G., Gogineni, K., Kittles, R.A. et al. Undercutting efforts of precision medicine: roadblocks to minority representation in breast cancer clinical trials. Breast Cancer Res Treat 187, 605–611 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-021-06264-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-021-06264-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation