Potential Impact of Revised NCI Eligibility Criteria Guidance: Prior Malignancy Exclusion in Breast Cancer Clinical Trials

Racial Disparities in Breast Cancer Treatments and Adverse Events in the SEER-Medicare Data

Despite lower incidence rates, African American (AA) patients have shorter survival from breast cancer (BC) than white (W) patients. Multiple factors contribute to decreased survival, including screening disparities, later presentation, and access to care. Disparities in adverse events (AEs) may contribute to delayed or incomplete treatment, earlier recurrence, and shortened survival. Here, we analyzed the SEER-Medicare dataset, which captures claims from a variety of venues, in order to determine whether the cancer care venues affect treatment and associated adverse events. We investigated a study population whose claims are included in the Outpatient files, consisting of hospital and healthcare facility venues, and a study population from the National Claims History (NCH) files, consisting of claims from physicians, office practices, and other non-institutional providers. We demonstrated statistically and substantively significant venue-specific differences in treatment rates, drugs administered, and AEs from treatments between AA and W patients. We showed that AA patients in the NCH dataset received lower rates of treatment, but patients in the Outpatient dataset received higher rates of treatment than W patients. The rates of recorded AEs per treatment were higher in the NCH setting than in the Outpatient setting in all patients. AEs were consistently higher in AA patients than in W patients. AA patients had higher comorbidity indices and were younger than W patients, but these variables did not appear to play roles in the AE differences. The frequency of specific anticancer drugs administered in cancer- and venue-specific circumstances and their associated AEs varied between AA and W patients. The higher AE rates were due to slightly higher frequencies in the administration of drugs with higher associated AE rates in AA patients than in W patients. Our investigations demonstrate significant differences in treatment rates and associated AEs between AA and W patients with BC, depending on the venues of care, likely contributing to differences in outcomes.

A Historical Misconception in Clinical Trials of Drugs for Cancer-Age Grouping

In clinical trials of cancer drugs, grouping by age is a very common grouping method, as it can allow for a visual comparison of the different pharmaceutical responses in patients at different age stages. Under the guidance of this thinking, many researchers use age grouping when studying clinical cancer drugs. However, even people at the same age may be at different stages in their lives, such as individuals who are going through puberty, menopause/andropause, or intermediate transition, as well as childhood and old age, affected by factors such as hormone levels, immune responses, ethnic groups, and regions. Every individual has different cancer symptoms and responses to drugs; therefore, the experimental effect of life stage grouping will be more obvious and clearer. Not only does this conclusion apply to cancer drugs, but it also applies to clinical trials for other diseases. In addition, this does not mean that age grouping should be completely abandoned. Life stage is a more general interval that can be further divided into life stage groups according to the age of the patients. Based on the principal law of lifespan (PLOSP), age trends in life stages also need to be updated from time to time. To date, life stage grouping has not been discussed systematically and has not been used as a grouping method for cancer patients. In this paper, life stage grouping is discussed as one of the important grouping categories in cancer clinical trials.