Racial Differences in Germline Genetic Testing for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review

Author:

Briggs Logan G.12ORCID,Steele Grant L.2ORCID,Qian Zhiyu Jason3,Subbanna Sara4,Alkhatib Khalid Y.2ORCID,Labban Muhieddine2ORCID,Langbein Bjoern J.2,Nguyen David-Dan2ORCID,Cellini Jacqueline5ORCID,Kilbridge Kerry6,Kibel Adam S.3,Trinh Quoc-Dien23ORCID,Rana Huma Q.67ORCID,Cole Alexander P.23ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Urologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ

2. Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA

3. Division of Urological Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA

4. Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ

5. Countway Library of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA

6. Department of Medical Oncology, Dana‐Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA

7. Division of Cancer Genetics and Prevention, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA

Abstract

PURPOSE: Testing for pathogenic variants can aid in oncologic risk stratification and identification of targeted therapies. Despite known disparities in access to prostate cancer (PCa) care, little has been written about access to germline genetic testing (GGT) for Black men and other historically marginalized populations. This systematic review sought to delineate racial/ethnic disparities in GGT for PCa. METHODS: This systematic review identified articles published from January 1996 through May 2021 in PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase. We included studies that reported rates of GGT in men with PCa in the United States by race/ethnicity as reflective of routine clinical care or research. A narrative synthesis was performed. RESULTS: Of 4,309 unique records, 91 studies examining 50 unique study populations met inclusion criteria. Of these, four populations included men who received GGT through routine clinical care, accounting for 4,415 men (72.6% White and 7.2% Black). The other 46 populations included men who received GGT as part of a research study, accounting for 30,824 men (64.3% White and 21.6% Black). Of these 46 research populations, 19 used targeted methods to increase recruitment from a specific demographic. CONCLUSION: Most studies that report GGT rates by race/ethnicity are in research settings. Many of these studies used targeted recruitment methods and subsequently have a greater proportion of Black men than clinical and US population–based studies. Other historically marginalized populations are not well represented. There remains a knowledge gap regarding the extent of racial disparities in the use of GGT, particularly in the clinical setting.

Publisher

American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)

Subject

Oncology (nursing),Health Policy,Oncology

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3