Skip to main content
Download PDF

Twenty-year trends in racial and ethnic enrollment in large diabetes randomized controlled trials

BMC Medicine volume 20, Article number: 294 (2022) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Lack of representativeness in Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour (BIPOC) enrollment could compromise the generalizability of study results and health equity. This study aimed to examine trends in BIPOC groups enrollment in diabetes randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and to explore the association between trial factors and high-enrollment of BIPOC groups.

Methods

We systematically searched the literature on large diabetes RCTs with a sample size of ≥ 400 participants published between 2000 and 2020. We assessed temporal trends in enrollment of racial and ethnic groups in the included trials. Logistic and linear regression analyses were used to explore the relationship between trial factors and the high-enrollment defined by median enrollment rate.

Results

A total of 405 RCTs were included for analyses. The median enrollment rate of BIPOC groups was 24.0%, with 6.4% for the Black group, 11.2% for Hispanic, 8.5% for Asian, and 3.0% for other BIPOC groups respectively. Over the past 20 years, the BIPOC enrollment showed an increased trend in the diabetes RCTs, ranging from 20.1 to 28.4% (P for trend = 0.041). A significant trend towards increased enrollment for Asian group was observed. We found that weekly or daily intervention frequency (OR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.26, 0.91) and duration of intervention > 6.5 month (OR = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.37, 0.95) were significantly related to decreased odds of high-enrollment, while type 2 diabetes (OR = 1.44, 95% CI: 1.04, 1.99) was associated with high-enrollment of BIPOC groups.

Conclusions

The enrollment of BIPOC was found to increase in large diabetes RCTs over the past two decades; some trial factors may be significantly associated with BIPOC enrollment. These findings may highlight the importance of enrollment of BIPOC groups and provide insights into the design and implementation of future clinical trials in diabetes.

Peer Review reports

Background

The prevalence of diabetes substantially varies by racial and ethnic groups [1,2,3], for instance, the prevalence of diabetes was significantly higher in Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour (BIPOC) groups compared with the White participants in the USA and UK [4,5,6,7,8]. The BIPOC participants generally had a lower rate of diabetes diagnosis and required more attention for the quality of treatment and care, because of their socioeconomic status, health insurance, education level, religious beliefs, and language barriers, among others [9,10,11,12]. While the majority of participants were White groups in clinical trials especially from the western countries [13], approximately one fifth of approved new drugs showed differences in drug exposure and response across racial and ethnic groups, with only a few cases translated into racial- and ethnicity-specific treatment recommendations [14]. Therefore, lack of representativeness in BIPOC enrollment could compromise the generalizability of study results and health equity [15].

According to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) [16, 17], adequate enrollment and analysis plans related to racial and ethnic groups are essentially needed in clinical research, where the adequate enrollment could be determined by using the participation to prevalence ratio that is the percentage of BIPOC among trial participants divided by the percentage of BIPOC in the overall diabetes population [8]. Despite the importance of representative racial and ethnic enrollment, the current practice remained suboptimal in many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including trials of cancer [18,19,20], stroke [21], systemic lupus erythematosus [22], cardiovascular disease [23,24,25,26,27], obesity [28], acute pain [29], coronavirus disease 2019 [30], and vaccine [31]. Likewise, one previously study reported that there were 62% and 78% of the diabetes RCTs conducted in the US and UK respectively under-enrolling the BIPOC groups [8]. However, there was an evidence gap in diabetes RCTs regarding the current status of and temporal trend in the overall enrollment of BIPOC groups.

Therefore, in this study, we aimed to examine the status of and temporal trend in enrollment of BIPOC groups in large diabetes RCTs with a sample size of ≥ 400 participants. We also explored the potential relationship between trial factors and high-enrollment of BIPOC groups. The research protocol of this study was registered in PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, CRD42021229100).

Methods

Search strategy

Details on the study procedures have been published elsewhere [8]. In brief, we comprehensively searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (via PubMed), and EMBASE, by using the terms “diabetes mellitus” and “randomized controlled trials.” The search covered the time span from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2020. We also searched the World Health Organization Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials, and Google Scholar. In addition, we searched the reference lists of the identified studies for further potential studies. The search strategies were determined by multiple pre-searches; Supplemental Table 1 shows the MEDLINE search strategies.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

We included both type 1 and type 2 diabetes RCTs involving multiple (≥ 2) racial and ethnic participants. Other inclusion criteria were participants over the age of 18, and a sample size of at least 400 participants, because trials with smaller a sample size were more likely to be early-stage and single-center studies. There were some publications from different stages of a trial, different subgroup or exploratory analyses; we only included those trials reporting main outcomes with baseline data for the whole population. We excluded trials that focused on gestational diabetes because the type of gestational diabetes may be a temporal form and could theoretically return to normal dependent on glucose control [32, 33]. Those trials that pre-defined some specific BIPOC were also excluded; for instance, the trial exclusively enrolling the Black group was not eligible. We also excluded duplicates, conference abstracts, comments and letters, studies published in languages other than English, and studies with no access to full text and data extraction.

Study selection

After eliminating duplicates by software and manual check, two reviewers (J Zhang and Y Wang) independently screened and reviewed titles and abstracts retrieved from the search before selecting potentially relevant studies. Subsequently, the two reviewers screened the full texts and determined final selection of trials. A pilot test was conducted before screening the literature to ensure that each reviewer fully understood the inclusion and exclusion criteria and process. Disagreements about the selection of studies were solved by consulting a third reviewer (G Li). The detailed process of study selection was displayed in a flow diagram (Supplemental Fig. 1) [34].

Outcomes

The primary outcomes were the status of and temporal trend in overall BIPOC enrollment from the included RCTs. The secondary outcomes included the trends in specific BIPOC enrollment that included Black, Asian, Hispanic, and other BIPOC groups.

We also explored the relationship between trial factors (details below) and high-enrollment of BIPOC participants, where the median enrollment rate was used to categorize the included RCTs into either high-enrollment trials or reference trials.

Data extraction

Two reviewers (J Zhang and Y Wang) independently extracted the following data from included trials using a standardized extraction sheet: (I) percentage enrollment of racial and ethnic group (all BIPOC, Black, Asian, Hispanic, other BIPOC groups), (II) publication information (first and corresponding authors, year of publication), (III) study details (type of RCTs, type of diabetes, type of complication, sample size, age, sex, research purpose, country or region of trial coordination office, outpatient enrollment, source of funding), and (IV) intervention and follow-up details (type of intervention, frequency and duration of intervention, type of follow-up, frequency and duration of follow-up). Disagreements were addressed through discussion with a third reviewer (G Li).

Trial factors for analyses of interest in this study included year of publication, sample size, type of diabetes, enrollment location, type of RCTs, source of funding, the intervention, and follow-up details. Patient age and sex were outcomes of the eligibility criteria or enrollment process, as was race and ethnicity. Therefore, patient age and sex were not included for analyses to explore the relationship with enrollment of BIPOC.

Statistical analyses

We described continuous variables with median and interquartile range (IQR) and categorical variables with counts and percentages. We used the kernel-weighted local polynomial smoothing curve to present the percentages of the BIPOC enrollment with the ascending year of publication. The Jonckheere-Terpstra proportion trend test was employed to explore whether there was a significant trend for the BIPOC participant enrollment over time.

We used univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses to analyze the association between trial factors and high-enrollment of BIPOC groups. All the trial factors were included in the multivariable logistic model to retain all possible factors in the model, taking the exploratory nature of our analyses into consideration. To enhance simplicity and interpretability, we used median values to dichotomize the continuous trial factors before they were entered into the model. Odds ratios (ORs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were employed to quantize the relationship. We also performed a sensitivity analysis by using linear regression analyses to assess the associations between trial factors and the continuous BIPOC enrollment rate, with beta coefficients (βs) and 95% CIs showed for the relationship.

All the data analyses were performed with STATA software (version 16.0), and a two-sided P value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

We identified 18,278 records in the initial literature search, among which 1463 literatures were retrieved for full-text review. A total of 405 RCTs were included for our analyses, with over two thirds of RCTs published in the last decade (2010–2020). Among the 405 trials, 84.4% reported data on Black group, 72.8% on Asian, 27.2% on Hispanic, and 89.1% on other BIPOC groups. Table 1 summarizes the factors of the included RCTs. 80.7% of the included RCTs were conducted in multiple countries, and 19.3% were single-country trials. Supplemental Table 2 shows the country or region of trial coordination office for the multi-country RCTs, with 23.2% in North America and 14.7% in Europe. More than two thirds of the trials focused on type 2 diabetes (85%). The included trials had a median sample size of 716 (IQR: 527–1246), female proportion of 46% (IQR: 39.9–50.1%), and age of 58 years old (IQR: 55.0–60.8). The trial aims mainly included glycemic control (31%), management (43%), and diabetic complication (26%). Most of the trials explored the intervention of drugs (86%); and the median intervention duration was 6.5 months (IQR: 6.0–13.5). More than half of the trials were conducted through a face-to-face follow-up; the median duration of follow-up was 12 months (IQR: 6.0–18.0). The majority of the trials received funding form industry (75.9%).

Table 1 Basic characteristics of the included diabetes RCTs published between 2000 and 2020
Full size table

Trends in enrollment proportion for BIPOC over time

The median enrollment rate of overall BIPOC groups was 24.0% (6.4% for the Black group, 11.2% for Hispanic, 8.5% for Asian, and 3.0% for other BIPOC groups respectively). Figure 1 shows the temporal trends in the BIPOC enrollment. Over the past 20 years, there was a significant trend towards increased BIPOC enrollment in the diabetes trials (P for trend = 0.041), with the enrollment ranging from 20.1 to 28.4%. An increased trend in the enrollment of the Asian group was observed (P for trend = 0.013), where the enrollment increased from 4.3 to 15.6%. However, no significant trends in enrollment of Hispanic, Black or other BIPOC groups were found.

Fig. 1
figure 1

The temporal trends in the BIPOC enrollment between 2000 and 2020

Full size image

Relationship between trial factor and BIPOC high-enrollment

Results from multivariable analyses revealed that weekly or daily intervention frequency (OR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.26, 0.91) and duration of intervention > 6.5 month (OR = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.37, 0.95) were significantly associated with decreased odds of high-enrollment of overall BIPOC groups, while type 2 diabetes (OR = 1.44, 95% CI: 1.04, 1.99) was significantly related to elevated high-enrollment (Table 2).

Table 2 Results from multivariable logistic regression analysis for the relationship between trial characteristics and high-enrollment of BIPOC groups
Full size table

Supplemental Table 3 and Fig. 2 show univariate and multivariable logistic regression results for the relationship between trial factors and the BIPOC high-enrollment in specific groups. For the Black group, a sample size ≥ 716 (OR = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.35, 0.92), trial objective of glucose control (OR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.18, 0.86), and intervention of medicine (OR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.15, 0.89) were significantly related with lower odds of high-enrollment. Regarding Asian group, while weekly or monthly frequency of follow-up (OR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.15, 0.94) was significantly associated with lower odds of high-enrollment, recent publication year (2010–2020; OR = 3.58, 95% CI: 1.59, 8.04) and type 2 diabetes (OR = 2.54, 95% CI: 1.52, 4.25) were related with increased high-enrollment. Duration of intervention > 6.5 months (OR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.12, 1.00) was found to significantly associate with decreased odds of high-enrollment of Hispanic group. For other BIPOC groups, those trials with a sample size ≥ 716 (OR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.37, 0.91) had lower odds of high-enrollment.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Results from multivariable logistic regression analysis for the relationship between trial characteristics and high-enrollment of BIPOC groups

Full size image

Sensitivity analyses

Findings from sensitivity analyses using linear regression analyses were displayed in Supplemental Table 4, Table 3, and Supplemental Table 5, where the results were largely in line with main analyses from the logistic regression.

Table 3 Results from multivariable linear regression analysis for the relationship between trial characteristics and enrollment rate of BIPOC groups
Full size table

Discussion

In this study, we found that there was a significant trend towards increased overall the BIPOC enrollment in diabetes trials over the past two decades. While an increased trend in the Asian enrollment was detected over time, no significant temporal changes in enrollment of Black, Hispanic, and other BIPOC groups were observed. Some trial factors including type of diabetes, intervention frequency, and duration of intervention were significantly related with high-enrollment of overall BIPOC groups from our exploratory analyses.

The enrollment of overall BIPOC and Asian participants were found to have a significantly increased trend in diabetes RCT. While this phenomenon required further exploration, part of the interpretations may be due to the fact that it reflected the altering overall BIPOC populations in the countries or regions where the trials were conducted. A systematic review demonstrated similar results in heart failure clinical trials; while the trend in the enrollment of Black participants remained stable, Asian (from 1.9 to 10.8%) and Hispanic (5.4 to 14.5%) enrollment showed an increased trend from 2001 to 2018 [35]. A more recent review of HF RCTs confirmed a temporal increase in enrollment of BIPOC groups and reporting of race and ethnicity data, both of which were independently associated with trial leadership by a woman [27]. However, one recent study reported that the enrollment of racial and ethnic groups decreased in clinical research of urate-lowering drugs (from 8.7 to 2.2%) over the past decade [36]. Moreover, one study focusing on trials of anti-cancer drugs for Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval reported the enrollment of overall racial and ethnic groups remained largely stable over time, with a slight increase among the Hispanic participants and a decline among the Black participants from 2013 to 2018 [18]. From 1985 to 2016, the enrollment of White participants remained dominantly high (over 80%), while the enrollment of Black participants was less than 5% and other BIPOC groups less than 6% in the prostate cancer clinical trials [37]. Therefore, our study indicated that although it may remain suboptimal, the enrollment of BIPOC groups in diabetes trials had improved temporally, especially when compared with gout and cancer trials.

There were no relevant studies that comprehensively analyzed the enrollment of BIPOC groups in diabetes RCTs, to the best of our knowledge. There was only a study with type 1 diabetes describing that the enrollment rates of BIPOC groups were significantly lower than the current prevalence in the USA, in which it included eight studies and focused on FDA-approved technologies from 2015 to 2020 [38]. Other comparable studies with a small sample size may either target other diseases (e.g., cancer [22]), or at specific countries (e.g., the US [28, 39]) or the drugs for FDA approval [38, 40,41,42], or focused on the NIH-funded trials [43]. While their main findings demonstrated that the enrollment of BIPOC groups remained inadequate, our results generated evidence to the temporal trend and current practice in diabetes RCTs. These findings may provide insights into the design and implementation of future clinical trials in diabetes, especially given the substantial rise of type 2 diabetes among the young people from BIPOC communities.

The BIPOC groups were willing to participate in clinical trials [44]. However there were barriers preventing BIPOC groups from obtaining equitable access to health researches [45]. The racial and ethnic low-enrollment in clinical research was due to several important reasons, including structural racism and socio-economic disadvantage [46, 47]. The implicitly biased perceptions of the BIPOC candidates by physicians or research staff hindered their opportunities to communicate effectively with participants and prevented the BIPOC recruitment in study design [48]. Participants may be less willing to participate in a trial, if the enrollment staff did not have a similar cultural and ethnic background [38]. The family composition, personal relationships with patients and community, investigator and participant training and mentoring, and engagement and operational practices of healthcare professionals also played important roles in BIPOC group enrollment [16, 49, 50]. It is recommended that researchers need to overcome these difficult challenges to enhance the enrollment of BIPOC groups in order to ensure the validity of results and reliable benefits for all.

Several trial factors were found to associate with enrollment rates of BIPOC groups. The frequency of interventions was also associated with reduced enrollment of BIPOC groups. For instance, BIPOC populations may be more likely to encounter barriers in trial recruitment in some behavioral interventions delivered on a weekly or daily basis [15]. By contrast, type 2 diabetes was found to significantly related to elevated high-enrollment. Because type 1 diabetes accounted for a small proportion of diabetes and was common in children and adolescents [51, 52], it would therefore be less likely enroll BIPOC groups in adult trials of type 1 diabetes. Although funding resource was not significantly related to enrollment of BIPOC groups in RCTs of diabetes, it had important implications in studies of other diseases. One recent study reported that the Black enrollment rate in industry-sponsored trials was only a third of the national cancer institute-sponsored trials in Cancer Clinical Trials, mainly because of their biased perceptions of BIPOC groups with low compliance [42]. While the majority of phase III clinical trials were funded through pharmaceutical companies or private sources [53, 54], the low-enrollment of BIPOC groups would remain or even aggravate in trials not funded by public resources. Taken together, although these associations between trial factors and BIPOC group enrollment required further clarification and exploration, our exploratory analysis findings may help with researchers when considering the enrollment of BIPOC participants from the aspects of trial design and implementation.

Strengths and limitations

Our study was the first to assess the temporal trend in enrollment of BIPOC groups and explore trial factors associated with the enrollment in diabetes RCTs. Our results may highlight the importance of the enrollment of BIPOC groups to the design of future clinical trials. There are several limitations in this research. First, we may have missed some studies in non-English language. Likewise, those trials with unpublished data were not included for our analyses, which may lead to publication bias. Second, we did not have access to enrollment data of BIPOC group for specific countries from the multi-national trials. Therefore, we could not calculate the participation to prevalence ratio for the diabetes population stratified by race and ethnicity to define under-representation of BIPOC groups in specific countries [55, 56]. Third, the BIPOC enrollment may have been affected by reporting bias [25]. The reporting of racial and ethnic enrollment was largely lacking in clinical trials, including the inclusion and exclusion criteria related to BIPOC groups and the enrollment rate of racial and ethnic groups [40, 57]. Therefore, some studies that enrolled BIPOC groups but did not report these data in their literatures were not included in our analyses. Another limitation was that we excluded trials with a sample size < 400 participants for analyses. This may lead to selection bias and thus weaken the strength of our study findings, especially given the fact that the majority of interventions evaluated in large RCTs may be being tested on the minority of the populations who will use them with corresponding citations. Moreover, even though we performed exploratory analyses for trial factors in relation to BIPOC group enrollment, there may be other trial factors that were unable to capture but could bias our findings in the regression analyses.

Conclusions

The enrollment of BIPOC was found to improve in diabetes RCTs over the past two decades; some trial factors may be significantly associated with BIPOC group enrollment. These findings may highlight the importance of enrollment of BIPOC groups and provide insights into the design and implementation of future clinical trials in diabetes.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Abbreviations

BIPOC:

Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour

RCTs:

Randomized controlled trials

NIH:

National Institutes of Health

IQR:

Interquartile range

ORs:

Odds ratios

CI:

Confidence interval

βs :

Beta coefficients

FDA:

Food and Drug Administration

References

  1. Virani SS, Alonso A, Benjamin EJ, Bittencourt MS, Callaway CW, Carson AP, Chamberlain AM, Chang AR, Cheng S, Delling FN, et al. Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2020 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2020;141(9):e139–596.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Zheng Y, Ley SH, Hu FB. Global aetiology and epidemiology of type 2 diabetes mellitus and its complications. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2018;14(2):88–98.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Burchard EG, Oh SS, Foreman MG, Celedón JC. Moving toward true inclusion of racial/ethnic minorities in federally funded studies. A key step for achieving respiratory health equality in the United States. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2015;191(5):514–21.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Zhu Y, Sidell MA, Arterburn D, Daley MF, Desai J, Fitzpatrick SL, Horberg MA, Koebnick C, McCormick E, Oshiro C, et al. Racial/ethnic disparities in the prevalence of diabetes and prediabetes by BMI: patient outcomes research to advance learning (PORTAL) multisite cohort of adults in the U.S. Diabetes Care. 2019;42(12):2211–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Pham TM, Carpenter JR, Morris TP, Sharma M, Petersen I. Ethnic differences in the prevalence of type 2 diabetes diagnoses in the UK: cross-sectional analysis of the health improvement network primary care database. Clin Epidemiol. 2019;11:1081–8.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Harris NS, Weaver KD, Beal SG, Winter WE. The interaction between Hb A1C and selected genetic factors in the African American population in the USA. J Appl Lab Med. 2021;6(1):167–79.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Andrasik MP, Broder GB, Wallace SE, Chaturvedi R, Michael NL, Bock S, Beyrer C, Oseso L, Aina J, Lucas J, et al. Increasing black, indigenous and people of color participation in clinical trials through community engagement and recruitment goal establishment. PLoS One. 2021;16(10):e0258858.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Li G, Zhang J, Van Spall HGC, Douglas PS, Wang Y, Sun X, Thabane L. Exploring ethnic representativeness in diabetes clinical trial enrolment from 2000 to 2020: a chronological survey. Diabetologia. 2000;2022:1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Britton LE, Hussey JM, Crandell JL, Berry DC, Brooks JL, Bryant AG. Racial/ethnic disparities in diabetes diagnosis and glycemic control among women of reproductive age. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2018;27(10):1271–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Canedo JR, Miller ST, Schlundt D, Fadden MK, Sanderson M. Racial/ethnic disparities in diabetes quality of care: the role of healthcare access and socioeconomic status. J Racial Ethn Health Disparities. 2018;5(1):7–14.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Shahin W, Kennedy GA, Stupans I. The impact of personal and cultural beliefs on medication adherence of patients with chronic illnesses: a systematic review. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2019;13:1019–35.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Fernández A, Quan J, Moffet H, Parker MM, Schillinger D, Karter AJ. Adherence to newly prescribed diabetes medications among insured Latino and White patients with diabetes. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177(3):371–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Knepper TC, McLeod HL. When will clinical trials finally reflect diversity? Nature. 2018;557(7704):157–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ramamoorthy A, Pacanowski MA, Bull J, Zhang L. Racial/ethnic differences in drug disposition and response: review of recently approved drugs. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2015;97(3):263–73.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Russo C, Stout L, House T, Santana VM. Barriers and facilitators of clinical trial enrollment in a network of community-based pediatric oncology clinics. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2020;67(4):e28023.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Regnante JM, Richie NA, Fashoyin-Aje L, Vichnin M, Ford M, Roy UB, Turner K, Hall LL, Gonzalez E, Esnaola N, et al. US cancer centers of excellence strategies for increased inclusion of racial and ethnic minorities in clinical trials. J Oncol Pract. 2019;15(4):e289–99.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Freedman LS, Simon R, Foulkes MA, Friedman L, Geller NL, Gordon DJ, Mowery R. Inclusion of women and minorities in clinical trials and the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993–the perspective of NIH clinical trialists. Control Clin Trials. 1995;16(5):277–85 Discussion 286-279, 293-309.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Loree JM, Anand S, Dasari A, Unger JM, Gothwal A, Ellis LM, Varadhachary G, Kopetz S, Overman MJ, Raghav K. Disparity of race reporting and representation in clinical trials leading to cancer drug approvals from 2008 to 2018. JAMA Oncol. 2019;5(10):e191870.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Nazha B, Mishra M, Pentz R, Owonikoko TK. Enrollment of racial minorities in clinical trials: old problem assumes new urgency in the age of immunotherapy. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2019;39:3–10.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Mishkin G, Minasian LM, Kohn EC, Noone AM, Temkin SM. The generalizability of NCI-sponsored clinical trials accrual among women with gynecologic malignancies. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;143(3):611–6.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Sheffet AJ, Howard G, Sam A, Jamil Z, Weaver F, Chiu D, Voeks JH, Howard VJ, Hughes SE, Flaxman L, et al. Challenge and yield of enrolling racially and ethnically diverse patient populations in low event rate clinical trials. Stroke. 2018;49(1):84–9.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Falasinnu T, Chaichian Y, Bass MB, Simard JF. The representation of gender and race/ethnic groups in randomized clinical trials of individuals with systemic lupus erythematosus. Curr Rheumatol Rep. 2018;20(4):20.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ugowe FE, Jackson LR 2nd, Thomas KL. Racial and ethnic differences in the prevalence, management, and outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review. Heart Rhythm. 2018;15(9):1337–45.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Essien UR, Holmes DN, Jackson LR 2nd, Fonarow GC, Mahaffey KW, Reiffel JA, Steinberg BA, Allen LA, Chan PS, Freeman JV, et al. Association of race/ethnicity with oral anticoagulant use in patients with atrial fibrillation: findings from the outcomes registry for better informed treatment of atrial fibrillation II. JAMA Cardiol. 2018;3(12):1174–82.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Tahhan AS, Vaduganathan M, Greene SJ, Fonarow GC, Fiuzat M, Jessup M, Lindenfeld J, O’Connor CM, Butler J. Enrollment of older patients, women, and racial and ethnic minorities in contemporary heart failure clinical trials: a systematic review. JAMA Cardiol. 2018;3(10):1011–9.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Preventza O, Critsinelis A, Simpson K, Olive JK, LeMaire SA, Cornwell LD, Jimenez E, Byrne J, Chatterjee S, Rosengart TK, et al. Sex, racial, and ethnic disparities in U.S. cardiovascular trials in more than 230,000 patients. Ann Thorac Surg. 2021;112(3):726–35.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Wei S, Le N, Zhu JW, Breathett K, Greene SJ, Mamas MA, Zannad F, Van Spall HGC. Factors Associated With Racial and Ethnic Diversity Among Heart Failure Trial Participants: A Systematic Bibliometric Review. Circ Heart Fail. 2022;15(3):e008685.

  28. Haughton CF, Silfee VJ, Wang ML, Lopez-Cepero AC, Estabrook DP, Frisard C, Rosal MC, Pagoto SL, Lemon SC. Racial/ethnic representation in lifestyle weight loss intervention studies in the United States: a systematic review. Prev Med Rep. 2018;9:131–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Lee P, Le Saux M, Siegel R, Goyal M, Chen C, Ma Y, Meltzer AC. Racial and ethnic disparities in the management of acute pain in US emergency departments: meta-analysis and systematic review. Am J Emerg Med. 2019;37(9):1770–7.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Salama C, Han J, Yau L, Reiss WG, Kramer B, Neidhart JD, Criner GJ, Kaplan-Lewis E, Baden R, Pandit L, et al. Tocilizumab in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(1):20–30.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Flores LE, Frontera WR, Andrasik MP, Del Rio C, Mondríguez-González A, Price SA, Krantz EM, Pergam SA, Silver JK. Assessment of the inclusion of racial/ethnic minority, female, and older individuals in vaccine clinical trials. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(2):e2037640.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Blumer I, Hadar E, Hadden DR, Jovanovič L, Mestman JH, Murad MH, Yogev Y. Diabetes and pregnancy: an endocrine society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2013;98(11):4227–49.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Omori Y, Jovanovic L. Proposal for the reconsideration of the definition of gestational diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2005;28(10):2592–3.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009;339:b2535.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Tahhan AS, Vaduganathan M, Greene SJ, Alrohaibani A, Raad M, Gafeer M, Mehran R, Fonarow GC, Douglas PS, Bhatt DL, et al. Enrollment of older patients, women, and racial/ethnic minority groups in contemporary acute coronary syndrome clinical trials: a systematic review. JAMA Cardiol. 2020;5(6):714–22.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Fogacci F, Borghi C, Di Micoli A, DegliEsposti D, Cicero AFG. Inequalities in enrollment of women and racial minorities in trials testing uric acid lowering drugs. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2021;31(12):3305–13.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Rencsok EM, Bazzi LA, McKay RR, Huang FW, Friedant A, Vinson J, Peisch S, Zarif JC, Simmons S, Hawthorne K, et al. Diversity of enrollment in prostate cancer clinical trials: current status and future directions. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2020;29(7):1374–80.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Akturk HK, Agarwal S, Hoffecker L, Shah VN. Inequity in racial-ethnic representation in randomized controlled trials of diabetes technologies in type 1 diabetes: critical need for new standards. Diabetes Care. 2021;44(6):e121–3.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Zhou Y, Elashoff D, Kremen S, Teng E, Karlawish J, Grill JD. African Americans are less likely to enroll in preclinical Alzheimer’s disease clinical trials. Alzheimers Dement (N Y). 2017;3(1):57–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Khan MS, Shahid I, Siddiqi TJ, Khan SU, Warraich HJ, Greene SJ, Butler J, Michos ED. Ten-year trends in enrollment of women and minorities in pivotal trials supporting recent US Food and Drug Administration approval of novel cardiometabolic drugs. J Am Heart Assoc. 2020;9(11):e015594.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Al Hadidi S, Mims M, Miller-Chism CN, Kamble R. Participation of African American persons in clinical trials supporting U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval of cancer drugs. Ann Intern Med. 2020;173(4):320–2.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Unger JM, Hershman DL, Osarogiagbon RU, Gothwal A, Anand S, Dasari A, Overman M, Loree JM, Raghav K. Representativeness of Black patients in cancer clinical trials sponsored by the National Cancer Institute compared with pharmaceutical companies. JNCI Cancer Spectr. 2020;4(4):pkaa034.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Prasanna A, Miller HN, Wu Y, Peeler A, Ogungbe O, Plante TB, Juraschek SP. Recruitment of Black adults into cardiovascular disease trials. J Am Heart Assoc. 2021;10(17):e021108.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Patel SN, Staples JN, Garcia C, Chatfield L, Ferriss JS, Duska L. Are ethnic and racial minority women less likely to participate in clinical trials? Gynecol Oncol. 2020;157(2):323–8.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Wilkins CH, Schindler SE, Morris JC. Addressing health disparities among minority populations: why clinical trial recruitment is not enough. JAMA Neurol. 2020;77(9):1063–4.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Eberly LA, Yang L, Eneanya ND, Essien U, Julien H, Nathan AS, Khatana SAM, Dayoub EJ, Fanaroff AC, Giri J, et al. Association of race/ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic status with sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor use among patients with diabetes in the US. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(4):e216139.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Churchwell K, Elkind MSV, Benjamin RM, Carson AP, Chang EK, Lawrence W, Mills A, Odom TM, Rodriguez CJ, Rodriguez F, et al. Call to action: structural racism as a fundamental driver of health disparities: a presidential advisory from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2020;142(24):e454–68.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Niranjan SJ, Martin MY, Fouad MN, Vickers SM, Wenzel JA, Cook ED, Konety BR, Durant RW. Bias and stereotyping among research and clinical professionals: perspectives on minority recruitment for oncology clinical trials. Cancer. 2020;126(9):1958–68.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Wendler D, Kington R, Madans J, Van Wye G, Christ-Schmidt H, Pratt LA, Brawley OW, Gross CP, Emanuel E. Are racial and ethnic minorities less willing to participate in health research? PLoS Med. 2006;3(2):e19.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Wong R, Amano T, Lin SY, Zhou Y, Morrow-Howell N. Strategies for the recruitment and retention of racial/ethnic minorities in Alzheimer disease and dementia clinical research. Curr Alzheimer Res. 2019;16(5):458–71.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Patterson CC, Karuranga S, Salpea P, Saeedi P, Dahlquist G, Soltesz G, Ogle GD. Worldwide estimates of incidence, prevalence and mortality of type 1 diabetes in children and adolescents: results from the International Diabetes Federation Diabetes Atlas, 9th edition. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2019;157:107842.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Ziegler R, Neu A. Diabetes in childhood and adolescence. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2018;115(9):146–56.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Mateen FJ. Is it time for quotas to achieve racial and ethnic representation in multiple sclerosis trials? Front Neurol. 2021;12:680912.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Ðoàn LN, Takata Y, Sakuma KK, Irvin VL. Trends in clinical research including Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander participants funded by the US National Institutes of Health, 1992 to 2018. JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(7):e197432.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Scott PE, Unger EF, Jenkins MR, Southworth MR, McDowell TY, Geller RJ, Elahi M, Temple RJ, Woodcock J. Participation of women in clinical trials supporting FDA approval of cardiovascular drugs. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;71(18):1960–9.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Antequera A, Stallings E, Henry RS, Lopez-Alcalde J, Runnels V, Tudiver S, Tugwell P, Welch V. Sex and Gender Appraisal Tool-Systematic Reviews-2 and Participation-To-Prevalence Ratio assessed to whom the evidence applies in sepsis reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2021;142:119–32.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Charrow A, Xia FD, Joyce C, Mostaghimi A. Diversity in dermatology clinical trials: a systematic review. JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153(2):193–8.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Likang Li and Qianyu Wu for their help with double-checking the data to ensure accuracy.

Funding

This work was supported by the Science and Technology Program of Guangzhou (number: 202002030252), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (number: 82103906), and the Science Foundation of Guangdong Second Provincial General Hospital (Grant no. YY2018-002).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Methodology (CCEM), Guangdong Second Provincial General Hospital, Guangzhou, China

    Jingyi Zhang, Ruoting Wang & Guowei Li

  2. Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (HEI), McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

    Harriette G. C. Van Spall, Lehana Thabane & Guowei Li

  3. Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

    Harriette G. C. Van Spall

  4. Department of Epidemiology, School of Medicine, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China

    Yaoyao Wang

  5. St Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, ON, Hamilton, Canada

    Lehana Thabane

  6. Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa

    Lehana Thabane

Authors
  1. Jingyi Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Harriette G. C. Van Spall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yaoyao Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lehana Thabane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ruoting Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Guowei Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

GL, JZ, and LT: conceived and designed the study. GL, JZ, YW, and LT: acquired data, performed statistical analyses and interpretation, and drafted the manuscript. HGCVS, RW, and LT: provided professional and statistical support and made several critical revisions to the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. GL acts as the guarantor of this work.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guowei Li.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

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.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1:

Supplemental Figure 1. Flow diagram showing the trial selection process. Supplemental Table 1. Search strategy used in MEDLINE. Supplemental Table 2. Country or region of trial coordination office for the multi-country trials. Supplemental Table 3. Results from univariable logistic regression analysis for the relationship between trial characteristics and high-enrollment of BIPOC groups. Supplemental Table 4. Results from univariable linear regression analysis for the relationship between trial characteristics and enrollment rate of BIPOC groups. Supplemental Table 5. Results from multivariable linear regression analysis for the relationship between trial characteristics and enrollment rate of BIPOC groups

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, J., Van Spall, H.G.C., Wang, Y. et al. Twenty-year trends in racial and ethnic enrollment in large diabetes randomized controlled trials. BMC Med 20, 294 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-022-02501-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-022-02501-2

Keywords

  • BIPOC
  • Enrollment
  • Diabetes
  • Randomized controlled trials

BMC Medicine

ISSN: 1741-7015

Contact us