AI Article Synopsis

  • The purpose of the systematic review was to investigate racial and ethnic disparities in access to germline genetic testing (GGT) for prostate cancer among Black men and other marginalized groups, as this testing is important for cancer risk assessment and treatment.
  • The review analyzed studies published between 1996 and 2021, finding that of 91 studies, only a small number (4) reflected GGT rates in routine clinical care, showing a significant underrepresentation of Black men compared to White men.
  • The conclusion highlights that most GGT data comes from research settings rather than clinical practice and that there's a lack of representation for other marginalized populations, indicating a significant gap in understanding racial disparities in GGT usage.

Article 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.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/OP.22.00634DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

systematic review
12
germline genetic
8
genetic testing
8
prostate cancer
8
black men
8
historically marginalized
8
marginalized populations
8
disparities ggt
8
routine clinical
8
clinical care
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!