Lung Cancer Biomarker Disparities | How Precision Medicine and Research Can Help
Lung Cancer Biomarker Disparities | How Precision Medicine and Research Can Help from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.
How can lung cancer research and precision medicine help with biomarker disparities? Experts Dr. Joshua Sabari from NYU Langone and Dr. Eugene Manley from SCHEQ Foundation discuss testing factors that need improvement, patient groups that show disparities, and how clinical trial participation can move research forward.
[ACT]IVATION TIP
“…we really have to more universally test everyone equally to really have an impact on outcomes.”
Download Resource Guide | Descargar guía de recursos
See More from [ACT]IVATED NSCLC Biomarkers
Related Resources:
Transcript:
Lisa Hatifeld:
So, how can advancements in precision medicine be made more inclusive and equitable to ensure that biomarker-driven treatments benefit diverse populations equally? Second part is, what do you see as the most pressing research priorities in understanding and mitigating these biomarker disparities?
Dr. Joshua Sabari:
So I think first and foremost, testing is key. I mean, educating clinicians, healthcare providers, that every single patient, no matter what clinical characteristic that may be, age, sex, ethnicity, race needs to be tested broadly with the same mutational sort of profile or same biomarker profile. Having somebody in your office who never smoked, those patients generally will have broad panel and next generation sequencing. If you have an 85-year-old patient who is a former heavy smoker, the rate of mutational testing comes down.
So I think we need to remove that bias, that those clinical biases that we have, that we carry with us on a day-to-day basis. We need to test all patients with lung cancer regardless of any clinical characteristic. And what I tell my fellows, my residents, and what I talk to patients about is really all you need is lungs to develop lung cancer.
We need to remove that stigma and when we remove that stigma, we will be testing more broadly in our practices. There are also a lot of systemic biases, a lot of racism that exists, that prevents clinicians, I believe, from doing the best thing for their patients. And if you look at clinical trial enrollment in this country and that’s something that we do need to improve in order to develop better treatment options for our patients, particularly our patients of Latin American descent or Black Americans in the United States.
We need to enroll more patients of more diverse backgrounds onto our trials. Otherwise, we’re only limiting our treatments to specific or small percent of our patient population. So to be honest, I don’t know how well our EGFR inhibitors work in Black patients. I know it’s approved and we utilize it, but we don’t have nearly as much data prospectively treating novel therapies.
A lot of our trials have inclusion rates as low as 2 percent to 3 percent. And we know that our Black patient populations make up 13 percent to 15 percent of our practices. So I think more needs to be done to align our enrollment on trial, I think from institutional policies as well as governmental. So the FDA has really made a forceful statement here to pharmaceutical companies that if your data is not inclusive of a U.S. patient population, this will have ramifications for approvals in the future.
So a lot needs to be done in the sense of education both from the healthcare provider and…but also from the patient, and to really motivate patients to enroll in trials. And one positive that I’ve seen from the patient support groups, the advocacy groups, particularly EGFR Resisters Group, for example, we’ve seen a tremendous sort of push for patients to enroll on trials, again, to benefit themselves as an individual patient diagnosed with EGFR mutant lung cancer, but also to help those who come before or after them in their journey with lung cancer.
Lisa Hatfield:
And, Dr. Manley, do you have anything to add to that?
Dr. Eugene Manley:
I think he hit most of it, but I will say that you have to test everyone because there are people that have risk factors for lung cancer and those that don’t. And like, one of the leading risk factors is history of smoking, but there’s a significant population of specifically Asian females that don’t smoke. Even recently, that have been showing that Black women that don’t smoke also have increased rates of lung cancer. And these are, we don’t know why.
So we still need to be able to test all these patients across all the indications and maybe cross-reference with stress income, socioeconomic status and really try to determine maybe if there are certain specific drivers and what we didn’t talk about. We know that there are some epigenetic changes that may occur due to stress. We also know that there are some changes in tumor mutational burden, some stuff out of MSK. And I think there is some stuff that even shows differences in the immunomarker frequency and response in Black populations. So, we really have to more universally test everyone equally to really have an impact on outcomes.
Share Your Feedback
Create your own user feedback survey
