Purpose: The perspective of all stakeholders involved in clinical trials is critical to addressing disparities in racial/ethnic minority (REM) clinical trial participation. Little is known about clinical trial investigator perspectives. To our knowledge, there are no published studies assessing differences in investigator perspectives on the basis of their primary role in clinical trials (ie, principal investigator [PI] or subinvestigator [sub-I]). Differences likely exist in investigator perspectives on the basis of having a more design-oriented (PI) or recruitment-oriented (sub-I) role.
Materials and methods: We conducted a cross-sectional, anonymous, pilot survey of 107 oncology clinical trial investigators at an academic center. The survey assessed five domains about disparities in REM clinical trial participation. We performed a subgroup analysis of mid- and late-career investigators (≥10 years of experience) comparing PIs (opened ≥one clinical trial in the past year) with sub-Is (did not).
Results: Among 60 respondents, a majority (83%) strongly agreed disparities exist in REM clinical trial participation and that this is problematic (75%). Notably, 45% agreed they cannot directly address this problem. In the subgroup analysis, PIs were more likely to have received training about barriers/facilitators to REM clinical trial participation and strategies to increase participation. They were also more likely to endorse wanting help in this area.
Conclusion: Our results suggest clinical trial investigators are aware of disparities in REM clinical trial participation but do not feel they can address them. PIs are more likely to have received previous training on this topic and to want help to improve their ability to address disparities. More studies are needed to inform targeted interventions and structural improvements to enhance investigators' self-efficacy for improving REM participation in oncology clinical trials.