Abstract B091: Introduction of Implicit Bias Training to oncology faculty as a means to improve minority participation in cancer clinical trials
Authors: Taylor Renee , Silber Andrea 
Published: January 2023

Background: Following George Floyd’s murder in May 2020, conversations about equity and bias became part of our daily national conversation. Simultaneously the COVID-19 outbreak disproportionately affected people of color which further illuminated existing disparities in outcomes. Bias training was introduced in many sectors as a strategy to address inequity. Inclusivity in healthcare is essential to develop evidence-based therapies and treatment plans. Previous studies have demonstrated the consequences when racial and ethnic minorities are excluded from research. (Hamel et al, 2016). Racial and ethnic minorities disproportionately bear adverse outcomes from cancer. Cancer clinical trials would benefit from solutions to promote inclusivity. (Khan et al. 2021) Research Purpose: The purpose of our study was to assess whether Implicit Bias Training can increase minority participation in cancer clinical trials. Methodology: The Office of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion offered Implicit Bias Training to all clinical oncologists at the Yale Cancer Center (YCC) between May and July 2021. While 109 physicians were eligible to participate, 57 physicians were required by the department to complete this training, and 84% of these physicians completed this opportunity. We analyzed YCC clinical trial enrollment data between two time periods defined as pre-intervention and post-intervention. We selected these periods to investigate not only the efficacy of bias training but specifically bias training as an adjunct to the national conversation during the time of our study. We selected the preintervention period as January 1, 2021, to June 30, 2021. The intervention was designed to be completed by July 1, 2021 therefore the post-intervention period is defined as July 1, 2021 to December 31, 2021. Results/Summary: Our analysis showed an increase of 2.5% in the participation of Black/African American patients. There was a slight (1.5%) decrease in Hispanic patient enrollment during this time. Conclusion: Our analysis suggested that implicit bias training delivered once had only a very modest, if any, improvement in racial minority participation in cancer clinical trials. Our project focused on participation by Black/African American patients. The impediment to Hispanic participation is quite nuanced. Hispanic patients, many of whom are non-English speaking with immigration/insurance issues face additional structural barriers. We think that a different strategy is needed to better serve this patient population. While we had hoped for metrics to demonstrate greater impact from bias training, our next investigation will look at if the intervention is best delivered repeatedly. Future Work: We have not abandoned the strategy of bias training to build trust and increase Black/AA participation. After the intervention, we are interested in whether greater impact is seen over time. We have designed a survey to look at the effects of the intervention after a year. Our next step is to examine whether repeated delivery of this intervention will amplify our results.

Citation Format: Renee Taylor, Andrea Silber. Introduction of Implicit Bias Training to oncology faculty as a means to improve minority participation in cancer clinical trials [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 15th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2022 Sep 16-19; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2022;31(1 Suppl):Abstract nr B091.