Sign up for our daily briefing
Make your busy days simpler with Axios AM/PM. Catch up on what's new and why it matters in just 5 minutes.
Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday
Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday
Denver news in your inbox
Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Denver
Des Moines news in your inbox
Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Des Moines
Minneapolis-St. Paul news in your inbox
Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Twin Cities
Tampa Bay news in your inbox
Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Tampa Bay
Charlotte news in your inbox
Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Charlotte
Clinical trials don’t enroll enough black participants, even when they’re testing drugs for treatments that disproportionately affect African-Americans, according to a ProPublica analysis.
Why it matters: It’s not entirely clear why some diseases affect different populations differently, but those differences are an important part of understanding whether a particular treatment is safe and effective — exactly what clinical trials are supposed to test.
By the numbers: In most of the trials ProPublica surveyed, fewer than 5% of participants were black — compared with more than 13% of the U.S. population.
- The results weren’t much better even for treatments that could disproportionately benefit black people, such as multiple myeloma and prostate cancer. These are more prevalent among African-Americans, yet black enrollment in trials for those drugs still often sat around 2% or 3%.
Go deeper: NIH launches massive program to diversify medical research.