Abstract:The metrics of success for oncology drug development and approval shifted with the shorter time to approval associated with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2018 Real-Time Oncology Review (RTOR) program and the newly mandated FDA Diversity Action Plan (DAP) requirements. 1 -4 The study by Mooghali et al 5 found that premarket evidence for RTOR indications was often drawn from surrogate end points. However, postmarketing requirements to confirm benefit for RTOR indications with traditional approval were infrequent. Mooghali et al 5 conclude that additional postmarketing requirements for trials with surrogate end points may be important to sustain the flexibility of the RTOR program. An active critical test case is how the RTOR program adapts premarketing and postmarketing evidence requirements to meet DAP objectives. The RTOR program and DAP requirements focus on distinct but complementary aspects of drug development and approval: speed to patient access and equity in data supporting access, respectively. The FDA Oncology Center of Excellence also has implemented other mechanisms, such as Project Orbis and the Product Quality Assessment Aid to expedite drug review and Project Equity to advance clinical trial diversity and evidence generation for historically underrepresented patient populations. 2 ,3,6 These initiatives reflect a broader FDA strategy to improve patient outcomes through regulatory efficiency and accurate understanding of outcomes for the intended patient population. The DAP gained legislative backing as a requirement in late 2022, the same year a draft guidance was issued. The final guidance is pending as of March 2024, and there is limited publicly available experience. In particular, it is unknown how the FDA will assess achievement of DAP goals for RTOR eligibility and the extent of postmarketing studies that are highlighted in the draft DAP guidance. 1 Despite prior FDA efforts to improve clinical trial diversity, overall recruitment of racially and ethnically diverse patient populations remains disproportionately low. For example, although Black patients account for approximately 20% of all patients with multiple myeloma, they represent approximately 4% of patients enrolled in myeloma clinical trials. 1 Population-level studies confirm racial and ethnic inequities in clinical trial participation across multiple cancer types. 7 The drivers of inequitable trial participation include trial eligibility criteria that disproportionately exclude Black, Indigenous, and people of color; geographic and transportation barriers; earned mistrust of the medical and clinical research system, bias among trial staff, and lack of partnership with Black, Indigenous, and people of color communities in clinical trial design. 8 Several of the multilevel drivers are addressed in the DAP and prior FDA guidance documents related to advancing clinical trial diversity. 1 Consideration of DAP goals early in the drug development process and early discussion with the FDA is likely the most effective approach to meeting the dual objectives of access and equity. A critical challenge to developing a meaningful DAP is deeply understanding the characteristics of patients who will likely benefit from the therapy. These characteristics extend beyond race and ethnicity to include other historically underrepresented populations based on age, sex, gender identity, socioeconomic status, pregnancy and lactation status, and disability. 1 Unfortunately, current and detailed epidemiologic information is not always available in research publications, existing incidence databases or disease registries. Availability of data is particularly challenging for rare diseases, regional or community differences, and specific indications (eg, second-line treatment for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer after a specific first-line chemotherapy regimen). One approach is to leverage data from electronic health records (EHRs) to extract additional patient demographic and clinical details not usually captured in other databases, such as claims and registry data. To make sense of complex data from disparate EHR sources and to enable efficient drug development and access programs, such as the RTOR, advanced analytic approaches and technology-based solutions are needed. For example, artificial intelligence and machine learning approaches can be applied to EHR data to support DAP enrollment goal-setting for specific indications and settings, optimization of trial eligibility criteria for diversity, and identification of potential trial sites enriched for diverse patient populations. Still, it will be important to assess and mitigate potential algorithmic bias in leveraging artificial intelligence and machine learning in these contexts. Additionally, equitable implementat -Abstract Truncated-

Harnessing policy to promote inclusive medical product evidence: development of a reference standard and structured audit of clinical trial diversity policies

Inclusion and diversity in clinical trials: Actionable steps to drive lasting change

Demographic diversity of US-based participants in GSK-sponsored interventional clinical trials

Enhancing Diversity and Inclusion in Clinical Trials

Promoting inclusion in clinical trials—a rapid review of the literature and recommendations for action

Exploring the barriers to, and importance of, participant diversity in early-phase clinical trials: an interview-based qualitative study of professionals and patient and public representatives

Regulatory landscape with U.S. patient requirements and Clinical Trial Diversity expectations

Improving diversity in study participation: Patient perspectives on barriers, racial differences and the role of communities

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Clinical Research: A Path Toward Precision Health for Everyone

Clinical trial transparency: a reassessment of industry compliance with clinical trial registration and reporting requirements in the United States

Diversity of US participants in AstraZeneca-sponsored clinical trials

Improving diverse patient enrollment in clinical trials, focusing on Hispanic and Asian populations: recommendations from an interdisciplinary expert panel

A retrospective look: Industry partnership and transparency in phase III randomized clinical trials of breast cancer targeted therapies across two decades.

"We are not invited": Australian focus group results on how to improve ethnic diversity in trials

How patient-clinician education can strengthen partnerships and promote tangible actions to improve clinical trial diversity in breast and lung cancer trials.

A Framework for Evaluating the Diversity of Clinical Trials

Equitable inclusion of diverse populations in oncology clinical trials: deterrents and drivers

Abstract 1311: Planning for health equity in oncology trials: Expectations and feasibility

Reporting of Demographics & Subgroup Analyses in Premarketing Studies of FDA Approved High-Risk Cardiovascular Devices, 2014–2022

The US Food and Drug Administration Dual Mandate for Rapid Drug Review and Equity

Race reporting and diversity in US food and drug administration (FDA) registration trials for prostate cancer; 2006–2020