LGBTQ+ participation in cancer clinical trials: Ensuring justice and data equity

This case study considers LGBTQ+ participation in cancer clinical trials as an issue of justice and data equity in research ethics. Although representation of LGBTQ+ people in clinical trials varies depending on the type of cancer, routine data collection of gender and sexual orientation in clinical trials is inconsistent, leading to underrepresentation in routine reporting. Improving LGBTQ+ participation in cancer clinical trials ensures more ethical and inclusive research, supporting the principle of justice, and enabling more accurate data collection practices to support LGBTQ+ health. This case study draws on findings from a pilot study involving a scoping review and key informants’ interviews in Australia to understand barriers and facilitators to LGBTQ+ participation in cancer clinical trials. A key issue identified is that gender and sexual orientation are not routinely collected in cancer clinical trials, and that while most professionals working in cancer clinical trials do not object to collecting this data, further education and resourcing is needed to support them to do so effectively. The case study provides key recommendations for improving LGBTQ+ participation in cancer clinical trials, including supporting minimum data requirements for gender and sexual orientation in cancer clinical trials, providing further training and support for workforce capacity, and upskilling ethics committees regarding LGBTQ+ data equity.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Research Ethics
Published
2025-10-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161251383558
Primary Topic
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

LGBTQ+ participation in cancer clinical trials: Ensuring justice and data equity

kylie valentine, Anna Hartley, Anthony K J Smith, Haryana M. Dhillon et al.
Research Ethics
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
article

LGBTQ+ participation in cancer clinical trials: Ensuring justice and data equity

kylie valentine, Anna Hartley, Anthony K J Smith, Haryana M. Dhillon, Kerryn Drysdale, Bridget Haire, Scott Walsberger, Lindsey Jasicki, Celine Daignault
article en

Abstract

This case study considers LGBTQ+ participation in cancer clinical trials as an issue of justice and data equity in research ethics. Although representation of LGBTQ+ people in clinical trials varies depending on the type of cancer, routine data collection of gender and sexual orientation in clinical trials is inconsistent, leading to underrepresentation in routine reporting. Improving LGBTQ+ participation in cancer clinical trials ensures more ethical and inclusive research, supporting the principle of justice, and enabling more accurate data collection practices to support LGBTQ+ health. This case study draws on findings from a pilot study involving a scoping review and key informants’ interviews in Australia to understand barriers and facilitators to LGBTQ+ participation in cancer clinical trials. A key issue identified is that gender and sexual orientation are not routinely collected in cancer clinical trials, and that while most professionals working in cancer clinical trials do not object to collecting this data, further education and resourcing is needed to support them to do so effectively. The case study provides key recommendations for improving LGBTQ+ participation in cancer clinical trials, including supporting minimum data requirements for gender and sexual orientation in cancer clinical trials, providing further training and support for workforce capacity, and upskilling ethics committees regarding LGBTQ+ data equity.

Research Ethics
The University of Sydney (AU), Curtin University (AU), Cancer Institute of New South Wales (AU), UNSW Sydney (AU)
Cancer Institute NSW
Openalex Percentile: Top 66%
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.