ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 1144

Understanding Clinical Trials Participation Among Individuals of African Descent with Lupus Through the Lens of Critical Race Theory: A Qualitative Analysis

Candace Feldman1, Jessica Williams 1, Courtnie Phillip 1, Corine Sinnette 1, Karen Mancera-Cuevas 2, Patricia Canessa 3, Gina Curry 4, Maryann Mason 2 and Rosalind Ramsey-Goldman 2, 1Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, 2Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, 3IPHA, Chicago, IL, 4University of Chicago, Chicago, IL

Meeting: 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting

Keywords: African-Americans and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), clinical trials, health disparities, qualitative

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print
Session Information

Date: Monday, November 11, 2019

Title: Healthcare Disparities In Rheumatology Poster

Session Type: Poster Session (Monday)

Session Time: 9:00AM-11:00AM

Background/Purpose: Despite a disproportionate burden of lupus and poorer outcomes among individuals of African descent (hereafter “black”) compared to white individuals, black individuals are underrepresented in lupus clinical trials. We aimed to explore the reasons behind this from the patient perspective using Critical Race Theory, applied to health equity research with the Public Health Critical Race Praxis (PHCRP). We hypothesized that ongoing racism and historical injustices contribute to the perpetuation of mistrust and to structural barriers within clinical trial design, which result in obstacles and fears that prevent some black individuals from participating in research.

Methods: We recruited black individuals with lupus, age >18 years old, and their caretakers (members of their support network who participate in their medical decision-making) to participate in focus groups. Participants were identified through community-based networks and organizations, lupus associations, and academic hospital networks in predominately black Boston and Chicago areas. A racially diverse, multidisciplinary study team developed our moderator guide incorporating PHCRP principles (Figure 1), and we used this framework to guide our analyses. Focus groups were transcribed verbatim. Three researchers read the transcripts and coded terms and from this, derived overarching themes, subthemes and proposed actions.

Results: We held 2 focus groups in Chicago (N=16) and two in Boston (N=15). The mean age was 54, 90% were female, and all participants identified as black. Twenty (65%) were diagnosed with SLE and 11 were caretakers. Thematic analysis of transcripts resulted in six key themes: skepticism of clinical trials/research (subthemes of trust, racism and historical context, and placebo arms), the greater good, SLE-specific factors, physician/institutional influences, social support influences, and trial/research-specific factors (subthemes of exclusion criteria, incentives and information presentation/ marketing of studies) (Table). Aspects of mistrust stemming from historical context and internalized and structural racism traversed themes. Analyses also revealed recurrent fears (e.g. being a “guinea pig”) and structural barriers (e.g. exclusion criteria), as well as mediating factors (e.g. relationships with physicians and social networks), and motivating factors (e.g. contribution to a greater good) (Figure 2). Following the PHCRP framework, actions proposed by participants included reframing the way trial information is presented and disseminated, and reevaluation of structural barriers (e.g. exclusion criteria) (Figure 1).

Conclusion: Issues of trust, racism and historical context permeated all four focus group discussions regardless of participant age. There were certain mediating factors, notably relationships between patients and their physicians, that increased the likelihood of participation in research. Our efforts to promote more inclusive, representative clinical trials should acknowledge the perpetuation of racism and the intersection of biases that occur with race, age and sex particularly in the context of lupus.


Figure 1 Clin Trials ACR

Figure 1


ClinTrials ACR Table 1

Table 1


Figure 2 Clin Trials ACR

Figure 2


Disclosure: C. Feldman, None; J. Williams, None; C. Phillip, None; C. Sinnette, None; K. Mancera-Cuevas, None; P. Canessa, None; G. Curry, None; M. Mason, None; R. Ramsey-Goldman, Exagen, 2.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Feldman C, Williams J, Phillip C, Sinnette C, Mancera-Cuevas K, Canessa P, Curry G, Mason M, Ramsey-Goldman R. Understanding Clinical Trials Participation Among Individuals of African Descent with Lupus Through the Lens of Critical Race Theory: A Qualitative Analysis [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019; 71 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/understanding-clinical-trials-participation-among-individuals-of-african-descent-with-lupus-through-the-lens-of-critical-race-theory-a-qualitative-analysis/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

« Back to 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/understanding-clinical-trials-participation-among-individuals-of-african-descent-with-lupus-through-the-lens-of-critical-race-theory-a-qualitative-analysis/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology