PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 29, 2026Journal of Clinical Oncology0 citations

Gender representation in first and senior authorship of phase III solid-tumor trials presented at the ASCO Annual Meeting, 2015-2025.

View Full Paper
SMSarbajit MukherjeeCancer Institute (WIA)ASAzza SarfrazMiami Heart Research InstituteSRShree RathMount Sinai Health System

Key Points

  • This research examines gender representation among first and senior authors of phase III solid-tumor trials at the ASCO Annual Meeting over a ten-year span.
  • Cross-sectional analysis of 1,517 phase III solid-tumor trial abstracts presented at ASCO from 2015-2025.
  • Data collection included authorship role, tumor type, funding source, and global region.
  • Multivariable logistic regression models assessed factors influencing women authorship.
  • Women comprised 27.9% of authors, with significant increases in female authorship observed over time (24.9% to 30.0%; p=0.002).
  • Senior authorship was significantly more likely to be male (OR=1.30, p=0.001) and women had lower odds of being senior authors compared to first authors (aOR 0.77, 95% CI 0.65–0.90).
  • East Asia and Pacific regions showed higher odds of women authorship (aOR 1.54, 95% CI 1.15–2.07) compared to North America.

Abstract

9006 Background: Authorship in clinical trials reflects access to research infrastructure, funding, and academic advancement. While gender gaps have been described, longitudinal trends and structural correlates remain poorly characterized. We examined temporal trends and determinants of gender representation among first and senior authors of phase III solid-tumor trials presented at the ASCO Annual Meeting. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of all phase III solid-tumor trial abstracts presented at the ASCO Annual Meeting from 2015–2025. Data included year, tumor track (breast, gastrointestinal GI, other), funding source (industry, academic, other), and first/senior authorship. Countries were classified by World Bank income group (high HIC, upper-middle UMIC, lower-middle LMIC, low-income LIC) and global region (North America, Europe aOR 1.34, 95% CI 1.13–1.58), most pronounced among senior authors (aOR 1.55, 95% CI 1.21–1.99; p =0.006). Women authorship varied by tumor track, with lower odds in GI compared with breast trials (aOR 0.49, 95% CI 0.38-0.64). Compared with North America, East Asia and Pacific affiliation was associated with higher odds of women authorship overall (aOR 1.54, 95% CI 1.15–2.07), strongest among first authors (aOR 1.89, 95% CI 1.25–2.91). Among senior authors, LMIC affiliation was associated with lower odds of women authorship compared to HICs (aOR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01–0.56). Conclusions: In the largest global oncology conference, women authorship in phase III solid-tumor trials has improved over the past decade but remains uneven, with persistent gaps in senior authorship. Authorship role, era, and tumor track by gender. Characteristic Women (N=845, 27.9%) Men (N=2,182, 71.9%) P -value Authorship role 0.002 First author 462 (54.7) 1,055 (48.4) Senior author 383 (45.3) 1,127 (51.6) Era 0.002 2015–2020 310 (36.7) 934 (42.8) 2021–2025 535 (63.3) 1,248 (57.2) Tumor track <0.001 Breast 203 (24.0) 307 (14.1) Gastrointestinal 150 (17.8) 456 (20.9) Other solid tumors 492 (58.2) 1,419 (65.0)

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Mukherjee et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a192d13fab5b468c4415dc6https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2026.44.16_suppl.9006
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper