Oncologists Call for Equity and Female Representation in Research During Women’s History Month

Shruti Patel, MD

This Women’s History Month, OncLive is spotlighting transformative and groundbreaking female-led research, the unique challenges women face as patients and practitioners, and the women advancing oncology practice and care each and every day.

On International Women’s Day, we were joined by Shruti Patel, MD, a clinical assistant professor of medicine-oncology at Stanford Medicine in California, who took over OncLive’s social media platforms alongside Megan Melody, MD, of Tampa General Hospital in Florida. During her Instagram takeover, Patel highlighted gender disparities affecting cancer care for women; paid tribute to pioneering women in the field of oncology; and emphasized the need for equity in gynecologic cancer research alongside ongoing efforts to recognize and support women in cancer research and treatment.

“Cancer doesn’t affect everyone equally, and women are too often left behind in research, funding and treatment access,” Patel stated. “This International Women’s Day, [we need to] commit to making oncology more equitable for women patients and women in this field, because better representation equals better outcomes.”

Patel also invited her fellow “Only Oncologists in the Building” collaborators, Emil Lou, MD, PhD, FACP, of the University of Minnesota Medical School in Minneapolis, and Shaalan Beg MD, MBA, FASCO, of UT Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, Texas, to provide their unique perspectives on the importance of women in oncology and discuss the lack of representation of women in clinical trials and funding for female-specific cancers.

In case you missed the takeover, here are some of their exclusive insights.

Gender Disparities in Cancer Care and Gynecologic Cancer Research

Patel kicked off her International Women’s Day takeover by sharing fast facts about gender disparities in cancer. First, she noted that women experience higher rates of delayed cancer diagnoses compared with men, even for cancers affecting both genders. This is corroborated by a 2015 study of 1481 women receiving navigation services, which found that 50% (n = 745) faced barriers to care, with older, non-White, non-English speaking, and uninsured patients experiencing the most significant delays.1

Women are also underrepresented in patient populations participating in oncology drug trials, including those that affect both genders. The FDA’s 2018 Drug Trials Snapshots reported that women comprised only 38% of the 5157 participants in clinical trials leading to 17 new drug approvals that year.2 Racial disparities were also evident, with Black and Hispanic patients each making up only 4% of trial participants, despite the higher burden of cancer incidence in racial and ethnic minority populations.

Lastly, research funding for female-specific malignancies lags behind other cancers. An analysis of National Cancer Institute funding distributed from 2007 to 2014 found that gynecologic cancers ranked in the bottom half of funding allocation among 18 cancers, limiting trial enrollment and treatment recommendations.3 Ovarian, cervical, and uterine cancer research received significantly less funding than other malignancies, contributing to fewer National Comprehensive Cancer Network category 1 recommendations—17—compared with melanoma (33), prostate cancer (38), breast cancer (45), and lung cancer (59).

“These disparities don’t happen by accident,” Patel stated. “They’re a result of historical biases in research funding and medical practice, and they have real consequences, like misdiagnoses, delayed treatments, and gaps in cancer care. As oncologists, researchers, and advocates, we have a responsibility to push for equity in cancer care. That means clinical trials that include diverse patient populations, funding that reflects the urgency of female-specific cancers, and policies that eliminate gender-based disparities in care.”

Female Powerhouses in Oncology

“From pioneering chemotherapy to revolutionizing cancer care research, women have shaped oncology in many ways that don’t always get the recognition they deserve,” Patel began. “These women broke barriers, changed medicine, and—let’s be real—probably didn't get half the credit they deserve. [We’re here] to give them their flowers.”

Patel first spotlighted Marie Skłodowska-Curie, a Polish-French physicist and chemist, who was the first woman to receive a Nobel Prize and the only woman to receive 2 Nobel prizes, which she received in 1903 and 1911. Curie made groundbreaking discoveries in radiation that laid the foundation for modern radiation therapy in oncology.

Next up was Jane Cooke Wright, MD, one of the 7 founding physicians of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and its only woman founder. She is credited with developing the technique of using human tissue cultures to test the effects of potential drugs on cancer cells in the 1950s, revolutionizing precision oncology when chemotherapy was still in its infancy.

Flashing forward to the 1970s, Jimmie C. Holland, MD, helped establish the field of psycho-oncology, which emphasized the importance of addressing the mental and emotional well-being of cancer patients alongside their physical health. Last but certainly not least was Angela Hartley Brodie, PhD, whose research on aromatase inhibitors led to one of the most effective treatments for patients with hormone-sensitive breast cancer, significantly improving patient outcomes.

“These women changed the game. There are many more past and present women continuing work, but there’s still a lot of work to be done,” Patel concluded.

Beg and Lou on the Underrepresentation of Women in Oncology Leadership and Research

“As men in this field, we know we wouldn’t be here without the mentorship, leadership and expertise of women who’veshaped modern oncology. We also know that when we improve cancer care for women, we improve it for everyone,” Beg began.

“That’s because cancer doesn’t affect all patients the same way,” Lou continued. “Women face unique challenges, such as symptoms being overlooked and underrepresentation in clinical trials; when we fail to address these disparities, we miss opportunities for better treatments and outcomes that benefit all patients.”

Lou went on to reference findings from a study on financial toxicity among breast and gynecologic cancer survivors, which estimated that approximately 50% of United States cancer survivors experience financial toxicity.4 Women—even when insured—are more likely than men to face cancer-related financial hardship, limiting their access to care. Data from the American Cancer Society’s 2024-2025 Breast Cancer Facts & Figures report further revealed that, despite having a 5% lower breast cancer incidence rate than White women, Black women experienced a 38% higher breast cancer mortality rate.5

Additional disparities in women’s health care experiences were corroborated in the 2022 KFF Women’s Health Survey.6 Among women ages 18 to 64 years who had visited a health care provider in the preceding 2 years, 29% reported having their concerns dismissed, 15% said they were not believed, and 19% noted that assumptions were made about them without being asked. Women were more likely than men to report these negative experiences (38% vs 32%), with 9% of women citing discrimination based on personal characteristics. Moreover, whereas 58% of women were asked about their occupations, far fewer were asked about social determinants of health, such as housing stability (30%), food security (20%), or access to transportation (20%).

Women also remain underrepresented in oncology leadership roles, such as those within oncology departments and medical journals, Beg noted. “Despite driving groundbreaking discoveries, [women] still receive less research funding [than men],” he added. A commentary on gender inequity in academic oncology published in JAMA Oncology found that among 6030 faculty members across 265 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education–accredited programs, women comprised 35.9% of faculty but only 24.4% of leadership roles.7 Notably, female representation was lowest in chair positions, with only 16.3% of departments led by women—21.7% of those in medical oncology, 11.7% of those in radiation oncology, and 3.8% of those in surgical oncology.

Similarly, a study by Patel, et al on editorial board diversity found that women held only 15.9% of editor-in-chief positions, with surgical oncology editorial boards having the lowest rate female representation at 2.3%.8 Additionally, editorial leadership was predominantly White (71.1%), with Asian members making up 22.5% of editorial board leaders. Women were nearly half as likely as men to hold top editorial positions (prevalence odds ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.23-0.95; P = .03).

“We [need to take] this moment to recognize the women who inspire us—our colleagues, our mentors, and the patients who show incredible strength every day. When we uplift women in oncology, we don’t just make cancer care better for women; we make it better for everyone,” Lou concluded.

Check out OncLive’s Instagram page to hear more from Dr Patel’s takeover and keep up with the latest news across tumor types!

References

1. Ramachandran A, Freund KM, Bak SM, Heeren TC, Chen CA, Battaglia TA. Multiple barriers delay care among women with abnormal cancer screening despite patient navigation. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2015;24(1):30-36. doi:10.1089/jwh.2014.4869
2. Nazha B, Mishra M, Pentz R, Owonikoko TK. Enrollment of racial minorities in clinical trials: old problem assumes new urgency in the age of immunotherapy. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. Published online May 17, 2019.doi:10.1200/EDBK_100021
3. Spencer RJ, Rice LW, Ye C, Woo K, Uppal S. Disparities in the allocation of research funding to gynecologic cancers by Funding to Lethality scores. Gynecol Oncol. 2019;152(1):106-111. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2018.10.021
4. Benedict C, Fisher S, Schapira L, et al. Greater financial toxicity relates to greater distress and worse quality of life among breast and gynecologic cancer survivors. Psychooncology. 2022;31(1):9-20. doi:10.1002/pon.5763
5. Malhotra, P. Understanding breast cancer racial disparities. Breast Cancer Research Foundation. Accessed March 19, 2025. https://www.bcrf.org/about-breast-cancer/breast-cancer-racial-disparities/
6. Long M, Frederiksen B, Ranji U, Diep K, Salganicoff A. Women’s experiences with provider communication and interactions in health care settings: findings from the 2022 KFF Women’s Health Survey. KFF. Feb 22, 2023. Accessed March 19, 2025. https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/issue-brief/womens-experiences-with-provider-communication-interactions-health-care-settings-findings-from-2022-kff-womens-health-survey/
7. Gharzai LA, Jagsi R. Ongoing gender inequity in leadership positions of academic oncology programs: the broken pipeline. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(3):e200691. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.0691
8. Patel SR, Riano I, Abuali I, et al. Race/ethnicity and gender representation in hematology and oncology editorial boards: what is the state of diversity? Oncologist. 2023;28(7):609-617. doi:10.1093/oncolo/oyad103