Comparison of Trial-Collected and Parent-Reported Race and Ethnicity in a Children’s Oncology Group Trial - Summary - MDSpire
Coming Soon: Introducing MDSpire News. Learn more
Conexiant’s news site is now MDSpire News. Learn more

Comparing Race and Ethnicity Recorded in a Children’s Oncology Group Trial With Parent-Reported Information

  • By

  • Callie Fry

  • Eva Robinson

  • Edie Weller

  • Morgan A. Paul

  • Rahela Aziz-Bose

  • Leanne Duhaney

  • McKenzie Griffin

  • Kristine Karvonen

  • Colleen A. Kelly

  • Sunyu Kang

  • Haley Newman

  • Puja J. Umaretiya

  • Daniel J. Zheng

  • Sumit Gupta

  • Rachel E. Rau

  • David T. Teachey

  • Sarah Alexander

  • John A. Kairalla

  • Kira Bona

  • November 11, 2026

Share

Objective:

Assess missingness and agreement between race and ethnicity recorded by a Children’s Oncology Group (COG) trial and information reported by parents of children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

Approach:
  • Design and participants: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected parent-survey data from US participants in COG AALL1731, a phase III trial enrolling children aged 1–9 years with B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
  • Measures and analysis: Compared parent-reported race and ethnicity with case report form (CRF) data recorded by trial sites. Assessed missing data and concordance using percentages and Cohen κ.
Key Findings:
  • CRF race and ethnicity data were missing for 88 of 1,012 participants (8.7%), compared with parent-reported data missing for 10 (1.0%).
  • Agreement was moderate for race (72.8%; κ=0.45), substantial for ethnicity (83.0%; κ=0.65), and substantial for combined race and ethnicity (78.6%; κ=0.67).
  • Concordance was lowest for parent-reported multiracial children: 8 of 69 (11.6%); 33 (47.8%) were classified by the trial as non-Hispanic White.
  • Parent-reported non-Hispanic White participants had the highest concordance (90.6%). Concordance was significantly lower for American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Hispanic, and multiracial participants than for non-Hispanic White participants; the differenc…
Interpretation:

The authors report that CRF-based classification misclassified about one in five children and that discrepancies disproportionately affected several historically minoritized and multiracial groups. They state that parent-reported survey collection was feasible and readily scalable, and call for requiring parent- or self-reported data in NCTN trials.

Limitations:
  • The analysis was limited to one pediatric NCTN clinical trial, which may limit generalizability to other national trial networks.
Conclusion:

The authors state that accurate race and ethnicity data are foundational to identifying disparities, understanding mechanisms, and informing interventions.

Sources:

Original Source(s)

Related Content