A qualitative investigation among men who have sex with men on the acceptability of performing a self- or partner anal exam to screen for anal cancer

Barriers and facilitators to anal cancer screening among men who have sex with men: a systematic review with narrative synthesis

BACKGROUND

Increasing trends of anal cancer among men who have sex with men (MSM) highlight the importance of anal cancer screening. However, the screening rate of anal cancer among MSM remains relatively low. This systematic review aims to identify and critically evaluate studies examining barriers and facilitators influencing MSM's participation in anal cancer screening.

METHODS

Systematic searches were performed in five databases (Web of Science, Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL). Evidence from qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies was extracted and synthesized. Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used for quality assessment. Two researchers underwent selection and appraisal independently. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024601449.

RESULTS

305 studies were identified with a total of 32 studies included, including 11 qualitative studies, 18 quantitative studies, and 3 mixed methods studies. The barriers and facilitators to anal cancer screening were categorized into four domains: individual factors, healthcare system factors, healthcare provider factors, and screen-related factors. Among the four domains, the most frequently reported barriers and facilitators to anal cancer screening were individual factors. A lack of knowledge about the risks of HPV, anal cancer, and anal screening (n = 16) was the most significant barrier. In contrast, a greater perceived understanding of anal cancer and screening (n = 6) was identified as the primary facilitator.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review provided a comprehensive assessment of barriers and facilitators to anal cancer screening among MSM, highlighting the need for targeted comprehensive intervention programs to enhance acceptance of screening. Implementing effective strategies to address potential barriers and promote facilitators across all domains of public health could significantly increase screening uptake.

A Brief Review of Anal Cancer Screening Methods for Prevention and Earlier Diagnosis

Anal cancer has shown increasing incidence and death rates in recent years despite their lower incidence rate in the general population. Various risk factors contribute to this upward trend, with sexual risk factors playing a notable role. Additionally, there is a strong correlation between patients' survival rates and clinical outcomes with tumor stages, underscoring the importance of developing effective screening methods for anal cancer, particularly in high-risk groups. The well-established link between human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and anal tumors, combined with the success of cervical cancer screening programs, has led to some similarities in anal cancer screening strategies. However, the absence of established guidelines for anal cancer screening indicates a need for further research to assess the efficacy of these methods across different populations. Such research would enhance knowledge, awareness, and motivation for participation in screening programs. In this review, we will discuss various anal screening approaches, including their characteristics, novel biomarkers, and molecular methods, as well as prevention strategies and existing limitations in anal screening.

Men who have sex with men experience low anxiety and few barriers to performing anal self or companion examinations: a qualitative study of the Prevent Anal Cancer Palpation Study

While rare in the larger population, anal cancer incidence is significantly higher in groups such as sexual minority men and people living with HIV. This qualitative analysis examined participants' experiences and perceptions of barriers to anal self-examination and anal companion examination through interviews completed as a part of a larger clinical trial. Interviews were conducted online with participants (n = 131) within a week of their baseline appointment between January 2020 and October 2021. Content analysis denoted participants' thoughts and perceptions about anal self-examination and anal companion examinations. Of the 131 cisgender men interviewed (mean age 49.9 years, SD 12.7), 92.4% identified as gay, 54.9% identified as white, 22.1% identified as Black, 19.9% identified as Latino, and 44.3% of participants were living with HIV. Participants did not report feelings of excessive anxiety when an abnormality was detected. However, three salient themes emerged as to why participants may not perform an anal self-examination or anal companion examination: (1) physical limitation(s), (2) potential sexualisation of the examination, and (3) level of comfort discussing anal health. Future work must continue to explore methods that not only decrease stigma surrounding anal health but also bolster feelings of accessibility to perform self and couple examinations.

Challenges and controversies patients and (health care) professionals experience in managing vaginal, vulvar, penile or anal cancer: The SILENCE study

OBJECTIVE

Patients with vaginal, vulvar, penile or anal cancer experience deteriorated psychosocial functioning and decreased Quality of Life (QoL). The aims of this study were to explore (1) the challenges and controversies patients experience in managing vaginal, vulvar, penile or anal cancer; their unmet needs; and how this affects their psychosocial functioning and (2) the gaps health care professionals (HCPs) experience in providing psychosocial support and potential improvements in care.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews with patients with vaginal, vulvar, penile or anal cancer and with HCPs were conducted. All interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients (86% female; mean age 55.5) and 12 HCPs (75% female; mean age 46.4) participated. Four themes were identified: (1) recognisable symptoms but unfamiliar diagnosis, (2) 'double hit' has severe impact on psychosocial functioning, (3) personal and tailored information is important but not guaranteed and (4) all-encompassing care to improve psychosocial functioning and QoL.

CONCLUSION

Patients with vaginal, vulvar, penile or anal cancer encounter a lack of awareness and knowledge about their rare cancer type, difficulties regarding communication and long-term changes in body image and sexuality. Awareness of symptoms should be raised and psychosocial care should be offered on a structural basis.

Targeting cancer prevention and screening interventions to LGBTQ communities: A scoping review

Although some people within LGBTQ communities are at risk of developing some cancers at higher rates than non-LGBTQ people, there is limited evidence of the outcomes of targeted cancer prevention and screening interventions for these communities. This scoping review examined key findings regarding the feasibility, acceptability and efficacy of evaluated intervention studies conducted in high income settings and published in peer reviewed literature (2014-2020) by combining evidence of both cancer risk-reducing behavioural interventions and screening and preventative practice interventions. While there is limited evidence of stronger outcomes from targeted interventions with cohorts of gender and sexuality diverse communities, compared with the use of mainstream or untailored interventions, there is stronger evidence that targeted interventions are more acceptable to these communities and may be more feasible in some contexts. Thus, there is benefit in understanding what targeting entails in these interventions, and to understand what influences acceptability, to inform the design and delivery of such interventions.

Prevention and Screening of HPV Malignancies

It is estimated that 5% of the global cancer burden, or approximately 690,000 cancer cases annually, is attributable to human papillomavirus (HPV). Primary prevention through prophylactic vaccination is the best option for reducing the burden of HPV-related cancers. Most high-income countries (HICs) have introduced the HPV vaccine and are routinely vaccinating adolescent boys and girls. Unfortunately, although they suffer the greatest morbidity and mortality due to HPV-related cancers, many lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have been unable to initiate and sustain vaccination programs. Secondary prevention in the form of screening has led to substantial declines in cervical cancer incidence in areas with established screening programs, but LMICs with absent or inadequate screening programs have high incidence rates. Meanwhile, HICs have seen incidence rates of anal and oropharyngeal cancers rise owing to the limited availability of organized screening for anal cancer and no validated screening options for oropharyngeal cancer. The implementation of screening programs for individuals at high risk of these cancers has the potential to reduce the burden of cervical cancer in LMICs, of anal and oropharyngeal cancers in HICs, and of anal cancer for highly selected HIV+ populations in LMICs. This review will discuss primary prevention of HPV-related cancers through vaccination and secondary prevention through screening of cervical, anal, and oropharyngeal cancers. Areas of concern and highlights of successes already achieved are included.

Barriers and Facilitators to Cancer Screening Among LGBTQ Individuals With Cancer

PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION

Cancer screening may reduce mortality and frequency of the disease. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer (LGBTQ) individuals are less likely than non-LGBTQ individuals to present for cancer screening.

LITERATURE SEARCH

A literature search was performed using CINAHL®, PsycINFO®, and PubMed®. Articles were included if they were published in English from 2008 to 2018 and addressed barriers or facilitators to cancer screening in LGBTQ populations.

DATA EVALUATION

Data were organized by thematic matrix and classified according to the multilevel influences on the cancer care continuum framework.

SYNTHESIS

This integrative review found that the lack of cancer screening data and knowledge about screening guidelines by LGBTQ populations and providers were major barriers to cancer screening adherence. Provider-created welcoming environments and caregiver inclusion were facilitators.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Determinants of health-seeking behavior included patients' and providers' lack of cancer screening knowledge, as well as perceived discrimination. Nurses are in a unique position to provide cancer screening information and culturally sensitive care for LGBTQ populations with adequate education.

Anal Cancer and Anal Cancer Screening Knowledge, Attitudes, and Perceived Risk Among Women Living With HIV

OBJECTIVES

The aims of the study were (1) to describe anal cancer knowledge, perceived risk, screening barriers, and acceptability of sample self-collection among women living with HIV (WLWH) at an integrated safety-net system and (2) to describe differences in demographic and psychosocial variables among a subsample of WLWH with a history of abnormal cervical cytology results versus those with normal results.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted telephone surveys with English- and Spanish-speaking WLWH (N = 99) and used electronic health record data to extract insurance type, CD4+ cell count, RNA viral load, and cervical cytology results. We calculated descriptive statistics for participant demographics, HIV laboratory results, and psychosocial variables. Among the subsample of women who completed a recent cervical Pap, we used Fisher exact test to assess differences in demographic variables, CD4+ counts, RNA viral loads, knowledge, awareness, acceptability, and perceived risk by cervical cytology results.

RESULTS

Most participants (70%) reported knowing nothing about anal cancer; 28% correctly responded that HIV increases one's chance of getting anal cancer. Most (68%) never heard of an anal Pap test. Forty percent would get an anal Pap if they could self-collect the sample, whereas 59% were neutral or disagreed. The 2 most commonly cited barriers to obtaining an anal Pap were "I do not know enough about it" (n = 15) and "It might hurt" (n = 9).

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights a gap in knowledge and awareness among WLWH regarding their heightened risk for anal cancer. It indicates the need for health education and suggests an opportunity for a self-collection intervention.

Human Papillomavirus Knowledge, Attitudes, Practices, and Prevalence Among Men Who Have Sex With Men in Monrovia, Liberia

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess human papillomavirus (HPV) prevalence, knowledge, attitudes, and practices, among men who have sex with men (MSM) in Monrovia, Liberia.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

This cross-sectional study was conducted with 107 MSM, aged 18 to 58 years, completing questionnaires and anal HPV screenings. Using peer-educators and direct community involvement, demographics, risk factors, and HPV knowledge data were collected.

RESULTS

Forty-eight participants (45%) were HPV positive and 21 participants (19.6%) self-identified as HIV positive. When examining HPV risk factors, 22 participants reported first sexual experience before the age of 15 years. Approximately half of participants (n = 58, 54.2%) have receptive anal sex and 40 (37.4%) reported more than 20 lifetime sexual partners. Eight participants (7.5%) had no formal education and 80 (74.8%) were not formally employed. Two-thirds of participants (64%) had never heard of HPV. Education was not significantly correlated with HPV knowledge. χ tests of independence were performed, and the relation between oral and anal sex and HPV knowledge was significant (χ (1) = 5.08, p < .05; χ (1) = 4.18, p < .05), respectively, such that those who engaged in oral and anal sex had lower levels of HPV knowledge.

CONCLUSIONS

Among the MSM population, HPV prevalence is high, as are high-risk practices. Participants lack HPV knowledge, independent of educational achievement, and are eager to receive educational information. Future studies should focus on identifying additional risk factors and implementing public health educational interventions.

A phase II clinical study to assess the feasibility of self and partner anal examinations to detect anal canal abnormalities including anal cancer

OBJECTIVE

Anal cancer is a common cancer among men who have sex with men (MSM); however, there is no standard screening protocol for anal cancer. We conducted a phase II clinical trial to assess the feasibility of teaching MSM to recognise palpable masses in the anal canal which is a common sign of anal cancer in men.

METHODS

A clinician skilled in performing digital anorectal examinations (DARE) used a pelvic manikin to train 200 MSM, aged 27-78 years, how to do a self-anal examination (SAE) for singles or a partner anal examination (PAE) for couples. The clinician then performed a DARE without immediately disclosing results, after which the man or couple performed an SAE or PAE, respectively. Percentage agreement with the clinician DARE in addition to sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated for the SAE, PAE and overall.

RESULTS

Men had a median age of 52 years, 42.5% were African American and 60.5% were HIV positive. DARE detected abnormalities in 12 men while the men's SAE/PAEs detected 9 of these. A total of 93.0% of men classified the health of their anal canal correctly (95% CI 89.5 to 96.5). Overall percentage agreement, sensitivity and specificity were 93.0%, 75.0% and 94.2%, respectively, while PPV and NPV were 45.0% and 98.3%, respectively. The six men who detected the abnormality had nodules/masses ≥3 mm in size. More than half of men (60.5%) reported never checking their anus for an abnormality; however, after performing an SAE/PAE, 93.0% said they would repeat it in the future.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that tumours of ≥3 mm may be detectable by self or partner palpation among MSM and encourage further investigation given literature suggesting a high cure rate for anal cancer tumours ≤10 mm.