Breast Cancer Risk and Screening in Transgender Individuals

Barriers and Nursing Strategies in Oncology Care for LGBTQIA+ People: A Scoping Review

LGBTQIA+ individuals with cancer face significant challenges in their interactions with nurses, which can negatively affect the quality of care, treatment adherence, and access to healthcare. Barriers such as implicit biases, discrimination, and inadequate communication skills contribute to these disparities, alongside a lack of nursing education on gender and sexual diversity. Despite the recognized role of nurses in reducing health inequalities, knowledge about effective strategies to overcome these barriers remains fragmented. This scoping review aims to identify and categorize the main barriers affecting the nurse-patient relationship in oncology and to explore evidence-based nursing interventions that promote equitable and inclusive care. A systematic literature search was conducted between January and February 2025 in PUBMED, SCOPUS, and Web of Science, including studies published in the last 10 years. Study management was performed using Zotero (version 6.0.30), and quality assessment was conducted with the JBI Critical Appraisal Tools. Two independent reviewers screened the studies, resolving discrepancies through discussion and consensus. This review follows the PRISMA-ScR checklist and the JBI scoping review methodology. The findings will provide insights into the primary barriers, highlight effective nursing interventions, and identify gaps in education and clinical guidelines, contributing to the development of more inclusive oncology care practices.

The Impact of a Breast Cancer Risk Assessment on the Decision for Gender-Affirming Chest Masculinization Surgery in Transgender and Gender-Diverse Individuals: A Pilot Single-Arm Educational Intervention Trial

BACKGROUND

Persons assigned female or intersex at birth and identify as transgender and/or gender-diverse (TGD) may undergo gender-affirming chest masculinization surgery (GACMS); however, GACMS is not considered equivalent to risk-reducing mastectomies (RRM). This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of elevated breast cancer (BC) risk in TGD persons, compare self-perceived versus calculated risk, and determine how risk impacts the decision for GACMS versus RRM.

METHODS

A prospective single-arm pilot educational intervention trial was conducted in individuals assigned female or intersex at birth, age ≥ 18 years, considering GACMS, without a BC history or a known pathogenic variant. BC risk was calculated using the Tyrer-Cuzik (all) and Gail models (age ≥ 35 years). Elevated risk was defined as ≥ 17%.

RESULTS

Twenty-five (N = 25) participants were enrolled with a median age of 24.0 years (interquartile range, IQR 20.0-30.0 years). All were assigned female sex at birth, most (84%) were Non-Hispanic (NH)-White, 48% identified as transgender and 40% as nonbinary, and 52% had a first- and/or second-degree family member with BC. Thirteen (52%) had elevated risk (prevalence 95% confidence interval (CI) 31.3-72.2%). Median self-perceived risk was 12% versus 17.5% calculated risk (p = 0.60). Of the 13 with elevated risk, 5 (38.5%) underwent/are scheduled to undergo GACMS, 3 (23%) of whom underwent/are undergoing RRM.

CONCLUSIONS

Over half of the cohort had elevated risk, and most of those who moved forward with surgery chose to undergo RRM. A BC risk assessment should be performed for TGD persons considering GACMS. Future work is needed to examine BC incidence and collect patient-reported outcomes. Trial Registration Number ClinicalTrials.gov (No. NCT06239766).

Breast care considerations for transgender and gender-diverse patients

Transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) persons represent a small but growing population in the United States. Accessing inclusive, equitable, and evidence-based healthcare remains a challenge for this patient population. Many TGD persons seek gender-affirming care, including gender-affirming hormonal therapy (GAHT) and gender-affirming surgery (GAS), to help ameliorate the physical and mental aspects of their gender incongruence. Both GAHT and GAS induce clinically important histopathologic and anatomic changes in breast tissue. Consequently, breast care in TGD persons has become an increasingly recognized topic of importance in gender-affirming care. However, there remains a scarce but growing base of literature specifically addressing the unique healthcare needs of breast care in TGD patients. This article will review how to establish trusting patient-provider relationships for TGD patients, gender inclusivity in breast clinics and imaging centers, the influence of GAHT and GAS on breast tissue, breast cancer screening recommendations and barriers, and breast cancer risk and treatment considerations in TGD persons.

Creating Breast and Gynecologic Cancer Guidelines for Transgender Patients With BRCA Mutations

More than 1.5 million individuals in the United States identify as transgender. Transgender individuals have lower rates of health care utilization and higher rates of health care discrimination than cisgender patients. With a growing interest in providing comprehensive and compassionate care to the transgender community, there has been a concurrent increase in research on transgender health. However, lack of long-term data limits understanding the effects of hormone therapy on cancer risk factors in this population. This is particularly relevant for patients with hormonally mediated cancers and those at elevated risk from hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndromes. Few cancer-screening and management guidelines currently exist for this population. Specific practices guided by the nuances of gender identity and gender-affirming care are essential to improve clinical management and to avoid further alienating a population that is already marginalized from the health care system. This commentary summarizes screening, management, and surveillance strategies devised for cisgender patients to offer corresponding recommendations tailored for transgender BRCA mutation carriers. In doing so, it highlights critical unanswered questions pertaining to the care of these patients. To address these questions, we must prioritize this population and adopt more inclusive frameworks in medicine and research.