Factors associated with self-reported anal cancer screening history in men who have sex with men

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.

Sexual risk characteristics, social vulnerability, and anal cancer screening uptake among men living with HIV in the deep south

ABSTRACTWithout standard guidelines, there is a critical need to examine anal cancer screening uptake in the South which has the highest HIV incidence in the U.S. We identified factors associated with screening among men living with HIV (MLHIV) at a large academic HIV outpatient clinic in Alabama. Relationships between sociodemographic, clinical, sexual risk characteristics and screening were examined using T-tests, Fisher's exact, Chi-square, and logistic regression analyses. Unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (AOR) were computed to estimate the odds of screening. Among 1,114 men, 52% had received annual anal cytology (pap) screening. Men who were screened were more likely to have multiple sexual partners compared to men who were not screened (22.8% vs. 14.8%, p = 0.002). Among men with one partner, the youngest were almost five times more likely to be screened compared to middle-aged men (AOR = 4.93, 95% CI: 2.34-10.39). Heterosexual men had lower odds and men who reported unprotected anal sex had higher odds of screening. Our findings suggest a racial disparity, with older black MLHIV being the least likely to be screened. In the South, MLHIV who are older, black, heterosexual, or live in high social vulnerability counties may be less likely to receive annual anal cancer screening.

Engagement and factors associated with annual anal human papillomavirus screening among sexual and gender minority individuals

Objectives

Annual screening with a provider has been recommended for groups at highest risk for anal cancer. Anal self-sampling could help address screening barriers, yet no studies have examined annual engagement with this method.

Methods

The Prevent Anal Cancer Self-Swab Study recruited sexual and gender minority individuals 25 years and over who have sex with men in Milwaukee, Wisconsin to participate in an anal cancer screening study. Participants were randomized to a home or clinic arm. Home-based participants were mailed an anal human papillomavirus self-sampling kit at baseline and 12 months, while clinic-based participants were asked to schedule and attend one of five participating clinics at baseline and 12 months. Using Poisson regression, we conducted an intention-to-treat analysis of 240 randomized participants who were invited to screen at both timepoints.

Results

58.8% of participants completed annual (median=370 days) anal screening. When stratified by HIV status, persons living with HIV had a higher proportion of home (71.1%) versus clinic (22.2%) annual screening ( p <0.001). Non-Hispanic Black participants had a higher proportion of home-based annual anal screening engagement (73.1%) compared to annual clinic screening engagement (31.6%) ( p =0.01). Overall, annual screening engagement was significantly higher among participants who had heard of anal cancer from an LGBTQ organization, reported "some" prior anal cancer knowledge, preferred an insertive anal sex position, and reported a prior cancer diagnosis. Annual screening engagement was significantly lower for participants reporting a medical condition.

Conclusions

Annual screening engagement among those at disproportionate anal cancer risk was higher in the home arm.

Home-based self-sampling vs clinician sampling for anal precancer screening: The Prevent Anal Cancer Self-Swab Study

Sexual minority men are at increased risk for anal squamous cell carcinoma. Our objective was to compare screening engagement among individuals randomized to self-collect an anal canal specimen at home or to attend a clinic appointment. Specimen adequacy was then assessed for human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA genotyping. A randomized trial recruited cisgendered sexual minority men and transgender people in the community and assigned them to use a home-based self-collection swabbing kit or attend a clinic-based swabbing. Swabs were sent for HPV genotyping. The proportions of participants completing screening in each study arm and the adequacy of their specimens for HPV genotyping were assessed. Relative risks were estimated for factors associated with screening. A total of 240 individuals were randomized. Age (median, 46 years) and HIV status (27.1% living with HIV) did not differ by study arm. A total of 89.2% and 74.2% of home-arm and clinic-arm individuals returned the swab, respectively (P = .003), difference between groups, 15.0% (95% CI 5.4%-24.6%). Among black individuals, 96.2% and 63.2% in the home and clinic arms screened (P = .006). Among individuals with HIV, 89.5% and 51.9% in the home and clinic arms screened (P < .001). Self-collected swabs and clinician-collected swabs were comparable in adequacy for HPV genotyping (96.3% and 93.3%, respectively). People at highest risk for anal cancer may be more likely to screen if they are able to self-collect swabs at home rather than attend a clinic.

Racial Disparities in Anal Cancer Screening Among Men Living With HIV: Findings From a Clinical Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Our objective was to quantify the extent of anal cancer screening among men receiving HIV specialty care in Ontario, Canada, and evaluate factors associated with screening.

SETTING

Cross-sectional questionnaire within a multisite clinical HIV cohort.

METHODS

A questionnaire assessing knowledge and experience with human papillomavirus-associated diseases and their prevention was administered in 2016-2017 to 1677 men in the Ontario HIV Treatment Network Cohort Study. We used logistic regression to identify factors associated with having discussed screening with a health care provider and self-reported receipt of screening [digital anal rectal examinations (DARE); anal cytology or anoscopy]. Results reported as adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Forty percent of men reported ever having had anal cytology/anoscopy, and 70% had ever had DARE. After accounting for differences in age, sexual orientation, years since HIV diagnosis, previous diagnosis with AIDS, knowing someone with human papillomavirus-associated cancer, comfort discussing anal health, education, and income, the proportion screened differed by self-identified race. Compared with white men, Asian men were less likely to have discussed screening with a health care provider (aOR = 0.48; 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.80) or to have been screened by DARE (aOR = 0.27; 95% CI: 0.17 to 0.44) or anal cytology/anoscopy (aOR = 0.51; 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.83), and African, Caribbean, or black men (aOR = 0.47; 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.70) were less likely to have had DARE. Results were consistent when restricting the analyses to gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men.

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight the potential for disparities in anal cancer screening that need to be considered when developing guidelines and screening programs to reduce the burden of anal cancer among men living with HIV and ensure health equity.

Delayed Diagnosis of Anal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Recent literature has shown disparities in diagnosis and treatment of anal cancer. Common perception is that many anal cancer patients may experience a delay in diagnosis and this may contribute to poor outcomes.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with anal cancer at a single academic institution from 2006 to 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were stratified according to time from symptom onset to diagnosis and divided into three groups: diagnosed within 6 weeks, between 6 weeks and 6 months, and greater than 6 months.

RESULTS

A total of 93 patients were included in this study. Twenty-two (23.7%) were diagnosed within 6 weeks, 48 (51.6%) between 6 weeks and 6 months, and 23 (24.7%) were diagnosed more than 6 months after the onset of symptoms. Over half (57%) of all patients were initially diagnosed with a benign condition. Stage did not vary significantly between groups. Patient diagnosed within 6 weeks had the highest rates of completion of chemotherapy (90%), radiation (95%), and complete response to chemoradiation (77%) but these did not reach statistical significance. There was no difference in recurrence, or overall survival between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Over half of anal cancer patients were initially misdiagnosed, and 25% were symptomatic for more than 6 months prior to diagnosis. Those patients diagnosed earlier tended to be more likely to receive complete chemoradiation therapy. We were unable to show a statistical difference in outcomes between groups. Further investigation into provider education and awareness of anal cancer is warranted to improve the care of these patients.