What Oncologists Should Know About Treating Sexual and Gender Minority Patients With Cancer

Scoping review of experiences of sexual minority women treated for breast cancer

PURPOSE

To summarize and critique research on the experiences and outcomes of sexual minority women (SMW) treated with surgery for breast cancer through systematic literature review.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search identified studies from the last 20 years addressing surgical experiences and outcomes of SMW breast cancer survivors. Authors performed a quality assessment and thematic content analysis to identify emergent themes.

RESULTS

The search yielded 121 records; eight qualitative studies were included in the final critical appraisal. Quality scores for included studies ranged 6-8 out of 10. Experiences and outcomes of SMW breast cancer survivors were organized by major themes: 1) Individual, 2) Interpersonal, 3) Healthcare System, and 4) Sociocultural and Discursive.

CONCLUSIONS

SMW breast cancer survivors have unique experiences of treatment access, decision-making, and quality of life in survivorship. SMW breast cancer survivors' personal values, preferences, and support network are critical considerations for researchers and clinicians.

State of Cancer Care in America: Achieving Cancer Health Equity Among Sexual and Gender Minority Communities

In 2017, ASCO issued the position statement, Strategies for Reducing Cancer Health Disparities Among Sexual and Gender Minority Populations, outlining five areas of recommendations to address the needs of both sexual and gender minority (SGM, eg, LGBTQ+) populations affected by cancer and members of the oncology workforce who identify as SGM: (1) patient education and support; (2) workforce development and diversity; (3) quality improvement strategies; (4) policy solutions; and (5) research strategies. In 2019, ASCO convened the SGM Task Force to help actualize the recommendations of the 2017 position statement. The percentage of the US population who publicly identify as SGM has increased dramatically over the past few years. Although increased national interest in SGM health equity has accompanied a general interest in research, policy change, and education around diversity, equity, and inclusion, resulting from public concern over discrimination in health care against Black, Indigenous, and People of Color, this has been accompanied by a surge in discriminatory legislation directly impacting the SGM community. Although much progress has been made in advancing SGM cancer health equity since 2017, more progress is needed to reduce disparities and advance equity. The five focus areas outlined in the 2017 ASCO position statement remain relevant, as we must continue to promote and advance equity in quality improvement, workforce development, patient care, research, and SGM-affirming policies. This article reports on the progress toward reducing SGM cancer disparities and achieving equity across these five areas and identifies future directions for the work that still remains.

Position paper of the Italian association of medical oncology on health disparities among transgender and gender-diverse people: the Assisi recommendations

Transgender and gender-diverse individuals experience substantial health disparities across the cancer care continuum. Despite well recognized unique healthcare needs, there are barriers in accessing cancer prevention and treatment services, influenced by disadvantages in key social-economic determinants of health which result in worse clinical outcomes, as compared to the general population. The Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) acknowledges the critical relevance of this issue. The "Assisi Recommendations" here summarize the outcomes of the "AIOM Oncology Ethics Day" dedicated to gender differences in oncology and cancer care of transgender and gender-diverse people. The recommendations generated during a 2-day multidisciplinary discussion address the various aspects of cancer care experience of transgender and gender-diverse people. The promotion of research in this field, through the generation of new evidence and the collection of prospective data, has been identified as a priority action to mitigate these disparities. By acknowledging the challenges of cancer care in transgender and gender-diverse people and recognizing the need for dedicated policy and clinical recommendations, AIOM demonstrates its commitment to improving the health and well-being of all patients with cancer, regardless of their gender identity or any other personal or social circumstances, as part of health-for-all societal vision.

"I don't just say, Hi! I'm gay": Sexual Orientation Disclosures in Oncology Clinic Settings Among Sexual Minority Women Treated for Breast Cancer in the U.S. South

OBJECTIVES

Few studies examine sexual orientation disclosures (SODs) among women with breast cancer; fewer examine the impact of culture and geography on disclosure processes. This study explores how sexual minority women (SMW) in the Southern United States engage in SODs with oncology clinicians.

DATA SOURCES

We conducted in-depth interviews with SMW (eg, lesbian, bisexual) treated for early-stage (stages I-III), hormone receptor-positive breast cancer (N = 12), using a semistructured interview guide. Participants completed an online survey prior to the 60-minute interview. Data was analyzed using an adapted pile sorting approach and thematic analysis conventions.

CONCLUSION

Average age of participants was 49.5 years (range: 30-69), all self-identified as cisgender; 83.3% as lesbian, 58.3% were married, 91.7% had completed a 4-year college degree or higher, 66.7% identified as non-Hispanic White, 16.7% as Black, and 16.7% as Hispanic/Latina. Half of the sample had not engaged in SODs with an oncology clinician. Key themes were: (1) religious and political conservatism in the South create SOD barriers; (2) oncologist-specific barriers to SODs; (3) "straight passing" as a discrimination mitigation strategy; and (4) SOD facilitators in oncology settings (ie, strategic disclosures, medical privilege, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender-friendly branding of oncology centers).

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

SMW with breast cancer living in the U.S. South navigate unique interpersonal barriers to SODs in oncology settings. Clinicians could encourage SODs by fostering inclusive environments via nonheteronormative language, inclusive intake forms, and respect for SMW's SOD navigation processes. Oncology clinicians require culturally relevant, geographic-specific communication training to facilitate SODs among SMW.

For the LOvE of Reproductive Health Communication: Assessment of the LGBT Oncofertility Education (LOvE) Module

Purpose: The lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) Oncofertility Education (LOvE) module aims to improve knowledge on providing inclusive and affirming care for LGBTQ adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer. The objective of this study is to evaluate the role of the module in improving reproductive health communication for the care of LGBTQ AYAs with cancer. Methods: A 10-item multiple-choice pre-test and post-test assessed learner knowledge, with total knowledge scores ranging from 0 (no correct responses) to 10 (all correct responses). A post-module survey and open-ended questions assessed relevance of the module, quality, and appropriateness to professional practice. Paired t-tests analyzed changes in knowledge before and after the module. Content analysis was applied to qualitative responses. Results: Thirty-seven learners completed both the pre-test and post-test. Around 8.1% correctly answered all pre-test questions; 59.5% correctly answered all posttest questions. The average pre-test score was 8.3, versus posttest score of 9.5 (p < 0.0001). Eighty-nine percent of learners strongly agreed that LOvE Enriching Communication Skills for Health Professionals in Oncofertility was relevant to their work; 95% strongly agreed that it was easy to understand and navigate. Open-ended responses highlighted how the module helped learners strengthen the provider-patient relationship in the context of oncofertility, create a safe space for patients, and understand the relevance of educational materials about fertility to LGBTQ patients. Conclusions: We found significant improvement in knowledge of reproductive health care for LGBTQ AYAs with cancer after completing the module. Improving provider knowledge may improve confidence in providing inclusive and affirming care for LGBTQ AYAs with cancer, resulting in improved whole-person care.

Needs and experiences of cancer care in patients' perspectives among the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer community: a systematic review

Individuals within the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer (LGBTQ) community who are diagnosed with cancer experience inequitable treatment in healthcare systems worldwide, resulting in dissatisfaction, communication challenges with healthcare providers, and a deep sense of disappointment. Stigma, discrimination, and perceived homophobia further heighten the risk of psychological and attitudinal disorders, including depression and suicidal tendencies, among LGBTQ cancer patients. To comprehensively assess the discrimination faced by LGBTQ cancer patients and gain deeper insights into their needs and experiences, we conducted a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines. We searched for relevant articles using specific keywords in reputable databases such as PubMed, Google Scholar, and PsycINFO. We rigorously evaluated article quality using the CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) checklist. From a total of 75 eligible studies, we carefully selected 14 studies, specifically examining LGBTQ cancer patients who were currently undergoing or had previously undergone cancer treatment. The studies revealed various factors, including unmet needs related to anxiety and depression, instances of discrimination, disparities in care, and inadequate support systems. A majority of patients expressed dissatisfaction with their cancer care and continued to encounter discrimination and disparities throughout their treatment journeys. Consequently, this led to heightened levels of anxiety, stress, depression, and negative perceptions of healthcare providers. Based on these findings, we recommend providing specialized training to social workers and healthcare providers. This training will equip them with the necessary skills and knowledge to deliver culturally sensitive care tailored to the unique needs of LGBTQ cancer patients. By addressing discrimination, reducing disparities, and fostering an inclusive environment, healthcare professionals can strive to ensure that LGBTQ cancer patients receive the care they deserve.

Piloting the Sexual and Gender Minority Cancer Curricular Advances for Research and Education (SGM Cancer CARE) Workshop: Research Training in the Service of SGM Cancer Health Equity

The purpose of this study is to describe the context, curriculum design, and pilot evaluation of the educational program "Sexual and Gender Minority Cancer Curricular Advances for Research and Education" (SGM Cancer CARE), a workshop for early-career researchers and healthcare providers interested in gaining knowledge and skills in sexual and gender minority (SGM) cancer research and healthcare advocacy. A needs assessment of a sample of clinicians and researchers (n = 104) and feedback from an Advisory Board informed the curriculum design of the SGM Cancer CARE workshop. Four SGM-tailored modules, focusing on epidemiology, clinical research, behavioral science and interventions, and community-based participatory approaches, were developed and tested in a 2.5-day virtual format among 19 clinicians and researchers. A fifth module to provide feedback to participants on brief presentations about their SGM cancer research ideas or related efforts was added later. A mixed-methods evaluation comprised of pre- and post-modular online evaluation surveys and virtual focus groups was used to determine the degree to which the workshop curriculum met participant needs. Compared to pre-module evaluations, participants reported a marked increase in SGM cancer research knowledge in post-module scores. Quantitative results were supported by our qualitative findings. In open field response survey questions and post-workshop focus groups, participants reported being extremely pleased with the content and delivery format of the SGM Cancer CARE workshop. Participants did regret not having the opportunity to connect with instructors, mentors, and colleagues in person. The SGM Cancer CARE curriculum was shown to increase the knowledge, skills, and level of preparedness of early-career clinicians and scientists to conduct culturally relevant and appropriate research needed to improve care for SGM persons across the cancer care continuum from prevention to survivorship.

Reinforcing or Disrupting Gender Affirmation: The Impact of Cancer on Transgender Embodiment and Identity

There is a pressing need for greater understanding and focus on cancer survivorship and informal cancer caring of trans people (binary and non-binary), across tumor types, to inform culturally safe trans inclusive cancer information and care. This qualitative study, part of the mixed methods Out with Cancer project, examined experiences of trans embodiment and identity after cancer diagnosis and treatment. We drew on open-ended survey responses from 63 trans cancer survivors and 23 trans cancer carers, as well as interviews and a photo-elicitation activity with a subset of 22 participants (15 cancer survivors, 7 cancer carers). Reflexive thematic analysis identified three themes: Cancer enhances trans embodiment, through experiences of gender euphoria following cancer treatment, and acceleration of decisions about gender affirmation; cancer erases or inhibits gender affirmation; trans embodiment is invisible or pathologized in cancer care. These findings demonstrate that trans embodiment and identity, as well as the process of gender affirmation, may be disrupted by cancer or informal cancer caring. Conversely, cancer and cancer treatment can positively impact the embodied identity and lives of trans people, despite the anxiety and strain of negotiating medical procedures. However, if healthcare professionals operate within a cis-heteronormative framework and do not understand the meaning of embodied change following cancer treatment for trans individuals, these positive benefits may not be realized.

Cancer in Transgender and Gender-Diverse Persons: A Review

Importance

Transgender and gender-diverse individuals face unique challenges, including barriers to health care access and inequities in treatment, that may influence cancer risk and outcomes.

Observations

In this narrative review, a scoping review was conducted focusing on primary and secondary prevention and epidemiology of cancer, barriers to health care services, and health care practitioners' knowledge about specific issues pertaining to transgender and gender-diverse individuals. PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase, were reviewed for citations from their inception to December 31, 2021. This review revealed that transgender and gender-diverse people had a high prevalence of tobacco consumption and alcohol use and high rates of infection with human papillomavirus (HPV) and HIV. Transgender and gender-diverse individuals were less likely to adhere to cancer screening programs and had a higher incidence of HIV- and HPV-associated cancers. Social and economic determinants seemed to drive these disparities in risk factors and outcomes. A lack of knowledge about gender minorities' health needs among health care practitioners was evidenced, and it represented a major hurdle to cancer prevention, care, and survivorship for transgender and gender-diverse individuals. Discrimination, discomfort caused by gender-labeled oncological services, stigma, and lack of cultural sensitivity of health care practitioners were other barriers met by transgender and gender-diverse persons in the oncology setting.

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings suggest that transgender and gender-diverse peoples' needs in the cancer care continuum are not optimally addressed. Effective solutions are needed to offer the best care to every patient in a person-centric and gender diversity-sensitive environment.

A Learning Health System Approach to Cancer Survivorship Care Among LGBTQ+ Communities

PURPOSE

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) individuals who receive primary care services at community health centers are often referred to external specialty care centers after cancer diagnosis, upon which primary care services are disrupted and may be discontinued because of gaps in communication between primary and oncologic care providers. This qualitative study evaluated barriers and facilitators to effective care coordination for LGBTQ+ patients with cancer and the utility of a novel cancer care coordination tool to mitigate identified barriers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Semistructured interviews with LGBTQ+ cancer survivors, caregivers to LGBTQ+ persons, clinical team members who provide care to LGBTQ+ patients, and members of community-based organizations that work with LGBTQ+ patients were conducted. Interview analysis was a multistage process, wherein a constant comparison approach was used. Transcripts were reviewed and coded using Atlas.ti Cloud.

RESULTS

A total of 26 individuals were interviewed: 10 patients, four caregivers, 10 clinical care team members, and two community organization representatives. Interview analysis yielded insight regarding (1) LGBTQ+ patient experiences engaging with primary and oncologic care at the clinic level and (2) perceptions of patient-provider and provider-provider communication and coordination.

CONCLUSION

Interview findings indicate a need for further development of interventions aimed at improving care coordination, patient experience, and outcomes in the cancer care continuum for LGBTQ+ patients. Learning health systems, like the one studied, show great potential for contributing to the development of such interventions.

"It's Kind of Complicated": A Qualitative Exploration of Perceived Social Support in Young Adult and Young Adult Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and/or Queer Cancer Survivors

Purpose: This qualitative secondary analysis describes the perceived importance of familial, peer, and health system social support for an understudied group of cancer survivors: young adults (YAs), including those who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and/or queer (LGBTQ). Methods: Semistructured interviews were conducted with YA cancer survivors as part of a study of social support networks and interactions. Team members conducted content analysis of interview transcripts; coding decisions were reviewed and discussed among the research team. Descriptions of social support were ultimately organized around family, peer, and health care system support. Results: Twelve YA survivors recruited using two National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers and social media participated between August 2019 and May 2020. Survivors averaged 28.2 years old. Half of survivors self-identified as female; four survivors were LGBTQ. Participants described both the positives of social support, as well as barriers to meeting support needs, within the following three levels: familial, peer, and health care providers or system. Conclusion: YA survivors have needs that are often addressed by their families, peers, and the health care system. However, barriers such as complex relationship history and lack of targeted/tailored support programs can prevent survivors from receiving adequate support. The growing diversity and intersectionality represented in the YA population call for targeted support and training by the health care system to sufficiently support this population.

LGBTQI cancer patients' quality of life and distress: A comparison by gender, sexuality, age, cancer type and geographical remoteness

Background

There is growing acknowledgement of the psycho-social vulnerability of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and/or intersex (LGBTQI) people with cancer. The majority of research to date has focused on cisgender adults with breast or prostate cancer.

Study Aim

This study examined psycho-social factors associated with distress and quality of life for LGBTQI cancer patients and survivors, across a range of sexualities and gender identities, intersex status, tumor types, ages and urban/rural/remote location using an intersectional theoretical framework.

Method

430 LGBTQI people with cancer completed an online survey, measuring distress, quality of life (QOL), and a range of psycho-social variables. Participants included 216 (50.2%) cisgender women, 145 (33.7%) cisgender men, and 63 (14.7%) transgender and gender diverse (TGD) people. Thirty-one (7.2%) participants reported intersex variation and 90 (20%) were adolescents or young adults (AYA), aged 15-39. The majority lived in urban areas (54.4%) and identified as lesbian, gay or bisexual (73.7%), with 10.9% identifying as bisexual, and 10.5% as queer, including reproductive (32.4%) and non-reproductive (67.6%) cancers.

Results

Forty-one percent of participants reported high or very high distress levels, 3-6 times higher than previous non-LGBTQI cancer studies. Higher rates of distress and lower QOL were identified in TGD compared to cisgender people, AYAs compared to older people, those who identify as bisexual or queer, compared to those who identify as lesbian, gay or homosexual, and those who live in rural or regional areas, compared to urban areas. Elevated distress and lower QOL was associated with greater minority stress (discrimination in life and in cancer care, discomfort being LGBTQI, lower outness) and lower social support, in these subgroups. There were no differences between reproductive and non-reproductive cancers. For the whole sample, distress and poor QOL were associated with physical and sexual concerns, the impact of cancer on gender and LGBTQI identities, minority stress, and lack of social support.

Conclusion

LGBTQI people with cancer are at high risk of distress and impaired QOL. Research and oncology healthcare practice needs to recognize the diversity of LGBTQI communities, and the ways in which minority stress and lack of social support may affect wellbeing.

Attitudes, knowledge and practice behaviours of oncology health care professionals towards lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex (LGBTQI) patients and their carers: A mixed-methods study

OBJECTIVE

There is growing recognition that health care professionals (HCPs) and policy makers are insufficiently equipped to provide culturally competent care to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex (LGBTQI) cancer patients and their families. We examined HCP attitudes, knowledge, and practices regarding LGBTQI cancer care using a mixed-methods research design.

METHOD

Surveys were completed by 357 oncology HCPs in nursing (40%), medical (24%), allied health (19%), and clinical leadership roles (11%); 48 of the surveyed HCPs were interviewed.

RESULTS

Most HCPs reported being comfortable treating LGBTQI patients, but reported low levels of confidence and knowledge and systemic barriers to LGBTQI cancer care. Most wanted more education and training, particularly on trans and gender-diverse people (TGD) and those born with intersex variations.

CONCLUSION

Education of HCPs and health system changes are required to overcome barriers to the provision of culturally competent cancer care for LGBTQI patients.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

These findings reinforce the need for inclusion of LGBTQI content in HCP education and professional training curricula, and institutional support for LGBTQI-inclusive practice behaviours. This includes administrative and visual cues to signal safety of LGBTQI patients within cancer care, facilitating inclusive environments, and the provision of tailored patient-centred care.

“Surviving Discrimination by Pulling Together”: LGBTQI Cancer Patient and Carer Experiences of Minority Stress and Social Support

Background

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and/or intersex (LGBTQI) people with cancer and their carers report poorer psychological outcomes than the general non-LGBTQI cancer population. There is growing acknowledgement that these health inequities can be explained by minority stress, which can be buffered by social support.

Study Aim

To examine subjective experiences of minority stress and social support for LGBTQI people with cancer and their carers, drawing on qualitative findings from the Out with Cancer study.

Method

An online survey including open ended items was completed by 430 LGBTQI cancer patients and 132 partners and other carers, representing a range of tumor types, sexual and gender identities, age and intersex status. A sub-sample of 104 patients and 31 carers completed an interview, with a follow-up photovoice activity and second interview completed by 45 patients and 10 carers. Data was thematically analysed using an intersectional theoretical framework.

Results

Historical and present-day experiences of discrimination, violence, family rejection and exclusion created a legacy of distress and fear. This impacted on trust of healthcare professionals and contributed to distress and unmet needs in cancer survivorship and care. Social support, often provided by partners and other chosen family, including intimate partners and other LGBTQI people, buffered the negative impacts of minority stress, helping LGBTQI patients deal with cancer. However, some participants lacked support due to not having a partner, rejection from family of origin and lack of support within LGBTQI communities, increasing vulnerability to poor psychological wellbeing. Despite the chronic, cumulative impacts of minority stress, LGBTQI patients and carers were not passive recipients of discriminatory and exclusion in cancer care, demonstrating agency and resistance through collective action and advocacy.

Conclusion

LGBTQI people have unique socio-political histories and present-day psycho-social experiences that contribute to distress during cancer. Social support serves to buffer and ameliorate this distress. There is a need for cancer healthcare professionals and support services to be aware of and responsive to these potential vulnerabilities, including the intersectional differences in experiences of minority stress and social support. There is also a need for recognition and facilitation of social support among LGBTQI people with cancer and their carers.

Gender- and Sexual Orientation- Based Inequities: Promoting Inclusion, Visibility, and Data Accuracy in Oncology

Sexual and gender minority (SGM) people, including agender, asexual, bisexual, gay, gender diverse, genderqueer, genderfluid, intersex, lesbian, nonbinary, pansexual, queer, and transgender people, comprise approximately 10% or more of the U.S. population. Thus, most oncologists see SGM patients whether they know it or not. SGM people experience stigma and structural discrimination that lead to cancer disparities. Because of the lack of systematic and comprehensive data collection, data regarding SGM cancer incidence, outcomes, and treatment responses are limited. Collection of data regarding sexual orientation, gender identity, transgender identity and/or experience, anatomy, and serum hormone concentrations in oncology settings would drastically increase collective knowledge about the impact of stigma and biologic markers on cancer outcomes. Increasing the safety of oncology settings for SGM people will require individual, institutional, and systems changes that will likely improve oncologic care for all patients.

"Queer Insights": Considerations and Challenges for Assessing Sex, Gender Identity, and Sexual Orientation in Oncofertility Research

This article addresses issues related to clinical and research approaches to oncofertility for adolescent and young adult (AYA) sexual and gender minority (SGM) cancer patients. Limited attention has been dedicated to understanding the extent to which oncofertility services are appropriately and equitably delivered to AYAs with diverse orientations toward sexual orientation, gender identity, and future family. Unresolved challenges to conducting research with this vulnerable population perpetuate a lack of adequate knowledge about SGM AYA oncofertility needs. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to inform considerations of sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation for investigations that include SGM AYAs. In order to improve the knowledge base and clinical services for this population, we discuss (1) challenges to sampling this population; (2) categorization and survey logic (e.g., skip patterns) in light of fluid sexual orientation and gender identities; and (3) clinical implications of accurately assessing sex and gender for oncofertility research and practice. We also recommend strategies for producing inclusive and accurate assessments of sexual and gender identity categories in both research and clinical encounters with SGM AYAs. Incorporating "queer insights" into empirical research - that is, positioning queer theory at the center of oncofertility study design - is suggested as a future direction for oncofertility research and practice.

LGBTQI Inclusive Cancer Care: A Discourse Analytic Study of Health Care Professional, Patient and Carer Perspectives

Background

Awareness of the specific needs of LGBTQI cancer patients has led to calls for inclusivity, cultural competence, cultural safety and cultural humility in cancer care. Examination of oncology healthcare professionals’ (HCP) perspectives is central to identifying barriers and facilitators to inclusive LGBTQI cancer care.

Study Aim

This study examined oncology HCPs perspectives in relation to LGBTQI cancer care, and the implications of HCP perspectives and practices for LGBTQI patients and their caregivers.

Method

357 oncology HCPs in nursing (40%), medical (24%), allied health (19%) and leadership (11%) positions took part in a survey; 48 HCPs completed an interview. 430 LGBTQI patients, representing a range of tumor types, sexual and gender identities, age and intersex status, and 132 carers completed a survey, and 104 LGBTQI patients and 31 carers undertook an interview. Data were analysed using thematic discourse analysis.

Results

Three HCP subject positions – ways of thinking and behaving in relation to the self and LGBTQI patients – were identified:’Inclusive and reflective’ practitioners characterized LGBTQI patients as potentially vulnerable and offered inclusive care, drawing on an affirmative construction of LGBTQI health. This resulted in LGBTQI patients and their carers feeling safe and respected, willing to disclose sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) status, and satisfied with cancer care. ‘Egalitarian practitioners’ drew on discourses of ethical responsibility, positioning themselves as treating all patients the same, not seeing the relevance of SOGI information. This was associated with absence of LGBTQI-specific information, patient and carer anxiety about disclosure of SOGI, feelings of invisibility, and dissatisfaction with healthcare. ‘Anti-inclusive’ practitioners’ expressed open hostility and prejudice towards LGBTQI patients, reflecting a cultural discourse of homophobia and transphobia. This was associated with patient and carer distress, feelings of negative judgement, and exclusion of same-gender partners.

Conclusion

Derogatory views and descriptions of LGBTQI patients, and cis-normative practices need to be challenged, to ensure that HCPs offer inclusive and affirmative care. Building HCP’s communicative competence to work with LGBTQI patients needs to become an essential part of basic training and ongoing professional development. Visible indicators of LGBTQI inclusivity are essential, alongside targeted resources and information for LGBTQI people.

Improving Sexual and Gender Minority Cancer Care: Patient and Caregiver Perspectives From a Multi-Methods Pilot Study

Purpose

Up to 1 million lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (i.e., sexual and gender minority, SGM) individuals in the United States have histories of cancer. This medically underserved population is diverse, with complex sexualities and gender identities, and distinct health concerns. SGM persons experience disproportionate risks for, and rates of, anal, breast, cervical, colorectal, endometrial, lung, and prostate cancers, in addition to cancers affecting transgender persons who have undergone sex-reassignment. SGM individuals are linked by shared experiences of stigmatization as a minority population for which little cancer research has been conducted. SGM cancer patients frequently report reluctance to seek healthcare, have poorer outcomes following diagnosis, engage in elevated risk behaviors (i.e. smoking and alcohol use) even after cancer diagnosis, have difficulty making emotional adjustment to illness, and experience higher rates of psychological distress. They report less satisfaction with cancer care, deficiencies in patient-centeredness and shared decision-making, gaps in care, and social isolation. Minority stress resulting from experiences of anti-SGM sentiment and discrimination affects cancer patients and their informal cancer caregivers. Our paper presents findings from a pilot study to identify gaps and opportunities to improve cancer care for SGM patients and caregivers at the University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center.

Methods

Between June 2020 and July 2021, we used a multi-methods research design informed by ecological theory to collect qualitative and quantitative data regarding cancer patient and caregiver quality of life (QoL) and experiences of cancer and survivorship care. We used PROMIS measures distributed via REDCap to assess QoL (i.e., fatigue, pain interference, pain intensity, anxiety, depression, emotional support, social isolation, and companionship), and conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews. We recruited 10 SGM cancer patients and 8 heterosexual, cisgender (H/C) patient matches, and their self-identified informal cancer caregivers (n=36, dyad total n=18). Interviews ranged from 1 to 2 hours, were audio-recorded and transcribed for analysis. The study was approved by the University of New Mexico Human Research Protections Office Institutional Review Board.

Results

Results of the PROMIS QoL assessments indicated that SGM patients reported greater anxiety [mean (SD) = 54.5 (8.8)] and depression [mean (SD) = 49.3 (4.8)] than H/C patients [mean (SD)=51.6 (7.5) and 45.4 (6.8) respectively], while heterosexual, cisgender (H/C) patients reported higher fatigue [mean (SD) =52.04 (8.18)] and stronger pain intensity than SGM patients [mean (SD)=48.3 (9.1) and 37.8 (9.1) respectively]. SGM patients reported higher levels of social isolation [mean (SD) = 48.3 (7.3) vs. 42.1 (7.4) for H/C patients, whereas H/C patients reported more emotional support (mean (SD) =57.5 (9.3) vs. 53.0 (6.9)] and companionship [mean (SD) = 55.2 (8.6) vs. 51.5 (11.0)]. SGM and H/C differences in caregiver QoL were most notable with regards to higher levels of fatigue [mean (SD) = 47.1 (6.0) for SGM, and 42.4 (11.5) for H/C] and companionship [mean (SD) = 55.3 (6.0) for SGM, and 50.9 (5.5) for H/C]. Qualitative interviews supported our quantitative results. SGM patients and caregivers articulated experiences of anti-SGM stigma and discrimination contributing to minority stress that influenced their initial cancer care encounters. SGM dyads had more trepidation and/or medical mistrust during initial cancer care encounters when compared to H/C patients and caregivers. SGM patients questioned care that was not culturally responsive to SGM preferences, while H/C patients were more apt to identify gaps in communication and perceived lack of clarity regarding cancer care delivery. Although SGM patients experienced high satisfaction with their cancer care once they developed trust with their providers, they discussed desires to have more direct conversations with their oncologists about their sexual orientation and gender identities and sexual health. All patients and providers in the study (SGM and H/C) appreciated their oncology care teams. All patients and caregivers relied on social networks comprised of friends and family, although SGM patients and caregivers had smaller social networks and relied less on biological family, and single SGM individuals experienced challenges accessing cancer care and struggled with social isolation. We discovered too, that all caregivers, regardless of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI), perceived a lack of support and information pertaining to their loved one’s treatment, side effects and best way to provide care.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates that prior stigmatizing experiences contribute to minority stress and medical mistrust for SGM cancer patients and their informal caregivers across the cancer care experience. Findings point to specific gaps in SGM cancer patient care, including lack of conversation about patient SOGI, inadequate staff and oncology provider SGM specific knowledge and cultural competence/cultural humility training, and insufficient patient supports for those who lack social support during cancer care treatment. Further, this study reveals inadequacies in SGM specific support, and overall support services for informal cancer caregivers. Additional research is required to develop targeted interventions to address minority stress and clinic environment concerns to improve cancer care for SGM patients. Importantly, while there were differences between SGM and H/C experiences of cancer treatment, significant similarities also emerged. Caregiver expressed consensus about the current lack of support and guidance for informal caregivers of cancer patients. Future work should focus on providing caregiver-specific resources in the clinic setting and facilitating support groups for caregivers to network with one another, as well as for tailoring SGM specific caregiver support services. Our findings highlight areas for improving cancer care for the SGM community, as well as a broader population of patients and caregivers.

Identification of Transgender People With Cancer in Electronic Health Records: Recommendations Based on CancerLinQ Observations

PURPOSE

Cancer prevalence and outcomes data, necessary to understand disparities in transgender populations, are significantly hampered because gender identity data are not routinely collected. A database of clinical data on people with cancer, CancerLinQ, is operated by the ASCO and collected from practices across the United States and multiple electronic health records.

METHODS

To attempt to identify transgender people with cancer within CancerLinQ, we used three criteria: (1) International Classification of Diseases 9/10 diagnosis (Dx) code suggestive of transgender identity; (2) male gender and Dx of cervical, endometrial, ovarian, fallopian tube, or other related cancer; and (3) female gender and Dx of prostate, testicular, penile, or other related cancer. Charts were abstracted to confirm transgender identity.

RESULTS

Five hundred fifty-seven cases matched inclusion criteria and two hundred and forty-two were abstracted. Seventy-six percent of patients with Dx codes suggestive of transgender identity were transgender. Only 2% and 3% of the people identified by criteria 2 and 3 had evidence of transgender identity, respectively. Extrapolating to nonabstracted data, we would expect to identify an additional four individuals in category 2 and an additional three individuals in category 3, or a total of 44. The total population in CancerLinQ is approximately 1,300,000. Thus, our methods could identify 0.003% of the total population as transgender.

CONCLUSION

Given the need for data regarding transgender people with cancer and the deficiencies of current data resources, a national concerted effort is needed to prospectively collect gender identity data. These efforts will require systemic efforts to create safe healthcare environments for transgender people.

Cross-sectional study of psychosocial well-being among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and heterosexual gynecologic cancer survivors

Background

Delays in care and increased risk for mental health diagnoses put individuals identifying as a sexual minority with cancer at risk for decreased quality of life.

Aim

To assess psychosocial health among sexual minority gynecologic cancer survivors, we compared self‐reported quality of life and psychosocial measures between individuals diagnosed with gynecologic cancers identifying as lesbian/gay/bisexual (LGB) and heterosexual.

Methods and Results

English‐speaking adults with gynecologic cancers were invited to participate in an ongoing cohort survey study. Quality of life and psychosocial measures included the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy‐General, Distress Thermometer (distress), Patient Health Questionnaire‐8 (depression), General Anxiety Disorder‐7 (anxiety), and Post‐traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for DSM‐5 (post‐traumatic stress disorder; PTSD). Measures were compared by self‐reported sexual orientation (heterosexual vs. LGB) using descriptive statistics (frequencies and means) and linear and logistic regression models, adjusting for college education.

Of 814 patients invited, 457 enrolled (56.1%) and 401 (92.6%) completed the survey and provided information on their sexuality. All but one self‐identified as cisgender women and 22 (5.5%) as LGB. LGB participants were more likely to have completed college (68.2% vs. 40.1%, p = .009) but were otherwise similar across demographic and clinical characteristics. Quality of life and distress scores were similar between groups. LGB participants, compared to heterosexual, reported higher rates of depression (31.8% vs. 10.6%, adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 4.1 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.6–11.0], p = .004), anxiety (25.0% vs. 7.1%, adjusted OR = 5.4 [95% CI: 1.7–16.7], p= .004), and PTSD (13.6% vs. 3.5%, adjusted OR = 4.2 [95% CI: 1.1–16.3], p = .04).

Conclusion

LGB participants reported poorer emotional health following a gynecologic cancer diagnosis than heterosexual participants. Our data suggest this population may need additional resources and support during and after their cancer diagnosis. Future work is needed to identify additional risk factors and the underlying sources of these disparities in order to improve patient care and wellness in this population.