Uptake and predictors of anal cancer screening in men who have sex with men

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.

Utilization of Anal Cytology Screening among Sexual and Gender Minority Populations in Pennsylvania

BACKGROUND

Despite the risk of anal cancer in sexual and gender minority (SGM) populations, anal cancer screening remains infrequent and inconsistent in these populations. The objective of this analysis was to identify factors associated with anal cancer screenings among SGM populations using the Andersen's behavioral model of health services use.

METHODS

Secondary analyses of two cross-sectional surveys from the 2020 (N = 1,125) and 2022 (N = 630) Pennsylvania LGBTQ Health Needs Assessment. Multiple logistic regression analyses were used to identify correlates of anal cytology screening.

RESULTS

Average age was 37.7 (SD = 13.3) and 39.7 (SD = 13.6) in 2020 and 2022, respectively. Approximately 16% to 18% reported living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). A minority of respondents reported past year screening (14.0%, 2020 and 13.6%, 2022). Enabling and need-based factors consistently associated with screening included sexually transmitted infection treatment, living with HIV, preexposure prophylaxis use, and multiple sex partners. Robust factors associated with ever being screened were age and living with HIV.

CONCLUSIONS

Anal cytology screening is being done in Pennsylvania at a small but not insignificant rate. In accordance with existing guidelines, SGM populations living with HIV were most likely to be screened, but still at a low rate. Predictive factors associated with screening in this study can inform future interventions to implement guideline-specific anal cancer prevention.

IMPACT

Factors that reflect consistent connection to healthcare are associated with increased rates of screening via anal cytology testing, indicating there are opportunities to implement anal cancer screening as part of a larger, more comprehensive SGM-focused care pathway.

Commonly Drawn Immunologic and Inflammatory Markers as Risk Predictors for Anal Cancer in Veterans Living With HIV

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to determine if immune inflammatory markers (neutrophil lymphocyte ratio [NLR], platelet lymphocyte ratio [PLR], and prognostic nutritional index [PNI]) correlate with anal cancer risk in people living with HIV and to compare these markers with the CD4/CD8 ratio.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a regional retrospective cohort study of veterans living with HIV who were screened for or diagnosed with anal neoplasia or cancer from 2001 to 2019. The NLR, PLR, PNI, and CD4/CD8 ratio within 1 year of anal pathology results were computed. Patients with anal cancer were compared to patients without anal cancer. Regression modeling was used to estimate the odds of developing anal cancer.

RESULTS

Three hundred thirty-four patients were included (37 with anal cancer, 297 without anal cancer). In patients with anal cancer, NLR and PLR were higher (2.17 vs 1.69, p = .04; 140 vs 110, p = .02, respectively), while PNI and CD4/CD8 ratio were lower (44.65 vs 50.01, p < .001; 0.35 vs 0.80, p < .001, respectively). On multivariate logistic regression modeling, only PNI (odds ratio, 0.90; p = .001) and CD4/CD8 ratio (odds ratio, 0.05; p < .001) were associated with increased anal cancer risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Although NLR and PLR independently correlate with anal cancer risk, when controlling for other risk predictors, only PNI and CD4/CD8 ratio were statistically significant biomarkers for anal cancer. The CD4/CD8 ratio is the strongest immune inflammatory marker that predicts risk of anal cancer among veterans living with HIV.

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.

Awareness of the causal association between human papillomavirus and anal cancer among US adults

PURPOSE

The incidence of anal cancer is on the rise in the US, especially among high-risk groups. This study examined the prevalence and determinants of awareness of the causal relationship between HPV and anal cancer among US adults.

METHODS

Study data was obtained from the 2017 to 2020 iterations of the Health Information National Trends Survey. The prevalence of awareness that HPV causes anal cancer was estimated among HINTS respondents who were aware of HPV in general. Survey weights were used to provide estimates representative of the adult US population. Multivariable logistic regressions were used to examine the associations between awareness that HPV causes anal cancer and cancer-related behaviors/perceptions and sociodemographic characteristics of respondents.

RESULTS

Two thousand six hundred and eighty four (27.2%) of the study population were aware that HPV caused anal cancer. Those of gay sexual orientation were more aware than heterosexuals [OR 2.27; 95% CI (1.24, 4.14)]. Compared to respondents with a high school diploma or less, individuals with some college education [OR 1.38; 95% CI (1.03, 1.85)] and those with at least a college degree [OR 1.52; 95% CI (1.17, 1.98)] were more likely to be aware. Participants who had positive cancer information seeking behavior were more aware of the HPV-anal cancer link compared to those who did not [OR 1.57; 95% CI (1.30, 1.89)].

CONCLUSION

Population-level awareness that HPV causes anal cancer remains critically low in the US. Sexual orientation, level of education and cancer information seeking behavior are associated with increased awareness of the causal relationship between HPV and anal cancer. Efforts should be directed toward addressing the awareness gap among individuals with lower education levels and promoting curiosity-driven information seeking behaviors.

Anal Cancer and Anal Cancer Screening

This chapter provides an overview of anal cancer and contemporary approaches for anal precancer detection, beginning with a discussion of the biology and natural history of anal squamous cell carcinoma, the predominant human papillomavirus -associated histologic subtype of anal cancer. This section is followed by a description of the epidemiology of anal cancer, including trends in incidence and mortality, a discussion of populations with elevated risk for anal cancer and an overview of associated risk factors. The remainder of the chapter provides the most up-to-date evidence on tools and approaches for anal cancer prevention, screening, and early detection; including, the role of human papillomavirus vaccination for primary prevention; anal cytology, high resolution anoscopy and novel biomarkers for secondary prevention; and digital anal-rectal examination for early detection.

Integration of human papillomavirus associated anal cancer screening into HIV care and treatment program in Pakistan: perceptions of policymakers, managers, and care providers

BACKGROUND

The incidence of anal cancer, largely associated with anal human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, is increasing among men who have sex with men (MSM), and transgender women living with or without HIV. Screening for anal cancer to detect anal precancerous lesions in high-risk groups is an important opportunity for prevention but still lacking in many low-and-middle-income countries. The aim of this study was to explore the readiness of Pakistan's healthcare system to integrate anal cancer and HPV screening into a national HIV program, as perceived by policymakers, health managers, and healthcare providers.

DESIGN

This qualitative study using key-informant interviews with participants influence in policy making, implementation and advocacy from public and private sector were conducted between March 2021 to August 2021 in Karachi Pakistan.

METHODS

Key informants were purposely selected from different domains of the healthcare system responsible for the target group of interest, MSM and transgender-women in general and people living with HIV in particular. A total of 18 key informants, at different levels of seniority were recruited from governmental and non-governmental organizations, high-level infectious disease healthcare managers, and United Nations Program representatives. Qualitative content analysis was used to identify the manifest and latent themes, based on socioecological framework.

RESULTS

The results were grouped into five major themes; (1) The policy context and priorities, (2) Health systems factors, (3) Community environment, (4) Healthcare setting & providers and (5) Individual-level obstacles. The policy actors expressed their concerns about their limited voice in country's health and health related priority setting. Informants reported a lack of political will and suggested that government should bring a change in the paradigm of healthcare service delivery from reactive to proactive approach. Although, participants unanimously favored integration of HPV preventive services into existing HIV program, they also identified several service delivery barriers including trained workforce shortage, limited capacity of information technology, lack of supplies needed for screening, lack of financing, and lack of services that could meet key-populations needs. Participants also predicted other implementation challenges such as stigma, social victimization, and systemic discrimination against at-risk groups at healthcare facilities.

CONCLUSION

Although policy makers and health providers in Pakistan saw a clear need to scale-up and integrate anal cancer screening for key populations, the feasibility of this is dependent on political will, financing, anti-stigma and discrimination interventions and health system efficiency.

Comparison of anal pre-cancer screening strategies among men who have sex with men

PURPOSE

Comparison of anal pre-cancer screening strategies in men who have sex with men (MSM).

METHODS

MSM in the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study underwent repeated anal cytology (aCyt), oncogenic human papillomavirus (oncHPV) testing. A subset received High-Resolution Anoscopy (HRA). We evaluated three screening strategies for their ability to predict anal histological High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial lesion (HSIL): single aCyt, sequential aCyt, and oncHPV co-testing. Multivariable logistic regression models evaluated risk of HSIL among participants undergoing HRA within 5 years of screening. Sensitivity and specificity were estimated among participants with HRA, and results corrected for verification bias using weighted generalized estimating equations.

RESULTS

There were 1426 MSM with aCyt screening (48% people with HIV [PWH]) and 428 that underwent HRA. Median age was 57 years, 14% of PWH had CD4< 350 cells/mm3. HSIL probability was higher in MSM with one (39%, p < 0.01) or two abnormal aCyt results (46%, p < 0.01), versus those with normal aCyt (23-24%). Among men with abnormal aCyt, men with oncHPV+ had significantly higher risk than those who were oncHPV- (47% vs. 16%, p < 0.01). Specificity was modest with single aCyt+ (50%) but increased with sequential aCyt+ (79%) or oncHPV+ (67%). Sensitivity was high with single oncHPV+ (88%), moderate with single aCyt+ (66%) and oncHPV+ co-testing (61%), and low with sequential aCyt+ (39%). After correcting for potential verification bias, specificity increased and sensitivity decreased, but inferences were similar.

CONCLUSION

None of the screening strategies evaluated had both sufficient specificity and sensitivity to warrant routine widespread use.

Influence of previous experience with and beliefs regarding anal cancer screening on willingness to be screened among men living with HIV

BACKGROUND

Implementation of anal cancer screening requires the procedure to be acceptable to the target population. Our objective was to assess the beliefs of men living with HIV regarding anal cancer screening and identify factors associated with their willingness to participate in screening.

METHODS

We developed a cross-sectional questionnaire using the Theory of Planned Behavior to examine beliefs regarding prevention of human papillomavirus (HPV)-related diseases, administered to men living with HIV in 2016-2017 in a multi-site HIV clinical cohort. Correspondence analysis was used to examine the interrelationships between men's beliefs and willingness to undergo anal cancer screening. We used multivariable proportional odds models to identify factors associated with increasing willingness. Results were reported as adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Among 1677 male participants, the vast majority (90%) would be willing to undergo screening by "anal Pap test"; willingness clustered with positive beliefs (e.g. confident they can get screened; disagree that they will feel pain) in the correspondence analysis. Higher self-perceived risk for anal cancer and positive beliefs regarding screening were associated with higher willingness to be screened. Gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men had higher willingness (aOR = 1.62; 95% CI: 1.15, 2.29) than heterosexual men. Racialized men reported lower willingness (aOR = 0.68; 95% CI: 0.54, 0.89) than white men.

CONCLUSIONS

Men generally had positive beliefs and were willing to undergo screening, though there were differences by sexual orientation and racial identity. Tailored community-led initiatives could focus on men's understanding of their risk and expectations of anal cancer screening to facilitate participation.

Would Chinese Men Who Have Sex With Men Take Up Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Screening as an Alternative Prevention Strategy to HPV Vaccination?

Background

Men who have sex with men (MSM) are at high risk for human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. A community-based organization (CBO)-private clinic service model promoting HPV vaccination among MSM was implemented in Hong Kong. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of this service model in increasing HPV screening among MSM.

Methods

This was a secondary analysis of the CBO-private clinic service model in increasing HPV screening among MSM. Participants were Hong Kong Chinese-speaking MSM aged 18–45 years who had never received HPV vaccination. All participants completed a telephone survey at baseline before receiving online intervention promoting HPV vaccination and completed another telephone survey 12 months afterward.

Results

A total of 350 participants completed a baseline telephone survey and received interventions promoting HPV vaccination. Among 274 participants being followed up at Month 12, 33 (12.0%) received any type of HPV screening during the study period. Such uptake rate was similar to the prevalence of HPV screening in the past year measured at baseline (12.0 vs. 9.9%, p = 0.43). More MSM preferred HPV vaccination or HPV vaccination plus HPV screening, and very few preferred HPV screening alone. After adjusting for significant baseline characteristics, higher perceived susceptibility to HPV (adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 1.16, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.00–1.34) and receiving HPV vaccination during the study period (AOR: 7.03, 95% CI: 3.07–16.13) were significantly associated with higher HPV screening uptake.

Conclusions

The CBO-private clinic service model promoting HPV vaccination had limited impact in increasing HPV screening among MSM in Hong Kong. MSM in Hong Kong may not use HPV screening as an alternative prevention strategy to HPV vaccination. Future programs preventing HPV-related diseases among MSM in Hong Kong should focus on HPV vaccination promotion.

Gay and Bisexual Men Who Report Anal Sex Stigma Alongside Discomfort Discussing Anal Sex with Health Workers Are Less Likely to Have Ever Received an Anal Examination or Anal Swab

Purpose: We sought to determine whether stigma toward anal sexuality was associated with having ever received an anal examination or anal swab among gay and bisexual men (GBM). Methods: In 2017, we conducted a cross-sectional online survey with 1513 adult cisgender GBM living in the United States. We used structural equation modeling to test whether the Anal Sex Stigma Scales (a validated measure comprising provider stigma, self-stigma, and silence) was negatively associated with lifetime receipt of anorectal examination or anal swabbing by a medical provider. The model assessed mediation by respondents' comfort discussing anal sex practices with health workers and adjusted for possible confounders. Results: As hypothesized, anal sex stigma was associated with less comfort discussing anal sex (β = -0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.50 to -0.38, p < 0.001), and greater comfort was associated with greater likelihood of screening (β = 0.28, 95% CI: 0.19 to 0.37, p < 0.001). The model demonstrated good fit (root mean square error of approximation = 0.045, comparative fit index, and Tucker-Lewis index each = 0.99) and adjusted for everyday discrimination, social support specific to anal sex, age, income, education, medical coverage, outness, and ethnic/racial identification. Collectively, model variables accounted for 48% of the variance in screening (p < 0.001). Conclusion: GBM who endorsed less anal sex stigma reported greater comfort discussing anal sex with health workers and were more likely to have ever received anal health screening by a medical provider. To improve anal health and cancer prevention among GBM, anal sex stigma and related discomfort discussing anal sex with health workers are targets for intervention.

Factors associated with anal cancer screening uptake in men who have sex with men living with HIV: a cross-sectional study

Most western countries have guidelines on anal cancer screening for men who have sex with men (MSM) living with HIV. However, adherence to these guidelines has been studied poorly. This cross-sectional study reports anal cancer screening uptake and identifies the factors associated with a previous screening in MSM living with HIV in a Paris Hospital (France). A total of 410 outpatients completed a self-administered questionnaire on anal cancer screening. The median age was 50 years and the median time from HIV diagnosis was 14.2 years. Overall, 82.2% of patients were aware of anal cancer screening and, of these, 56.7% had already undergone a screening test. The absence of history of screening (43.3%) was most often explained by lack of time (31.3%) or information (28.2%). Among patients familiar with the anal screening procedure, those older than 50 years (adjusted odds ratio=2.4, 95% confidence interval=1.3-4.7, P=0.007) and informed by healthcare providers (adjusted odds ratio=8.2, 95% confidence interval=2.5-32.0, P=0.001) were more likely to have already been screened. To date, adherence to anal cancer screening in MSM living with HIV appears to be inadequate to enable diagnosis of cancer at its early stages. Encouraging physicians to inform MSM living with HIV about anal cancer screening, irrespective of their age, could be an effective strategy to improve anal cancer screening uptake.

Anal cancer screening and prevention: a review for dermatologists

The incidence of and mortality from anal cancer, predominantly squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), have been increasing since the 1980s, during an era when many common malignancies have seen decreases in mortality. Dermatologists may be more likely to see patients at an increased risk for anal SCC, such as those living with HIV, MSM and those presenting for management of anogenital warts, yet there is little guidance in the field on how to manage these patients. We underwent a project to review the evidence surrounding screening and prevention of anal SCC. HPV vaccination, the main preventative measure for anal SCC, is often underutilized and may not be effective for those most at risk. Screening methods currently include high-risk HPV and anal cytology testing, with high-resolution anoscopy (HRA) reserved for biopsy and confirmatory testing. High-risk HPV testing has been associated with high sensitivity for intraepithelial neoplasia, but low specificity in high-risk groups. Recent meta-analyses examining AIN detection using anal cytology estimate a similarly high sensitivity of 74-87%, with a relatively higher specificity (44-66%) for identifying high-grade AIN. HRA is the gold standard for diagnosis, but its accessibility and cost are deterrents from its use as a screening tool. Cervical cancer screening, initially adopted without significant evidence of its impact, has significantly decreased cervical cancer rates. The argument can be made that rates of anal SCC may also benefit from appropriate screening methods, particularly anal cytology. It is prudent for dermatologists to be aware of the methods available to them in the management of at-risk patients, the data supporting them, and the potential benefits of screening in order to counsel patients appropriately and address the increasing burden of disease.

Anal Cancer Screening for HIV-Negative Men Who Have Sex with Men: Making Clinical Decisions with Limited Data

Anal cancer is a rare disease that disproportionately affects people living with HIV and men who have sex with men (MSM). Although screening of MSM living with HIV occurs in the absence of consistent national guidelines, less research exists on screening HIV-negative MSM. In this article, we discuss patient-, clinician-, and systems-level factors that may influence decisions to screen HIV-negative MSM. Randomized controlled trials with MSM living with HIV and those at high risk are in progress, yet more research is needed to address clinical uncertainty around screening additional at-risk groups.

Oral and laryngeal HPV infection: Incidence, prevalence and risk factors, with special regard to concurrent infection in head, neck and genitals

This review focuses on the importance of oral and laryngeal HPV infection which is present in majority of sexually active individuals at least once in their lifetime. Despite testing, still little is known about prevalence rates, determinants and, especially, the concurrent HPV infection in head and neck, and genitals. The purpose of this review is to clarify some issues of oral HPV incidence, prevalence, and to demonstrate the difficulties in identification of asymptomatic oral HPV carriers. The main premise to take up this topic is the high and still increasing risk for development of oropharyngeal cancer, and potential benefit from screening strategies, education programs and HPV vaccination. Transmission of HPV to the oral cavity and oropharynx is hypothesized to occur mainly through sexual contact. The exposure of oropharyngeal mucosa to HPV infection with consequence of increased risk for oropharyngeal carcinoma depends on specific sexual behavior. Male gender, older age, race or ethnicity, oral hygiene and current cigarette smoking are independently associated with any prevalent oral HPV infection.

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.

Low human papillomavirus (HPV) knowledge related to low risk perception among men living with HIV: Implications for HPV-associated disease prevention

Human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated anal cancer is orders of magnitude higher among men living with HIV than the general male population. Our objective was to examine factors associated with HPV awareness and self-perceived risk for HPV-associated anal cancer among men living with HIV, which may influence uptake of cancer prevention strategies. A cross-sectional questionnaire on HPV was administered from 2016 to 2017 to 1677 men in a multisite, HIV clinical cohort in Ontario, Canada. We used logistic regression and proportional odds models to identify factors associated with being familiar with HPV and increasing self-perceived risk for anal cancer, respectively. We used correspondence analysis to examine associations of specific HPV-related knowledge with self-perceived risk. Only 52% were familiar with HPV, and 72% felt they had no or low risk for anal cancer. Familiarity with HPV was more common among men who have sex with men than heterosexual men (58% vs. 21%). Older men were less likely to be familiar with HPV (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] per 10 years = 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.69, 0.85). Familiarity with HPV was associated with increasing self-perceived risk (aOR = 2.39; 95% CI: 1.87, 3.04). After accounting for differences in HPV awareness and sexual orientation, racialized men had lower self-perceived risk (aOR = 0.68; 95% CI: 0.52, 0.88). In the correspondence analysis, risk-focused HPV-related knowledge (e.g., knowing smoking increases risk) was associated with highest risk perception. Efforts are needed to improve HPV-related health literacy in this population. Our findings suggest specific HPV-related knowledge may differentially influence self-perceived risk for anal cancer.

Shared decision-making around anal cancer screening among black bisexual and gay men in the USA

Shared decision-making is a strategy to achieve health equity by strengthening patient-provider relationships and improve health outcomes. There is a paucity of research examining these factors among patients who identify as sexual or gender minorities and racial/ethnic minorities. Through intrapersonal, interpersonal and societal lenses, this project evaluates the relationship between intersectionality and shared decision-making around anal cancer screening in Black gay and bisexual men, given their disproportionate rates of anal cancer. Thirty semi-structured, one-on-one interviews and two focus groups were conducted during 2016-2017. Participants were asked open-ended questions regarding intersectionality, relationships with healthcare providers and making shared decisions about anal cancer screening. Forty-five individuals participated - 30 in individual interviews and 15 in focus groups. All participants identified as Black and male; 13 identified as bisexual and 32 as gay. Analysis revealed that the interaction of internalised racism, biphobia/homophobia, provider bias and medical apartheid led to reduced healthcare engagement and discomfort with discussing sexual practices, potentially hindering patients from engaging in shared decision-making. Non-judgemental healthcare settings and provider relationships in which patients communicate openly about each aspect of their identity will promote effective shared decision-making about anal cancer screening, and thus potentially impact downstream anal cancer rates.

Acceptability of anal cancer screening tests for women living with HIV in the EVVA study

Background

Anal cancer is potentially preventable through screening. For screening to be implemented, the screening procedures must be acceptable to the affected population. The objective of the present study was to measure the acceptability of currently available anal cancer screening tests in a population of women living with hiv who had experienced the tests.

Methods

The evva study ("Evaluation of Human Immunodeficiency Virus, Human Papillomavirus, and Anal Intraepithelial Neoplasia in Women") is a prospective cohort study of adult women living with hiv in Montreal, Quebec. Participants were screened with cervical or anal hpv testing and cervical or anal cytology every 6 months for 2 years. High-resolution anoscopy (hra) and digital anal rectal examination (dare) were also performed systematically, with biopsies, at baseline and at 2 years. An acceptability questionnaire was administered at the final visit or at study withdrawal.

Results

Of 124 women who completed the acceptability questionnaire, most considered screening "an absolute necessity" in routine care for all women living with hiv [77%; 95% confidence interval (ci): 69% to 84%]. Yearly anal cytology or anal hpv testing was considered very acceptable by 81% (95% ci: 73% to 88%); hra every 2 years was considered very acceptable by 84% (95% ci: 77% to 90%); and yearly dare was considered very acceptable by 87% (95% ci: 79% to 92%). Acceptability increased to more than 95% with a longer proposed time interval. Pain was the main reason for lower acceptability.

Conclusions

Most participating women considered anal cancer screening necessary and very acceptable. Longer screening intervals and adequate pain management could further increase the acceptability of repeated screening.

Facilitators of and barriers to high-resolution anoscopy adherence among men who have sex with men: a qualitative study

Background Anal cancer is a rare malignancy that disproportionately affects men who have sex with men (MSM) and HIV-infected people. Anal cancer is associated with human papillomavirus (HPV) in upward of 90% of cases and is preceded by pre-cancerous changes in cells of the anal canal. High-resolution anoscopy (HRA) is used for the detection, treatment and continued monitoring of anal dysplasia. Practice guidelines regarding anal cancer prevention vary by jurisdiction and institution, and patient engagement is low for high-risk populations such as MSM. The purpose of this study is to characterise perceptions among MSM of barriers to and facilitators of their adherence to HRA follow-up recommendations.

METHODS

Surveys and in-person focus groups with MSM who were either adherent or non-adherent to HRA follow-up recommendations at a Federally Qualified Health Centre in Boston, MA, which specialises in sexual and gender minority care, were conducted. Facilitators of and barriers to follow-up were identified by deductive content analysis.

RESULTS

Focus group participants identified the following barriers to and facilitators of HRA follow up: (1) patient-level beliefs about HPV-related disease or HRA, ability to engage in care, internalised stigma and physical discomfort; (2) provider-level knowledge and expertise, communication skills and relationship-building with patient; and (3) systems-level societal stigma and healthcare system inefficiencies.

CONCLUSIONS

Reinforcing facilitators of and reducing barriers to HRA follow up may improve adherence among MSM. This includes improvements to: patient education, provider training to increase knowledge and cultural sensitivity, public awareness about HPV-related anal cancer, physical discomfort associated with HRA and systems inefficiencies.

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

Background Men who have sex with men (MSM) are at greater risk of developing anal cancer caused by human papillomavirus (HPV) than the rest of the general population. Currently, there are no formal national guidelines in the US advising men how and when to get anal cancer screening. We sought to assess differences in demographics, familiarity and anxiety about anal cancer among men who report having had anal cancer screening (i.e. anal cytology and/or a digital anorectal examination (DARE)).

METHODS

MSM were recruited to participate in a study to assess the feasibility of teaching self and partner anal examinations as a means of screening for anal cancer. Data for this secondary analysis were obtained using a written pre-test and a computer-assisted self-interview. Factors associated with screening were assessed with multivariable logistic regression to allow calculation of adjusted odds ratios (aORs).

RESULTS

Of the 197 participants with data, 145 (73.6%) reported having had anal cancer screening (either anal cytology, DARE or both) during their lifetime. Men who were younger, Black and HIV-negative were associated with decreased odds of reporting any type of anal cancer screening. For example, compared with White men, Black men were 80% less likely to report screening (aOR 0.2; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.1-0.5). Self-perception of anal cancer knowledge was not associated with screening in multivariable analysis (aOR 1.6; 95% CI 0.6-3.9).

CONCLUSIONS

Age, race and HIV status were independently associated with a history of anal cancer screening.

Multidisciplinary Approach to the Management and Treatment of Anal Dysplasia

The incidence of anal intraepithelial neoplasia (AIN) has been increasing over the years. AIN acts as a precursor lesion for anal squamous cell cancer. Factors leading to progression of AIN into malignancy are complex and involve grade of the lesion, human papillomavirus and HIV coinfection, as well as patient-related risk factors such as immunocompromised state and men who have sex with men. The multifaced aspects of this disease make its management challenging, as it involves several disciplines including pathology, primary care, infectious disease, and colorectal specialties. Each of these fields brings its own expertize to the management of AIN, and their collaborative, coordinated work culminates into best practice and optimized outcomes in the care of the AIN patient.

Acceptability of high-resolution anoscopy for anal cancer screening in HIV-infected patients

OBJECTIVES

HIV-infected individuals are at increased risk of anal cancer. Screening for anal cancer precursors using high-resolution anoscopy (HRA) may be clinically beneficial. In this study, we examined patient tolerability of this procedure.

METHODS

The acceptability of HRA was evaluated among HIV-infected patients who completed a first-time HRA between July 2008 and December 2013 at Kaiser Permanente Northern California. We reviewed electronic medical records to identify lack of HRA acceptability, which was defined as receipt of HRA with sedation, dispensation of opioid analgaesia, and/or an urgent care visit following HRA, and to evaluate factors associated with patients not returning for a recommended repeat HRA (proxy for HRA acceptability). HRA acceptability was also assessed via a survey mailed to patients who completed HRA between January 2014 and August 2014. Logistic regression was used to model lack of acceptability of initial HRA and likelihood of not returning for a repeat HRA.

RESULTS

Of 1857 HIV-infected patients, 94 were prescribed opioids and one had an urgent care visit. Lack of HRA acceptability was more likely in patients with pre-existing anal conditions [e.g. warts or fissure; adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 4.02; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.4-6.7], those who had ever smoked (aOR 1.6; 95% CI 1.0-2.5) and women (aOR 5.3; 95% CI 1.6-17.5). Fifty per cent of patients returned for a repeat HRA, with younger patients less likely to return (per 10-year age interval, aOR 0.8; 95% CI 0.7-0.9). Of 48 survey respondents, 91.7% reported acceptable pain levels and all reported willingness to return for a repeat HRA.

CONCLUSIONS

HRA was generally well tolerated and may be an acceptable screening approach for patients at high risk of anal cancer.

Primary Care Provider Practices and Perceptions Regarding HPV Vaccination and Anal Cancer Screening at a Boston Community Health Center

Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and anal cancer screening are valuable, yet underutilized, tools in prevention of HPV-related cancers among sexual and gender minority (SGM) populations. The aim of this study was to characterize primary care providers' (PCPs) practices and perceptions pertaining to HPV vaccination and anal cancer screening. A survey assessing self-reported practice characteristics related to HPV vaccination and anal cancer screening, as well as perceived barriers to vaccination and anal cancer screening at the patient-, provider-, and system-level was distributed to PCPs at a Federally-Qualified Health Center that specializes in care for SGM populations in the greater Boston area. A total of 33 PCPs completed the survey. All PCPs strongly recommended HPV vaccination to their patients by emphasizing that the vaccine is extremely important or very important. Most PCPs told their patients that the HPV vaccine prevents cervical cancer (96.9%), anal cancer (96.9%), oropharyngeal cancer (72.7%), penile cancer (57.5%), and genital warts (63.6%). There is substantial variability among providers regarding recommendations for anal cancer screening and follow-up. Most PCPs perceived that patient-level factors such as poverty, mental illness, and substance use disorders were barriers to HPV vaccination and anal cancer screening. Systems-level barriers such as lack of clinical time with each patient and lack of staffing were also described as barriers to vaccination and screening. Patient-, provider- and systems-level improvements are important to increase HPV vaccination and anal cancer screening rates.

Factors associated with anal cancer screening follow-up by high-resolution anoscopy

OBJECTIVES

High-resolution anoscopy (HRA) is a potential screening method for detection of anal cancer precursors. We evaluated factors associated with adherence to recommended HRA follow-up time intervals among men who have sex with men (MSM).

METHODS

We employed a retrospective, observational cohort study with 155 MSM screened by HRA between 1 April 2011 and 31 March 2016 at a Federally Qualified Health Centre in Boston, Massachusetts.

RESULTS

The sample was 80% white, with a median age of 48 (non-normal distribution, IQR 15). All patients were assigned male sex at birth and none identified as transgender. Fifty patients (32%) followed up with a HRA appointment within 6 months of previous HRA detection of anal high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL). Among patients, 112 (72%) were HIV infected, 56 (36%) had a syphilis diagnosis during the study period, 89 (57.4%) had initiated Hepatitis A or B vaccination series, 70 (45.2%) accessed case management services and 19 (12.3%) utilised pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). In bivariate analysis, patients who underwent recommended follow-up HRA within 6 months of HSIL diagnosis were less likely to report: case management utilisation (p=0.023), initiation of Hepatitis A or B vaccination (p=0.047), HIV diagnosis (p<0.001) and syphilis diagnosis (p=0.001), but were more likely to use HIV PrEP (p<0.001). In binomial logistic regression modelling after adjusting for age and race/ethnicity, patients who had follow-up with HRA within a recommended period of 6 months after HSIL diagnosis were less likely to have initiated Hepatitis A or B vaccination (adjusted OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.94), more likely to use PrEP (adjusted OR 4.47, 95% CI 1.30 to 15.49) and less likely to have a syphilis diagnosis (adjusted OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.86).

CONCLUSIONS

Three-quarters of patients with HSIL did not have follow-up HRA within the clinic's recommended follow-up period of 6 months following HSIL diagnosis by HRA. Future studies ought to explore whether addressing anal health during other STI-related care helps improve adherence to recommended time intervals for follow-up HRA. Given the high prevalence of STI and PrEP use, studies might also evaluate whether integrating HRA follow-up with other sexual health screenings helps improve adherence to recommended HRA follow-up.

Patterns of repeated anal cytology results among HIV-positive and HIV-negative men who have sex with men

Background

Men who have sex with men (MSM) are at increased risk for anal cancer. In cervical cancer screening, patterns of repeated cytology results are used to identify low- and high-risk women, but little is known about these patterns for anal cytology among MSM.

Methods

We analyzed Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study (MACS) data for MSM who were offered anal cytology testing annually (HIV-positive) or every 2 years (HIV-negative) for 4 years.

Results

Following an initial negative (normal) cytology, the frequency of a second negative cytology was lower among HIV-positive MSM with CD4 ≥ 500 (74%) or CD4 < 500 (68%) than HIV-negative MSM (83%) (p < 0.001). After an initial abnormal cytology, the frequency of a second abnormal cytology was highest among HIV-positive MSM with CD4 < 500 (70%) compared to CD4 ≥ 500 (53%) or HIV-negative MSM (46%) (p = 0.003). Among HIV-positive MSM with at least three results, 37% had 3 consecutive negative results; 3 consecutive abnormal results were more frequent among CD4 < 500 (22%) than CD4 ≥ 500 (10%) (p = 0.008).

Conclusions

More than one-third of HIV-positive MSM have consistently negative anal cytology over three years. Following abnormal anal cytology, a repeated cytology is commonly negative in HIV-negative or immunocompetent HIV-positive men, while persistent cytological abnormality is more likely among HIV-positive men with CD4 < 500.

Sociodemographic Characteristics and Health Outcomes Among Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual U.S. Adults Using Healthy People 2020 Leading Health Indicators

PURPOSE

This study aimed to characterize the sociodemographic characteristics of sexual minority (i.e., gay, lesbian, bisexual) adults and compare sexual minority and heterosexual populations on nine Healthy People 2020 leading health indicators (LHIs).

METHODS

Using a nationally representative, cross-sectional survey (National Health Interview Survey 2013-2015) of the civilian, noninstitutionalized population (228,893,944 adults), nine Healthy People 2020 LHIs addressing health behaviors and access to care, stratified using a composite variable of sex (female, male) and sexual orientation (gay or lesbian, bisexual, heterosexual), were analyzed individually and in aggregate.

RESULTS

In 2013-2015, sexual minority adults represented 2.4% of the U.S.

POPULATION

Compared to heterosexuals, sexual minorities were more likely to be younger and to have never married. Gays and lesbians were more likely to have earned a graduate degree. Gay males were more likely to have a usual primary care provider, but gay/lesbian females were less likely than heterosexuals to have a usual primary care provider and health insurance. Gay males received more colorectal cancer screening than heterosexual males. Gay males, gay/lesbian females, and bisexual females were more likely to be current smokers than their sex-matched, heterosexual counterparts. Binge drinking was more common in bisexuals compared to heterosexuals. Sexual minority females were more likely to be obese than heterosexual females; the converse was true for gay males. Sexual minorities underwent more HIV testing than their heterosexual peers, but bisexual males were less likely than gay males to be tested. Gay males were more likely to meet all eligible LHIs than heterosexual males. Overall, more sexual minority adults met all eligible LHIs compared to heterosexual adults. Similar results were found regardless of HIV testing LHI inclusion.

CONCLUSION

Differences between sexual minorities and heterosexuals suggest the need for targeted health assessments and public health interventions aimed at reducing specific negative health behaviors.

HIV Infection, Immunosuppression, and Age at Diagnosis of Non-AIDS-Defining Cancers

Background

It is unclear whether immunosuppression leads to younger ages at cancer diagnosis among people living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLWH). A previous study found that most cancers are not diagnosed at a younger age in people with AIDS, with the exception of anal and lung cancers. This study extends prior work to include all PLWH and examines associations between AIDS, CD4 count, and age at cancer diagnosis.

Methods

We compared the median age at cancer diagnosis between PLWH in the North American AIDS Cohort Collaboration on Research and Design and the general population using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program. We used statistical weights to adjust for population differences. We also compared median age at cancer diagnosis by AIDS status and CD4 count.

Results

After adjusting for population differences, younger ages at diagnosis (P < .05) were observed for PLWH compared with the general population for lung (difference in medians = 4 years), anal (difference = 4), oral cavity/pharynx (difference = 2), and kidney cancers (difference = 2) and myeloma (difference = 4). Among PLWH, having an AIDS-defining event was associated with a younger age at myeloma diagnosis (difference = 4; P = .01), and CD4 count <200 cells/µL (vs ≥500) was associated with a younger age at lung cancer diagnosis (difference = 4; P = .006).

Conclusions

Among PLWH, most cancers are not diagnosed at younger ages. However, this study strengthens evidence that lung cancer, anal cancer, and myeloma are diagnosed at modestly younger ages, and also shows younger ages at diagnosis of oral cavity/pharynx and kidney cancers, possibly reflecting accelerated cancer progression, etiologic heterogeneity, or risk factor exposure in PLWH.

The Effect of Anal Dysplasia and Cancer Screening Education on Attitudes, Beliefs, and Self-Efficacy

Introduction: The incidence of anal cancer among individuals who are HIV-positive is estimated to be 80-fold higher than the general population. Implementation of anal dysplasia and cancer screening programs has been successful in urban HIV clinics. Lack of provider training is a primary barrier to such programs. The most effective method of increasing cancer screening among providers is interactive professional education. Methods: HIV care providers from a large medical institution in Chicago completed baseline surveys about knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and measures of self-efficacy. They then participated in an interactive presentation. The survey was readministered following the presentation. Results: We had 100% survey completion by the 11 providers who participated. Significant differences were found in total scores (p < .01), perceived norms (p = .02), perceived behavioral control (p = .01), and intent to screen (p = .01). Discussion: Our findings suggest that HIV care providers respond well to education about screening practices. Most important, they left the sessions with increased intention to incorporate anal dysplasia and cancer screening in their clinical settings. Our recommendation is to incorporate interactive provider education into clinical practice.

Exploring the Perceptions of Anal Cancer Screening and Behaviors Among Gay and Bisexual Men Infected With HIV

BACKGROUND

The incidence of anal cancer is on the rise among HIV-infected men who have sex with men (MSM). Given the increasing availability of screening, this study explored anal cancer screening awareness and behaviors among MSM infected with HIV.

METHODS

In-depth interviews were conducted with 58 MSM infected with HIV.

RESULTS

Other than 2 participants treated for anal cancer and 3 treated for precancerous anal lesions, the majority of participants had never heard of anal cancer. Men reported lack of awareness and recommendations from their health care professionals as the greatest barriers to screening. Upon learning about their risk for anal cancer and the availability of screening, the men were eager to discuss screening with their physicians. Participants provided numerous recommendations for future interventions, including training health care professionals to promote screening, disseminating information pertaining to anal cancer through social networks, and creating media campaigns to raise awareness about the need to screen for this type of cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Future intervention work should focus on ensuring that health care professionals, particularly among HIV/primary care specialists, promote screening for anal dysplasia. It is critical that intervention methods use a community-based approach to raise awareness about the need to screen for anal cancer, especially among MSM infected with HIV.

Gay and Bisexual Men's Willingness to Use a Self-Collected Anal Cancer Screening Test

OBJECTIVE

We investigated gay and bisexual men's willingness to self-administer an anal cancer screening test at home.

METHODS

We conducted 2 national, online cross-sectional surveys of self-identified gay and bisexual men: Study I in 2009 with men ages 20 to 59 (n = 306) and Study II in 2013 with men ages 18 to 26 (n = 428). We used multivariate logistic regression analyses to determine variables associated with willingness to self-administer the screening test.

RESULTS

Most men were willing to self-administer an anal cancer screening test (78% Study I; 67% Study II). In Study I, willingness was higher among men who trusted anal Paps to find treatable cancer (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.47; 95% CI, 1.04-2.09) and who believed that men who have sex with men should be screened for anal cancer between 1 and 3 years vs. other intervals (aOR = 2.19; 95% CI, 1.17-4.10). In Study II, willingness was higher among men who perceived greater likelihood of anal cancer (aOR = 1.57; 95% CI, 1.12-2.20). Their most common concerns were not performing the test correctly and inaccuracy of results.

CONCLUSIONS

Many gay and bisexual men were willing to self-administer anal cancer screening tests at home. If routine screening is warranted, self-collected home testing could improve participation.

Anal human papillomavirus and HIV: A cross-sectional study among men who have sex with men in Moscow, Russia, 2012-2013

Anal human papillomavirus (HPV) is prevalent among men who have sex with men (MSM), but has not been studied in the Russian Federation. A cross-sectional survey and HPV genotyping were conducted among HIV seropositive (n=58) and seronegative MSM (n=65)in Moscow. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify correlates of infection with oncogenic HPV genotypes 16 and/or 18 (HPV 16/18). Forty per cent (49/124) of all MSM were infected with at least one anal HPV genotype, 31.5% (39/124) had HPV16/18,and 11.5% (14/121) had high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL). HPV 16/18 was more prevalent in HIV seropositive than seronegative men (24/58,41.4% vs 15/65, 23.1%; p=0.03). HIV infection was independently associated with HPV 16/18 (adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 5.08; 95% confidence intervals (CI):1.49-17.34, p=0.01), as was having 2-4 steady male sex partners in the last year (vs ≤ 1 partner; AOR: 6.99;95%CI: 1.94–25.24, p<0.01). History of prison/detention,migration to/within Russia and use of incompatible lubricants were marginally associated with HPV16/18 (p<0.10). Comprehensive prevention options are needed to address HIV and HPV infection among MSM in Russia and may benefit from inclusion of young men in piloted HPV vaccination programmes.