Frequency and distribution of primary site among gender minority cancer patients: An analysis of U.S. national surveillance data

Investigating the Needs and Concerns of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, or Questioning Cancer Patients

The needs and concerns of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or questioning (LGBTQ+) patients with cancer remain poorly understood. This is important as LGBTQ+ patients have an elevated risk of developing certain cancers and have poorer oncologic outcomes compared to non-LGBTQ+ patients. The lack of research may be linked to the complexity of studying the needs and concerns of this patient population. This review aimed to describe the evidence that sought to identify the needs and concerns of LGBTQ+ cancer patients. Studies were extracted using keywords such as "LGBTQ" and "Oncology." Patient participants were excluded if they did not identify as LGBTQ+ and if they did not have cancer or were not cancer survivors. Healthcare professionals were excluded if they were not oncology specific. A total of 22 studies met our inclusion criteria. LGBTQ+ cancer patients expressed concerns surrounding heteronormative assumptions made by healthcare professionals, a lack of LGBTQ±specific cancer support groups, and psychosexual concerns such as erectile dysfunction following cancer treatment. Oncology healthcare professionals lacked the knowledge and education that are required to manage this patient cohort. Further research is required to investigate the needs and concerns of LGBTQ+ cancer patients specifically in the radiation oncology setting.

Prostate Cancer in Transgender Women: Epidemiology, Clinical Characteristics, and Management Challenges

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To systematically review the evidence on prostate cancer (PCa) in transgender women (TGW).

RECENT FINDINGS

A total of 25 studies were included. Fourteen articles were case reports or case series describing 21 TGW with PCa; 11 papers focused primarily on assessing the incidence or screening of PCa in TGW. The median (range) age of patients with PCa was 63 (45-78) years. Median (range) PSA at diagnosis was 7.5 (0.4-1710) ng/mL. Prostate biopsy detected ISUP 3-5 in 10 (67%) cases. T3-4 stages were described in 7 (64%) patients. Three (14.3%) cases of nodal involvement and 2 (9.5%) of metastases were reported at diagnosis. First-line therapy included radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy ± androgen deprivation therapy in 14 (74 %) subjects. Median (range) follow-up was 24 (2-120) months. A good response to first-line therapy was recorded in 8 (47.1%) cases. Median (range) incidence of PCa in TGW was 44.1 (4.34-140) cases per 100,000 person-years. PCa was significantly less frequent in TGW than in cisgender males (HR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.9). Risk of death after PCa diagnosis was significantly higher in TGW compared to cisgender males (HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.06-3.45). TGW had lower lifetime PSA rates (48% vs. 64.6%, p = 0.048) than cisgender males. Few cases of PCa in TGW are currently reported. PCa seems significantly less frequent in TGW than in cisgender males; however, some data suggest a possible higher mortality in this cohort. TGW appear to have less access to PSA testing than cisgender men.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Cervical Cancer Incidence, Survival, and Mortality by Histologic Subtype

PURPOSE

We conducted an integrated population-based analysis of histologic subtype-specific cervical cancer incidence, survival, and incidence-based mortality by race and ethnicity, with correction for hysterectomy prevalence.

METHODS

Using the SEER 21 and 18 registries, we selected primary cases of malignant cervical cancer diagnosed among women ≥ 15 years. We evaluated age-adjusted incidence rates among cases diagnosed between 2000 and 2018 (SEER21) and incidence-based mortality rates among deaths from 2005 to 2018 (SEER18), per 100,000 person-years. Rates were stratified by histologic subtype and race/ethnicity (incidence and mortality), and stage, age at diagnosis, and county-level measures of social determinants of health (incidence only). Incidence and mortality rates were corrected for hysterectomy using data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. We estimated 5-year relative survival by histologic subtype and stratified by stage at diagnosis.

RESULTS

Incidence rates of cervical squamous cell carcinoma were highest in Black and Hispanic women, while incidence rates of cervical adenocarcinoma (ADC) were highest among Hispanic and White women, particularly for localized ADC. County-level income and education variables were inversely associated with squamous cell carcinoma incidence rates in all racial and ethnic groups but had less influence on ADC incidence rates. Black women had the highest overall mortality rates and lowest 5-year relative survival, irrespective of subtype and stage. Disparities in survival were particularly pronounced for Black women with regional and distant ADC, compared with other racial/ethnic groups.

CONCLUSION

Although Black women are less likely to be diagnosed with ADC compared with all other racial/ethnic groups, they experience the highest mortality rates for this subtype, likely attributed to the poor survival observed for Black women with regional and distant ADC.

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.

Community-generated solutions to cancer inequity: recommendations from transgender, non-binary and intersex people on improving cancer screening and care

Objective

Transgender, non-binary and intersex people are less likely to receive appropriate cancer screening for their bodies and have a higher incidence of certain cancers than cisgender people. We aimed to elicit community-generated solutions to improve cancer screening for these populations.

Methods and analysis

We conducted six online, asynchronous focus groups in English and Spanish with transgender, non-binary, intersex and cisgender participants who were at least 15 years of age from across the USA. Participants shared their experiences with cancer screening and related conversations with healthcare providers and recommendations for making screening practices more inclusive of their bodies and experiences. Focus group data were exported into transcripts and analysed with thematic analysis.

Results

The 23 participants represented a diversity of races, genders, sexualities, ages and geographical locations. Transgender, non-binary and intersex participants, particularly Black, Indigenous and/or people of colour, reported having to self-advocate to receive necessary care by initiating conversations about screening with their providers, requesting specific screenings and educating providers about the appropriate care for their body. Notably, no white or cisgender participants described having to request relevant screenings or initiate conversations with their providers. Participants recommended that forms ask about body parts and allow for self-identification.

Conclusion

The ability to properly screen patients can have a direct impact on cancer outcomes. More inclusive intake forms may alleviate the need for transgender, non-binary and intersex patients to self-advocate to receive necessary care. More work should be done to educate providers on cancer risk for transgender, non-binary and intersex individuals.

Prostate cancer in transgender women: considerations for screening, diagnosis and management

Transgender individuals represent 0.55% of the US population, equivalent to 1.4 million transgender adults. In transgender women, feminisation can include a number of medical and surgical interventions. The main goal is to deprive the phenotypically masculine body of androgens and simultaneously provide oestrogen therapy for feminisation. In gender-confirming surgery (GCS) for transgender females, the prostate is usually not removed. Due to limitations of existing cohort studies, the true incidence of prostate cancer in transgender females is unknown but is thought to be less than the incidence among cis-gender males. It is unclear how prostate cancer develops in androgen-deprived conditions in these patients. Six out of eleven case reports in the literature presented with metastatic disease. It is thought that androgen receptor-mediated mechanisms or tumour-promoting effects of oestrogen may be responsible. Due to the low incidence of prostate cancer identified in transgender women, there is little evidence to drive specific screening recommendations in this patient subpopulation. The treatment of early and locally advanced prostate cancer in these patients warrants an individualised thoughtful approach with input from patients' reconstructive surgeons. Both surgical and radiation treatment for prostate cancer in these patients can profoundly impact the patient's quality of life. In this review, we discuss the evidence surrounding screening and treatment of prostate cancer in transgender women and consider the current gaps in our knowledge in providing evidence-based guidance at the molecular, genomic and epidemiological level, for clinical decision-making in the management of these patients.

Standards of Care for the Health of Transgender and Gender Diverse People, Version 8

Background: Transgender healthcare is a rapidly evolving interdisciplinary field. In the last decade, there has been an unprecedented increase in the number and visibility of transgender and gender diverse (TGD) people seeking support and gender-affirming medical treatment in parallel with a significant rise in the scientific literature in this area. The World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) is an international, multidisciplinary, professional association whose mission is to promote evidence-based care, education, research, public policy, and respect in transgender health. One of the main functions of WPATH is to promote the highest standards of health care for TGD people through the Standards of Care (SOC). The SOC was initially developed in 1979 and the last version (SOC-7) was published in 2012. In view of the increasing scientific evidence, WPATH commissioned a new version of the Standards of Care, the SOC-8. Aim: The overall goal of SOC-8 is to provide health care professionals (HCPs) with clinical guidance to assist TGD people in accessing safe and effective pathways to achieving lasting personal comfort with their gendered selves with the aim of optimizing their overall physical health, psychological well-being, and self-fulfillment. Methods: The SOC-8 is based on the best available science and expert professional consensus in transgender health. International professionals and stakeholders were selected to serve on the SOC-8 committee. Recommendation statements were developed based on data derived from independent systematic literature reviews, where available, background reviews and expert opinions. Grading of recommendations was based on the available evidence supporting interventions, a discussion of risks and harms, as well as the feasibility and acceptability within different contexts and country settings. Results: A total of 18 chapters were developed as part of the SOC-8. They contain recommendations for health care professionals who provide care and treatment for TGD people. Each of the recommendations is followed by explanatory text with relevant references. General areas related to transgender health are covered in the chapters Terminology, Global Applicability, Population Estimates, and Education. The chapters developed for the diverse population of TGD people include Assessment of Adults, Adolescents, Children, Nonbinary, Eunuchs, and Intersex Individuals, and people living in Institutional Environments. Finally, the chapters related to gender-affirming treatment are Hormone Therapy, Surgery and Postoperative Care, Voice and Communication, Primary Care, Reproductive Health, Sexual Health, and Mental Health. Conclusions: The SOC-8 guidelines are intended to be flexible to meet the diverse health care needs of TGD people globally. While adaptable, they offer standards for promoting optimal health care and guidance for the treatment of people experiencing gender incongruence. As in all previous versions of the SOC, the criteria set forth in this document for gender-affirming medical interventions are clinical guidelines; individual health care professionals and programs may modify these in consultation with the TGD person.

Incidence of testicular cancer in trans women using gender-affirming hormonal treatment: a nationwide cohort study

Objective

To assess the incidence of testicular cancer in trans women (male sex assigned at birth, female gender identity) using gender‐affirming hormonal treatment.

Patients and Methods

Data of trans women starting hormonal treatment at our gender identity clinic between 1972 and 2017 were linked to the national pathology database to obtain testicular cancer diagnoses. The standardised incidence ratio (SIR) was calculated using the number of observed testicular cancer cases in our cohort and the number of expected cases based on age‐specific Dutch incidence rates. Subgroup analyses were performed in testicular tissues sent for histopathological analysis at the time of bilateral orchidectomy, and when follow‐up exceeded 5 years.

Results

The cohort consisted of 3026 trans women with a median follow‐up time of 2.3 interquartile range (IQR) (1.6–3.7) years. Two testicular cancer cases were identified whilst 2.4 cases were expected (SIR 0.8, 95% confidence interval 0.1–2.8). In addition, one testicular cancer case was encountered in an orchidectomy specimen (0.1%). In the 523 trans women with a follow‐up time of >5 years (median [IQR] 8.9 [6.4–13.9] years), no testicular cancer was observed.

Conclusion

Testicular cancer risk in trans women is similar to the risk in cis men. The testicular cancer cases occurred within the first 5 years after commencing hormonal treatment, and the percentage of cases encountered at the time of bilateral orchidectomy was low. As no testicular cancer was observed in trans women with a long follow‐up period, long‐term hormonal treatment does not seem to increase testicular cancer risk.

Attitudes of transgender men and non-binary people to cervical screening: a cross-sectional mixed-methods study in the UK

Background

Transgender men and non-binary people assigned female at birth (TMNB) who have not had surgery to remove the cervix are recommended to undertake cervical screening with the same frequency as cisgender women, but evidence suggests that TMNB have lower odds of lifetime and up-to-date cervical screening uptake.

Aim

To understand the attitudes towards and preferences for cervical screening among UK-based TMNB.

Design and setting

Cross-sectional survey of TMNB at an NHS gender identity clinic (GIC) and an NHS sexual health service specialising in care of transgender people.

Method

Recruitment was via email invitations to patients of the GIC and sexual health service. Inclusion criteria were: female sex assigned at birth; transgender man, masculine, or non-binary gender identity; aged ≥18 years; and UK resident. Quantitative results were analysed using descriptive statistics, and free-text comments were analysed thematically.

Results

In total there were 137 participants; 80% identified as transmasculine,18% as non-binary, and the remaining participants reported other noncisgender identities. Sixty-four participants (47%) were eligible for cervical screening and 37 (58%) of those had been screened. Only 34 (53%) of those eligible felt they had sufficient information about cervical screening. Just over half (n = 71/134, 53%) stated they would like the option to self-swab for high-risk human papillomavirus. Only half (n = 68/134, 51%) of participants were in favour of an automatic invitation for cervical screening. Thematic analysis identified a number of additional barriers to and facilitators of screening.

Conclusion

TMNB have identified numerous potential areas for change that may improve cervical screening uptake and patient experience.

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.

Prostate cancer in transgender women: what does a urologist need to know?

OBJECTIVE

To review of the existing literature, current guidelines and standard of practice related to prostate cancer in transgender women, as the transgender population share many of the same healthcare needs as their cisgender counterparts, but may have additional specialist needs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a non-systematic review of the literature, current guidelines and standard of practice related to prostate cancer in transgender women.

RESULTS

Our search revealed 10 case reports of prostate cancer in transgender women, four specialist opinion papers, six cohort studies, and four systematic reviews. The information in these publications were assimilated to produce a review of prostate cancer in transgender women.

CONCLUSION

The risk of prostate cancer in transgender women who are not on gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT) or who have not had gender-affirming surgery (GAS) and gender non-conforming individuals (who may never commence GAHT or have GAS) is the same as that in the cis male population. In these patients, healthcare professionals need to be able to discuss screening, diagnostic and treatment options considering future wishes for gender-affirming treatment. Prostate cancer incidence in transgender women on GAHT or following GAS is lower than age-matched cis-male counterparts, but diagnosis and treatment is more nuanced. The present review discusses the existing literature about development and incidence of prostate cancer in this population, and makes recommendations about screening, the usefulness of diagnostic tools e.g. prostate-specific antigen and magnetic resonance imaging, and considerations when formulating treatment. Potential directions for future research are discussed, which will hopefully lead to development of robust evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer in transgender women.

Cancer Stage, Treatment, and Survival Among Transgender Patients in the United States

Background

Transgender persons face many barriers to health care that may delay cancer diagnosis and treatment, possibly resulting in decreased survival. Yet, data on cancer in this population are limited. We examined cancer stage at diagnosis, treatment, and survival among transgender patients compared with cisgender patients in the National Cancer Database (NCDB).

Methods

Gender (male, female, or transgender) was extracted from medical records from patients diagnosed with cancer between 2003 and 2016. Logistic regression estimated odds ratios (ORs) for the associations between gender and stage at diagnosis and treatment receipt. Cox proportional hazards regression estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for associations between gender and all-cause survival.

Results

Among 11 776 699 persons with cancer in NCDB, 589 were transgender. Compared with cisgender patients, transgender patients may be more likely to be diagnosed with advanced stage lung cancer (OR = 1.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.95 to 3.28); be less likely to receive treatment for kidney (OR = 0.19, 95% CI = 0.08 to 0.47) and pancreas (OR = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.11 to 0.95) cancers; and have poorer survival after diagnosis with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (HR = 2.34, 95% CI = 1.51 to 3.63), prostate (HR = 1.91, 95% CI = 1.06 to 3.45), and bladder cancers (HR = 2.86, 95% CI = 1.36 to 6.00). Similar associations were found for other cancer sites, although not statistically significant.

Conclusion

Transgender patients may be diagnosed at later stages, be less likely to receive treatment, and have worse survival for many cancer types. Small sample size hampered our ability to detect statistically significant differences for some cancer sites. There is a need for transgender-focused cancer research as the population ages and grows.

Medical transition for gender diverse patients

Purpose of review

The purpose of this review is to provide an up-to-date overview of gender-affirming hormone therapy, including the various hormone regimens available, the efficacy and potential risks of these treatments, and considerations for surveillance and long-term care.

Recent findings

Recent studies reaffirm that hormone therapy has positive physical and psychological effects for many transgender individuals. The overall risks of treatment are low. Transgender women may have an increased risk of venous thromboembolism and breast cancer based on recent cohort studies, but these findings have yet to be confirmed with randomized controlled trials. Important long-term considerations include metabolic, cardiovascular, and skeletal health.

Summary

High-quality, long-term studies on the effectiveness and safety of various gender-affirming hormone treatment regimens are lacking, but the currently available evidence suggests that it is overall safe and effective with appropriate oversight.

Assessing the Quality of Care Delivered to Transgender and Gender Diverse Patients with Cancer in Ireland: A Case Series

INTRODUCTION

"Transgender" and "gender diverse" are umbrella terms encompassing those whose gender identities or expressions differ from those typically associated with the sex they were assigned at birth. There is scant global information on cancer incidence, outcome, and mortality for this cohort. This group may present with advanced cancer, have mistrust in health care services and report anxiety and depression at higher frequencies, a finding often seen in marginalized groups because of minority stress.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Medical oncologists were contacted by secure email to identify patients who self-identify as transgender and gender diverse in three Irish hospitals. Five patients were identified. A retrospective chart review was conducted and a pseudonymized patient survey was distributed.

RESULTS

All patients included in our chart review (n = 5) were diagnosed with advanced disease on initial diagnosis. Two patients identified as men, two as women, and one as a transwoman. Two of five patients' health record charts reflected a name or gender change. Three patients had gender transitioning treatment postponed. Assessing comorbidities, it was seen that four patients required psychiatry input. Predominant issues noted in our patient survey by the two respondents (n = 2) were "mis-gendering," lack of a gender-neutral hospital environment, lack of inclusion in cancer groups, and barriers in changing name and/or sex on hospital records.

CONCLUSION

Components of care requiring revision include patient accessible pathways to change names and gender on health records, earlier access to psychological support and targeted screening and support groups. Resources for hospital staff to improve awareness of correct terminology and to provide gender neutral facilities are worthwhile.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The implications for practice on an international level include patient-friendly pathways for changing hospital name and gender so that patients may feel comfortable using wristbands. The need for international screening guidelines for transgender patients and national transgender cancer support groups is highlighted. On a day-to-day level for providers, the correct use of pronouns makes a big difference to patients. Asking about preferred pronoun on first visit and noting on patient's file is worthwhile. It is important for providers to know that increased psychological support should be offered early on first clinic visit and engaged with as necessary when patient has a history of anxiety or depression. Providers should discuss openly that some gender transitioning treatment will be postponed because of cancer care and refer to both the physical and psychological sequelae of this. Asking transgender patients which room or bathroom they would prefer when rooms are gendered is essential.

Creating Affirmative and Inclusive Practices When Providing Genetic and Genomic Diagnostic and Research Services to Gender-Expansive and Transgender Patients

BACKGROUND

Gender expansive and transgender (GET) healthcare extends beyond gender-affirming therapies, reaching every medical specialty and subspecialty. As the number of GET patients seeking health services has increased, so has the need for standards of care regarding GET-affirmative practices throughout the healthcare system. As such, the number of publications surrounding GET-affirmative practices has steadily risen. However, even as such research has gained ground in other areas, one realm in which there has been a relative lag is genetics and genomics (GG).

CONTENT

In this article, we track the GET patient and their laboratory sample from the clinic to the GG laboratory and back. Throughout the preanalytical, analytical, and postanalytical phases, we identify publications, recommendations, and guidelines relevant to the care of the GET community. We also identity knowledge gaps in each area and provide recommendations for affirmative and inclusive processes for addressing those gaps.

SUMMARY

We have identified the practices involved in GG services that would benefit from GET-affirmative process improvement, reviewing relevant affirmative guidelines. Where guidelines could not be found, we identified those knowledge gaps and suggested potential solutions and future directions for implementing GET-affirmative practices.

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

Sexual and gender minority (SGM) individuals encompass a broad spectrum of sexual orientations and gender identities. Although SGM is a research term, this population is often known as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer (LGBTQ). Typically, LGB refers to sexual orientation, T refers to gender identity, and Q may refer to either. Although each group is distinct, they share the common bond of experiencing health disparities that may be caused, in part, by stigma and discrimination, as well as by the oncology provider’s lack of knowledge and, therefore, lack of comfort in treating this population. One challenge in improving the quality of care for SGM patients with cancer is the lack of collection of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) data in the medical record. Furthermore, national studies suggest that many oncologists are unsure of what to do with this information, even when it is collected, and some are uncertain as to why they would need to know the SOGI of their patients. This clinical review offers insight into the health disparities experienced by SGM individuals and strategies for improving the clinical encounter and creating a welcoming environment.

Barriers and facilitators to cervical cancer screening among transgender men and non-binary people with a cervix: A systematic narrative review

Cervical cancer mortality in the United Kingdom (UK) has decreased over the last decade, largely due to uptake of cervical cancer screening. However, only those with a female gender marker on their health records are invited, creating a significant barrier to gender minorities accessing screening. We undertook a systematic review to synthesise published literature on cervical cancer screening among eligible gender minorities, aiming to identify barriers and facilitators that might inform changes in UK policy and clinical practice. We conducted a broad search across Medline, Embase, PsycInfo and Global Health databases to 3rd January 2020 and included any original, peer-reviewed research, published in the English language that reported on cervical cancer screening among gender minorities assigned female at birth (AFAB). Twenty-seven studies were critically appraised and included in the final synthesis, which identified significant disparities in cervical cancer screening uptake between gender minorities AFAB and cis women. It revealed a lack of knowledge surrounding the relationship between gender minority status and cervical cancer risk among both service users and providers and highlighted significant barriers to access for gender minorities AFAB. Cervical cancer screening was not universally associated with dysphoria among gender minorities AFAB and we recommend that providers explore patients' preferences around screening, while avoiding assumptions. Providers should be proficient in examination techniques that maximise patient autonomy and minimise gender dysphoria or pain. Self-swabs for high-risk HPV may provide a more acceptable, evidence-based, alternative to Pap smears but there remains a need for further UK-specific research, to inform changes in policy.

Transgender individuals' cancer survivorship: Results of a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Transgender individuals' cancer prevalence and transgender cancer survivors' health needs have received scarce attention. The current study compared transgender and cisgender individuals' cancer prevalence and described the health needs of transgender cancer survivors.

METHODS

The authors used Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data on 95,800 cisgender and transgender individuals who self-reported a cancer diagnosis. Using multiple logistic regression, they estimated cancer prevalence and calculated odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals of physical, psychological, overall health, and health behaviors of transgender survivors compared with cisgender survivors.

RESULTS

After adjusting for confounders, transgender men had a significantly higher (>2-fold) number of cancer diagnoses compared with cisgender men, but not cisgender women. Cancer prevalence among gender nonconforming individuals and transgender women was not significantly different from that of cisgender men and cisgender women. Gender nonconforming survivors had significantly greater physical inactivity, heavy episodic alcohol use, and depression compared with cisgender men and cisgender women. Transgender men survivors were significantly more likely to report poor physical health and greater medical comorbidities and were less likely to report smoking compared with cisgender men and cisgender women. Transgender women survivors were significantly more likely to report diabetes compared with cisgender men and cisgender women and were more likely to report cardiovascular disease compared with cisgender women.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians should be aware of the higher prevalence of cancer among transgender men and a potential survivorship bias among transgender individuals. Transgender survivors have considerable variation in their risk profile. Clinicians and health services can target gender nonconforming survivors' depression and health behaviors to improve survival and should address the complex comorbidities of transgender men and transgender women.