A phase II clinical study to assess the feasibility of self and partner anal examinations to detect anal canal abnormalities including anal cancer

The accuracy of anal self- and companion exams among sexual minority men and transgender women: a prospective analysis

Background

Squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA) annual incidence among sexual minority men with and without HIV is 85/100,000 and 19/100,000 persons, respectively, which is significantly higher than the overall incidence (2/100,000). Incidence may also be higher in transgender women. Since SCCA tumours average ≥30 mm at diagnosis, we assessed the accuracy of individuals to self-detect smaller anal abnormalities.

Methods

Using convenience sampling, the study enrolled sexual minority men and transgender women, aged 25-81 years, in Chicago, Illinois and Houston, Texas, USA, during 2020-2022. Individuals were taught the anal self-examination and anal companion examination (ASE/ACE). Then, a clinician performed a digital anal rectal examination (DARE) before participants conducted the ASE or ACE. The sensitivity, specificity and concordance of the ASE/ACE to detect an abnormality were measured along with factors associated with ASE/ACE and DARE concordance.

Findings

Among 714 enrolled individuals, the median age was 40 years (interquartile range, 32-54), 36.8% (259/703) were living with HIV, and 47.0% (334/710), 23.4% (166/710), and 23.0% (163/710) were non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic, respectively. A total of 94.1% (671/713) identified as cisgendered men, and 5.9% (42/713) as gender minorities. A total of 658 participants completed an ASE and 28 couples (56 partners) completed an ACE. Clinicians detected abnormalities in 34.3% (245/714) of individuals. The abnormalities were a median of 3 mm in diameter. Sensitivity and specificity of the ASE/ACE was 59.6% (95% CI 53.5-65.7%) and 80.2% (95% CI 76.6-83.8%), respectively. Overall concordance was 0.73 (95% CI 0.70-0.76) between ASE/ACE and DARE and increased with increasing anal canal lesion size (p = 0.02). Concordance was lower when participants were older and received ASE/ACE training from a lay person rather than a clinician.

Interpretation

Sexual minority men/transgender women may self-detect SCCA when malignant lesions are much smaller than the current mean dimension at presentation of ≥30 mm.

Funding

National Cancer Institute.

Anal cancer: a 20-year retrospective study from Australia

BACKGROUNDS

Anal cancer is an uncommon condition, occurring at higher rates in specific subpopulations. Clinical experience is limited and substantial changes have recently occurred in our understanding of this condition. We, therefore, set out to characterize patients presenting with anal cancer and investigate whether there have been any changes over the past 20 years.

METHODS

Retrospective audit of cases identified from pathology and clinical databases during the period 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2019.

RESULTS

Two hundred and sixteen patients had anal squamous cell carcinomas, comprising 160 (74%) males and 56 (26%) females. Mean age at initial diagnosis was 55.1 ± 11.20 for males and 60.6 ± 15.18 for females (P = 0.02). At initial diagnosis, HIV-positive cases were significantly younger than HIV negative cases (mean 52.2 ± 9.35 vs. 62.8 ± 11.61, P < 0.001); 46% of cases were classified as intra-anal, 29% perianal and 25% both; 52% were > 2 cm at diagnosis. At presentation, intra-anal cases were larger and more advanced than perianal cases (P = 0.049). Compared with the period 2000-2009, anal cancers presented more commonly in 2010-2019 (148 vs. 76), were more likely to occur in HIV-negative people and to be diagnosed at a similar stage.

CONCLUSION

The number of anal cancer cases almost doubled over the study period and people living with HIV presented 10 years younger than others. Perianal cases presented earlier than those originating in intra-anal locations. Together with the large size at diagnosis, this suggests the potential value of screening, particularly for intra-anal cancers in those at high risk.

Cancer screening in people living with HIV

BACKGROUND

Cancer is the leading cause of mortality in people living with HIV (PWH) and is expected to account for a growing fraction of deaths as PWH age.

METHODS

In this literature review, we have compiled the most recent developments in cancer screening and screening performance in PWH, which are currently primarily implemented in well-resourced settings. This includes an assessment of the associated benefits, harms, and cost-effectiveness. The article also addresses unmet needs and potential strategies for tailored screening in the HIV population.

FINDINGS

Incidence and mortality due to screenable cancer are higher in PWH than in the general population, and diagnosis is frequently made at younger ages and/or at more advanced stages, the latter amenable to improved screening. Adequate evidence on the benefits of screening is lacking for most cancers in the HIV population, in whom standard practice may be suboptimal. While cancer surveillance has helped reduce mortality in the general population, and interest in risk-based strategies is growing, implementation of screening programs in the HIV care settings remains low.

INTERPRETATION

Given the devastating consequences of a late diagnosis, enhancing early detection of cancer is essential for improving patient outcomes. There is an urgent need to extend the investigation in cancer screening performance to PWH, evaluating whether personalized measures according to individual risk could result in higher efficiency and improve patient outcomes.

The accuracy of anal self- and companion exams among sexual minority men and transgender women: The Prevent Anal Cancer Palpation Study

Background

Squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA) annual incidence among sexual minority men (SMM) with and without HIV is 85/100,000 and 19/100,000 persons, respectively, which is significantly higher than the overall incidence (2/100,000). Since SCCA tumours average ≥30 mm at diagnosis, we assessed the accuracy of individuals to self-detect anal abnormalities.

Methods

The study enrolled 714 SMM and transgender women (SMM/TW), aged 25 to 81 years, in Chicago, Illinois and Houston, Texas during 2020-2022. Individuals were taught the anal self- and companion examinations (ASE/ACE). Then, a clinician performed a digital anal rectal examination (DARE) before participants conducted the ASE or ACE. Accuracy was measured along with factors associated with ASE/ACE and DARE concordance.

Findings

The median age was 40 years (interquartile range, 32-54), 36.8% were living with HIV, and 47.0%, 23.4%, and 23.0% were non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic. Clinicians detected 245 individuals with abnormalities (median diameter 3 mm). Sensitivity and specificity of the ASE/ACE was 59.6% (95%CI 53.5-65.7%) and 80.2% (95%CI 76.6-83.8%), respectively. Overall concordance was 0.73 (95% CI 0.70-0.76) between ASE/ACE and DARE and increased with increasing anal canal lesion size (p=0.02). However, concordance was lower for participants aged ≥55 years (compared to 25-34 years) and when the ASE/ACE trainer was a lay person rather than a clinician.

Interpretation

SMM/TW who complete an ASE or ACE are likely to detect SCCA at an early stage when malignant lesions are much smaller than the current median dimension at presentation of ≥30 mm.

Funding

National Cancer Institute.

Research in context

Evidence before this study: While squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA) incidence is substantially elevated in people with HIV, there are currently no consensus recommendations on how to screen for it, nor is there widespread technological infrastructure for one prevailing method, high-resolution anoscopy. In the absence of screening programs, the size of SCCA tumours at diagnosis are > 30 mm. We searched PubMed for articles between January 1, 2000 and June 15, 2023 using the search terms 'anus neoplasm' and 'self-examination'. We found no studies assessing the accuracy of self-examinations to detect anal masses other than our prior feasibility study.Added value of this study: The primary goal of the Prevent Anal Cancer Palpation Study was to assess the accuracy of lay self-examinations and companion examinations to recognise abnormalities in the anal region. Clinicians conducted a digital anal rectal examination and recorded all lesions observed at the perianus or anal canal. The median size of lesions was 3 mm. Participants conducted lay examinations and these results were judged against a clinician's examination. The sensitivity and specificity of the lay examinations, for any lesion at the anal canal or perianal region was 59.6% and 80.1%, respectively. As lesions increased in size, concordance increased between clinician's exam and the lay exam.Implications of all the available evidence: It is now known that high-resolution anoscopy can reduce the risk for SCCA but the infrastructure using this technology is very limited in high-resource settings and almost non-existent in low resource settings, especially where HIV prevalence is highest. The evidence suggests that self- and partner examination of the anal region is feasible and that lay persons can detect lesions that are much smaller than the prevailing size of SCCA tumours.

Men who have sex with men experience low anxiety and few barriers to performing anal self or companion examinations: a qualitative study of the Prevent Anal Cancer Palpation Study

While rare in the larger population, anal cancer incidence is significantly higher in groups such as sexual minority men and people living with HIV. This qualitative analysis examined participants' experiences and perceptions of barriers to anal self-examination and anal companion examination through interviews completed as a part of a larger clinical trial. Interviews were conducted online with participants (n = 131) within a week of their baseline appointment between January 2020 and October 2021. Content analysis denoted participants' thoughts and perceptions about anal self-examination and anal companion examinations. Of the 131 cisgender men interviewed (mean age 49.9 years, SD 12.7), 92.4% identified as gay, 54.9% identified as white, 22.1% identified as Black, 19.9% identified as Latino, and 44.3% of participants were living with HIV. Participants did not report feelings of excessive anxiety when an abnormality was detected. However, three salient themes emerged as to why participants may not perform an anal self-examination or anal companion examination: (1) physical limitation(s), (2) potential sexualisation of the examination, and (3) level of comfort discussing anal health. Future work must continue to explore methods that not only decrease stigma surrounding anal health but also bolster feelings of accessibility to perform self and couple examinations.

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.

Digital Anal Rectal Examination Usage Among Individuals at Increased Risk for Anal Cancer

OBJECTIVE

Multiple organizations recommend an annual digital anal rectal examination (DARE) for people at highest risk for anal cancer. The authors assessed DARE usage among sexual minority men and transgender women.

METHODS

Community-recruited and asymptomatic individuals from a mid-sized US city were enrolled into the Prevent Anal Cancer Self-Swab Study, a longitudinal clinical trial of anal cancer screening. Self-reported data from the baseline survey were used to assess usage of DARE in the last year and during the lifetime. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and CIs for factors associated with each outcome were determined using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among 241 participants, median age was 46 years (interquartile range, 33-57 years), 27.0% were living with HIV, and 24.5% reported a previous diagnosis of anal warts. A total of 13.7% (95% CI = 9.4%-18.0%) of individuals reported a DARE in the previous year, whereas 53.9% (95% CI = 47.7%-60.2%) reported a DARE during the lifetime. The following were associated with a DARE in the previous year: increasing age (aOR = 1.04; 95% CI = 1.01-1.08 for each additional year), any previous anal cytology (aOR = 2.62; 95% CI = 1.19-5.80, compared with no previous test or no knowledge of a test), and preferred receptive position during anal sex (aOR = 4.93; 95% CI = 1.17-20.86 compared with insertive).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite guidelines recommending an annual DARE, it was uncommonly reported. There is an urgent need to understand barriers to conducting DARE among individuals most vulnerable to anal cancer and their health care providers.

Adherence to weekly anal self-examination among men who have sex with men for detection of anal syphilis

Background

Men who have sex with men (MSM) practicing exclusively receptive anal sex are more likely to present with secondary than primary syphilis, implying primary anorectal lesions may be missed. If men could detect anorectal lesions by regular anal self-examination, the duration of infectiousness could be reduced. This study aimed to examine adherence to weekly anal self-examination.

Method

We conducted a longitudinal feasibility study examining the adherence to weekly anal self-examinations among MSM attending a sexual health clinic in Melbourne, Australia between December 2020 and June 2021. Adherence to weekly anal self-examinations over 12 weeks was assessed from a logbook and 4-weekly surveys. Participants who identified abnormalities in their anus were recommended to seek medical review.

Results

Of the 30 men who completed the study, anal self-examination was performed at least weekly for 308 of 360 person-weeks (86% of the weeks, 95% CI: 82–89). The mean adherence was 3.6 (95% CI: 3.3–3.9) examinations per 4-weeks per person in Weeks 1–4, 3.5 (95% CI: 3.1–3.8) in Weeks 5–8 and 3.3 (95% CI: 2.9–3.7) in Weeks 9–12 (P_trend = 0.06). Six men (20%, 6/30) were seen for medical review after they identified abnormalities, whilst eight men (27%, 8/30) reported abnormalities, but did not seek medical review. No participants were diagnosed with syphilis during the study period.

Conclusion

We conclude that men adhered well to weekly anal self-examination. Therefore, it is feasible to trial this as a routine practice among MSM. Future studies should investigate possible reductions in adherence over time and ways to increase medical review for abnormalities that men find.

A cross-sectional survey on attitudes of men who have sex with men towards anal self-examination for detection of anal syphilis

Studies suggest men who have sex with men (MSM) practising receptive anal sex are more likely to present with secondary syphilis, implying primary anorectal lesions are likely to be missed. If men could detect anorectal lesions in the primary stage by regular anal self-examination (ASE), transmission could be reduced by early diagnosis and treatment. We aimed to explore the attitudes of MSM on performing ASE to detect primary anorectal syphilis. An online anonymous cross-sectional survey among MSM over 18 years of age living in Australia, was conducted between July and November 2020 and recruitment was from a sexual health clinic and social media. A total of 568 MSM completed the survey (median age: 34 [IQR 27–45]): 32% (183) had previously performed ASE. Among 66% (374) who had never performed ASE, 68% (250) would consider performing ASE in the future with a preferred median frequency of 2 times per 4 weeks (IQR 1–4), whilst men who were already performing ASE were performing it at median 1 per 4 weeks (IQR 0.2–3). Almost two-thirds of MSM who had never performed ASE were willing to adopt ASE practice in the future. Studies are required to determine the effectiveness of ASE for syphilis detection.

Anal Cancer Screening and Prevention: Summary of Evidence Reviewed for the 2021 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Sexually Transmitted Infection Guidelines

In June 2019 the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) convened an advisory group to assist in development of the 2021 CDC sexually transmitted infections (STI) guidelines. The advisory group on anal cancer screening and prevention met to formulate key questions in this field. The group examined published literature and abstracts to assess evidence and give recommendations for development of the CDC guidelines. This article summarizes key questions, evidence, recommendations, and areas for further research for the screening, diagnosis, and prevention of anal cancer.

Preferences of men who have sex with men for performing anal self-examination for the detection of anal syphilis in Australia: A discrete choice experiment

BACKGROUND

Regular anal self-examination could potentially reduce syphilis transmission by detecting anal syphilis earlier among men who have sex with men (MSM). This study aimed to examine the preferences of MSM on performing anal self-examination to detect anal syphilis.

METHODS

An online survey with a discrete choice experiment (DCE) was distributed to MSM attending a sexual health clinic and through social media in Australia between June and November 2020. The DCE examined the preferred attributes of anal self-examination that would encourage MSM to perform anal self-examination. Data were analysed using a random parameters logit (RPL) model.

FINDINGS

The median age of 557 MSM who completed the survey was 35 (inter quartile range, 27-45). The choice to perform anal self-examination was most influenced by two attributes: the accuracy of anal self-examination to diagnose anal syphilis, and the frequency of anal self-examination, followed by the type of instruction materials to perform anal self-examination, waiting time for medical review, and type of support received if abnormalities were found. Using the most preferred attributes, 98% of people would conduct anal self-examination compared with 35% when the least preferred anal self-examination attributes were offered.

INTERPRETATION

If anal self-examination were recommended for anal syphilis screening, it will be important to consider preferences of MSM: men were more likely to undertake anal self-examination if the frequency was once a month and there was higher accuracy of detecting anal syphilis.

FUNDING

Australian National Health And Medical Research Council.

Provider Preferences for Anal Cancer Prevention Screening: Results of the International Anal Neoplasia Society Survey

Objective

This study explores provider preferences regarding anal cancer screening indications, initiation age, tools, and referral threshold to high resolution anoscopy (HRA).

Methods

International Anal Neoplasia Society affiliates were invited to complete an online survey. Options for initiation age and tools were delineated by sub-groups. HRA referral thresholds separately queried recommendations by patient immune status.

Results

One hundred forty respondents participated. Although consensus was lacking with regard to specific screening initiation age, more respondents recommended younger initiation ages for men who have sex with men (MSM) living with HIV (LWH) compared with MSM not LWH (p < 0.01). “No age threshold” ranged 44-55% among sub-groups with lower genital tract disease. Cytology and digital anorectal exam (DARE) were the most frequently selected tools for all sub-groups (ranges 77-90% and 74-86%, respectively). HRA was recommended significantly more frequently for MSM LWH (58%) and patients with vulvar cancer (52%) compared to others (p < 0.01). “Any [test] abnormality” was more often selected as indication for HRA for immunocompromised (56%) and immunocompetent (46%) patients than a specific cytology test result (29%, 36% respectively).

Conclusion

Cytology and DARE were preferred screening tools; screening initiation age and HRA referral threshold showed less consensus. Evidence-based guidelines are needed and may lead to more consistent screening practices.

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.

Exploring the attitudes of men who have sex with men on anal self-examination for early detection of primary anorectal syphilis: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Studies show men who have sex with men (MSM) practising receptive anal sex are more likely to present with secondary syphilis, suggesting anorectal primary lesions are being missed. Regular anal self-examination might be able to detect anorectal syphilis lesions, hence potentially reducing transmission. This study aimed to explore the attitudes of MSM on performing anal self-examination to detect primary syphilis.

METHODS

In this qualitative study, 20 MSM over 18 years of age were purposively sampled from a sexual health clinic to participate in semi-structured interviews. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and data analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Four major themes and 12 sub-themes were generated from the study: (1) reasons for performing anal self-examination, (2) preferred educational resources for anal self-examination, (3) attitudes towards partner anal examination, and (4) acceptability of anal self-examination. Most participants had performed some form of anal self-examination in the past, and, just over half performed regularly for mostly health-related concerns. Most participants who infrequently or never performed anal self-examination were agreeable to perform regularly if it was recommended by health professionals with appropriate guidance. Participants preferred education on anal self-examination from health professionals and trusted online learning resources.

CONCLUSION

Our study showed MSM were agreeable to anal self-examination however would like to receive education and training to gain more confidence in conducting anal self-examination as a screening tool. Further studies are required to explore the adherence and acceptability of anal self-examination for syphilis prior to studies examining efficacy. The study provides foundation for any future policy aiming at utilising anal self-examination as a screening tool for syphilis among MSM.

Prevention and Screening of HPV Malignancies

It is estimated that 5% of the global cancer burden, or approximately 690,000 cancer cases annually, is attributable to human papillomavirus (HPV). Primary prevention through prophylactic vaccination is the best option for reducing the burden of HPV-related cancers. Most high-income countries (HICs) have introduced the HPV vaccine and are routinely vaccinating adolescent boys and girls. Unfortunately, although they suffer the greatest morbidity and mortality due to HPV-related cancers, many lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have been unable to initiate and sustain vaccination programs. Secondary prevention in the form of screening has led to substantial declines in cervical cancer incidence in areas with established screening programs, but LMICs with absent or inadequate screening programs have high incidence rates. Meanwhile, HICs have seen incidence rates of anal and oropharyngeal cancers rise owing to the limited availability of organized screening for anal cancer and no validated screening options for oropharyngeal cancer. The implementation of screening programs for individuals at high risk of these cancers has the potential to reduce the burden of cervical cancer in LMICs, of anal and oropharyngeal cancers in HICs, and of anal cancer for highly selected HIV+ populations in LMICs. This review will discuss primary prevention of HPV-related cancers through vaccination and secondary prevention through screening of cervical, anal, and oropharyngeal cancers. Areas of concern and highlights of successes already achieved are included.

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.

Anal Cancer and Anal Cancer Screening Knowledge, Attitudes, and Perceived Risk Among Women Living With HIV

OBJECTIVES

The aims of the study were (1) to describe anal cancer knowledge, perceived risk, screening barriers, and acceptability of sample self-collection among women living with HIV (WLWH) at an integrated safety-net system and (2) to describe differences in demographic and psychosocial variables among a subsample of WLWH with a history of abnormal cervical cytology results versus those with normal results.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted telephone surveys with English- and Spanish-speaking WLWH (N = 99) and used electronic health record data to extract insurance type, CD4+ cell count, RNA viral load, and cervical cytology results. We calculated descriptive statistics for participant demographics, HIV laboratory results, and psychosocial variables. Among the subsample of women who completed a recent cervical Pap, we used Fisher exact test to assess differences in demographic variables, CD4+ counts, RNA viral loads, knowledge, awareness, acceptability, and perceived risk by cervical cytology results.

RESULTS

Most participants (70%) reported knowing nothing about anal cancer; 28% correctly responded that HIV increases one's chance of getting anal cancer. Most (68%) never heard of an anal Pap test. Forty percent would get an anal Pap if they could self-collect the sample, whereas 59% were neutral or disagreed. The 2 most commonly cited barriers to obtaining an anal Pap were "I do not know enough about it" (n = 15) and "It might hurt" (n = 9).

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights a gap in knowledge and awareness among WLWH regarding their heightened risk for anal cancer. It indicates the need for health education and suggests an opportunity for a self-collection intervention.

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.

The Utility of Digital Anal Rectal Examinations in a Public Health Screening Program for Anal Cancer

OBJECTIVES

There are no uniform screening recommendations for anal cancer. Medical practice guidelines are now available on the use of Digital Anal Rectal Examinations (DARE) for the detection of anal cancer; however, because screening can result in more harm than benefit, our objective was to assess the evidence for use of DARE as a public health screening tool.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a current critical appraisal of anal cancer literature using World Health Organization criteria for assessing the potential utility of a public health screening program.

RESULTS

Digital Anal Rectal Examination satisfies most, but not all, World Health Organization criteria for a public health program that seeks to detect early invasive anal cancer in populations at high risk for anal cancer, most notably HIV-positive men who have sex with men; however, DARE is not appropriate when facilities for treatment are nonexistent. In addition, there are insufficient data on DARE sensitivity and specificity.

CONCLUSIONS

The mildly invasive nature of DARE, limited likelihood of adverse procedure-related events, cost-effectiveness and patient acceptability, as well as wide availability of DARE support consideration of its integration into screening for populations at high risk of anal cancer, especially HIV-positive men who have sex with men.

Incorporating digital anorectal examinations for anal cancer screening into routine HIV care for men who have sex with men living with HIV: a prospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Men who have sex with men (MSM) living with HIV have a high risk of anal cancer, which is often detected at late stages, when morbidity and mortality are high. The objective of this study was to describe the feasibility and challenges to incorporating regular digital anorectal examination (DARE) into routine HIV care for MSM living with HIV, from the perspective of patients, physicians and the health service.

METHODS

In 2014, we recruited 327 MSM living with HIV, aged 35 and above from one major sexual health centre (n = 187), two high HIV caseload general practices (n = 118) and one tertiary hospital (n = 22) in Melbourne, Australia. Men were followed up for two years and DARE was recommended at baseline, year 1 and year 2. Data were collected regarding patient and physician experience, and health service use. An ordered logit model was used to assess the relationship between sociodemographic factors and the number of DAREs performed.

RESULTS

Mean age of men was 51 (SD ± 9) years, 69% were Australian born, 32% current smokers, and mean CD4 was 630 (SD ± 265) cells per mm3 , with no significant differences between clinical sites. Overall, 232 (71%) men received all three DAREs, 71 (22%) received two DAREs, and 24 (7%) had one DARE. Adverse outcomes were rarely reported: anal pain (1.2% of total DAREs), bleeding (0.8%) and not feeling in control of their body during the examination (1.6%). Of 862 DAREs performed, 33 (3.8%) examinations resulted in a referral to a colorectal surgeon. One Stage 1 anal cancer was detected.

CONCLUSION

Incorporation of an early anal cancer detection programme into routine HIV clinical care for MSM living with HIV showed high patient acceptability, uncommon adverse outcomes and specialist referral patterns similar to other cancer screening programmes.

Trends in Risks for Second Primary Cancers Associated With Index Human Papillomavirus-Associated Cancers

IMPORTANCE

In the last 4 decades, survival among patients with human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated cancers has improved, while the incidence of these cancers has increased among younger cohorts. Among survivors of HPV-associated cancers, persistent HPV infection may remain a risk factor for preventable HPV-associated second primary cancers (HPV-SPCs).

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the risk of HPV-SPCs among survivors of HPV-associated index cancers and to test the hypothesis that the HPV-SPC risk among these persons has increased over the last 4 decades.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective cohort study of 9 cancer registries of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database was conducted to identify patients with HPV-associated (cervical, vaginal, vulvar, oropharyngeal, anal, and penile) cancers diagnosed from January 1, 1973, through December 31, 2014. The dates of analysis were July 1, 2017, to January 31, 2018.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The HPV-SPC risk was quantified by calculating standard incidence ratios (SIRs) and excess absolute risks (EARs) per 10 000 person-years at risk (PYR). The HPV-SPC risk by time was estimated using Poisson regression.

RESULTS

From 113 272 (73 085 female and 40 187 male) survivors of HPV-associated cancers, 1397 women and 1098 men developed HPV-SPCs. The SIRs for HPV-SPCs were 6.2 (95% CI, 5.9-6.6) among women and 15.8 (95% CI, 14.9-16.8) among men. The EARs were 18.2 per 10 000 PYR for women and 53.5 per 10 000 PYR for men. Among both women and men, those who had index oropharyngeal cancers had the highest HPV-SPC risk (SIR, 19.8 [95% CI, 18.4-21.4] and EAR, 80.6 per 10 000 PYR among women; SIR, 18.0 [95% CI, 16.9-19.1] and EAR, 61.5 per 10 000 PYR among men). Women who had index cervical cancers and men who had index anal cancers had the lowest HPV-SPC risk (SIR, 2.4 [95% CI, 2.2-2.7] and EAR, 4.5 per 10 000 PYR among women; SIR, 6.5 [95% CI, 4.7-8.8] and EAR, 18.5 per 10 000 PYR among men). Both women and men who had index HPV-associated cancers of any kind had a significantly higher risk of oropharyngeal HPV-SPCs. Over the last 4 decades, the risk of developing most types of HPV-SPCs after index cervical, vaginal, and vulvar cancers increased.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

According to this study, the HPV-SPC risk among survivors of HPV-associated cancers is significant, implying that persistent HPV infection at multiple sites may be associated with HPV-SPCs. These findings have the potential to inform surveillance recommendations for survivors of HPV-associated cancers.

A qualitative investigation among men who have sex with men on the acceptability of performing a self- or partner anal exam to screen for anal cancer

PURPOSE

Persistent infection with oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) is the primary cause of anal cancer, a disease that disproportionately affects men who have sex with men (MSM); however, there is no uniform screening protocol to detect anal cancer. This qualitative study explores whether a self-anal exam (SAE) or partner anal exam (PAE), that includes self-palpation or palpation of a partner's anal canal, is an acceptable and self-efficacious screening test, which will cue appropriate follow-up care in MSM.

METHODS

Twenty-four MSM living in Houston took part in four focus group sessions eliciting their responses to a study teaching them to perform an SAE or PAE (SAE/PAE). Participants were asked about the acceptability and feasibility of executing an SAE/PAE routinely. Thematic analysis of session transcripts was used to identify common patterns in participant responses.

RESULTS

Overall, participants expressed self-efficacy for performing an SAE/PAE and voiced a preference for being taught the procedure by a clinician. Participants agreed that they would consult with a clinician if they ever discovered an abnormality while performing an SAE/PAE. A lack of knowledge about anal cancer among MSM may present a barrier to adopting SAE/PAE. In discussing their experience of the exams, some participants suggested that it could become a routine practice for them.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that SAE and PAE, as a screen for anal cancer, are acceptable and feasible to MSM. Future research should explore attitudes and beliefs of MSM, with the aim of improving anal cancer education and understanding of pathologic findings.