Health-related quality of life by human immunodeficiency virus status in a cross-sectional survey of gay and bisexual prostate cancer survivors

A clinical overview of people living with HIV and genitourinary cancer care

The number of people living with HIV infection has been increasing globally. Administration of antiretroviral therapy is effective in controlling the infection for most patients and, as a consequence, people living with HIV (PLWH) now often have a long life expectancy. However, their risk of developing cancer - most notably virus-related cancers - has been increasing. To date, few studies have assessed the risk of genitourinary cancers in PLWH, and robust scientific data on their treatment-related outcomes are lacking. Previous studies have noted that PLWH are at a reduced risk of prostate cancer; however, low adoption and/or availability of prostate cancer screening among these patients might be confounding the validity of this finding. In genitourinary cancers, advanced stage at diagnosis and reduced cancer-specific mortality have been reported in PLWH. These data likely reflect, at least in part, the inequity of health care access for PLWH. Notably, systemic chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy could decrease total CD4+ cell counts, which could, therefore, increase the risk of morbidity and mortality from cancer treatments in PLWH. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have become the therapeutic backbone for many advanced malignancies in the general population; however, most studies validating their efficacy have excluded PLWH owing to concerns of severe adverse effects from immune checkpoint inhibitors themselves and/or related to their immunosuppressed status. To our knowledge, no genitourinary cancer survivorship programme exists that specifically caters to the needs of PLWH. By including PLWH in ongoing cancer trials, we can gain invaluable insights that will help to improve cancer care specifically for PLWH.

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

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

Prevalence and Risk Factors for Sexually Transmitted Infections in Gay and Bisexual Prostate Cancer Survivors: Results From the Restore-2 Study

Background

Equitable cancer survivorship care for gay and bisexual male (GBM) prostate cancer survivors should be responsive to their sexual health needs. Rates of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are higher among GBM compared to heterosexual men across the lifespan. In addition, evidence suggests that GBM will use a variety of strategies to cope with sexual dysfunction that may increase risk for STIs. The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of STIs following prostate cancer treatment among GBM and identify risk factors.

Methods

In 2019, 401 GBM previously treated for prostate cancer were recruited into the Restore-2 Study. They completed a baseline online questionnaire with items assessing STIs diagnosed since being treated for prostate cancer. Any STI diagnoses was regressed on demographic, clinical, and relationship related variables using binary logistic regression.

Results

Forty-five participants (11.4%) were diagnosed with an STI during or following their prostate cancer treatment. The mostly commonly diagnosed STI was syphilis (4.3%), followed by gonorrhoea (2.8%), and chlamydia (2.5%). Four participants were infected with HIV following their prostate cancer treatment. Independent risk factors for STI diagnosis included time since prostate cancer diagnosis (aOR = 1.18; 95% CI: 1.10-1.26), nonmonogamous sexual relationship (aOR = 11.23; 95% CI: 2.11-59.73), better sexual function (aOR = 1.02; 95% CI: 1.01-1.04), penile injection treatment (aOR = 3.28; 95% CI: 1.48-7.29), and multiple sex partners (aOR = 5.57; 95% CI: 1.64-18.96).

Conclusions

GBM prostate cancer survivors are at risk for STIs. Culturally responsive STI prevention should be incorporated into cancer survivorship plans, particularly as men are treated for and regain sexual function over time.

Racial/Ethnic Differences in Health-Related Quality of Life Among Gay and Bisexual Prostate Cancer Survivors

Introduction

Prostate cancer treatment has established effects on the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of patients. While racial/ethnic differences in HRQOL have been explored in heterosexual patients, this is the first study to examine racial/ethnic differences in a cohort of sexual minority prostate cancer survivors.

Methods

We used data from the Restore-1 study, an online cross-sectional survey of sexual and gender minority (SGM) prostate cancer survivors in North America, to explore the association between race/ethnicity and HRQOL. General mental and physical HRQOL was assessed using the Short-Form Health Survey version 2 (SF-12). The frequency and distress of prostate cancer specific symptoms was assessed using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Composite (EPIC) scale. Multivariable linear regression was used to estimate mean differences in HRQOL between sexual minority men of color and their white, non-Hispanic counterparts after adjustment for pertinent demographic and medical characteristics.

Results

Among 190 participants, 23 (12%) self-identified as non-white and/or Hispanic. In unadjusted analysis, sexual minority men of color compared to their white counterparts reported worse HRQOL scores in the EPIC hormonal summary (73.8 vs. 81.8) and hormonal function (70.9 vs 80.5) domains. Clinically important differences between men of color and their white counterparts were seen in the EPIC bowel function (mean difference (MD): -4.5, 95% CI: -9.9, 0.8), hormonal summary (MD: -8.0, 95% CI: -15.6, -0.4), hormonal function (MD: -9.6, 95% CI: -17.6, -1.6), and hormonal bother (MD: -6.7, 95% CI: -14.4, 1.1) domains. After adjustment for covariates, clinically important differences persisted between men of color and white, non-Hispanic men on the hormonal summary (74.4 vs. 81.7), hormonal function (71.3 vs. 80.3), and hormonal bother (77.0 vs. 82.7) domains.

Conclusions

This exploratory study provides the first evidence that sexual minority men of color may have worse HRQOL outcomes compared to white, non-Hispanic sexual minority men following prostate cancer treatment.

Addressing urologic health disparities in sexual and gender minority communities through patient-centered outcomes research

Sexual and gender minority (SGM) communities face stigma and discrimination that impact all aspects of health. To better understand and improve their urologic health outcomes, we must study SGM patients as a distinct population and pursue research on outcomes identified as priorities to SGM communities. Patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) is a methodology which is increasingly familiar to urologists and is crucial to adequately addressing SGM health in future urological research. We review existing literature focused on urologic outcomes of SGM populations and highlight specific PCOR initiatives built on SGM community engagement.

Every urologist and oncologist should know about treating sexual and gender minority prostate cancer patients: translating research findings into clinical practice

In 2016, the NIH designated sexual and gender minorities (SGM) a health disparity population. The next year, the American Society of Clinical Oncology highlighted the need to improve the suboptimal cancer and survivorship care received by SGM populations. There are currently no evidence-based training programs in culturally competent care of prostate cancer patients who are gay, bisexual and/or transgender. In this selective review, we summarize findings from the largest quantitative studies focused on sexual minority prostate cancer survivors and from 65 interviews with NIH staff, clinicians, and cancer clinics in 11 US cities. The report is divided into three parts and uses a question and answer format to address 21 questions relevant to clinicians providing care to SGM prostate cancer patients. First, we identify population-specific issues that are culturally relevant in the care of SGM patients with prostate cancer. While a body of research has emerged on sexual minority prostate cancer patients, the literature on gender minorities is limited to single case reports and inadequate to inform practice. This review covers definitions, population size, cultural and historical context, sexual behavior, population invisibility, sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) in the electronic medical record, disparities and evidence of discrimination in treatment provision. The second part focuses on promoting evidence-informed, patient-centered care. This includes current practices in assessing sexual orientation, management of disclosure of sexual orientation, how to address common problems sexual minority men experience post-treatment, common questions sexual minority patients have, management of urinary incontinence, HIV and STI risk during and post-treatment, and sub-groups of sexual minority patients with worse outcomes. It then identifies how male partners differ in prostate cancer support, current research on rehabilitation for sexual minority men, issues in advanced prostate cancer, and things to avoid with minority patients. Finally, we examine the cultural divide between provider and patient, advocating for cultural humility when working with minority patients. Training programs and continuing education can help providers both to become more aware of their own cultural assumptions, informed about health disparities, and able to provide quality care, and to make clinics more welcoming to SGM patients.

Health outcomes of sexual and gender minorities after cancer: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Cancer research on sexual and gender minority (SGM) populations is gaining momentum. The purpose of this systematic review was to examine what is currently known in the research literature regarding patient-reported health outcomes after cancer treatment among SGM populations.

METHODS

In March 2021, a medical librarian conducted a systematic keyword search on PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO, ClinicalTrials.gov , and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The primary inclusion criterion was assessment of at least one physical, psychosocial, emotional, or functional patient-reported health outcome related to the impacts of cancer diagnosis and/or treatment. Articles that met inclusion criteria were reviewed in their entirety, charted in a Word Table, and assessed for quality. Quality considerations included study design, sampling approach, diversity of sample, measures used, and analytic procedures. Studies were synthesized based on type of cancer study participants experienced.

RESULTS

Sixty-four studies were included in the final analysis: most were quantitative, secondary analyses or cross-sectional studies with convenience samples, and focused on people with a history of breast or prostate cancer. Differences between sexual minority men and women in terms of coping and resilience were noted. Few studies reported on experiences of transgender persons and none reported on experiences of intersex persons.

CONCLUSIONS

A growing literature describes the patient-reported health outcomes of SGM people with a history of cancer. This study summarizes important between-group differences among SGM and heterosexual, cisgender counterparts that are critical for clinicians to consider when providing care.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Sexual orientation and gender identity are relevant to cancer survivors' health outcomes. Subgroups of SGM people have differential experiences and outcomes related to cancer and its impacts.

Health outcomes of sexual and gender minorities after cancer: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Cancer research on sexual and gender minority (SGM) populations is gaining momentum. The purpose of this systematic review was to examine what is currently known in the research literature regarding patient-reported health outcomes after cancer treatment among SGM populations.

METHODS

In March 2021, a medical librarian conducted a systematic keyword search on PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO, ClinicalTrials.gov , and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The primary inclusion criterion was assessment of at least one physical, psychosocial, emotional, or functional patient-reported health outcome related to the impacts of cancer diagnosis and/or treatment. Articles that met inclusion criteria were reviewed in their entirety, charted in a Word Table, and assessed for quality. Quality considerations included study design, sampling approach, diversity of sample, measures used, and analytic procedures. Studies were synthesized based on type of cancer study participants experienced.

RESULTS

Sixty-four studies were included in the final analysis: most were quantitative, secondary analyses or cross-sectional studies with convenience samples, and focused on people with a history of breast or prostate cancer. Differences between sexual minority men and women in terms of coping and resilience were noted. Few studies reported on experiences of transgender persons and none reported on experiences of intersex persons.

CONCLUSIONS

A growing literature describes the patient-reported health outcomes of SGM people with a history of cancer. This study summarizes important between-group differences among SGM and heterosexual, cisgender counterparts that are critical for clinicians to consider when providing care.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Sexual orientation and gender identity are relevant to cancer survivors' health outcomes. Subgroups of SGM people have differential experiences and outcomes related to cancer and its impacts.

Prostate cancer and sexual consequences among men who have sex with men

Prostate cancer and its treatment frequently lead to sexual side effects that negatively impact personal identity, sexual function, and intimate relationships. The sexual consequences of prostate cancer treatment on men who have sex with men (MSM) differ in some ways from what is observed in heterosexual men. This review summarizes literature from the past two decades exploring how MSM are affected by, and adapt to, prostate cancer treatment. The evidence on whether prostate cancer has a lower prevalence in MSM is unclear but lower screening rates are well-documented within this population. Prostate cancer treatment affects urinary, bowel, and sexual function in both MSM and heterosexual men. These changes may have different sexual and psychological ramifications in MSM when compared to heterosexual men. A common concern among MSM treated for prostate cancer is absence of support, both from the medical profession and in some cases from their own communities. Many MSM with prostate cancer have developed coping strategies and altered sexual practices to accommodate side effects. Lessons learned from this population may have relevance to sexual wellness in non-MSM prostate cancer survivors. Concise recommendations for caring for MSM with prostate cancer are provided.

Increased risk of mortality and readmission associated with lower SF-12 scores in cardiac patients: Results from the national DenHeart study

BACKGROUND

The SF-12v2 health survey (SF-12) is widely used as a generic measure of health-related quality of life. However, interpretation of score differences can be difficult.

AIM

To estimate benchmarks for interpretation of score differences on the SF-12 for readmission and all-cause mortality in cardiac patients.

METHODS

Data from the DenHeart study, a national cross-sectional survey including one year follow-up register data, were used. Patients with ischaemic heart disease, arrhythmia, heart failure and heart valve disease answered the survey at hospital discharge. Cox proportional hazards models were used to regress readmission and all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 10,813 cardiac patients completed the SF-12. For patients with ischaemic heart disease and arrhythmia, a one point lower physical component summary score was associated with a 2% increase in risk in readmission (hazard ratio (HR) 1.022 (95% confidence interval 1.017;1.027) and HR 1.024 (1.018; 1.029), respectively) and a 3% increase in risk for patients with heart failure (HR 1.027 (1.015; 1.038)). A one point lower mental component summary score was associated with a 2% increase in the risk of readmission (HR 1.017 (1.013; 1.022)) across diagnoses. For both the physical and mental component summary score, a one point lower score meant a 5% increase in the risk of all-cause mortality (HR 1.046 (1.031; 1.060) and HR 1.046 (1.029; 1.065), respectively) across diagnoses.

CONCLUSION

In a large group of cardiac patients, a one point lower physical or mental component summary score was associated with an up to 3% increased risk of readmission and a 5% increased risk of mortality in the first year after discharge.