Experiences of sexual and gender minority people living with multiple sclerosis in Northern California: An exploratory study

Diversity and representation within the literature on sexual dysfunction in multiple sclerosis: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Sexual dysfunction (SD) is a common and distressing symptom for people living with multiple sclerosis (MS). Populations included in existing studies of SD may not fully reflect the diversity of people living with MS, with important implications for wider applicability. We aimed to evaluate reporting of sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, and ethnicity across studies of SD in MS.

METHODS

A systematic search of four databases was performed. Two independent authors evaluated all papers. Reporting of sex and gender identity, sexual orientation, and ethnicity were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 419 papers were reviewed, and 204 studies with 77,902 participants met the criteria for evaluation. Of 204 studies, 98 (48.0%) included both male and female participants; 78 (38.2%) included females only, and 27 (13.2%) males only. In 19 (9.3%) studies, participants were asked their gender. No studies reported asking a two-step question on sex and gender identity. No studies reported including non-binary patients or gender identities other than male or female. No studies reported including intersex patients. Only 10 (4.9%) studies reported the inclusion of homosexual or bisexual participants, or participants from other sexual minority groups. The overwhelming majority of studies (181; 88.7%) did not report ethnicity or race of participants.

CONCLUSION

Sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, and ethnicity are poorly reported in studies on SD in MS. These variables must be adequately evaluated to ensure research applies across diverse MS patient populations.

Addressing LGBTQ+ health equity and disparities in multiple sclerosis: A call for research and action

Multiple sclerosis (MS) research has largely overlooked the experiences of the LGBTQ+ community, leaving significant gaps in understanding and addressing their unique health equity challenges. Despite widespread recognition of LGBTQ+ health disparities, particularly in neurology, research at the intersection of sexual orientation, gender identity, and MS remains limited. LGBTQ+ individuals encounter systemic barriers such as discrimination and lack of culturally competent care, exacerbating disparities in MS management and outcomes. Existing studies are scarce, highlighting the urgent need for increased funding and support for research initiatives. By prioritizing LGBTQ+ inclusivity in research, healthcare, and advocacy, we can strive for a more equitable future in MS care.

Pregnancy and reproductive health in women with multiple sclerosis: an update

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic immune-mediated, inflammatory, neuro-degenerative disease of the central nervous system, prevalent in women of reproductive age. Today, many women want to start a family after MS diagnosis. There are over 20 treatments for MS, and safely navigating family planning is important. We review updated information on family planning, preconception, and peri-partum considerations, and reproductive concerns in special populations with MS.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are no MS-related restrictions on any available and appropriate contraceptive method in women with MS. The question of MS and pregnancy outcomes following assisted reproduction, remains somewhat unsettled. In many studies, no elevated relapse risk is confirmed regardless of the type of fertility treatment. MRI status may offer better assessment of postpartum disease stability than relapse rate alone. Ongoing effective MS treatments during fertility assistance and before pregnancy, can further reduce the relapse risk. B-cell depleting therapies are emerging as safe and effective treatments for peripartum MS patients.

SUMMARY

Patients with MS should receive accurate support and counseling related to their reproductive options. The general outlook on pregnancy and MS remains positive. The ever-increasing therapeutic complexity of MS calls for ongoing education and updated guidance for neuroimmunology and obstetrics healthcare providers.

Neurological care for LGBT+ people

Sexual and gender minority (LGBT+) people face unique health disparities that must be considered by health-care providers to ensure equitable and inclusive care. Although traditionally LGBT+ health has not been integrated into neurology training, sexual orientation and gender identity have direct relevance to neurological health, driven by both systemic and interpersonal factors. In this Review, we summarize the evidence for associations between sexual orientation and gender identity with the prevalence and outcomes of various neurological conditions, including neurodegenerative diseases, epilepsy, stroke and neurodevelopmental disorders, among others. We describe important clinical considerations pertaining to LGBT+ people and recommend language and practices to promote inclusive care, as well as highlight gaps in need of further research and possible strategies to minimize these, including systematic collection of sexual orientation and gender identity and use of inclusive language.

Limitations and Future Directions in Sex, Sexuality, and Gender Diverse Research in Neurology

Sex, sexuality, and gender diversity is understudied and underserved in neurology. Neurology research inclusive of LGBTQIA+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, asexual) people is limited. Existing research struggles with a paucity of neurology studies collecting sex, sexuality, and gender diverse (SSGD) data, conflation of sex and gender, lack of precision in measures, neglect of younger and older populations, nebulous benefit to community, and absent intersectionality. Future directions in SSGD neurology research include precise and community-based measurements, respect for LGBTQIA+ colleagues, and the application of minority stress models. All patients stand to benefit from research that elucidates how SSGD variables influence neurological health. ANN NEUROL 2024;95:421-431.

Women's Health and Pregnancy in Multiple Sclerosis

Multiple sclerosis has a 3:1 female-to-male predominance and commonly presents in young adult women. The hormonal changes in women throughout their lifetime do affect the underlying pathology of multiple sclerosis, and the needs of women therefore change with age. Although multiple sclerosis does not adversely affect fertility or pregnancy, there are many factors to consider when caring for women throughout family planning, pregnancy, and the postpartum period. The care of these women and complex decisions regarding disease-modifying therapy use in family planning should be individualized and comprehensive.

Hormonal Therapies in Multiple Sclerosis: a Review of Clinical Data

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Given the potential for exogenous hormones to influence risk and course of MS, this narrative review aims to summarize current knowledge from observational and interventional studies of exogenous hormones in humans with MS.

RECENT FINDINGS

Large randomized clinical trials for combined oral contraceptives and estriol both show modest effect on inflammatory activity, with the latter showing potential neuroprotective effect. After fertility treatment, large actively treated cohorts have not confirmed any elevated risk of relapse. Preclinical data suggest that androgens, selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs), and selective androgen receptor modulators (SARMs) may be neuroprotective but clinical data are lacking. Gender affirming treatment, particularly estrogen in trans-women, could possibly be associated with elevated risk of inflammation. For women with MS entering menopause, hormone therapy appears safe during the appropriate menopausal window, but its long-term effects on neuroprotection are unknown. Exogenous hormones, used in varied doses and for diverse indications, have variable effects on MS risk, inflammatory activity, and neuroprotection. Large randomized trials are needed before it is possible to determine the true effect of exogenous hormones in a condition as complex as MS.

Podcast on the Challenges and Recommendations to Address Unmet Needs in MS for LGBTQ+ Populations in the United States

In general, individuals who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning, plus other identities (LGBTQ+) living with multiple sclerosis (MS) have less favorable healthcare experiences and poorer overall health than cisgendered heterosexual individuals. They may experience further challenges in addition to managing their MS, including psychological or emotional problems, and an increased risk of comorbid diseases and substance abuse. Transgender individuals specifically face additional unique challenges, including high rates of mental health distress and effects from long-term exogenous hormone use and gender affirmation surgery. These findings highlight disparities in both quality of care and health outcomes of LGBTQ+ individuals. Unmet needs and drivers of these disparities relate to a lack of inclusivity in healthcare environments, poor communication between healthcare professionals (HCPs) and LGBTQ+ patients, inadequate HCP knowledge of LGBTQ+ health issues, and gaps in research into the impact of sexual orientation and gender identity in MS. Although data are limited, recommendations to improve the experience and care of LGBTQ+ individuals with MS include increasing HCP awareness of the challenges LGBTQ+ individuals face and provision of inclusive care, with the overarching goal for HCPs to be allies to the LGBTQ+ community. Improvements may be achieved through diversity and cultural awareness training of HCPs on sexual orientation and gender identity, and ensuring a friendly, open, and supportive healthcare environment. Use of sensitive and gender-neutral language by HCPs, representation of LGBTQ+ individuals in patient materials, and access to LGBTQ+ MS support groups are also recommended. HCPs should aim to integrate discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity and sexual and mental health into routine assessments and collaborate with other HCPs as needed. By addressing the challenges and unmet needs of LGBTQ+ individuals with MS, this should help resolve disparities in their quality of care and improve their overall health.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the Multiple Sclerosis Community: A Call to Action

Many medical organizations have begun to confront the longstanding problem of inequalities in health care delivery and the undeniable effect of disparities on health outcomes. The Consortium of Multiple Sclerosis Centers (CMSC) recognizes that disparities affect the lives of many people with multiple sclerosis (MS) and acknowledges the need to address this as an organization. The CMSC recently (1) appointed a task force, (2) conducted a survey of its membership, (3) commissioned this review article and call to action, and (4) formulated a mission statement on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), which was adopted by the CMSC's Board of Governors in March 2023. This paper summarizes recent literature on health care disparities in MS, particularly those relating to race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, and gender identity. It presents findings from CMSC's survey of members' awareness of DEI issues, the need for education and resources for MS care providers, and existing institutional policies on DEI in the members' practice settings. It also presents the task force's recommendations for next steps, which includes the goal of greater diversity in the MS workforce of the future. The CMSC will continue to revisit DEI policies and practices over time with the goal of motivating greater awareness, momentum, and positive changes within the MS community.

social determinants of health in multiple sclerosis

Social determinants of health are the conditions in which people are born, grow, live, work and age. These circumstances are the non-medical factors that influence health outcomes. Evidence indicates that health behaviours, comorbidities and disease-modifying therapies all contribute to multiple sclerosis (MS) outcomes; however, our knowledge of the effects of social determinants — that is, the ‘risks of risks’ — on health has not yet changed our approach to MS. Assessing and addressing social determinants of health could fundamentally improve health and health care in MS; this approach has already been successful in improving outcomes in other chronic diseases. In this narrative Review, we identify and discuss the body of evidence supporting an effect of many social determinants of health, including racial background, employment and social support, on MS outcomes. It must be noted that many of the published studies were subject to bias, and screening tools and/or practical interventions that address these social determinants are, for the most part, lacking. The existing work does not fully explore the potential bidirectional and complex relationships between social determinants of health and MS, and the interpretation of findings is complicated by the interactions and intersections among many of the identified determinants. On the basis of the reviewed literature, we consider that, if effective interventions targeting social determinants of health were available, they could have substantial effects on MS outcomes. Therefore, funding for and focused design of studies to evaluate and address social determinants of health are urgently needed.

Here, the authors discuss the potential effects of social determinants of health on multiple sclerosis risk and outcomes. They suggest that addressing these determinants of health could substantially improve the lives of individuals with multiple sclerosis and call for more research.

Addressing an individual’s social determinants of health — that is, the conditions under which they are born, grow, live, work and age — could provide opportunities to reduce the burden of living with multiple sclerosis (MS).

Individual factors that may influence MS-related outcomes include sex, gender and sexuality, race and ethnicity, education and employment, socioeconomic status, and domestic abuse.

Societal infrastructures, including access to food, health care and social support, can also affect MS-related outcomes.

Awareness of the specific circumstances of a patient with MS might help neurologists deliver better care.

Social determinants of health are not static and can change according to wider sociopolitical contexts, as highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Rigorous studies of interventions to ameliorate the effects of poor social determinants on people with MS are urgently needed.