Prostate Cancer Incidence under Androgen Deprivation: Nationwide Cohort Study in Trans Women Receiving Hormone Treatment

Tumors, Treatments, and Trust: Cancer Characteristics, Outcomes, and Screening Uptake in Transgender and Gender-Diverse Patients

BACKGROUND

More than 2.5 million adults in the United States identify as transgender or gender-diverse (TGD), but little data exist on cancer screening and care for this population. We examined cancer characteristics, screening adherence, genetic testing, and provider inclusive language for TGD patients with cancer.

METHODS

This single institution retrospective cohort study identified TGD patients with cancer between 2000 and 2022. Demographic, clinicopathological, treatment, and screening data were collected, as well as data on gender-affirming care (GAC) and use of patients' personal pronouns in medical records. Descriptive statistics and regression analyses were used to report outcomes.

RESULTS

Sixty unique patients with 69 cancer diagnoses were included: 63.3% were transgender women, 21.7% transgender men, 6.7% nonbinary, and 8.3% were genderqueer. Sixty-five percent had a family history of cancer. Only 46.2% of those who met genetic testing criteria were referred. On review of recommended cancer screening, colorectal screening had the greatest uptake (62%), followed by breast (48.3%), lung (35.7%), cervical (33.3%), and prostate (32%); 8.5% of cancers were diagnosed on screening. Individuals with Medicare had reduced odds of screening uptake (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01-0.58) versus private insurance. With respect to GAC, 73.3% used gender-affirming hormone therapy and 41% had gender-affirming surgery. After initiating GAC and asserting personal pronouns, 75% were referred to by incorrect name/pronouns in provider documentation.

CONCLUSIONS

Our TGD cancer patient cohort had low rates of disease-specific cancer screening and inadequate genetic referrals. Many providers did not use appropriate patient names/pronouns. Provider and patient interventions are needed to ensure inclusive preventative and oncologic care for this marginalized population.

Cancer in people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or gender-nonconforming

BACKGROUND

Individuals who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, or gender-nonconforming (LGBTQ+) experience discrimination and minority stress that may lead to elevated cancer risk.

METHODS

In the absence of population-based cancer occurrence information for this population, this article comprehensively examines contemporary, age-adjusted cancer risk factor and screening prevalence using data from the National Health Interview Survey, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, and National Youth Tobacco Survey, and provides a literature review of cancer incidence and barriers to care.

RESULTS

Lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults are more likely to smoke cigarettes than heterosexual adults (16% compared to 12% in 2021-2022), with the largest disparity among bisexual women. For example, 34% of bisexual women aged 40-49 years and 24% of those 50 and older smoke compared to 12% and 11%, respectively, of heterosexual women. Smoking is also elevated among youth who identify as lesbian, gay, or bisexual (4%) or transgender (5%) compared to heterosexual or cisgender (1%). Excess body weight is elevated among lesbian and bisexual women (68% vs. 61% among heterosexual women), largely due to higher obesity prevalence among bisexual women (43% vs. 38% among lesbian women and 33% among heterosexual women). Bisexual women also have a higher prevalence of no leisure-time physical activity (35% vs. 28% among heterosexual women), as do transgender individuals (30%-31% vs. 21%-25% among cisgender individuals). Heavier alcohol intake among lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals is confined to bisexual women, with 14% consuming more than 7 drinks/week versus 6% of heterosexual women. In contrast, prevalence of cancer screening and risk reducing vaccinations in LGBTQ+ individuals is similar to or higher than their heterosexual/cisgender counterparts except for lower cervical and colorectal cancer screening among transgender men.

CONCLUSIONS

People within the LGBTQ+ population have a higher prevalence of smoking, obesity, and alcohol consumption compared to heterosexual and cisgender people, suggesting a higher cancer burden. Health systems have an opportunity to help inform these disparities through the routine collection of information on sexual orientation and gender identity to facilitate cancer surveillance and to mitigate them through education to increase awareness of LGBTQ+ health needs.

Incidence of prostate cancer in transgender women in the US: a large database analysis

The risk of prostate cancer among transgender women undergoing medical and surgical gender-affirming interventions remains unclear, though up to a fivefold decreased risk has been reported in comparison to cisgender men. In this study, we conducted a comparative analysis of the risk of prostate cancer among transgender women (TW) using data from TriNetX, a large database, versus SEER. Our findings indicate that, overall, transgender women exhibited a 2.56-fold lower risk of prostate cancer compared to cisgender men. Specifically, among TW on hormone therapy between ages 50-64, we observed a 2.06-fold decrease in risk. Contrary to the previous perception of prostate cancer being rare in transgender women, our study suggests that it may not be as uncommon as previously believed.

Prostate Cancer Screening Uptake in Transgender Women

Importance

There is no consensus in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening guidelines regarding transgender women despite their known prostate cancer risk.

Objective

To identify factors associated with recent (within the last 2 years) PSA screening in transgender women compared with cisgender men.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This case-control study used data from the 2018 and 2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) surveys to characterize rates of PSA screening for prostate cancer within the past 2 years and multivariable logistic regressions to characterize factors associated with recent screening among transgender women. The BRFSS program of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention annually surveys over 400 000 US adults on behavioral risk factors, chronic illnesses, and use of preventive services. Respondents to the BRFSS who were cisgender men or transgender women 40 years or older and who had complete PSA testing responses and no prostate cancer history were included; 313 transgender women and 138 937 cisgender men met inclusion criteria. Matching was performed by age, race and ethnicity, educational level, employment, annual income, survey year, and cost barriers to care. Data were collected on November 2, 2022, and analyzed from November 2, 2022, to December 3, 2023.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Rates of and factors associated with recent PSA screening in transgender women.

Results

Among the 1275 participants included in the matched cohort (255 transgender women and 1020 cisgender men; 570 [44.7%] aged 55-69 years), recent PSA screening rates among transgender women and cisgender men aged 55 to 69 were 22.2% (n = 26) and 36.3% (n = 165), respectively; among those 70 years and older, these rates were 41.8% (n = 26) and 40.2% (n = 98), respectively. In the matched cohort, transgender women had lower univariable odds of recent screening than cisgender men (odds ratio [OR], 0.65 [95% CI, 0.46-0.92]; P = .02). In a hierarchical regression analysis adding time since the last primary care visit, effect size and significance were unchanged (OR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.42-0.87]; P = .007). After adding whether a clinician recommended a PSA test, there was no statistically significant difference in odds of screening between transgender women and cisgender men (OR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.45-1.27]; P = .21). The results were further attenuated when clinician-led discussions of PSA screening advantages and disadvantages were added (OR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.47-1.31]; P = .32). In a multivariable logistic regression among transgender women, having a recommendation for PSA testing was the factor with the strongest association with recent screening (OR, 12.40 [95% CI, 4.47-37.80]; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this case-control study of one of the largest cohorts of transgender women studied regarding PSA screening, the findings suggest that access to care or sociodemographic factors were not principal drivers of the screening differences between transgender women and cisgender men; rather, these data underscore the clinician's role in influencing PSA screening among transgender women.

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.

Position paper of the Italian association of medical oncology on health disparities among transgender and gender-diverse people: the Assisi recommendations

Transgender and gender-diverse individuals experience substantial health disparities across the cancer care continuum. Despite well recognized unique healthcare needs, there are barriers in accessing cancer prevention and treatment services, influenced by disadvantages in key social-economic determinants of health which result in worse clinical outcomes, as compared to the general population. The Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) acknowledges the critical relevance of this issue. The "Assisi Recommendations" here summarize the outcomes of the "AIOM Oncology Ethics Day" dedicated to gender differences in oncology and cancer care of transgender and gender-diverse people. The recommendations generated during a 2-day multidisciplinary discussion address the various aspects of cancer care experience of transgender and gender-diverse people. The promotion of research in this field, through the generation of new evidence and the collection of prospective data, has been identified as a priority action to mitigate these disparities. By acknowledging the challenges of cancer care in transgender and gender-diverse people and recognizing the need for dedicated policy and clinical recommendations, AIOM demonstrates its commitment to improving the health and well-being of all patients with cancer, regardless of their gender identity or any other personal or social circumstances, as part of health-for-all societal vision.

A Urologist's Guide to Caring for Transgender and Gender Diverse Patients

Urologists are experts in the fields of genital and pelvic anatomy, sexual health and reproductive medicine. As such, a working understanding of urologic conditions relevant to transgender and gender diverse patients should be expected within their scope of practice. Herein, we describe an introductory framework for general urologists to grow their knowledge of the appropriate terminology, anatomy, and basic tenets of gender-affirming care to better manage the urologic needs of transgender and gender diverse patients.

Cancer screening and management in the transgender population: Review of literature and special considerations for gender affirmation surgery

BACKGROUND

Literature focused on cancer screening and management is lacking in the transgender population.

AIM

To action to increase contributions to the scientific literature that drives the creation of cancer screening and management protocols for transgender and gender nonconforming (TGNC) patients.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of PubMed on January 5th, 2022, with the following terms: "TGNC", OR "transgender", OR "gender non-conforming", OR "gender nonbinary" AND "cancer screening", AND "breast cancer", AND "cervical cancer", AND "uterine cancer", AND "ovarian cancer", AND "prostate cancer", AND "testicular cancer", AND "surveillance", AND "follow-up", AND "management". 70 unique publications were used. The findings are discussed under "Screening" and "Management" categories.

RESULTS

Screening: Current cancer screening recommendations default to cis-gender protocols. However, long-term gender-affirming hormone therapy and loss to follow-up from the gender-specific specialties contribute to a higher risk for cancer development and possible delayed detection. The only known screening guidelines made specifically for this population are from the American College of Radiology for breast cancer. Management: Prior to undergoing Gender Affirmation Surgery (GAS), discussion should address cancer screening and management in the organs remaining in situ. Cancer treatment in this population requires consideration for chemotherapy, radiation, surgery and/or reconstruction. Modification of hormone therapy is decided on a case-by-case basis. The use of prophylactic vs aesthetic techniques in surgery is still debated.

CONCLUSION

When assessing transgender individuals for GAS, a discussion on the future oncologic risk of the sex-specific organs remaining in situ is essential. Cancer management in this population requires a multidisciplinary approach while the care should be highly individualized with considerations to social, medical, surgical and gender affirming surgery related specifications. Special considerations have to be made during planning for GAS as surgery will alter the anatomy and may render the organ difficult to sample for screening purposes. A discussion with the patient regarding the oncologic risk of remaining organs is imperative prior to GAS. Other special considerations to screening such as the conscious or unconscious will to unassociated with their remaining organs is also a key point to address. We currently lack high quality studies pertinent to the cancer topic in the gender affirmation literature. Further research is required to ensure more comprehensive and individualized care for this population.

Sexual health and treatment-related sexual dysfunction in sexual and gender minorities with prostate cancer

Prostate cancer treatment has substantial effects on sexual health and function. Sexual function is a vital aspect of human health and a critical component of cancer survivorship, and understanding the potential effects of different treatment modalities on sexual health is crucial. Existing research has extensively described the effects of treatment on male erectile tissues necessary for heterosexual intercourse; however, evidence regarding their effects on sexual health and function in sexual and gender minority populations is minimal. These groups include sexual minority - gay and bisexual - men, and transgender women or trans feminine people in general. Such unique effects in these groups might include altered sexual function in relation to receptive anal and neovaginal intercourse and changes to patients' role-in-sex. Sexual dysfunctions following prostate cancer treatment affecting quality of life in sexual minority men include climacturia, anejaculation, decreased penile length, erectile dysfunction, and problematic receptive anal intercourse, including anodyspareunia and altered pleasurable sensation. Notably, clinical trials investigating sexual outcomes after prostate cancer treatment do not collect sexual orientation and gender identity demographic data or outcomes specific to members of these populations, which perpetuates the uncertainty regarding optimal management. Providing clinicians with a solid evidence base is essential to communicate recommendations and tailor interventions for sexual and gender minority patients with prostate cancer.

Skin cancer incidence in transgender individuals receiving gender-affirming hormone treatment: a nationwide cohort study in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

Development of skin cancer, in particular melanoma, has been linked to sex hormones. We aimed to determine the incidence of skin cancer in transgender individuals receiving gender-affirming hormone treatment (GAHT).

METHODS

In this nationwide retrospective cohort study, clinical information of participants who visited our clinic between (the years) 1972 and 2018 and received GAHT was integrated with national pathology and cancer statistics data in order to assess skin cancer incidence. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) were calculated.

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 2,436 trans women and 1,444 trans men. The median age at the start of GAHT was 31 years (IQR 24-42) in trans women and 24 years (IQR 20-32) in trans men. The median follow-up time for trans women was 8 years (IQR 3-18) with a total follow-up time of 29,152 years and 4 years (IQR 2-12) with a total follow-up time of 12,469 years for trans men. Eight trans women were diagnosed with melanoma (SIR 1.80 [95% CI 0.83-3.41] vs. all men; SIR 1.40 [0.65-2.65] vs. all women), and seven developed squamous cell carcinoma (SIR 0.78 [0.34-1.55] vs. all men; SIR 1.15 [0.50-2.27] vs. all women). Two trans men developed melanoma (SIR 1.05 [0.18-3.47] vs. all men; SIR 0.77 [0.14-2.70] vs. all women).

CONCLUSIONS

GAHT did not appear to affect skin cancer incidence in this large cohort of transgender individuals. As skin cancer incidence increases with age and the proportion of elderly subjects is currently limited in this cohort, it will be worthwhile to repeat this analysis in the future.

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.

Gender-affirming hormonal therapy for transgender and gender-diverse people-A narrative review

As the number of transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) people accessing gender-affirming care increases, the need for healthcare professionals (HCPs) providing gender-affirming hormonal therapy (GAHT) also increases. This chapter provides an overview of the HCPs interested in getting involved in providing GAHT.

Analysis of Mortality Among Transgender and Gender Diverse Adults in England

IMPORTANCE

Limited prior research suggests that transgender and gender diverse (TGD) people may have higher mortality rates than cisgender people.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate overall and cause-specific mortality among TGD persons compared with cisgender persons.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This population-based cohort study used data from general practices in England contributing to the UK's Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD and Aurum databases. Transfeminine (assigned male at birth) and transmasculine (assigned female at birth) individuals were identified using diagnosis codes for gender incongruence, between 1988 and 2019, and were matched to cisgender men and women according to birth year, practice, and practice registration date and linked to the Office of National Statistics death registration. Data analysis was performed from February to June 2022.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Cause-specific mortality counts were calculated for categories of disease as defined by International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision chapters. Overall and cause-specific mortality rate ratios (MRRs) were estimated using Poisson models, adjusted for index age, index year, race and ethnicity, Index of Multiple Deprivation, smoking status, alcohol use, and body mass index.

RESULTS

A total of 1951 transfeminine (mean [SE] age, 36.90 [0.34] years; 1801 White [92.3%]) and 1364 transmasculine (mean [SE] age, 29.20 [0.36] years; 1235 White [90.4%]) individuals were matched with 68 165 cisgender men (mean [SE] age, 33.60 [0.05] years; 59 136 White [86.8%]) and 68 004 cisgender women (mean [SE] age, 33.50 [0.05] years; 57 762 White [84.9%]). The mortality rate was 528.11 deaths per 100 000 person-years (102 deaths) for transfeminine persons, 325.86 deaths per 100 000 person-years (34 deaths) for transmasculine persons, 315.32 deaths per 100 000 person-years (1951 deaths) for cisgender men, and 260.61 deaths per 100 000 person-years (1608 deaths) for cisgender women. Transfeminine persons had a higher overall mortality risk compared with cisgender men (MRR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.06-1.68) and cisgender women (MRR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.27-2.01). For transmasculine persons, the overall MMR was 1.43 (95% CI, 0.87-2.33) compared with cisgender men and was 1.75 (95% CI, 1.08-2.83) compared with cisgender women. Transfeminine individuals had lower cancer mortality than cisgender women (MRR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.32-0.83) but an increased risk of external causes of death (MRR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.05-3.50). Transmasculine persons had higher mortality from external causes of death than cisgender women (MRR, 2.77; 95% CI, 1.15-6.65). Compared with cisgender men, neither transfeminine nor transmasculine adults had a significantly increased risk of deaths due to external causes.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cohort study of primary care data, TGD persons had elevated mortality rates compared with cisgender persons, particularly for deaths due to external causes. Further research is needed to examine how minority stress may be contributing to deaths among TGD individuals to reduce mortality.

Gender-affirming hormone therapy, mental health, and surgical considerations for aging transgender and gender diverse adults

As the transgender and gender diverse (TGD) population ages, more transfeminine and transmasculine individuals present to clinic to initiate or continue their gender-affirming care at older ages. Currently available guidelines on gender-affirming care are excellent resources for the provision of gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT), primary care, surgery, and mental health care but are limited in their scope as to whether recommendations require tailoring to older TGD adults. Data that inform guideline-recommended management considerations, while informative and increasingly evidence-based, mainly come from studies of younger TGD populations. Whether results from these studies, and therefore recommendations, can or should be extrapolated to aging TGD adults remains to be determined. In this perspective review, we acknowledge the lack of data in older TGD adults and discuss considerations for evaluating cardiovascular disease, hormone-sensitive cancers, bone health and cognitive health, gender-affirming surgery, and mental health in the older TGD population on GAHT.

Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening in Transgender Patients

CONTEXT

Approximately 0.4-1.3% of the worldwide population is transgender. Although the exact prevalence is unknown, there is an increase in open identification as transgender. Among transgender women (TW), the prostate is retained even after gender-affirmation surgery, thus necessitating ongoing screening for prostate cancer (CaP). However, little is known about CaP screening in this population.

OBJECTIVE

To assess our current understanding of CaP incidence and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening in TW.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We performed a nonsystematic narrative review of all PubMed publications through June 2022 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. Given the limited primary research on this subject, case reports were also included. Studies were reviewed to understand PSA screening practices and reports of CaP in this population, as applicable.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

There is no consensus regarding PSA screening in TW from any of the major societies, and TW are largely absent from guidelines. Case report data suggest that TW with CaP may have more aggressive disease, and these cancers may have been pre-existing prior to present before gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT) or be castrate-resistant.

CONCLUSIONS

We are in the infancy of our understanding of PSA screening in TW. Important avenues for future research include understanding the risks/benefits of PSA screening in TW, how best to mitigate potential negative psychological effects of PSA screening in TW, establishing baseline PSA values for those on GAHT (and determining what values should be considered "elevated"), establishing when to initiate PSA screening for those on GAHT, and establishing the accuracy of biomarkers for those undergoing GAHT.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We examined patterns of prostate cancer screening for transgender women. Little is known about prostate cancer incidence or screening in this population. Additional research is needed to establish guidelines for screening in this population.

Prostate Cancer in Male-to-Female Transgender Individuals: Histopathologic Findings and Association With Gender-affirming Hormonal Therapy

Male-to-female (MtF) transgender individuals are at risk for prostate cancer, although guidelines for screening and management in this population are not well established. We describe a series of 9 MtF transgender patients who underwent prostate tissue sampling and highlight histopathologic features and challenges related to pathologic interpretation of prostate tissue in this patient population. Seven of 9 total patients were diagnosed with prostate cancer and all had elevated prostate-specific antigen at the time of diagnosis. Three of the 7 patients diagnosed with prostate cancer had received different types of hormone therapy for gender affirmation before the diagnosis of prostate cancer, and in all 3 of these patients, there was histologic evidence of hormone therapy effect in both benign prostate tissue and/or the adenocarcinoma. The 2 patients with benign prostate tissue underwent transurethral resection for lower urinary tract symptoms and were previously on hormone therapy for gender affirmation. Both of these specimens showed diffuse glandular atrophy and basal cell hyperplasia, indicative of hormone therapy effect on benign prostatic tissue. In the patients diagnosed with prostate cancer, a spectrum of grades was observed, ranging from Grade Group 1 to Grade Group 5. Four patients underwent radical prostatectomy, with 2 cases showing extraprostatic extension and Grade Group 5 prostatic adenocarcinoma, and 2 showing Grade Group 2 prostatic adenocarcinoma. Three of the 4 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy had received gender-affirming hormone therapy before surgery, and all 3 of these specimens showed hormone therapy effect in non-neoplastic prostate tissue and focal hormone therapy effect in prostatic adenocarcinoma. The presence of areas of viable carcinoma without hormone therapy effect enabled the assignment of a Gleason score and Grade Group in these 3 cases. Hormone therapy administered for gender identity affirmation induces histopathologic changes to both benign prostate tissue (nonkeratinizing squamous metaplasia, diffuse atrophy, basal cell hyperplasia, and stromal dominance with decreased numbers of glands) and prostatic adenocarcinoma (nuclear pyknosis, atrophy, cytoplasmic vacuolization, and architectural patterns that would qualify for Gleason 4 and 5 in the absence of hormone therapy effect) that have been traditionally seen in cis-male prostate cancer patients receiving hormone therapy. In the absence of hormone therapy, the morphology of prostatic adenocarcinoma in transgender patients shows classic morphologic features similar to those seen in cis-male patients not on hormone therapy. Prostate cancer with hormone therapy effect may not only be histologically quite subtle and may be overlooked if not suspected, but also should not be assigned a Gleason score because the Gleason score would substantially overstate its biologic potential. Therefore, similar to cis-male patients who have received androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer, transgender patients on hormone therapy for gender affirmation may be at risk for both underrecognition and over-grading of prostate cancer, particularly if the pathologist is not aware of the clinical history.

The state of PSA counseling in male-to-female transgender patients in the U.S

BACKGROUND

Morbidity and mortality from prostate cancer (PCa) are known to vary heavily based on socioeconomic and demographic risk factors. We sought to describe prescreening PSA (prostate-specific antigen) counseling (PPC) rates amongst male-to-female transgender (MtF-TG) patients and non-TG patients using the behavioral risk factor surveillance system (BRFSS).

METHODS

We used the survey data from 2014, 2016, and 2018 BRFSS and included respondents aged 40-79 years who completed the "PCa screening" and "sexual orientation and gender identity" modules. We analyzed differences in age, education level, income level, marital status, and race/ethnicity using Pearson's χ² tests. The association of PPC with MtF-TG status and other patient characteristics was evaluated using multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 175,383 respondents were included, of which 0.3% identified as MtF-TG. Overall, 62.4% of respondents reported undergoing PPC. On univariate analysis, PPC rates were lower among MtF-TG respondents when compared to the non-TG group (58.3% vs. 62.4%, p = 0.03). MtF-TG respondents were also more likely to report lower education level (p < 0.01), lower-income level (p < 0.01), and were less likely to be white (p < 0.01) than non-TG respondents. However, multivariate analysis adjusting for these respondent features demonstrated an association between higher income and higher education levels with increased odds of PPC, but no association was demonstrated between MtF-TG status and PPC rates. PPC rates for the MtF-TG and non-TG populations did not change significantly over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Although PPC was less frequently reported among MtF-TG respondents than in the non-TG group on univariate analysis, this association was not demonstrated when controlling for confounders, including education and income levels. Instead, on multivariate analysis, low education and income levels were more predictive of PPC rates. Further research is needed to ensure equivalent access to prescreening counseling for patients across the socioeconomic and gender identity spectrum.

Gender- and Sexual Orientation- Based Inequities: Promoting Inclusion, Visibility, and Data Accuracy in Oncology

Sexual and gender minority (SGM) people, including agender, asexual, bisexual, gay, gender diverse, genderqueer, genderfluid, intersex, lesbian, nonbinary, pansexual, queer, and transgender people, comprise approximately 10% or more of the U.S. population. Thus, most oncologists see SGM patients whether they know it or not. SGM people experience stigma and structural discrimination that lead to cancer disparities. Because of the lack of systematic and comprehensive data collection, data regarding SGM cancer incidence, outcomes, and treatment responses are limited. Collection of data regarding sexual orientation, gender identity, transgender identity and/or experience, anatomy, and serum hormone concentrations in oncology settings would drastically increase collective knowledge about the impact of stigma and biologic markers on cancer outcomes. Increasing the safety of oncology settings for SGM people will require individual, institutional, and systems changes that will likely improve oncologic care for all patients.

Reproductive Organ Pathology of Individuals Undergoing Gender-Affirming Surgery

As gender-affirming surgeries become more routine, it is increasingly important for pathologists to recognize the expected histologic changes seen in various tissues secondary to gender-affirming hormone therapy. For example, exogenous testosterone-related squamous atrophy or transitional cell metaplasia of the cervix may be confused for high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion. In addition to distinguishing between benign and dysplastic/malignant features, pathologists should be mindful of the phrasing of their reports and aim to use objective, nongendered language.

Prostate cancer awareness among transgender women after gender-affirming surgery

BACKGROUND

The prostate gland remains unresected during gender-affirming surgery (GAS) for transgender women (TGW), and may develop malignancies in later life. We sought to evaluate prostate cancer awareness (PCA) among post-GAS TGW.

METHODS

The investigators implemented a cross-sectional study and enrolled a sample of Thai post-GAS TGW without medical background. Predictor variables were categorized as demographic, clinical, operative, or postoperative. The outcome variable was PCA (yes/no). Appropriate statistics were computed, and a p-value ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

The sample consisted of 100 Thai post-GAS TGW (4% bisexual, 12% bachelor [or higher] graduates, 51% service workers, 64% had monthly net income <40,000 TB [or ca. 1050 Euro], 92% operated by plastic surgeons) with a mean age of 26.2 ± 5.4 years (range: 18-45). On bivariate analysis, PCA was significantly associated with educational level (p = 0.007; adjusted odd ratio [OR_adj. ]: 5.85; 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.65-20.69), being operated ≥ 10 years  (p = 0.01; OR_adj. : 0.16; 95% CI: 0.04-0.76), self-recognition of the remaining prostate gland (p = 0.0001; OR_adj. : 0.02; 95% CI: 0-0.12), and emphasis on PCA by the GAS operator (p = 0.01; OR_adj. : 0.07; 95% CI: 0.01-0.63). Multiple linear regression analysis revealed a statistically significant, positive correlation (r = 0.78; p = 0.0001) among these four predictors, and continued to confirm the positive effect on PCA in TGW with high education and realization of the prostate gland (r = 0.56; p = 0.04) or information on PCA by the operator (r = 0.68; p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

The GSA operator should intensively inform TGW about the remnant prostate and the risk of PC, especially those with low and middle levels of education attained.

Reference intervals for biochemical analytes in transgender individuals on hormone therapy

BACKGROUND

Hormone therapy in transgender individuals may impact processes that lead to changes in biochemical analytes, and therefore reference intervals. Currently, few reference interval studies are available for the transgender population. We determined biochemical reference intervals for transgender individuals receiving hormone therapy.

METHODS

Our retrospective, laboratory-based, observational study included healthy transgender males (N = 24) and transgender females (N = 84) on hormone therapy. Various biochemical reference intervals were established for each cohort and compared to their cisgender counterparts.

RESULTS

We detected significant differences in reference intervals for sodium, 139-142 mmol/L vs. 136-145 mmol/L when comparing transgender males (TM) with cisgender males (CM). The following significant changes in upper reference limits (URL) for TM versus CM were detected, ALP (URL: 96 U/L vs. 128 U/L), GGT (URL: 27 U/L vs. 67 U/L) and testosterone (URL: 46.7 nmol/L vs. 29.0 nmol/L), respectively. Moreover, when comparing transgender female (TF) to cisgender female (CF), significant differences in creatinine (URL: 117 μmol/L vs. 90 μmol/L), albumin (lower reference limit: 41 g/L, vs. 35 g/L), AST (URL: 50 U/L vs. 35 U/L), ALP (URL: 118 U/L vs. 98 U/L) and oestradiol (URL: 934 pmol/L vs. 213 pmol/L) were noted, respectively. Significantly higher LDL-C was observed for TM on hormone treatment, compared to baseline (2.9 mmol/L vs. 2.2 mmol/L, p <0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Biochemical results for TM and TF receiving hormone therapy can be evaluated against our transgender-specific reference intervals for some analytes, while others can be compared to their identified gender reference intervals.

Embryologic and hormonal contributors to prostate cancer in transgender women

Transgender women, who were assigned male at birth but identify as women, may take several steps to merge their physical and psychological identities, including gender-affirming surgeries and hormone therapy. With the presence of the mature prostate gland there persists a risk for malignant transformation in this population. The recognition by the medical community and society at large that transgender women are at risk of developing prostate cancer has recently been supported by investigative efforts. The slowly emerging clinical evidence suggests that the disease is likely to be more aggressive than in cisgender men, with 6 of 9 published cases discussing metastasis reporting metastatic disease on presentation. Currently the overall prevalence appears low, pointing to evolving awareness, educational status, socioeconomic status, and late presentation. This commentary focuses on exploring the factors contributing to the incidence of prostate cancer and the biochemical and endocrine mechanisms that lead to aggressive prostate tumor development in transgender women.

Understanding the role of sex hormones in cancer for the transgender community

Sex hormones are crucial for the body's development and function. Therefore, many transgender people seek hormone therapy as part of their transition. However, sex hormones modulate cancer risk. Studying sex hormones in cisgender and transgender populations will improve our knowledge of their biological role in cancer and reduce health disparities.

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.

Enhancing the care of transgender and non-binary patients through effective communication

There is increasing evidence to suggest that transgender (trans) and non-binary people encounter significant societal discrimination, stereotypical and misleading representation in the media, and frequent misgendering. They may also experience several barriers to accessing healthcare, as well as discrimination from staff and other patients. This article explores how and why trans and non-binary people experience discrimination, and discusses how healthcare professionals, including nurses, can enhance the care experience for these patients, with a particular emphasis on language and communication.

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.

Approach to Interpreting Common Laboratory Pathology Tests in Transgender Individuals

CONTEXT

As the number of transgender (trans) people (including those who are binary and/or nonbinary identified) seeking gender-affirming hormone therapy rises, endocrinologists are increasingly asked to assist with interpretation of laboratory tests. Many common laboratory tests such as hemoglobin, iron studies, cardiac troponin, and creatinine are affected by sex steroids or body size. We seek to provide a summary of the impact of feminizing and masculinizing hormone therapy on common laboratory tests and an approach to interpretation.

CASES

Case scenarios discussed include 1) hemoglobin and hematocrit in a nonbinary person undergoing masculinizing hormone therapy; 2) estimation of glomerular filtration rate in a trans woman at risk of contrast-induced nephropathy; 3) prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in a trans woman; and 4) chest pain in a trans man with a cardiac troponin concentration between the reported male and female reference ranges.

CONCLUSIONS

The influence of exogenous gender-affirming hormone therapy on fat and muscle distribution and other physiological changes determines interpretation of laboratory tests that have sex-specific differences. In addition to affirmative practice to ensure a patient's name, gender, and pronoun are used appropriately, we propose that once individuals have commenced gender-affirming hormone therapy, the reference range of the affirmed gender be reported (and specified by treating clinicians) except for PSA or cardiac troponin, which are dependent on organ size. While suggestions may be challenging to implement, they also represent an opportunity to lead best practice to improve the quality of care and experiences of healthcare for all trans people.

Approach to Interpreting Common Laboratory Pathology Tests in Transgender Individuals

CONTEXT

As the number of transgender (trans) people (including those who are binary and/or nonbinary identified) seeking gender-affirming hormone therapy rises, endocrinologists are increasingly asked to assist with interpretation of laboratory tests. Many common laboratory tests such as hemoglobin, iron studies, cardiac troponin, and creatinine are affected by sex steroids or body size. We seek to provide a summary of the impact of feminizing and masculinizing hormone therapy on common laboratory tests and an approach to interpretation.

CASES

Case scenarios discussed include 1) hemoglobin and hematocrit in a nonbinary person undergoing masculinizing hormone therapy; 2) estimation of glomerular filtration rate in a trans woman at risk of contrast-induced nephropathy; 3) prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in a trans woman; and 4) chest pain in a trans man with a cardiac troponin concentration between the reported male and female reference ranges.

CONCLUSIONS

The influence of exogenous gender-affirming hormone therapy on fat and muscle distribution and other physiological changes determines interpretation of laboratory tests that have sex-specific differences. In addition to affirmative practice to ensure a patient's name, gender, and pronoun are used appropriately, we propose that once individuals have commenced gender-affirming hormone therapy, the reference range of the affirmed gender be reported (and specified by treating clinicians) except for PSA or cardiac troponin, which are dependent on organ size. While suggestions may be challenging to implement, they also represent an opportunity to lead best practice to improve the quality of care and experiences of healthcare for all trans people.

Transgender patients: considerations for routine gynecologic care and cancer screening

In the last several years, demand for transgender care from gynecologists has increased significantly. Transgender people comprise a diverse group who do not identify with the sex they were assigned at birth. Worldwide, it is estimated that 25 million people identify as transgender. Some undergo hormonal and/or surgical treatment aiming to feminize or masculinize their bodies. Cross-sex hormone treatment for transgender women-individuals assigned as male at birth who identify themselves as women-includes exogenous estrogen and/or progestin administration in combination with anti-androgens, whereas testosterone is used for transgender men-individuals whose natal sex is women but identify themselves as men. Although it is usually rare, hormone-sensitive malignancies may arise, and long-term effects remain unknown. In addition, reconstructive surgeries may include breast augmentation and vaginoplasty (creation of a vagina) for transgender women, and chest masculinization surgery (bilateral mastectomy) and metoidioplasty (lengthening of the clitoris to create a microphallus) or phalloplasty (creation of a phallus) for transgender men. Evidence relating to breast and reproductive tract cancers in the trans population is limited and insufficient to estimate cancer prevalence, and recommendations for screening and preventive care depend on the patients' hormonal and surgical status. Even less information exists regarding the sub-set of individuals with genetic predisposition for these malignancies. In this review, we aimed to summarize current recommendations for gynecologists and gynecologic oncologists regarding cancer screening and personalized cancer-risk assessment in transgender people.