The association of sexual orientation with cancer screening and diagnosis.

Abstract

6506 Background: Data on heterogeneity in cancer screening and diagnosis rates among sexual minorities (SMs) is lacking. Recent studies have shown SMs are more likely to engage in risky health behavior and have decreased healthcare utilization compared to heterosexual counterparts. However, few studies have examined how sexual orientation (SO) impacts cancer screening and prevalence. We therefore investigated whether SO affects prevalent gender-specific cancer screening and prevalence, including prostate (PCa), breast (BC), and cervical cancer (CC). Methods: This was a cross-sectional survey-based US study, including men and women aged 18+ from the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) database (part of the National Cancer Institute’s division of cancer control and population sciences) between 2017-2019. The primary endpoint was individual-reported PCa, BC, and CC screening and prevalence rates among heterosexual and SM men and women. Multivariable logistic regression analyses assessed association of various covariates with undergoing screening and diagnosis of these cancers. Results: Overall, 4,441 (95.18%) men and 6,333 (96.75%) women reported a SO of heterosexual whereas 167 (3.6%) and 58 (1.2%) men and 105 (1.6%) and 108 (1.6%) women reported a SO of gay and bisexual, respectively. Mean age was higher in the heterosexual group compared to the gay and bisexual groups in both men (57.7 [±16.0] vs. 52.4 [±14.5] and 51.9 [±18.0] years, p = < 0.001) and women (56.2 [±16.7] vs. 49.0 [±17.1] and 40.0 [±14.8] years, p = < 0.001). Homosexuals and bisexuals were less likely to be screened for PCa (30.53% and 27.58% vs 41.27%, p = < 0.001), BC (63.81% and 45.37% vs 80.74%, p = < 0.001), and CC (90.48% and 86.11% vs 95.36%, p = < 0.001) than their heterosexual counterparts. While rates of PCa and BC diagnoses were similar across SO, more homosexual and bisexual women were diagnosed with CC compared to their heterosexual counterparts (4.76% and 3.70% vs 1.85%, p = 0.039). Multivariable logistic regression models showed that SMs were less likely to be screened for cancer with ORs of 0.61 (95% CI 0.39-0.95, p = 0.030) for PCa, 0.52 (95% CI 0.30-0.92, p = 0.025) for BC, and 0.21 (95% CI 0.09-0.46, p = < 0.001) for CC. Although multivariable models did not show that SMs were more likely to be diagnosed with PC, BC, or CC, SMs were more likely to be diagnosed with any cancer with ORs of 1.64 (95% CI 1.06-2.54, p = 0.026) in women only and 1.50 (95% CI 1.11-2.03, p = 0.009) in men and women combined. Conclusions: These data suggest that in addition to other established and known specific socio-economic risk factors, SMs may be less likely to undergo screening of prevalent malignancies such as PCa, BC, and CC. This provides more evidence of ongoing healthcare inequality, urging our healthcare system to invest more in cancer screening of this vulnerable population.