Assessing Preferences of Facial Appearance in Transgender and Gender Nonbinary Patients.

BACKGROUND: We designed a survey to evaluate preferences of facial appearance in transgender male (TM), transgender female (TF) and gender nonbinary patients to better inform goals of facial gender affirming surgery (FGAS) in gender nonbinary patients. METHODS: TM/TF and nonbinary patients > 18 years old were identified via retrospective chart review and distributed an anonymized survey via email from October 3 to December 31, 2022. To assess facial preferences, AI-generated and open-source portraits were edited to create five image sets with a range of features from masculine to feminine for the forehead, mandible/chin and hairline. Data were analyzed using Fisher's exact tests and ANOVA in R-Studio. RESULTS: Survey response rate was 32% (180 patients identified via chart review, 58 respondents; TM = 5, TF = 39, nonbinary = 14). TM and TF patients as well as TF and nonbinary patients had significantly different preferences for all regions (p < 0.005; all series), while TM and nonbinary patients did not (p => 0.05; all series). TF patients consistently selected 4s with neutral or more feminine features. TM and nonbinary patients, however, demonstrated no consistent preference for either male or female features but rather a range of responses spanning extremes of both masculine and feminine options. When stratified by sex assigned at birth, nonbinary patients consistently identified preferences opposite to their assigned gender. CONCLUSION: Gender nonbinary and TM patients appear to have uniquely individual preferences regarding facial appearance that do not fit into classically masculine or feminine patterns/phenotypes. As a result, we recommend individualized preoperative planning for FGAS to achieve the optimal result in these patient populations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

A Retrospective Analysis of Creatinine-Based Kidney Function With and Without Sex Assigned at Birth Among Transgender Adults.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians use sex-based kidney function estimating equations, but the appropriate sex modifier for transgender adults undergoing hormone therapy (HT) is undetermined. OBJECTIVES: Compare median estimated creatinine clearance (eCrCL; Cockcroft-Gault) and estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs; Modification of Diet in Renal Disease [MDRD] and Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Study [CKD-EPI]) before and during HT when estimated with and without sex assigned at birth. METHODS: Single-system retrospective cohort study of transgender adults (2007-2017) prescribed ≥90 days HT (index date = first order) and measured serum creatinine ≤6 months pre-index date (baseline) and ≤12 months post-index date. We grouped patients based on testosterone or estrogen treatment and compared eCrCL and eGFRs at baseline up to 6-12 months post-index date using equations based on sex assigned at birth (female or male modifier in testosterone or estrogen groups, respectively) or gender identity (male or female modifier in testosterone or estrogen groups, respectively). We used Wilcoxon signed-rank tests (Bonferroni correction) for all comparisons. RESULTS: In total, 29 (median age 26 years, follow-up 259 days) and 41 patients (29 years, 250 days) were prescribed testosterone or estrogen, respectively. In the testosterone group, the maximum eCrCL and eGFR changes based on sex assigned at birth were -14%, P = 0.0181; -18%; P = 0.0009, respectively, and based on gender identity were +5%, P > 0.025 and +11%, P = 0.0094, respectively. In the estrogen group, eCrCL or eGFRs based on sex assigned at birth did not change from baseline but based on gender identity were -17%, P < 0.0001 and -26%, P < 0.0001, respectively. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Female-based equations may underestimate kidney function in transgender adults undergoing testosterone or estrogen treatment. Prospective cohort studies are needed to confirm the clinical significance of these findings.

Priorities for efficacy trials of gender-affirming hormone therapy with estrogen: collaborative design and results of a community survey.

PURPOSE: Treatment guidelines for gender-affirming hormone therapy with estrogen (GAHT-E) recommend specific dosing regimens based on limited data. Well-controlled efficacy trials are essential to tailoring treatment to patient goals as the guidelines recommend. The goal of this study was to take a foundational step toward designing community-centered effectiveness trials for gender-diverse individuals seeking GAHT-E. METHODS: Our team developed a cross-sectional survey based on broad clinical experience and consultation with our community advisory board. The survey included 60 items covering demographics, transition history, goals and priorities for treatment, indicators of treatment success, sexual function goals, and future research priorities. The survey was distributed during the summer of 2021, primarily through social networks designed for gender-expansive individuals seeking treatment with estrogen. RESULTS: A total of 1270 individuals completed the survey. Overall treatment goals most frequently rated "extremely important" or "very important" were the following: (1) improved satisfaction with life (81%), (2) appearing more feminine (80%), (3) appearing less masculine (77%), (4) improved mental health (76%), and (5) being seen as your true gender by others (75%). The three body characteristics most frequently rated "highest priority" or "high priority" among changes were the following: (1) facial hair (85%), (2) breast shape or size (84%), and (3) body shape (80%). The highest-rated research priority was comparing feminization with different routes of estrogen administration. CONCLUSION: The goals and experiences of individuals seeking GAHT-E are diverse. Future clinical trials of GAHT-E should be grounded in the needs and priorities of community stakeholders.

Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming surgery: A state-by-state review.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review Medicaid policies state-by-state for gender-affirming surgery coverage. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING: Primary data were collected for each US state utilizing the LexisNexis legal database, state legislature publications, and Medicaid manuals. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional study evaluating Medicaid coverage for numerous gender-affirming surgeries. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: We previously reported on state health policies that protect gender-affirming care under Medicaid coverage. Building upon our prior work, we systematically assessed the 27 states with protective policies to determine coverage for each type of gender-affirming surgery. We analyzed Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming surgeries in four domains: chest, genital, craniofacial and neck reconstruction, and miscellaneous procedures. Medicaid coverage for each type of surgery was categorized as explicitly covered, explicitly noncovered, or not described. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Among the 27 states with protective Medicaid policies, 17 states (63.0%) provided explicit coverage for at least one gender-affirming chest procedure and at least one gender-affirming genital procedure, while only eight states (29.6%) provided explicit coverage for at least one craniofacial and neck procedure (p = 0.04). Coverage for specific surgical procedures within these three anatomical domains varied. The most common explicitly covered procedures were breast reduction/mastectomy and hysterectomy (n = 17, 63.0%). The most common explicitly noncovered surgery was reversal surgery (n = 12, 44.4%). Several states did not describe the specific surgical procedures covered; thus, final coverage rates are indeterminate. CONCLUSIONS: In 2022, 52.9% of states had health policies that protected gender-affirming care under Medicaid; however, coverage for various gender-affirming surgical procedures remains both variable and occasionally unspecified. When specified, craniofacial and neck reconstruction is the least covered anatomical area compared with chest and genital reconstruction.

Duration of Feminizing Hormone Therapy on Facial Fat Volumes.

BACKGROUND: Gender-affirming feminizing hormone therapy induces body fat redistribution. However, the amount and timing of facial fat changes in response to feminizing hormone therapy are unknown, albeit relevant to counseling and surgical planning for facial gender-affirming surgery. In this work, we assessed the influence of feminizing hormone therapy duration on malar and temporal fat volume. METHODS: Malar and temporal fat volumes were compared using computed tomography in transfeminine patients (age 20-29 years, body mass index [BMI] 18.5-24.9) treated with feminizing hormone therapy for <2 years versus ≥2 years. Patients with prior surgical or non-surgical facial soft-tissue interventions were excluded. Multivariable linear regressions evaluated the contribution of hormone therapy duration to malar and temporal fat volumes. RESULTS: 45 patients were included with 30 patients (66.7%) treated with feminizing hormone therapy for ≥2 years and 15 patients (33.3%) treated for <2 years (median[interquartile range, IQR]: 44.5[33.5-65.6] vs. 15.0[11.0-18.0] months, p<0.001). Patients treated with hormone therapy for ≥2 years demonstrated a 1.6-fold greater malar fat volume (5.5[4.2-6.3] vs. 3.4[2.3-4.2] cm 3,p<0.001) and 1.4-fold greater temporal fat volume (2.8[2.4-3.6] cm 3 vs. 2.0[1.7-2.4] cm 3, p=0.01) compared to those treated for <2 years. When accounting for other contributory variables such as BMI, skull size, and total soft-tissue depth in multivariable linear regression models, hormone therapy duration ≥2 years independently predicted higher malar (ß=0.51, p<0.001) and temporal (ß=0.32, p=0.02) fat volumes. CONCLUSIONS: Feminizing hormone therapy increases malar and temporal fat volumes by approximately 2 cm 3 and 0.8 cm 3 for each area, respectively, after 2 years of treatment.