Disparities in cancer incidence by sexual orientation.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer risk factors are more common among sexual minority populations (e.g., lesbian, bisexual) than their heterosexual peers, yet little is known about cancer incidence across sexual orientation groups. METHODS: The 1989-2017 data from the Nurses' Health Study II, a longitudinal cohort of female nurses across the United States, were analyzed (N = 101,543). Sexual orientation-related cancer disparities were quantified by comparing any cancer incidence among four sexual minority groups based on self-disclosure-(1) heterosexual with past same-sex attractions/partners/identity; (2) mostly heterosexual; (3) bisexual; and (4) lesbian women-to completely heterosexual women using age-adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRR) calculated by the Mantel-Haenszel method. Additionally, subanalyses at 21 cancer disease sites (e.g., breast, colon/rectum) were conducted. RESULTS: For all-cancer analyses, there were no statistically significant differences in cancer incidence at the 5% type I error cutoff among sexual minority groups when compared to completely heterosexual women; the aIRR was 1.17 (95% CI,0.99-1.38) among lesbian women and 0.80 (0.58-1.10) among bisexual women. For the site-specific analyses, incidences at multiple sites were significantly higher among lesbian women compared to completely heterosexual women: thyroid cancer (aIRR, 1.87 [1.03-3.41]), basal cell carcinoma (aIRR, 1.85 [1.09-3.14]), and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (aIRR, 2.13 [1.10-4.12]). CONCLUSION: Lesbian women may be disproportionately burdened by cancer relative to their heterosexual peers. Sexual minority populations must be explicitly included in cancer prevention efforts. Comprehensive and standardized sexual orientation data must be systematically collected so nuanced sexual orientation-related cancer disparities can be accurately assessed for both common and rare cancers.

Disrespectful and inadequate palliative care to transgender persons.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to describe disrespectful, inadequate, and abusive care to seriously ill patients who identify as transgender and their partners. METHODS: A cross-sectional mixed methods study was conducted. The sample included 865 nurses, physicians, social workers, and chaplains. Respondents were asked whether they had observed disrespectful, inadequate, or abusive care due to the patient being transgender and to describe such care. RESULTS: Of the 21.3% of participants who reported observing discriminatory care to a transgender patient, 85.3% had observed disrespectful care, 35.9% inadequate care, and 10.3% abusive care. Disrespectful care included insensitivity; rudeness, ridicule, and gossip by staff; not acknowledging or accepting the patient's gender identity or expression; privacy violations; misgendering; and using the incorrect name. Inadequate care included denying, delaying, or rushing care; ignorance of appropriate medical and other care; and marginalizing or ignoring the spouse/partner. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: These findings illustrate discrimination faced by seriously ill transgender patients and their spouse/partners. Providers who are disrespectful may also deliver inadequate care to transgender patients, which may result in mistrust of providers and the health-care system. Inadequate care due to a patient's or spouse's/partner's gender identity is particularly serious. Dismissing spouses/partners as decision-makers or conferring with biological family members against the patient's wishes may result in unwanted care and constitute a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) violation. Institutional policies and practices should be assessed to determine the degree to which they are affirming to both patients and staff, and revised if needed. Federal and state civil rights legislation protecting the LGBTQ+ community are needed, particularly given the rampant transphobic legislation and the majority of states lacking civil rights laws protecting LGBTQ+ people. Training healthcare professionals and staff to become competent and comfortable treating transgender patients is critical to providing optimal care for these seriously ill patients and their spouse/partner.

Impact of text reminders on pneumatic compression device (PCD) compliance in patients with breast cancer-related lymphedema.

PURPOSE: Do cell phone text reminders impact the rate of compliance with pneumatic compression device (PCD) therapy among women with breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL)? METHODS: A prospective, randomized, 2-group feasibility study conducted at 2 centers. Participants were adult females (≥18 years old) with unilateral BCRL who had the capability of receiving reminder text messages. All participants underwent PCD therapy. Participants were randomized 1:1 to control (no text messages) or test group (received text message reminders if the PCD had not been used for 2 consecutive days). The rate of compliance between treatment groups was the main outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures were changes in arm girth, quality of life (QOL), and symptom severity. RESULTS: Twenty-nine participants were enrolled and randomized, 25 were available for follow-up at 60 days (14 test, 11 control). Overall, 52.2% (12/23) of all participants were completely compliant, an additional 43.5% (10/23) were partially compliant, and 1 patient (4.3%) was noncompliant. The test and control groups did not differ in device compliance. In the pooled population, weight, BMI, and arm girth were improved. Overall disease-specific QOL and symptom severity were improved. Regression analysis showed benefits were greater among participants with higher rates of compliance. CONCLUSIONS: Automated text reminders did not improve compliance in patients with BCRL as compliance rates were already high in this patient population. Improvements in weight, BMI, arm girth, disease-specific quality of life, and symptom severity measures were observed regardless of the treatment assignment. Full compliance resulted in greater functional and QOL benefits. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered at www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov (NCT04432727) on June 16, 2020.

Disrespectful and inadequate palliative care to lesbian, gay, and bisexual patients.

OBJECTIVES: The study aims to describe inadequate, disrespectful, and abusive palliative and hospice care received by lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) patients and their spouses/partners due to their sexual orientation or gender identity. METHODS: A national sample of 865 healthcare professionals recruited from palliative and hospice care professional organizations completed an online survey. Respondents were asked to describe their observations of inadequate, disrespectful, or abusive care to LGB patients and their spouses/partners. RESULTS: There were 15.6% who reported observing disrespectful care to LGB patients, 7.3% observed inadequate care, and 1.6% observed abusive care; 43% reported discriminatory care toward the spouses/partners. Disrespectful care to LGB patients included insensitive and judgmental attitudes and behaviors, gossip and ridicule, and disrespect of the spouse/partner. Inadequate care included denial of care; care that was delayed incomplete, or rushed; dismissive or antagonistic treatment; privacy and confidentiality violations; and dismissive treatment of the spouse/partner. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: These findings provide evidence of discrimination faced by LGB patients and partners while receiving care for serious illness. Hospice and palliative care programs should promote respectful, inclusive, and affirming care for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) community, including policies and practices that are welcoming and supportive to both employees and patients. Staff at all levels should be trained to create safe and respectful environments for LGBTQ patients and their families.

Cancer care in lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer populations.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ) populations experience health and healthcare disparities that may place them at higher risk for developing cancer. In addition, LGBTQ communities have psychosocial factors, such as fear of discrimination, that have substantial impacts on their medical care. As a result, these populations have specific needs with regard to cancer screening, treatment and support that must be addressed by cancer care providers. Although much has been done to address cancer care in the general population, more improvement is needed in the care of LGBTQ patients. We aim to present an overview of the current state of LGBTQ cancer care, opportunities for improvement and how cancer centers and providers can create a better future for the care of LGBTQ cancer patients.

Development of a mentor training curriculum to support LGBTQIA+ health professionals.

While mentors can learn general strategies for effective mentoring, existing mentorship curricula do not comprehensively address how to support marginalized mentees, including LGBTQIA+ mentees. After identifying best mentoring practices and existing evidence-based curricula, we adapted these to create the Harvard Sexual and Gender Minority Health Mentoring Program. The primary goal was to address the needs of underrepresented health professionals in two overlapping groups: (1) LGBTQIA+ mentees and (2) any mentees focused on LGBTQIA+ health. An inaugural cohort (N = 12) of early-, mid-, and late-career faculty piloted this curriculum in spring 2022 during six 90-minute sessions. We evaluated the program using confidential surveys after each session and at the program's conclusion as well as with focus groups. Faculty were highly satisfied with the program and reported skill gains and behavioral changes. Our findings suggest this novel curriculum can effectively prepare mentors to support mentees with identities different from their own; the whole curriculum, or parts, could be integrated into other trainings to enhance inclusive mentoring. Our adaptations are also a model for how mentorship curricula can be tailored to a particular focus (i.e., LGBTQIA+ health). Ideally, such mentor trainings can help create more inclusive environments throughout academic medicine.

State of Cancer Care in America: Achieving Cancer Health Equity Among Sexual and Gender Minority Communities.

In 2017, ASCO issued the position statement, Strategies for Reducing Cancer Health Disparities Among Sexual and Gender Minority Populations, outlining five areas of recommendations to address the needs of both sexual and gender minority (SGM, eg, LGBTQ+) populations affected by cancer and members of the oncology workforce who identify as SGM: (1) patient education and support; (2) workforce development and diversity; (3) quality improvement strategies; (4) policy solutions; and (5) research strategies. In 2019, ASCO convened the SGM Task Force to help actualize the recommendations of the 2017 position statement. The percentage of the US population who publicly identify as SGM has increased dramatically over the past few years. Although increased national interest in SGM health equity has accompanied a general interest in research, policy change, and education around diversity, equity, and inclusion, resulting from public concern over discrimination in health care against Black, Indigenous, and People of Color, this has been accompanied by a surge in discriminatory legislation directly impacting the SGM community. Although much progress has been made in advancing SGM cancer health equity since 2017, more progress is needed to reduce disparities and advance equity. The five focus areas outlined in the 2017 ASCO position statement remain relevant, as we must continue to promote and advance equity in quality improvement, workforce development, patient care, research, and SGM-affirming policies. This article reports on the progress toward reducing SGM cancer disparities and achieving equity across these five areas and identifies future directions for the work that still remains.

Project Respect: experiences of seriously ill LGBTQ+ patients and partners with their health care providers.

Discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) persons in health care creates barriers to serious illness care, including patients avoiding or delaying necessary care, providers disrespecting wishes of surrogates, and adverse outcomes for patients and families. A cross-sectional mixed-methods study using an online survey was used to determine the extent to which LGBTQ+ patients and spouses, partners, and widows experienced disrespectful or inadequate care due to sexual orientation or gender identity. A total of 290 LGBTQ+ patients and partners reported high levels of disrespectful and inadequate care, including 35.2% stating their provider was insensitive to them because of their identity; 30% reporting their provider was unaware of LGBTQ+ health needs; 23.1% feeling judged; 20.7% experiencing rudeness; 20.3% stating providers did not use their correct pronouns; and 19.7% reporting their treatment decisions were disregarded. Black and Hispanic patients were 2-4 times more likely than non-Hispanic White patients to report discrimination. This study demonstrated high levels of disrespectful and inadequate care towards patients and partners due to being LGBTQ+, which was especially problematic for Black and Hispanic patients and those living in politically conservative regions. Recommendations include federal and state civil rights laws to prohibit LGBTQ+ discrimination and institutional practices to address discrimination, including cultural sensitivity training for staff.

Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Data Collection in Oncology Practice: Findings of an ASCO Survey.

PURPOSE: Lack of collection of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) data in oncology practices limits assessment of sexual and gender minority (SGM) cancer patients' experiences and restricts opportunities to improve health outcomes of SGM patients. Despite national calls for routine SOGI data collection, individual-level and institutional barriers hinder progress. This study aimed to identify these barriers in oncology. METHODS: An online survey of ASCO members and others assessed SOGI data collection in oncology practices, institutional characteristics related to SOGI data collection, respondents' attitudes about SOGI data and SGM patients, and respondent demographics. Logistic regression calculated adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs for factors associated with sexual orientation (SO) and gender identity (GI) data collection. RESULTS: Less than half of 257 respondents reported institutional SO and GI data collection (40% and 46%, respectively), whereas over a third reported no institutional data collection (34% and 32%, respectively) and the remainder were unsure (21% and 17%, respectively). Most respondents felt that knowing both SO and GI was important for quality care (77% and 85%, respectively). Collection of SO and GI was significantly associated in separate models with leadership support (ORs = 8.01 and 6.02, respectively), having resources for SOGI data collection (ORs = 10.6 and 18.7, respectively), and respondents' belief that knowing patient SO and GI is important (ORs = 4.28 and 2.76, respectively). Themes from qualitative comments mirrored the key factors identified in our quantitative analysis. CONCLUSION: Three self-reinforcing factors emerged as critical drivers for collecting SOGI data: leadership support, dedicated resources, and individual respondents' attitudes. Policy mandates, implementation science, and clinical reimbursement are strategies to advance meaningful data collection and use in clinical practice.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Cancer Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: The full effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care disparities, particularly by race and ethnicity, remains unknown. Objectives: To assess whether the race and ethnicity of patients with cancer was associated with disparities in cancer treatment delays, adverse social and economic effects, and concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic and to evaluate trusted sources of COVID-19 information by race and ethnicity. Design, Setting, and Participants: This national survey study of US adults with cancer compared treatment delays, adverse social and economic effects, concerns, and trusted sources of COVID-19 information by race and ethnicity from September 1, 2020, to January 12, 2021. Exposures: The COVID-19 pandemic. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was delay in cancer treatment by race and ethnicity. Secondary outcomes were duration of delay, adverse social and economic effects, concerns, and trusted sources of COVID-19 information. Results: Of 1639 invited respondents, 1240 participated (75.7% response rate) from 50 US states, the District of Columbia, and 5 US territories (744 female respondents [60.0%]; median age, 60 years [range, 24-92 years]; 266 African American or Black [hereafter referred to as Black] respondents [21.5%]; 186 Asian respondents [15.0%]; 232 Hispanic or Latinx [hereafter referred to as Latinx] respondents [18.7%]; 29 American Indian or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or multiple races [hereafter referred to as other] respondents [2.3%]; and 527 White respondents [42.5%]). Compared with White respondents, Black respondents (odds ratio [OR], 6.13 [95% CI, 3.50-10.74]) and Latinx respondents (OR, 2.77 [95% CI, 1.49-5.14]) had greater odds of involuntary treatment delays, and Black respondents had greater odds of treatment delays greater than 4 weeks (OR, 3.13 [95% CI, 1.11-8.81]). Compared with White respondents, Black respondents (OR, 4.32 [95% CI, 2.65-7.04]) and Latinx respondents (OR, 6.13 [95% CI, 3.57-10.53]) had greater odds of food insecurity and concerns regarding food security (Black respondents: OR, 2.02 [95% CI, 1.34-3.04]; Latinx respondents: OR, 2.94 [95% CI, [1.86-4.66]), financial stability (Black respondents: OR, 3.56 [95% CI, 1.79-7.08]; Latinx respondents: OR, 4.29 [95% CI, 1.98-9.29]), and affordability of cancer treatment (Black respondents: OR, 4.27 [95% CI, 2.20-8.28]; Latinx respondents: OR, 2.81 [95% CI, 1.48-5.36]). Trusted sources of COVID-19 information varied significantly by race and ethnicity. Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey of US adults with cancer, the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with treatment delay disparities and adverse social and economic effects among Black and Latinx adults. Partnering with trusted sources may be an opportunity to overcome such disparities.

Improving the Hospice and Palliative Care Experiences of LGBTQ Patients and Their Caregivers.

Primary care providers often express a desire to be more involved with their patients as they transition to hospice care. Given that these providers have a central role in the care of their patients, they have the potential to significantly improve the experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer patients who face serious illnesses. This article discusses the barriers to quality hospice and palliative care experienced by many sexual and gender minorities, as well as specific ways in which primary care physicians can promote equitable end-of-life care.

Experiences of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Patients and Families in Hospice and Palliative Care: Perspectives of the Palliative Care Team.

Background: Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) patients fear being open about their identities, not receiving equal or safe treatment, and having their family and surrogates disrespected or ignored by providers. Objective: To examine inadequate, disrespectful, and abusive care to patients and family due to sexual orientation or gender identity. Design: A cross-sectional study using an online survey. Setting/Subjects: Home and residential hospice, inpatient palliative care service, and other inpatient and outpatient settings. Subjects were 865 hospice and palliative care providers, including physicians, social workers, nurses, and chaplains. Measurements: Inadequate, disrespectful, or abusive care to LGBT patients and discriminatory treatment of family and surrogates were measured. Results: Among respondents, 53.6% thought that lesbian, gay, or bisexual (LGB) patients were more likely than non-LGB patients to experience discrimination at their institution; 23.7% observed discriminatory care; 64.3% reported that transgender patients were more likely than nontransgender patients to experience discrimination; 21.3% observed discrimination to transgender patients; 15% observed the spouse/partner of LGBT patients having their treatment decisions disregarded or minimized; and 14.3% observed the spouse/partner or surrogate being treated disrespectfully. Conclusions: These findings provide strong evidence that LGBT patients and their families are more likely to receive discriminatory care as compared with those who are not LGBT. Disrespectful care can negatively impact the trust patients have in providers and institutions, and lead to delaying or avoiding care, or not disclosing relevant information. Partners/spouses and surrogates may be treated disrespectfully, have their treatment decisions ignored or minimized, be denied or have limited access to the patient, and be denied private time. Advocacy and staff training should address barriers to delivering respectful and nondiscriminatory care.

Establishing a Mutually Respectful Environment in the Workplace: A Toolbox for Performance Excellence.

Most health care professionals spend a substantial amount of their time at the workplace. Our interactions with team members can define our daily experiences, impact our work performance, and influence our overall job satisfaction. Over the last years, how we interact with colleagues and patients has changed with the introduction of social media, a tenser political climate, and an evolving health care system. In oncology, a team can be composed of medical students, clinicians, and support and administrative staff within a heavy emotional environment where some of our patients are facing the risk of early mortality and most are dealing with the unmeasurable burden of cancer. Many of these factors can increase the risk for professionalism lapses. We discuss common challenges faced in the practice of cancer care, including the generational gap between medical trainees and senior members, gender disparities, and microaggressions. Microaggressions represent verbal, behavioral, and environmental indignities that communicate hostile, derogatory, and negative slights that insult a target person or group. Microaggressions should not be accepted as the norm in the workplace. It is essential to recognize these negative behaviors and manage them effectively to reduce or even prevent the long-term toxicities that these behaviors can bring to the workplace environment. Ultimately, we must acknowledge that these issues exist and remember that education and collaboration are the pillars of an inclusive workplace. We owe such efforts to our patients who deserve good care, to our partners in the care of patients so that they feel supported and included, and to ourselves.

LGBT Cultural Competence and Interventions to Help Oncology Nurses and Other Health Care Providers.

OBJECTIVES: To define and give an overview of the importance of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) cultural competency and offer some initial steps on how to improve the quality of care provided by oncology nurses and other health care professionals. DATA SOURCES: A review of the existing literature on cultural competency. CONCLUSION: LGBT patients experience cancer and several other diseases at higher rates than the rest of the population. The reasons for these health care disparities are complex and include minority stress, fear of discrimination, lower rates of insurance, and lack of access to quality, culturally competent care. Addressing the health care disparities experienced by LGBT individuals and families requires attention to the actual needs, language, and support networks used by patients in these communities. Training on how to provide quality care in a welcoming and non-judgmental way is available and can improve health equity. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: Health care professionals and institutions that acquire cultural competency training can improve the overall health of LGBT patients who currently experience significant health care disparities.

Current Best Practices for Sexual and Gender Minorities in Hospice and Palliative Care Settings.

Although several publications document the health care disparities experienced by sexual and gender minorities (SGMs), including lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals,1e4 less is known about the experiences and outcomes for SGM families and individuals in hospice and palliative care (HPC) settings. This article provides a brief overview of issues pertaining to SGMs in HPC settings, highlighting gaps in knowledge and research. Current and best practices for SGM individuals and their families in HPC settings are described, as are recommendations for improving the quality of such care.

A Multiorganization Approach to Improving Palliative Care in Honduras.

Since 2011, oncology nurses and physicians in the United States have been volunteering in Honduras with the International Cancer Corps (ICC), organized by the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), in partnership with Health Volunteers Overseas (HVO). In this article, the authors will summarize the work of the ASCO/HVO ICC teams that developed educational programs with local partners to improve cancer and palliative care in Honduras.

American Society of Clinical Oncology Position Statement: Strategies for Reducing Cancer Health Disparities Among Sexual and Gender Minority Populations.

ASCO is committed to addressing the needs of sexual and gender minority (SGM) populations as a diverse group at risk for receiving disparate care and having suboptimal experiences, including discrimination, throughout the cancer care continuum. This position statement outlines five areas of recommendations to address the needs of both SGM populations affected by cancer and members of the oncology workforce who identify as SGM: (1) patient education and support; (2) workforce development and diversity; (3) quality improvement strategies; (4) policy solutions; and (5) research strategies. In making these recommendations, the Society calls for increased outreach and educational support for SGM patients; increased SGM cultural competency training for providers; improvement of quality-of-care metrics that include sexual orientation and gender information variables; and increased data collection to inform future work addressing the needs of SGM communities.