Engagement and factors associated with annual anal human papillomavirus screening among sexual and gender minority individuals.

Objectives: Annual screening with a provider has been recommended for groups at highest risk for anal cancer. Anal self-sampling could help address screening barriers, yet no studies have examined annual engagement with this method. Methods: The Prevent Anal Cancer Self-Swab Study recruited sexual and gender minority individuals 25 years and over who have sex with men in Milwaukee, Wisconsin to participate in an anal cancer screening study. Participants were randomized to a home or clinic arm. Home-based participants were mailed an anal human papillomavirus self-sampling kit at baseline and 12 months, while clinic-based participants were asked to schedule and attend one of five participating clinics at baseline and 12 months. Using Poisson regression, we conducted an intention-to-treat analysis of 240 randomized participants who were invited to screen at both timepoints. Results: 58.8% of participants completed annual (median=370 days) anal screening. When stratified by HIV status, persons living with HIV had a higher proportion of home (71.1%) versus clinic (22.2%) annual screening ( p <0.001). Non-Hispanic Black participants had a higher proportion of home-based annual anal screening engagement (73.1%) compared to annual clinic screening engagement (31.6%) ( p =0.01). Overall, annual screening engagement was significantly higher among participants who had heard of anal cancer from an LGBTQ organization, reported "some" prior anal cancer knowledge, preferred an insertive anal sex position, and reported a prior cancer diagnosis. Annual screening engagement was significantly lower for participants reporting a medical condition. Conclusions: Annual screening engagement among those at disproportionate anal cancer risk was higher in the home arm.

The influence of home versus clinic anal human papillomavirus sampling on high-resolution anoscopy uptake in the Prevent Anal Cancer Self-Swab Study.

Background Anal cancer disproportionately affects sexual and gender minority individuals living with HIV. High-resolution anoscopy (HRA) is an in-clinic procedure to detect precancerous anal lesions and cancer, yet prospective data on factors associated with HRA attendance are lacking. We examined whether anal HPV sampling at home versus in a clinic impacts HRA uptake and assessed HRA acceptability. Methods Sexual and gender minority individuals were randomised to home-based self-sampling or clinical sampling. All were asked to attend in-clinic HRA 1year later. We regressed HRA attendance on study arm using multivariable Poisson regression and assessed HRA acceptability using χ 2 tests. Results A total of 62.8% of 196 participants who engaged in screening attended HRA. Although not significant (P =0.13), a higher proportion of participants who engaged in clinic-based screening attended HRA (68.5%) compared to home-based participants (57.9%). Overall, HRA uptake was higher among participants with anal cytology history (aRR 1.40, 95% CI 1.07-1.82), and lower among participants preferring a versatile anal sex position versus insertive (aRR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53-0.91), but did not differ by race or HIV serostatus. In the clinic arm, persons living with HIV had lower HRA attendance (42.9%) versus HIV-negative participants (73.3%) (P =0.02) and Black non-Hispanic participants had lower HRA attendance (41.7%) than White non-Hispanic participants (73.1%), (P =0.04). No differences in attendance by race or HIV status were observed in the home arm. Conclusions HRA uptake differed significantly by race and HIV status in the clinic arm but not the home arm.

Factors associated with decreased anal sphincter tone and the accuracy of forced anal examinations to detect individuals having receptive anal intercourse: An observational study.

Objective and Design: Forced anal examinations are used to prosecute sexual and gender minorities (SGM) in at least seven countries under the presumption that decreased sphincter tone, estimated by a finger inserted into the anal canal, can detect persons practicing receptive anal intercourse. In a cross-sectional analysis of the baseline data from a longitudinal study, we aimed to determine factors associated with sphincter tone and the accuracy of sphincter tonality to detect persons engaging in receptive anal intercourse. Setting: Clinicians in Chicago, Houston, and Milwaukee, USA conducted digital anal rectal examinations (DARE) on 838 participants, 94.0% of whom were cisgendered males. Clinicians used the Digital Rectal Examination Scoring System to score sphincter resting tone (RT) and squeeze tone (ST). On a separate survey, individuals reported their preferred position for anal intercourse: i.e., either always/mostly insertive anal intercourse, always/mostly receptive anal intercourse, or both receptive and insertive anal intercourse. Multivariable regression assessed factors associated with decreased sphincter tone while area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curves (AUC) estimated the accuracy of sphincter tonality to detect receptive anal intercourse. Results: 11.3% had decreased RT (95/838) and 6.3% had decreased ST (53/838). The accuracy of DARE to detect any receptive anal intercourse was little better than random guessing (AUC 0.53, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.55, and AUC 0.51, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.53, respectively. RT and ST decreased with age regardless of sexual behavior (p trend <0.01 for both). Compared to individuals having always/mostly insertive anal intercourse, individuals having always/mostly receptive anal intercourse was associated with decreased RT, but not ST, while those equally preferring both insertive and receptive anal intercourse were not associated with decreased RT or ST. Conclusions: Decreased sphincter tone is uncommon among SGM who prefer receptive anal intercourse. Given virtually no accuracy, a finger inserted into the anus has no utility to detect individuals practicing receptive anal intercourse and thus should not be used as such. Trial registration: NCT04090060. Summary Box: What is already known on this topic: To gather evidence for prosecution of sexual and gender minorities, forced anal exams are used in multiple countries. The examination includes inserting the index finger into the anal canal to detect decreased sphincter tone which is considered evidence of receptive anal intercourse. We found only two small studies (n= 58 and n=24) assessing factors associated with decreased sphincter tone and none assessing the accuracy of sphincter tone to detect sexual and gender minorities having receptive anal intercourse.What this study adds: Our study suggests that a finger inserted into the anal canal is not useful to detect a history of receptive anal intercourse. As such, the sexual practices of individuals cannot be known using a forced anal examination.

The impact of body mass index and physical disability on home-based anal self-sampling.

PURPOSE: Self-sampling is increasingly being used in screening programs, yet no studies to date have examined the impact of bodily characteristics on self-sampling experiences. Our objective was to assess whether body mass index (BMI) and physical disability were associated with anal self-sampling difficulty. METHODS: We recruited sexual minority men (SMM) and trans persons in Milwaukee, Wisconsin to participate in an anal cancer screening study. Between January 2020 and August 2022, 240 participants were randomized to a home (n = 120) or clinic (n = 120) screening arm. Home participants received a mailed at-home anal self-sampling kit and were asked to attend a baseline clinic visit where biometric measurements were collected. Participants were asked to complete a survey about their experience with the kit. This research utilized data from participants who used the at-home kit and completed a baseline clinic visit and post-swab survey (n = 82). We assessed the impact of BMI and physical disability on reported body or swab positioning difficulty. RESULTS: Most participants reported no or little difficulty with body positioning (90.3%) or swab positioning (82.9%). Higher BMI was significantly associated with greater reported difficulty with body positioning (aOR = 1.10, 95% CI 1.003-1.20, p = 0.04) and swab positioning (aOR = 1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.20, p = 0.01). Although not significant, participants who said body positioning was difficult had 2.79 higher odds of having a physical disability. Specimen adequacy did not differ by BMI category (p = 0.76) or physical disability (p = 0.88). CONCLUSION: Anal self-sampling may be a viable option to reach obese persons who may be more likely to avoid screening due to weight-related barriers.

Acceptability of Anal Human Papillomavirus Home Self-Sampling and Clinician Sampling Among Sexual and Gender Minority Individuals in Milwaukee, Wisconsin: The Prevent Anal Cancer Self-Swab Study.

Purpose: Anal cancer has disproportionately high incidence among sexual minority men. We compared acceptability of home versus clinic human papillomavirus (HPV) anal swabbing. Methods: The Prevent Anal Cancer Self-Swab Study recruited sexual and gender minority individuals in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Eligible participants were randomized to a home or clinic arm. Home participants received a mailed anal HPV self-sampling kit. Clinic participants attended a clinic appointment where a clinician collected an anal HPV swab. We examined acceptability (overall thoughts, comfort with method, pain, and future willingness to swab) of home versus clinic swabbing using postswab survey responses. Results: A total of 191 individuals completed swabbing and a postswab survey (home = 53.4%, clinic = 46.6%). Mean age was 47 years (range = 25-78). Reported overall thoughts about home (71.6%) and clinic (69.7%) swabbing were mostly positive (p = 0.83). Overall thoughts about the home kit did not differ by participant characteristics, but overall thoughts about clinician swabbing differed by race (p = 0.04) and HIV status (p = 0.002). Nearly all participants (98.4%) reported they were comfortable receiving the kit or getting the swabbing in the clinic, reported little or no pain (98.4%), and reported willingness to undergo swabbing in the future (97.9%). After swabbing, clinic participants reported greater trust that swabbing can give accurate information about anal cancer risk (89.9%) than home participants (69.6%) (p < 0.001), and that swabbing will help them avoid anal cancer (clinic = 79.8%, home = 59.8%) (p = 0.01). Conclusion: Anal swabbing acceptability was high and did not differ between home and clinic. Participants reported high confidence and knowledge using the mailed anal self-sampling kit. Clinical Trial Registration number is NCT03489707.

Concordance of Human Papillomavirus Genotypes in Mailed Home-Based Self-Collected Versus Clinician-Collected Anal Swabs Among Sexual and Gender Minority Individuals.

BACKGROUND: Home-based self-sampling may be a viable option for anal cancer screening among sexual minority men (SMM). Yet limited research has compared home-based self-collected with clinician-collected anal swabs for human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping. METHODS: The Prevent Anal Cancer Self-Swab Study recruited SMM and transgender persons 25 years and over in Milwaukee, WI to participate in an anal cancer screening study. Participants were randomized to a home or clinic arm. Home-based participants were mailed an anal self-sampling kit to complete and return via postal mail. They were also asked to attend a clinic appointment where a clinician collected an anal swab. Swabs were HPV-genotyped using the SPF 10 -LiPA 25 assay. We analyzed 79 paired self and clinician swabs to determine HPV prevalence, percent agreement, and sensitivity and specificity of the mailed home-based anal self-swab to detect HPV genotypes using the clinician-collected swab as the reference. RESULTS: The median number of days between the home and clinic swab was 19 days (range = 2 to 70). Human papillomavirus was detected in 73.3% of self and 75.0% of clinician anal swabs ( P = 0.99). Prevalence of any HPV, any high-risk HPV, any low-risk HPV, and individual HPV types did not significantly differ between self and clinician anal swabs. Agreement between self and clinician swabs was over 90% for 21 of the 25 HPV genotypes. Mailed home-based self-collected swabs had a sensitivity of 94.1% (95% confidence interval, 82.9-99.0) for detection of high-risk HPV versus clinician-collected sampling. CONCLUSIONS: Mailed home-based self-collected and clinician-collected anal swabs demonstrated high concordance for HPV genotyping.

Home-based self-sampling vs clinician sampling for anal precancer screening: The Prevent Anal Cancer Self-Swab Study.

Sexual minority men are at increased risk for anal squamous cell carcinoma. Our objective was to compare screening engagement among individuals randomized to self-collect an anal canal specimen at home or to attend a clinic appointment. Specimen adequacy was then assessed for human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA genotyping. A randomized trial recruited cisgendered sexual minority men and transgender people in the community and assigned them to use a home-based self-collection swabbing kit or attend a clinic-based swabbing. Swabs were sent for HPV genotyping. The proportions of participants completing screening in each study arm and the adequacy of their specimens for HPV genotyping were assessed. Relative risks were estimated for factors associated with screening. A total of 240 individuals were randomized. Age (median, 46 years) and HIV status (27.1% living with HIV) did not differ by study arm. A total of 89.2% and 74.2% of home-arm and clinic-arm individuals returned the swab, respectively (P = .003), difference between groups, 15.0% (95% CI 5.4%-24.6%). Among black individuals, 96.2% and 63.2% in the home and clinic arms screened (P = .006). Among individuals with HIV, 89.5% and 51.9% in the home and clinic arms screened (P < .001). Self-collected swabs and clinician-collected swabs were comparable in adequacy for HPV genotyping (96.3% and 93.3%, respectively). People at highest risk for anal cancer may be more likely to screen if they are able to self-collect swabs at home rather than attend a clinic.

The Impact of Body Mass Index and Medical Conditions on Home-based Anal Self-Sampling.

Purpose. Self-sampling is increasingly being used in screening programs, yet no studies to date have examined the impact of bodily characteristics on self-sampling experiences. Our objective was to assess whether body mass index (BMI) and physical disability were associated with anal self-sampling difficulty. Methods. We recruited sexual minority men (SMM) and trans persons in Milwaukee, Wisconsin to participate in an anal cancer screening study. Between January 2020 and August 2022, 240 participants were randomized to a home (n=120) or clinic (n=120) screening arm. Home participants received a mailed at-home anal self-sampling kit and were asked to attend a baseline clinic visit where biometric measurements were collected. Participants were asked to complete a survey about their experience with the kit. This research utilizes data from participants who used the kit and completed a baseline clinic visit and post-swab survey (n=82). We assessed the impact of BMI and physical disability on reported body or swab positioning difficulty. Results. Most participants reported no or little difficulty with body positioning (90.3%) or swab positioning (82.9%). Higher BMI was significantly associated with greater reported difficulty with body positioning (aOR=1.10, 95% CI 1.003-1.20, p =.04) and swab positioning (aOR=1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.20, p =.01). Physical disability was not significantly associated with body or swab positioning difficulty. Specimen adequacy did not differ by BMI category ( p =.76) or physical disability ( p =.88). Conclusion. Anal self-sampling may be a viable option to reach obese persons who may be more likely to avoid screening due to weight-related barriers.

Digital Anal Rectal Examination Usage Among Individuals at Increased Risk for Anal Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Multiple organizations recommend an annual digital anal rectal examination (DARE) for people at highest risk for anal cancer. The authors assessed DARE usage among sexual minority men and transgender women. METHODS: Community-recruited and asymptomatic individuals from a mid-sized US city were enrolled into the Prevent Anal Cancer Self-Swab Study, a longitudinal clinical trial of anal cancer screening. Self-reported data from the baseline survey were used to assess usage of DARE in the last year and during the lifetime. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and CIs for factors associated with each outcome were determined using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 241 participants, median age was 46 years (interquartile range, 33-57 years), 27.0% were living with HIV, and 24.5% reported a previous diagnosis of anal warts. A total of 13.7% (95% CI = 9.4%-18.0%) of individuals reported a DARE in the previous year, whereas 53.9% (95% CI = 47.7%-60.2%) reported a DARE during the lifetime. The following were associated with a DARE in the previous year: increasing age (aOR = 1.04; 95% CI = 1.01-1.08 for each additional year), any previous anal cytology (aOR = 2.62; 95% CI = 1.19-5.80, compared with no previous test or no knowledge of a test), and preferred receptive position during anal sex (aOR = 4.93; 95% CI = 1.17-20.86 compared with insertive). CONCLUSIONS: Despite guidelines recommending an annual DARE, it was uncommonly reported. There is an urgent need to understand barriers to conducting DARE among individuals most vulnerable to anal cancer and their health care providers.

The influence of home versus clinic anal human papillomavirus sampling on high-resolution anoscopy uptake in the Prevent Anal Cancer Self-Swab Study.

Background: Anal cancer disproportionately affects men who have sex with men (MSM) living with HIV. High-resolution anoscopy (HRA) is an in-clinic procedure to detect precancerous anal lesions and cancer, yet prospective data on factors associated with HRA attendance are lacking. We examined whether anal HPV sampling at home versus in a clinic impacts HRA uptake and assessed HRA acceptability. Method: MSM and trans persons 25 years and older were randomized to home-based self-sampling or clinical sampling. All were asked to attend in-clinic HRA one year later. We regressed HRA attendance on study arm using multivariable Poisson regression and assessed HRA acceptability using χ 2 tests. Results: 62.8% of 196 participants who engaged in screening attended HRA. Although not significant ( p =0.13), a higher proportion of participants who engaged in clinic-based screening attended HRA (68.5%) compared to home-based participants (57.9%). Overall, HRA uptake was higher among participants with anal cytology history (aRR 1.44, 95% CI 1.11 - 1.87) and lower among participants preferring versatile anal sex position versus insertive (aRR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53 - 0.91), but did not differ by race or HIV serostatus. In the clinic arm, persons living with HIV had lower HRA attendance (42.9%) versus HIV-negative participants (73.3%) ( p =0.02) and Black non-Hispanic participants had lower HRA attendance (41.7%) than White non-Hispanic participants (73.1%), ( p =0.04); however, no differences in attendance by race or HIV status were observed in the home arm. Conclusions: HRA uptake differed significantly by race and HIV status in the clinic arm but not the home arm.

Effect of the environment on home-based self-sampling kits for anal cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: Anal cancer incidence has increased in Western countries in recent decades and currently there are no consensus screening guidelines. Home-based self-sampling kits might facilitate screening for anal precancer/cancer but could require travel through postal mail where they may experience extreme temperatures or long transport times. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of the environment on specimen adequacy for HPV genotyping of a mailed home-based self-sampling anal cancer screening kit. STUDY DESIGN: The Prevent Anal Cancer (PAC) Study in Milwaukee, Wisconsin recruited men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender persons 25 years of age and older. Participants were randomized to receive a mailed self-sampling kit or attend a clinic for screening. Kits were insulated with foam and included a device to record temperature every twenty minutes. Samples were returned via mail and underwent HPV genotyping using the SPF10-LiPA25 assay which also detected human RNase P to determine specimen adequacy by qPCR. For the first 93 kits, logistic regression assessed associations between specimen inadequacy and temperature, freeze-thaw cycle, presence of fecal matter, and number of days in an uncontrolled environment. RESULTS: Most specimens (92.5%) were adequate for HPV genotyping. Specimen inadequacy was not associated with temperature, freeze-thaw cycle, or transit time. Fecal matter was present more often in inadequate (71.4%) compared to adequate specimens (16.3%) (p = .004). CONCLUSIONS: These real-world data from mailed home-based anal self-sampling kits found that environmental conditions did not affect specimen adequacy. While over 90% of specimens were adequate, presence of fecal matter predicted specimen inadequacy.

Qualitative analysis of user reviews from Nurx and Planned Parenthood Direct: what user experiences reveal about telecontraception apps.

BACKGROUND: Telecontraception is a novel method that aims to address existing barriers associated with obtaining contraception in the United States, yet research examining user experiences with these apps is lacking. METHODS: Qualitative data analysis was used to conduct a content analysis of user reviews from two major telecontraception platforms, Nurx and Planned Parenthood Direct. RESULTS: Access and timeliness, clinician interaction, cost and affordability, support for the idea of telecontraception, and platform experience were the main themes across both platforms. Telecontraception alleviated many barriers related to in-person visits for contraception, such as waiting months for a booked provider appointment or having to take time off from work to visit a healthcare facility. Information and education, birth control options, and largely positive interactions with clinicians indicated that telecontraception has the potential to improve user experiences of contraceptive counselling by facilitating on-demand access to clinicians and contraceptive information. Cost and affordability had mixed reviews, with varying experiences depending on insurance. CONCLUSIONS: Similar themes across both platforms highlight shared motivations for turning to telecontraception platforms and uncover currently unmet needs in the traditional in-person reproductive healthcare system. Telecontraception platforms eradicate many barriers present in traditional in-person healthcare visits yet are limited by existing institutional frameworks such as insurance. Addressing cost and reach barriers could help ensure all women can utilise telecontraception.

Poor mental health among low-income women in the U.S.: The roles of adverse childhood and adult experiences.

RATIONALE: It is well established that exposure to a greater number of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) increases the risk of poor physical and mental health outcomes. Given the predictive validity of ACE scores and other cumulative risk metrics, a similar measurement approach may advance the study of risk in adulthood. OBJECTIVE: We examined the prevalence and interrelations of 10 adverse adult experiences, including household events such as intimate partner violence and extrafamilial events such as crime victimization. We also tested the relation between cumulative adult adversity and later mental health problems, and we examined whether adult adversity mediates the link between childhood adversity and mental health. METHODS: Data were collected from 501 women in the Families and Children Thriving Study, a longitudinal investigation of low-income families that received home visiting services in Wisconsin. We conducted correlation analyses to assess interrelations among study measures along with multivariate analyses to test the effects of childhood and adult adversity on three outcomes: depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). We then fit a structural equation model to test whether the effects of childhood adversity on mental health are mediated by adult adversity. RESULTS: Over 80% of participants endorsed at least one adverse adult experience. Adult adversities correlated with each other and with the mental health outcomes. Controlling for ACEs and model covariates, adult adversity scores were positively associated with depression, anxiety, and PTSD scores. Path analyses revealed that the ACE-mental health connection was mediated by adult adversity. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that mental health problems may be better understood by accounting for processes through which early adversity leads to later adversity. Pending replication, this line of research has the potential to improve the identification of populations that are at risk of poor health outcomes.