Advancing genomics to improve health equity.

Health equity is the state in which everyone has fair and just opportunities to attain their highest level of health. The field of human genomics has fallen short in increasing health equity, largely because the diversity of the human population has been inadequately reflected among participants of genomics research. This lack of diversity leads to disparities that can have scientific and clinical consequences. Achieving health equity related to genomics will require greater effort in addressing inequities within the field. As part of the commitment of the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) to advancing health equity, it convened experts in genomics and health equity research to make recommendations and performed a review of current literature to identify the landscape of gaps and opportunities at the interface between human genomics and health equity research. This Perspective describes these findings and examines health equity within the context of human genomics and genomic medicine.

Health status of transgender people globally: A systematic review of research on disease burden and correlates.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Transgender and gender diverse (trans) health research has grown rapidly, highlighting the need to characterize the scientific evidence base. We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed research on disease burden and correlates in trans adolescents and adults over a 20-month period to identify knowledge gaps and assess methodological characteristics including measurement of gender identity, community engagement, and study quality. DATA SOURCES, ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: We searched seven databases using terms related to (a) transgender populations and (b) health or disease. Eligible studies were in English, French, or Spanish and reported original quantitative data on mental health or substance use conditions, infectious diseases, or non-communicable conditions in at least 25 trans individuals aged 15+. Quality assessment was performed in duplicate on a 10% sample of articles and findings were summarized using narrative synthesis. RESULTS: The 328 included studies were conducted in 45 countries, with most from North America (54%) and limited research from South Asia (3%), Sub-Saharan Africa (3%), and the Middle East and North Africa (2%). Most studies used cross-sectional designs (73%) and convenience sampling (65%). Only 30% of studies reported any form of community engagement. Mental health and substance use disorders were the most studied area (77% of studies) and non-communicable conditions the least (16%). Available data indicated that trans populations experience high disease burden with considerable heterogeneity within and across settings. Of 39 articles assessed for quality, 80% were rated as fair, 18% as poor, and 3% as good quality. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Geographic, gender-specific, and topical gaps remain in trans health, but we found more research from African countries, with transmasculine people, and on non-communicable conditions than previous syntheses. Areas for growth in trans health research include community engagement, non-binary health, chronic and age-related conditions, and health determinants. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021234043.

First They Came for Us All: Responding to Anti-Transgender Structural Violence With Collective, Community-Engaged, and Intersectional Health Equity Research and Advocacy.

This article is a call for collective action across health equity researchers and advocates to build a more just world. We attempt to make sense of senseless structural and interpersonal brutality in the context of the current political climate across the United States, whereby the spectrum of gender nonconformity has been and continues to be stigmatized. From drag performance to transgender identities to gender-affirming health care, extremists have instrumentalized primary levers of democracy-the courts, legislatures, and social media-to attempt to outlaw and eradicate gender expansiveness and those who provide forms of support and care, including gender-affirming medical care, to transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive (TNBGE) individuals.

State-level heterogeneity in associations between structural stigma and individual health care access: A multilevel analysis of transgender adults in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: State-level variation in how restrictive policies affect health care access for transgender populations has not been widely studied. Therefore, we assessed the association between structural stigma and four measures of individual health care access among transgender people in the United States, and the extent to which structural stigma explains state-level variability. METHODS: Data were drawn from the 2015-2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System and the Human Rights Campaign's State Equality Index. We calculated weighted proportions and conducted multilevel logistic regression of individual heterogeneity and discriminatory accuracy. RESULTS: An increase in the structural stigma score by one standard deviation was associated with lower odds of health care coverage (OR = 0.80; 95% CI: 0.66, 0.96) after adjusting for individual-level confounders. Approximately 11% of the total variance for insurance coverage was attributable to the state level; however, only 18% of state-level variability was explained by structural stigma. Adding Medicaid expansion attenuated the structural stigma-insurance association and explained 22% of state-level variation in health insurance. For the remaining outcomes (usual source of care, routine medical check-up, and cost-related barriers), we found neither meaningful associations nor considerable between-state variability. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the importance of Medicaid expansion and transgender-inclusive antidiscrimination protections to enhance health care insurance coverage. From a measurement perspective, however, additional research is needed to develop and validate measures of transgender-specific structural stigma to guide future policy interventions.

Will clinical standards not be part of the choir? Harmonization between the HL7 gender harmony project model and the NASEM measuring sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation report in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: To propose an approach for semantic and functional data harmonization related to sex and gender constructs in electronic health records (EHRs) and other clinical systems for implementors, as outlined in the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) report Measuring Sex, Gender Identity, and Sexual Orientation and the Health Level 7 (HL7) Gender Harmony Project (GHP) product brief "Gender Harmony-Modeling Sex and Gender Representation, Release 1." MATERIALS AND METHODS: Authors from both publications contributed to a plan for data harmonization based upon fundamental principles in informatics, including privacy, openness, access, legitimate infringement, least intrusive alternatives, and accountability. RESULTS: We propose construct entities and value sets that best align with both publications to allow the implementation of EHR data elements on gender identity, recorded sex or gender, and sex for clinical use in the United States. We include usability- and interoperability-focused reasoning for each of these decisions, as well as suggestions for cross-tabulation for populations. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Both publications agree on core approaches to conceptualization and measurement of sex- and gender-related constructs. However, some clarifications could improve our ability to assess gender modality, alignment (or lack thereof) between gender identity and assigned gender at birth, and address both individual-level and population-level health inequities. By bridging the GHP and NASEM recommendations, we provide a path forward for implementation of sex- and gender-related EHR elements. Suggestions for implementation of gender identity, recorded sex or gender, and sex for clinical use are provided, along with semantic and functional justifications.

Health and Health Care Among Transgender Adults in the United States.

Transgender (trans) communities in the USA and globally have long organized for health and social equity but have only recently gained increased visibility within public health. In this review, we synthesize evidence demonstrating that trans adults in the USA are affected by disparities in physical and mental health and in access to health care, relative to cisgender (nontrans) persons. We draw on theory and data to situate these disparities in their social contexts, explicating the roles of gender affirmation, multilevel and intersectional stigmas, and public policies in reproducing or ameliorating trans health disparities. Until recently, trans health disparities were largely made invisible by exclusionary data collection practices. We highlight the importance of, and methodological considerations for, collecting inclusive sex and gender data. Moving forward, we recommend routine collection of gender identity data, an emphasis on intervention research to achieve trans health equity, public policy advocacy, and investment in supporting gender-diverse public health leadership.

Gender affirming hormone therapy dosing behaviors among transgender and nonbinary adults.

Gender-affirming hormones have been shown to improve psychological functioning and quality of life among transgender and nonbinary (trans) people, yet, scant research exists regarding whether and why individuals take more or less hormones than prescribed. Drawing on survey data from 379 trans people who were prescribed hormones, we utilized multivariable logistic regression models to identify factors associated with hormone-dosing behaviors and content analysis to examine the reasons for dose modifications. Overall, 24% of trans individuals took more hormones than prescribed and 57% took less. Taking more hormones than prescribed was significantly associated with having the same provider for primary and gender-affirming care and gender-based discrimination. Income and insurance coverage barriers were significantly associated with taking less hormones than prescribed. Differences by gender identity were also observed. Addressing barriers to hormone access and cost could help to ensure safe hormone-dosing behaviors and the achievement trans people's gender-affirmation goals.

Prevalence and associations of COVID-19 testing in an online sample of transgender and non-binary individuals.

BACKGROUND: Testing for COVID-19 and linkage to services is fundamental to successful containment and control of transmission. Yet, knowledge on COVID-19 testing among transgender and non-binary communities remains limited. METHODS: Between October 2020 and November 2020, we examined the prevalence and associations of COVID-19 testing in an online sample of transgender and non-binary people (n=536). Multivariable hierarchical logistic regression analyses examined associations between COVID-19 testing and participants' sociodemographic, mental health, substance use, gender affirmation, economic changes and healthcare experiences. RESULTS: Prevalence of COVID-19 testing in this sample was 35.5% (n=190/536). In the final model, transgender and non-binary participants from upper socioeconomic income background and Europe, who reported having active alcohol use disorder, limited access to gender-affirming surgery, had more than 20% reduction in income, and experienced mistreatment in a health facility due to gender identity had significantly increased odds of COVID-19 testing (all p<0.05); those who reported recent tobacco use had significantly lower odds of COVID-19 testing (p=0.007). CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight structural disparities in COVID-19 testing and reinforce the importance of increasing testing strategies for transgender and non-binary populations.

Hormone Therapy, Mental Health, and Quality of Life Among Transgender People: A Systematic Review.

We sought to systematically review the effect of gender-affirming hormone therapy on psychological outcomes among transgender people. We searched PubMed, Embase, and PsycINFO through June 10, 2020 for studies evaluating quality of life (QOL), depression, anxiety, and death by suicide in the context of gender-affirming hormone therapy among transgender people of any age. We excluded case studies and studies reporting on less than 3 months of follow-up. We included 20 studies reported in 22 publications. Fifteen were trials or prospective cohorts, one was a retrospective cohort, and 4 were cross-sectional. Seven assessed QOL, 12 assessed depression, 8 assessed anxiety, and 1 assessed death by suicide. Three studies included trans-feminine people only; 7 included trans-masculine people only, and 10 included both. Three studies focused on adolescents. Hormone therapy was associated with increased QOL, decreased depression, and decreased anxiety. Associations were similar across gender identity and age. Certainty in this conclusion is limited by high risk of bias in study designs, small sample sizes, and confounding with other interventions. We could not draw any conclusions about death by suicide. Future studies should investigate the psychological benefits of hormone therapy among larger and more diverse groups of transgender people using study designs that more effectively isolate the effects of hormone treatment.

The Affordable Care Act and Its Impact on Plastic and Gender-Affirmation Surgery.

SUMMARY: The Affordable Care Act's provisions have affected and will continue to affect plastic surgeons and their patients, and an understanding of its influence on the current American health care system is essential. The law's impact on pediatric plastic surgery, craniofacial surgery, and breast reconstruction is well documented. In addition, gender-affirmation surgery has seen exponential growth, largely because of expanded insurance coverage through the protections afforded to transgender individuals by the Affordable Care Act. As gender-affirming surgery continues to grow, plastic surgeons have the opportunity to adapt and diversify their practices.

Intersectionality and Health Inequities for Gender Minority Blacks in the U.S.

INTRODUCTION: Gender minority blacks represent the intersection of multiply marginalized populations that experience severe health inequities in the U.S. However, few studies focus on the unique health experiences of this multiply disadvantaged population. This study quantifies the health inequities experienced by gender minority blacks in the U.S. using an intersectional framework. METHODS: This cross-sectional study analyzed data in 2018/2019 from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, including all cisgender black, gender minority black, and gender minority white survey respondents who completed the gender identity module between 2014 and 2018. Investigators compared demographics, healthcare access, behavioral risk factors, chronic conditions, and perceived health status of gender minority blacks with those of cisgender blacks and gender minority whites. RESULTS: In the primary analysis of weighted survey data, gender minority blacks were more likely to report experiencing severe mental distress (AOR=1.99, 95% CI=1.14, 3.47, p=0.02), longer periods of being physically or mentally unwell (adjusted RR=1.36, 95% CI=1.17, 1.59, p<0.001), and longer periods of activity limitations owing to poor health (adjusted RR=1.53, 95% CI=1.01, 1.41, p=0.003) than cisgender blacks. In a matched analysis, gender minority blacks had worse self-reported health than both cisgender blacks (OR=1.32, 95%: CI=1.05, 1.67, p=0.02) and gender minority whites (OR=1.53, 95% CI=1.15, 2.04, p=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Gender minority blacks have health experiences that are distinct from those of both the cisgender black and gender minority populations with which they intersect. Health policies and programs, including data collection efforts, must specifically consider this multiply marginalized population to effectively advance health equity.

Effects of antiandrogens on prolactin levels among transgender women on estrogen therapy: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Gender-affirming hormone therapy for transgender women includes estrogen and antiandrogens (cyproterone acetate, spironolactone, or gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists). Both estrogen and antiandrogens are reported to increase prolactin levels. The objective is to systematically review the evidence of the effects of antiandrogens on prolactin levels, hyperprolactinemia, and prolactinomas among transgender women on estrogen therapy. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and PsycInfo up to May 2020. We included studies with at least 3 months follow-up that evaluated the effects of antiandrogens among transgender women and reported on prolactin levels, hyperprolactinemia, or image-confirmed prolactinomas. Two reviewers independently screened studies for eligibility, serially abstracted data, and independently assessed risk of bias and graded strength of evidence. FINDINGS: We included 17 studies (16 publications): 8 prospective cohorts, 8 retrospective cohorts, and 1 cross-sectional study, each with a moderate to serious risk of bias. Among transgender women on estrogen, prolactin levels increased by over 100% with cyproterone acetate and by up to 45% with spironolactone. However, we were unable to isolate the effects of antiandrogens from estrogen therapy. We were unable to draw conclusions about effects of antiandrogens on hyperprolactinemia and prolactinomas. INTERPRETATION: Prolactin levels may be increased in transgender women who are taking both estrogens and an antiandrogen. Future research is needed to determine the effects of different antiandrogens on prolactin levels separately from estrogen therapy. Ideally, future studies would be prospective, provide either a comparison of two different antiandrogens or compare combination of estrogen and antiandrogen therapy to estrogen alone, and control for possible confounders.

Gender Identity Disparities in Cancer Screening Behaviors.

INTRODUCTION: Transgender (trans) and gender-nonconforming adults have reported reduced access to health care because of discrimination and lack of knowledgeable care. This study aimed to contribute to the nascent cancer prevention literature among trans and gender-nonconforming individuals by ascertaining rates of breast, cervical, prostate, and colorectal cancer screening behaviors by gender identity. METHODS: Publicly available de-identified data from the 2014-2016 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System surveys were utilized to evaluate rates of cancer screenings by gender identity, while controlling for healthcare access, sociodemographics, and survey year. Analyses were conducted in 2017. RESULTS: Weighted chi-square tests identified significant differences in the proportion of cancer screening behaviors by gender identity among lifetime colorectal cancer screenings, Pap tests, prostate-specific antigen tests, discussing prostate-specific antigen test advantages/disadvantages with their healthcare provider, and up-to-date colorectal cancer screenings and Pap tests (p<0.036). Weighted logistic regressions found that although some differences based on gender identity were fully explained by covariates, trans women had reduced odds of having up-to-date colorectal cancer screenings compared to cisgender (cis) men (AOR=0.20) and cis women (AOR=0.24), whereas trans men were more likely to ever receive a sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy as compared to cis men (AOR=2.76) and cis women (AOR=2.65). Trans women were more likely than cis men to have up-to-date prostate-specific antigen tests (AOR=3.19). Finally, trans men and gender-nonconforming individuals had reduced odds of lifetime Pap tests versus cis women (AOR=0.14 and 0.08, respectively), and gender-nonconforming individuals had lower odds of discussing prostate-specific antigen tests than cis men (AOR=0.09; all p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that gender identity disparities in cancer screenings persist beyond known sociodemographic and healthcare factors. It is critical that gender identity questions are included in cancer and other health-related surveillance systems to create knowledge to better inform healthcare practitioners and policymakers of appropriate screenings for trans and gender-nonconforming individuals.