Cancer screening in sexual and gender minority populations: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

10540 Background: The sexual and gender minority (SGM) populations experience a greater cancer burden than their heterosexual or cisgender counterparts. Screening rates for cancer within this cohort are frequently suboptimal, highlighting notable deficiencies in screening recommendations. Inadequate culturally competent care and screening guidelines may contribute to delays in cancer diagnosis and treatment, ultimately impacting survival and quality of life. We sought to investigate the existing disparities in cancer screening among SGM populations. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the cancer screening rates in SGM. The SGM population included in this study were gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgender men, and transgender women. Two reviewers conducted a systematic search of numerous databases, including PubMed, PsycINFO, and CINAHL, and then extracted relevant information from eligible studies. For this study, we conducted a meta-analysis using a random-effects model. Pooled estimates of the odds ratio were calculated for any combination of outcomes and population when at least two studies had relevant data. Study heterogeneity was assessed using I² statistics. Meta-regression, accounting for the study weight, year, and latitude, was performed on variables potentially associated with heterogeneity. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the quality of selected studies. Results: We analyzed data from a total of 60 eligible studies with 65,315 patients. Pooled analysis showed that sexual minority groups were at lower risk for cancer screening such as breast cancer screening (OR: 0.79, 95% CI, 0.75-0.82; Chi2=835.23; p<0.001; I2=97%), cervical cancer screening (OR: 0.62, 95% CI, 0.56-0.72; Chi2=926.23; p<0.001; I2=96%), colorectal cancer screening (OR: 0.51, 95% CI, 0.45-0.61; Chi2=3272.21; p<0.001; I2=98%), and prostate cancer screening (OR: 0.71, 95% CI, 0.63-0.82; Chi2=1282.92; p<0.001; I2=99%). The prevalence of lung cancer (p<0.001) and anal cancer screening (p<0.001) were also lower in sexual minority groups. The analysis also showed no small study effects (Egger test: 1.33; 95% CI: −5.42, −0.63; p=0.182). All the subgroups (geographical location, screening procedure, screening period) had high between-study heterogeneity. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that cancer screening rates for breast, cervical, colorectal, prostate, lung, and anal cell cancer are significantly lower in SGM populations and emphasize the urgent need for targeted interventions, culturally competent care, and inclusive screening guidelines to address these disparities. Understanding and addressing these issues are crucial for reducing delays in cancer diagnosis and improving survival and quality of life for SGM population. Further research and comprehensive strategies are warranted to bridge these gaps in cancer screening accessibility and uptake.