4.3 Article

Cancer diagnoses among lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults: results from the 2013-2016 National Health Interview Survey

Journal

CANCER CAUSES & CONTROL
Volume 29, Issue 9, Pages 845-854

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10552-018-1060-x

Keywords

LGBT health; Cancer disparities; Cancer diagnosis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objective of this study was to compare cancer diagnoses by age, gender, and sexual orientation. This study used data on 129,431 heterosexual adults and 3,357 lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) adults in the 2013-2016 National Health Interview Survey. Logistic regression models compared the prevalence of cancer diagnoses by sexual orientation while controlling for demographics, socioeconomic status, and health profiles. Then, using coefficients from fully adjusted models, we estimated average marginal effects to compare the probability of a cancer diagnosis by sexual orientation across five age categories. After controlling for demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, gay men (odds ratio [OR] 1.54; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10-2.18) were more likely to have been diagnosed with cancer compared to heterosexual men, and bisexual women (OR 1.70; 95% CI 1.16-2.48) were more likely to have been diagnosed with cancer compared to heterosexual women. Gay men aged 65 years and older were 6.0% points (p < 0.05) more likely to be diagnosed with cancer compared to heterosexual men of the same age. Bisexual women aged 65 years and older were 7.6% points (p < 0.05) more likely to be diagnosed with cancer compared to women of the same age. Some sexual minorities may be at greater risk for cancer (or having a personal history of cancer) compared to heterosexuals. More research on cancer detection, treatment, and survivorship in sexual minorities is critically needed. Health care providers and public health practitioners should be aware of the unique health care needs in LGB adults, including their elevated cancer risks.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available