Lung cancer is the most common cancer and cause of cancer death in Canada, with approximately 50% of cases diagnosed at stage IV. Sociodemographic inequalities in lung cancer diagnosis have been documented, but it is not known if inequalities exist with respect to immigration status. We used multiple linked health-administrative databases to create a cohort of Ontarians 40–105 years of age who were diagnosed with an incident lung cancer between 1 April 2012 and 31 March 2017. We used modified Poisson regression with robust standard errors to examine the risk of diagnosis at late vs. early stage among immigrants compared to long-term residents. The fully adjusted model included age, sex, neighborhood-area income quintile, number of Aggregated Diagnosis Group (ADG) comorbidities, cancer type, number of prior primary care visits, and continuity of care. Approximately 62% of 38,788 people with an incident lung cancer from 2012 to 2017 were diagnosed at a late stage. Immigrants to the province were no more likely to have a late-stage diagnosis than long-term residents (63.5% vs. 62.0%, relative risk (RR): 1.01 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.99–1.04), adjusted relative risk (ARR): 1.02 (95% CI: 0.99–1.05)). However, in fully adjusted models, people with more comorbidities were less likely to have a late-stage diagnosis (adjusted relative risk (ARR): 0.82 (95% CI: 0.80–0.84) for those with 10+ vs. 0–5 ADGs). Compared to adenocarcinoma, small cell carcinoma was more likely to be diagnosed at a late stage (ARR: 1.29; 95% CI: 1.27–1.31), and squamous cell (ARR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.87–0.91) and other lung cancers (ARR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.91–0.94) were more likely to be diagnosed at an early stage. Men were also slightly more likely to have late-stage diagnosis in the fully adjusted model (ARR: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.05–1.08). Lung cancer in Ontario is a high-fatality cancer that is frequently diagnosed at a late stage. Having fewer comorbidities and being diagnosed with small cell carcinoma was associated with a late-stage diagnosis. The former group may have less health system contact, and the latter group has the lung cancer type most closely associated with smoking. As lung cancer screening programs start to be implemented across Canada, targeted outreach to men and to smokers, increasing awareness about screening, and connecting every Canadian with primary care should be system priorities.

Background: In the United States, inequities in preventive health behaviors such as cervical cancer screening have been documented. Sexual orientation, gender identity, and race/ethnicity all individually contribute to such disparities. However, little work has investigated their joint impact on screening behavior. Methods: Using sampling weighted data from the 2016 and 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, we assessed differences in two metrics via chi-square statistics: 1) lifetime uptake, and 2) up-to-date cervical cancer screening by sexual orientation and gender identity, within and across racial/ethnic classifications. Results: Within all races, individuals who identify as members of sexual and gender minority (SGM) communities reported higher rates of never being screened (except for Black transgender men) than straight or cisgender individuals (p < 0.0001). [*START* Across all races, the Asian/Pacific Islander transgender population (32.4%; weighted n (w.n.) = 1,313) had the lowest proportion of lifetime screening, followed by the Asian/Pacific Islander gay/lesbian (53.0%, w.n. = 21,771), Hispanic transgender (58.7%; w.n. = 24,780), Asian/Pacific Islander bisexual (61.8%, w.n. = 54,524), and Hispanic gay/lesbian (69.6%, w.n. = 125,781) populations. *END*] Straight or cisgender Non-Hispanic White (w.n. = 40,664,476) individuals had the highest proportion of lifetime screening (97.7% and 97.5%, respectively). However, among individuals who had been screened at least once in their lifetime, identifying as SGM was not associated with a decreased proportion of up-to-date screening within or between races. Conclusions: Due to small sample sizes, especially among Asian/Pacific Islander and Hispanic populations, confidence intervals were wide. Heterogeneity in screening participation by SGM status within and across racial/ethnic groups were observed. Impact: These screening disparities reveal the need to disaggregate data to account for intersecting identities and for studies with larger sample sizes to increase estimate reliability.

Background: Cancer survivors are at high risk for chronic health conditions and physical and cognitive limitations. However, few studies have explored these outcomes among Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Plus (LGBTQ+) survivors. Methods: We used pooled, weighted Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data from 23 states that completed two specific modules at least once from 2020 to 2022. We calculated age-adjusted prevalence for heart disease, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, depressive disorders, myocardial infarction, kidney disease, stroke, diabetes, hearing disability, vision disability, cognitive limitations, and difficulty walking, dressing, and running errands in LGBTQ+, lesbian, gay, or bisexual, transgender or gender nonconforming (TGNC), and non-LGBTQ+ cancer survivors. Four multivariable logistic regression models controlling for different factors were run for each outcome. Results: Of 40,990 cancer survivors, 1,715 were LGBTQ+. LGBTQ+ survivors had significantly higher age-adjusted prevalence of all outcomes. The prevalence of all outcomes was the highest among TGNC survivors, except for depressive disorders and cognitive limitations. LGBTQ+ survivors had higher odds of reporting asthma [adjusted OR (aOR): 1.5; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.2–1.9], depressive disorders (aOR: 1.9; 95% CI, 1.6–2.4), kidney disease (aOR: 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1–2.1), stroke (aOR: 1.7; 95% CI, 1.3–2.3), diabetes (aOR: 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0–1.6), vision disability (aOR: 1.6; 95% CI, 1.2–2.2), cognitive limitations (aOR: 2.3; 95% CI, 1.8–2.9), difficulty walking (aOR: 1.7; 95% CI, 1.3–2.0), dressing (aOR: 2.0; 95% CI, 1.5–2.7), and running errands (aOR: 1.6; 95% CI, 1.3–2.1). In TGNC models, TGNC cancer survivors had increased odds of most outcomes in comparison to cisgender survivors. Conclusions: LGBTQ+ cancer survivors have an elevated burden of all chronic health conditions, disabilities, and limitations assessed. TGNC cancer survivors experience even higher burden of the same outcomes. Impact: Findings highlight substantial disparities regarding the health of LGBTQ+ cancer survivors. See related In the Spotlight, p. 1395

To investigate the joint impact of sexual orientation, gender identity, and race/ethnicity on colorectal and breast cancer screening disparities in the United States. Utilizing sampling weighted data from the 2016 and 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, we assessed differences in two metrics via chi-square statistics: 1) lifetime uptake, and 2) up-to-date colorectal and breast cancer screening by sexual orientation and gender identity, within and across racial/ethnic classifications. Within specific races/ethnicities, lifetime CRC screening was higher among gay/lesbian (within NH-White, Hispanic, and Asian/Pacific Islander) and bisexual individuals (Hispanic) compared to straight individuals, and lowest overall among transgender women and transgender nonconforming populations (p < 0.05). Asian transgender women had the lowest lifetime CRC screening (13.0%; w.n. = 1,428). Lifetime breast cancer screening was lowest among the Hispanic bisexual population (86.6%; w.n. = 26,940) and Hispanic transgender nonconforming population (71.8%; w.n. = 739); within all races, SGM individuals (except NH-White, Hispanic, and Black bisexual populations, and NH-White transgender men) had greater breast cancer screening adherence compared to straight individuals. Due to small, unweighted sample sizes, results should be interpreted with caution. Heterogeneity in screening participation by SGM status within and across racial/ethnic groups were observed, revealing the need to disaggregate data to account for intersecting identities and for studies with larger sample sizes to increase estimate reliability.