ReviewTransgender health2026
A Review on Cervical Cancer Screening in Transgender Men: What Are the Particularities of This Approach?
Review in Transgender health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Cervical cancer is the fourth most common cancer in the population with a uterus and vagina worldwide. Transgender men (TM) undergo less screening for cervical cancer than the population of cisgender women (CW). This review aimed to summarize the evidence on screening methods for cervical cancer in TM. Methods: This is an integrative review structured along three axes: barriers of screening, colpocytology and human papillomavirus (HPV) screening. The keywords, "transgender," "uterine cervix cancer," "pap smear," and "pap test," were used to search articles in Embase and PubMed databases. Results: Three hundred and fifty-two articles were found, 12 of which were used to prepare this review. Disaffirmation of the patient's gender and unequal power dynamics between patient and provider during screening contribute to patient unwillingness to be screened. TM are significantly less likely to receive Papanicolaou (Pap) tests. Unsatisfactory Pap tests are more frequent in TM due to vaginal atrophy caused by testosterone use. Even when compared with atrophic CW, the rate of unsatisfactory tests is lower in TM. Metaplasia and cellular changes such as "small cells" and dysplastic changes in TM on testosterone may complicate cytologic interpretation. HPV molecular detection can be a screening alternative for this group, and self-collection can be an alternative to increase screening rates in this population. Conclusion: TM have lower screening rates for cervical cancer than CW. Pap smear presents higher rates of unsatisfactory results in the TM population. The assessment of dysplasias may be hampered by the action of testosterone. Strategies that aim to evaluate HPV molecular biology detection and self-collection can improve this population's adherence to screening programs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.