S643 Current Recommendations for Screening Guidelines in the Management of Anal Cancer for High-Risk Populations: A Review

Introduction: Anal cancer in the general population is rare. However, the incidence has increased the last several decades in high-risk populations including people with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), people who are immunocompromised, human papillomavirus (HPV) positive infection, high risk sex behaviors, men who have sex with men (MSM), and/or engaging in unprotected anal sex. Since anal cancer continues to rise in certain populations, it is imperative to investigate if screening tools should be implemented to prevent and better treat anal cancer if detected early. As it stands currently, there are no screening guidelines for anal cancer in high-risk groups. Methods: Rayyan website use to stratify articles based on abstract and title with inclusion criteria of anal cancer. Inclusion criteria included: anal cancer and screening guidelines or diagnostic High-risk populations also included HIV, HPV, MSM populations according to existing guidelines. While HPV is related to both anal and cervical cancer, if the article just talked about cervical cancer, then it was excluded. Exclusion criteria included: if the paper was not written in English without translation provided, if the paper was published before 2000, if other cancers were mentioned, or if other clinical outcomes were reported not in the scope of this systematic review. Fifty-two articles were included. Results: Multiple studies reported evidence of potential biases and disparities when discussing anal cancer screening. Compared with White men, Asian men were less likely to have discussed screening with a healthcare provider or to have been screened by digital anal rectal examination or anal cytology/anoscopy. Men who identified as African, Caribbean, or Black were less likely to have had digital anal rectal examination. These results remained consistent when restricting the analyses to gay, bisexual, and men who have sex with men. It is imperative to be conscious of implicit biases, so it does not affect the care patients receive and deserve. Conclusion: With the increasing incidence of anal cancer in high-risk populations, this systematic review sought to review current literature to determine the potential role of standardized screening guidelines for anal cancer for prevention and early detection. Without universal and standardized guidelines, as it stands currently, there is likelihood of bias and inconsistency when determining who to screen.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
The American Journal of Gastroenterology
Published
2025-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.14309/01.ajg.0001130032.13568.d4
Primary Topic
Colorectal and Anal Carcinomas
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

S643 Current Recommendations for Screening Guidelines in the Management of Anal Cancer for High-Risk Populations: A Review

Alexander García, Mahir Qureshi, Simran Kripalani, Apeksha Shah et al.
The American Journal of Gastroenterology
Colorectal and Anal Carcinomas
article

S643 Current Recommendations for Screening Guidelines in the Management of Anal Cancer for High-Risk Populations: A Review

Alexander García, Mahir Qureshi, Simran Kripalani, Apeksha Shah, Ateef A. Qureshi, Avneet Singh
article en

Abstract

Introduction: Anal cancer in the general population is rare. However, the incidence has increased the last several decades in high-risk populations including people with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), people who are immunocompromised, human papillomavirus (HPV) positive infection, high risk sex behaviors, men who have sex with men (MSM), and/or engaging in unprotected anal sex. Since anal cancer continues to rise in certain populations, it is imperative to investigate if screening tools should be implemented to prevent and better treat anal cancer if detected early. As it stands currently, there are no screening guidelines for anal cancer in high-risk groups. Methods: Rayyan website use to stratify articles based on abstract and title with inclusion criteria of anal cancer. Inclusion criteria included: anal cancer and screening guidelines or diagnostic High-risk populations also included HIV, HPV, MSM populations according to existing guidelines. While HPV is related to both anal and cervical cancer, if the article just talked about cervical cancer, then it was excluded. Exclusion criteria included: if the paper was not written in English without translation provided, if the paper was published before 2000, if other cancers were mentioned, or if other clinical outcomes were reported not in the scope of this systematic review. Fifty-two articles were included. Results: Multiple studies reported evidence of potential biases and disparities when discussing anal cancer screening. Compared with White men, Asian men were less likely to have discussed screening with a healthcare provider or to have been screened by digital anal rectal examination or anal cytology/anoscopy. Men who identified as African, Caribbean, or Black were less likely to have had digital anal rectal examination. These results remained consistent when restricting the analyses to gay, bisexual, and men who have sex with men. It is imperative to be conscious of implicit biases, so it does not affect the care patients receive and deserve. Conclusion: With the increasing incidence of anal cancer in high-risk populations, this systematic review sought to review current literature to determine the potential role of standardized screening guidelines for anal cancer for prevention and early detection. Without universal and standardized guidelines, as it stands currently, there is likelihood of bias and inconsistency when determining who to screen.

The American Journal of GastroenterologyVol. 120(10S2)
Openalex Percentile: Top 52%
Colorectal and Anal Carcinomas
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.