Background: Gender and sex can influence cannabis behaviors and consequences (Cannabis Use Disorder [CUD]). Research typically examines sex and gender independently. Gender analyses often exclude transgender and gender diverse (TGD) populations. The objectives of this study were to (a) replicate less frequent cannabis use among TGD young adults compared to cisgender counterparts (b) compare severity of CUD, and (c) examine the role of sex on cannabis outcomes. Method: Online survey participants between 18 and 34 (N=1213) from the United States who reported past-week cannabis consumption provided information on cannabis practices and CUD from February to April 2022. Bivariate analyses explored gender differences across frequency (daily frequency across routes of administration [ROAs]; daily use of 2+ ROAs, use throughout the day) and CUD. Adjusted regression models provided model-estimated marginal probabilities and means to examine differences across four gender-by-sex categories (cisgender men: n=385; cisgender women: n=681; male-at-birth TGD: n=26; female-at-birth TGD: n=121). Benjamini-Hochberg adjustments (10% false discovery rate) were applied. Results: Among past-week consumers, female-at-birth TGD participants demonstrated lower probability of daily flower smoking compared to cisgender men (0.54 vs. 0.67). Cisgender men reported greater probability of daily concentrate vaping (0.55) compared to cisgender women (0.45) and female-at-birth TGD participants (0.27); they were also more likely to report daily use of 2+ ROAs (cisgender men: 0.51 vs. cisgender women: 0.39 and female at-birth TGD: 0.27). TGD participants reported greater CUD severity compared to cisgender counterparts, t(1096)=-3.69, p=0.002. Model-estimated means found lower severity among cisgender women compared to cisgender men and female-at-birth TGD participants. Stratified regression models support positive associations between daily cannabis use and CUD in both TGD in cisgender groups. Among cisgender participants, greater severity was predicted by male sex, younger age, and younger age of onset. Conclusions: The present study replicates and extends a prior finding that among past-week cannabis consumers, TGD young adults report less frequent use than cisgender counterparts. Despite this, TGD participants demonstrated greater severity of CUD. While analyses were limited by the small sample of male-at-birth TGD participants, the article highlights the importance of expanding sex- and gender-focused analyses. Future work is expanding efforts to target hard-to-reach consumers.
Keywords: cannabis; gender differences; gender minority; health disparities; sex.