Clinical and Translational Oncology

, Volume 20, Issue 5, pp 576–583 | Cite as

Assessment of acute bowel function after radiotherapy for prostate cancer: Is it accurate enough?

  • M. Bonet
  • L. Cayetano
  • M. Núñez
  • E. Jovell-Fernández
  • A. Aguilar
  • Y. Ribas
Research Article
  • 51 Downloads

Abstract

Background and purpose

Pelvic radiotherapy for prostate cancer can be associated with bowel toxicity, which may have a significant impact on quality of life. Our aim was to assess the adequacy of the tools currently used to assess bowel symptoms after radiotherapy, including physician and patient reported outcomes. This sub-study on acute toxicity was part of a prospective trial assessing long-term bowel dysfunction.

Materials and methods

Between February 2013 and July 2015, 75 patients with prostate cancer who received radiotherapy completed the LENT/SOMA and the EPIC questionnaires baseline and 2 weeks after the treatment. The Bristol stool scale and two additional questions on faecal urgency were added. Physicians assessed toxicity using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v.4.0. Agreement between patients and clinicians was assessed using the Cohen’s κ coefficient.

Results

Acute toxicity during radiotherapy was very low. The pattern of overall bowel bother was similar before and after treatment. Faecal urgency significantly increased after radiotherapy compared to baseline but was only detected by the additional questions and not by the physicians or the patient-reported outcomes (PRO) questionnaires. Correlation between physician and PRO was poor for most symptoms.

Conclusion

Bowel symptoms such as urgency may remain undetected by usual tools to assess toxicity after radiotherapy. Assessment of bowel toxicity should be reappraised in order to identify those patients who may have symptoms with an impact on their quality of life.

Keywords

Radiotherapy Prostate cancer Bowel dysfunction Faecal urgency Quality of life 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Ferlay J, Steliarova-Foucher E, Lortet-Tieulent J, Rosso S, Coebergh JWW, Comber H, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality patterns in Europe: estimates for 40 countries in 2012. Eur J Cancer. 2013;49:1374–403.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shao YH, Demissie K, Shih W, Mehta AR, Stein MN, Roberts CB, et al. Contemporary risk profile of prostate cancer in the United States. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101:1280–3.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chen RC, Clark JA, Talcott JA. Individualizing quality-of-life outcomes reporting: how localized prostate cancer treatments affect patients with different levels of baseline urinary, bowel, and sexual function. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:3916–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Korfage IJ, Essink-Bot M-L, Borsboom GJJM, Madalinska JB, Kirkels WJ, Habbema JDF, et al. Five-year follow-up of health-related quality of life after primary treatment of localized prostate cancer. Int J Cancer. 2005;116:291–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ferrer M, Guedea F, Suárez JF, De Paula B, Macías V, Mariño A, et al. Quality of life impact of treatments for localized prostate cancer: cohort study with a 5 year follow-up. Radiother Oncol. 2013;108:306–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bacon C, Giovannucci E, Testa M, Kawachi I. The impact of cancer treatment on quality of life outcomes for patients with localized prostate cancer. J Urol. 2001;166:1804–10.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bacon CG, Giovannucci E, Testa M, Glass TA, Kawachi I. The association of treatment-related symptoms with quality-of-life outcomes for localized prostate carcinoma patients. Cancer. 2002;94:862–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Andreyev HJ, Wotherspoon A, Denham JW. H-JM. Defining pelvic-radiation disease for the survivorship era. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:310–2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Basch E, Reeve BB, Mitchell SA, Clauser SB, Minasian LM, Dueck AC, Mendoza TR, Hay J, Atkinson TM, Abernethy AP, Bruner DW, Cleeland CS, Sloan JA, Chilukuri R, Baumgartner P, Denicoff A, St Germain D, O’Mara AM, Chen A, Kelaghan J, Bennett AV, Sit L, Roga SD. Development of the National Cancer Institute’s patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE). J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106:dju244.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lips IM, Kotte ANTJ, Van Gils CH, Van Leerdam ME, Van Der Heide UA, Van Vulpen M. Influence of antiflatulent dietary advice on intrafraction motion for prostate cancer radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;81:e401–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Petersen SE, Bentzen L, Emmertsen KJ, Laurberg S, Lundby L, Høyer M. Development and validation of a scoring system for late anorectal side-effects in patients treated with radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2014;111:94–9.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yeoh EK, Bartholomeusz DL, Holloway RH, Fraser RJ, Botten R, Di Matteo A, et al. Disturbed colonic motility contributes to anorectal symptoms and dysfunction after radiotherapy for carcinoma of the prostate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010;78:773–80.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Krol R, Smeenk RJ, van Lin ENJT, Hopman WPM. Impact of late anorectal dysfunction on quality of life after pelvic radiotherapy. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2013;28:519–26.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yeoh EK, Holloway RH, Fraser RJ, Botten R, Di Matteo A, Moore JW, et al. Anorectal function after three- versus two-dimensional radiation therapy for Carcinoma of the prostate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009;73:46–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lawton CAF, Michalski J, El-Naqa I, Buyyounouski MK, Lee WR, Menard C, et al. RTOG GU radiation oncology specialists reach consensus on pelvic lymph node volumes for high-risk prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009;74:383–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gay HA, Barthold HJ, O’Meara E, Bosch WR, El Naqa I, Al-Lozi R, et al. Pelvic normal tissue contouring guidelines for radiation therapy: a radiation therapy oncology group consensus panel atlas. Int. J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;83:e353–62.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chang P, Szymanski KM, Dunn RL, Chipman JJ, Litwin MS, Nguyen PL, Sweeney CJ, Cook R, Wagner AA, DeWolf WC, Bubley GJ, Funches R, Aronovitz JA, Wei JTSM. Expanded prostate cancer index composite for clinical practice: development and validation of a practical health related quality of life instrument for use in the routine clinical care of patients with prostate cancer. J Urol. 2011;186:865–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Vaizey CJ, Carapeti E, Cahill JA, Kamm MA. Prospective comparison of faecal incontinence grading systems. Gut. 1999;44:77–80.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lewis SJ, Heaton KW. Stool form scale as a useful guide to intestinal transit time. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1997;32:920–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    National Institute of Cancer. Common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE). NIH Publ [Internet]. 2010;2009:0–71. http://ctep.cancer.gov/protocolDevelopment/electronic_applications/docs/ctcaev3.pdf. Accessed 16 Jan 2012.
  21. 21.
    Gray PJ, Paly JJ, Yeap BY, Sanda MG, Sandler HM, Michalski JM, et al. Patient-reported outcomes after 3-dimensional conformal, intensity-modulated, or proton beam radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. Cancer. 2013;119:1729–35.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Stefanelli A, Pascale G, Rainieri E, Ursino S, Colella M, Zini G, et al. Can we decrease the acute proctitis in prostate cancer patients using hyaluronic acid during radiation therapy: a prospective historically controlled clinical study. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2012;16:639–45.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zelefsky MJ, Kollmeier M, Cox B, Fidaleo A, Sperling D, Pei X, et al. Improved clinical outcomes with high-dose image guided radiotherapy compared with non-IGRT for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;84:125–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Peach MS, Showalter TN, Ohri N. Systematic review of the relationship between acute and late gastrointestinal toxicity after radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer. 2015;2015:1–11.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yeoh EEK, Holloway RH, Fraser RJ, Botten RJ, Di Matteo AC, Moore JWE, et al. Anorectal dysfunction increases with time following radiation therapy for carcinoma of the prostate. Am J Gastroenterol. 2004;99:361–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Andreyev J. Gastrointestinal symptoms after pelvic radiotherapy: a new understanding to improve management of symptomatic patients. Lancet Oncol. 2007;8:1007–17.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Putta S, Andreyev HJN. Faecal incontinence: a late side-effect of pelvic radiotherapy. Clin Oncol. 2005;17:469–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Andreyev HJN, Wotherspoon A, Denham JW, Hauer-Jensen M. “Pelvic radiation disease”: new understanding and new solutions for a new disease in the era of cancer survivorship. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2011;46:389–97.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Harrington S, Lee J, Colon G, Alappattu M. Oncology section EDGE task force on prostate cancer: a systematic review of outcome measures for health-related quality of life. Rehabil Oncol (American Phys Ther Assoc Oncol Sect). 2016;34:27–35.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Schmidt S, Garin O, Pardo Y, Valderas JM, Alonso J, Rebollo P, et al. Assessing quality of life in patients with prostate cancer: a systematic and standardized comparison of available instruments. Qual Life Res. 2014;23:2169–81.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sultan AH, Monga A, Lee J, Emmanuel A, Norton C, Santoro G, et al. An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female anorectal dysfunction. Int Urogynecol J. 2017;28:5–31.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Atkinson TM, Ryan SJ, Bennett AV, Stover AM, Saracino RM, Rogak LJ, et al. The association between clinician-based common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) and patient-reported outcomes (PRO): a systematic review. Support Care Cancer. 2016;24:3669–76.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Federación de Sociedades Españolas de Oncología (FESEO) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Radiation OncologyConsorci Sanitari de TerrassaTerrassaSpain
  2. 2.Department of Radiation OncologyHospital Universitari Sant Joan de ReusReusSpain
  3. 3.Department of SurgeryConsorci Sanitari de TerrassaTerrassaSpain
  4. 4.Department of EpidemiologyConsorci Sanitari de TerrassaTerrassaSpain
  5. 5.Department of UrologyConsorci Sanitari de TerrassaTerrassaSpain

Personalised recommendations