Article

Late Gastrointestinal Toxicities Following Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer

The Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ 08903, USA.
European Urology (Impact Factor: 13.94). 06/2011; 60(5):908-16. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.05.052
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT

Radiation therapy is commonly used to treat localized prostate cancer; however, representative data regarding treatment-related toxicities compared with conservative management are sparse.
To evaluate gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities in men treated with either primary radiation or conservative management for T1-T2 prostate cancer.
We performed a population-based cohort study, using Medicare claims data linked to the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results data. Competing risk models were used to evaluate the risks.
GI toxicities requiring interventional procedures occurring at least 6 mo after cancer diagnosis.
Among 41,737 patients in this study, 28,088 patients received radiation therapy. The most common GI toxicity was GI bleeding or ulceration. GI toxicity rates were 9.3 per 1000 person-years after three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, 8.9 per 1000 person-years after intensity-modulated radiotherapy, 5.3 per 1000 person-years after brachytherapy alone, 20.1 per 1000 person-years after proton therapy, and 2.1 per 1000 person-years for conservative management patients. Radiation therapy is the most significant factor associated with an increased risk of GI toxicities (hazard ratio [HR]: 4.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.97-5.66). Even after 5 yr, the radiation group continued to experience significantly higher rates of new GI toxicities than the conservative management group (HR: 3.01; 95% CI, 2.06-4.39). Because our cohort of patients were between 66 and 85 yr of age, these results may not be applicable to younger patients.
Patients treated with radiation therapy are more likely to have procedural interventions for GI toxicities than patients with conservative management, and the elevated risk persists beyond 5 yr.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Grace Lu-Yao
  • Source
    • "Using contrast-enhanced ultrasound , increases in tumor blood flow and perfusion were observed in mice bearing SCCVII tumors for up to 48 h post dose with flow peaking at 6 h (Fig. 8) [70]. Abdominal and pelvic tumors are often treated with radiotherapy but the dose of radiation that can be safely administered is limited by the sensitivity of the GI epithelium to radiation, which can result in both acute GI toxicity, as well as late effects such as fibrosis, obstruction and perforation [72]. The determination of6. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The endogenous mediator of vasodilation, nitric oxide (NO), has been shown to be a potent radiosensitizer. However, the underlying mode of action for its role as a radiosensitizer - while not entirely understood - is believed to arise from increased tumor blood flow, effects on cellular respiration, on cell signaling, and on the production of reactive oxygen and nitrogen species (RONS), that can act as radiosensitizers in their own right. NO activity is surprisingly long-lived and more potent in comparison to oxygen. Reports of the effects of NO with radiation have often been contradictory leading to confusion about the true radiosensitizing nature of NO. Whether increasing or decreasing tumor blood flow, acting as radiosensitizer or radioprotector, the effects of NO have been controversial. Key to understanding the role of NO as a radiosensitizer is to recognize the importance of biological context. With a very short half-life and potent activity, the local effects of NO need to be carefully considered and understood when using NO as a radiosensitizer. The systemic effects of NO donors can cause extensive side effects, and also affect the local tumor microenvironment, both directly and indirectly. To minimize systemic effects and maximize effects on tumors, agents that deliver NO on demand selectively to tumors using hypoxia as a trigger may be of greater interest as radiosensitizers. Herein we discuss the multiple effects of NO and focus on the clinical molecule RRx-001, a hypoxia-activated NO donor currently being investigated as a radiosensitizer in the clinic. Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier B.V.
    Full-text · Article · Jul 2015
  • Source
    • "Two other recent studies , however , have suggested that PBT is associated with increased bowel toxicity compared with IMRT ( Kim et al , 2011 ; Sheets et al , 2012 ) . These studies rely on billing codes that may not capture the patient ' s own experience and large databases that contain few PBT patients and also lack data on treatment dose , margins , and other important relevant clinical factors . "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Proton therapy is a promising, but costly, treatment for prostate cancer. Theoretical physical advantages exist; yet to date, it has been shown only to be comparably safe and effective when compared with the alternatives and not necessarily superior. If clinically meaningful benefits do exist for patients, more rigorous study will be needed to detect them and society will require this to justify the investment of time and money. New technical advances in proton beam delivery coupled with shortened overall treatment times and declining device costs have the potential to make this a more cost-effective therapy in the years ahead.
    Full-text · Article · Mar 2013 · British Journal of Cancer
  • Source
    • "In summary, Kim et al. [3] teach us about the low rates of severe GI toxicity seen with RT. Their data show evidence of an RT learning curve and suggest that further improvements will occur once newer modalities are mastered. "

    Full-text · Article · Jul 2011 · European Urology
Show more