4.5 Article

Time course of late rectal toxicity after radiation therapy for prostate cancer

Journal

PROSTATE CANCER AND PROSTATIC DISEASES
Volume 13, Issue 2, Pages 138-143

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/pcan.2009.56

Keywords

rectal toxicity; late toxicity; radiation therapy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Rectum and bladder are the crucial organs at risk for curative radiation therapy of localized prostate cancer. We analyzed the incidence, profile and time course of late rectal radiation toxicity. A total of 320 patients with T1-3 prostate cancer were treated with three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT). The prescription dose was 70Gy for T1 and T2 patients (n = 230) and 74Gy for patients with locally advanced T3 tumors (n = 90). Late rectal toxicity was graded according to the Fox Chase modification of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) and Late Effects Normal Tissue Task Force (LENT) criteria. The median follow-up time was 6.2 years (range 0.2-10.7 years). At 5 years, the risk for the development of grade 2 and 3 rectal toxicities was 15.6 and 7.0%, respectively. All new cases of grade 2 and 3 rectal toxicities were observed within 5 years after treatment. Prevalence of grade 2 and 3 rectal symptoms showed fluctuation with maximum at 1.5 years and the minor peak at 4.5 years. Toxicity profile changed significantly over time. The proportion of rectal bleeding within grade 2 and 3 toxicity decreased from 85% at 1.5 years to 46% at 4.5 years. Conversely, the proportion of fecal incontinence among grade 2 and 3 rectal symptoms gradually increased (0% at 1.5 years vs 27% at 4.5 years). Late rectal radiation toxicity represents a dynamic process. Rectal bleeding decreases and fecal incontinence increases over time. Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases (2010) 13, 138-143; doi: 10.1038/pcan.2009.56; published online 29 December 2009

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available