scholarly journals External beam radiation treatment for rectal cancer is associated with a decrease in subsequent prostate cancer diagnosis

Cancer ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (4) ◽  
pp. 943-949 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen E. Hoffman ◽  
Theodore S. Hong ◽  
Anthony L. Zietman ◽  
Anthony H. Russell
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Cancer Diagnosis ◽  
Radiation Treatment ◽  
External Beam Radiation ◽  
External Beam ◽  
Beam Radiation ◽  
Prostate Cancer Diagnosis

Risk of second primary cancers after treatment for locoregional rectal cancer.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3578-3578 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chaitali Singh Nangia ◽  
Thomas H. Taylor ◽  
Walter Tsang ◽  
Jason Wong ◽  
Joseph Carmichael ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Small Intestine ◽  
Radiation Treatment ◽  
Uterine Cancer ◽  
External Beam Radiation ◽  
Second Primary ◽  
Beam Radiation ◽  
Pelvic Radiation

3578 Background: The risk of second primary colorectal cancers among rectal cancer patients has been described, but little is known about the risk of non-colorectal malignancies that may occur in the field of radiation. We attempted to quantify the risk, using data from the large population-based California Cancer Registry (CCR). Methods: We analyzed the CCR data for surgically-treated locoregional rectal cancer cases, diagnosed during the period 1988–2009. We excluded cases with second primary tumor (SPT) diagnosed within 12 months of initial diagnosis . Radiation treatment used was external beam radiation therapy. Standardized incidence ratios (SIR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated to evaluate risk as compared to the underlying population after matching for age, sex, ethnicity, and time. Results: Of the study cohort of 13,418 rectal cancer cases, 1572 cases of SPTs were observed . The SIR was increased for small intestine cancer among cases receiving radiation treatment (4 cases observed vs. 1.01 cases expected; SIR=3.94, 95% CI 1.07-10.10) but not among cases lacking radiation treatment (4 observed vs. 4.45 expected; SIR=0.90, 5% CI 0.24-2.30). Among females treated with radiation, the SIR was increased for uterine cancer (12 observed vs. 5.59 expected; SIR=2.15, 95% CI 1.11 to 3.75) but not among cases lacking radiation therapy (23 observed vs. 26.17 expected; SIR=0.88, 95% CI 0.56-1.32). Among males receiving radiation treatment, the SIR for prostate cancer was decreased (23 observed vs. 69.78 expected; SIR=0.33; 95% CI 0.21 to 0.49) but of borderline significance among males lacking radiation therapy (243 observed vs. 276.97 expected; SIR=0.88, 95% CI 0.77-0.99). No significant differences were observed for cancers of the vagina, cervix, ovary, kidney, bladder, penis, testes, or leukemia based on prior radiation treatment for rectal cancer. Conclusions: Patients receiving pelvic radiation for treatment of rectal cancer have a subsequently higher than expected incidence of small intestine and uterine cancer. The incidence of prostate cancer appears to fall after pelvic radiation. These unexpected findings suggest complex relationships associated with radiation treatment for rectal cancer and SPT risk.

scholarly journals Life after prostate cancer diagnosis: One step beyond.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 40-40
Author(s):  
Adam Glaser ◽  
Amy Downing ◽  
Penny Wright ◽  
Luke Hounsome ◽  
Paul Kind ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Diagnosis ◽  
Population Control ◽  
Postal Survey ◽  
External Beam Radiation ◽  
Disease Stage ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Beam Radiation ◽  
Prostate Cancer Diagnosis ◽  
Stage 4

40 Background: Prostate cancer (PCa) outcome studies are frequently restricted to specific disease stage or treatments. Interpretation may be restricted through lack of population control data & selection bias. We report a whole population evaluation of health-related quality of life (HRQL) following diagnosis of PCa compared to a general population (GenPop) cohort. Methods: Cross-sectional postal survey of all men diagnosed with PCa in the UK 18-42 months earlier. Measures of generic HRQL (EQ-5D) and PCa specific outcomes (EPIC-26 & interventions for erectile dysfunction), as defined in ICHOM minimum dataset, were utilized. Comparable GenPop data was collected from men never diagnosed with PCa in Northern Ireland. Results: 35,823 PCa survivors responded (60.8% response rate), median age 71, and 2,995 from the GenPop (30%). Overall HRQL was slightly lower in the PCa men than the GenPop, this difference was significant only in stage 4 disease. Men with PCa were less likely to report problems in individual EQ5D domains than men in the GenPop (62.0% vs. 68.8%). Both populations were most likely to report pain/discomfort, this was lower in PCa men than the GenPop (42.1% vs. 60.8%). Problems increased with age in all domains, with the exception of anxiety/depression. Men generally reported good function on EPIC-26; however PCa survivors reported poorer sexual function (78.9% vs 48%) except in the oldest. Medications/devices/services to aid or improve erections were offered to 45.4%, 26.0% & 16.9% respectively (and considered helpful by 14.7%, 7.5% & 3.2%). Men with PCa reported more problems with urinary leakage (13.1% vs. 7.1%), particularly after surgery. Hormonal symptoms were linked with receiving Androgen Deprivation Therapy and, to a lesser extent, external beam radiation. Conclusions: 18-42 months following diagnosis of PCa significant sexual and urinary morbidity is experienced relative to the GenPop. Specialist support for sexual dysfunction is not always offered. With the exception of men with stage 4 disease, overall HRQL is only mildly reduced. Funding The Life After Prostate Cancer Diagnosis study was funded by the Movember Foundation, in partnership with Prostate Cancer UK, as part of the Prostate Cancer Outcomes programme, grant number BO26/MO.

Delineating biochemical failure with 68Ga-PSMA-PET following definitive external beam radiation treatment for prostate cancer

2017 ◽  
Vol 122 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Hruby ◽  
Thomas Eade ◽  
Andrew Kneebone ◽  
Louise Emmett ◽  
Lesley Guo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Radiation Treatment ◽  
Biochemical Failure ◽  
External Beam Radiation ◽  
External Beam ◽  
Beam Radiation ◽  
Psma Pet

Rates of Adverse IBD-Related Outcomes for Patients With IBD and Concomitant Prostate Cancer Treated With Radiation Therapy

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. 728-733 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda A Feagins ◽  
Jaehyun Kim ◽  
Anchalia Chandrakumaran ◽  
Cassandra Gandle ◽  
Katrina H Naik ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel Disease ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Cancer Diagnosis ◽  
Bowel Disease ◽  
Radiation Treatment ◽  
Multiple Logistic Regression Analysis ◽  
External Beam Radiation ◽  
Beam Radiation ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel

Abstract Background Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) may be at higher risk for complications from radiation treatment for prostate cancer. However, available data are limited, and controversy remains regarding the best treatment approach for IBD patients who develop prostate cancer. Methods A retrospective cohort study across 4 Department of Veterans Affairs hospital systems. Patients with established IBD who were diagnosed and treated for prostate cancer between 1996–2015 were included. We assessed for flares of IBD, IBD-related hospitalizations, and IBD-related surgeries within 6, 12, and 24 months of cancer diagnosis and survival at 1, 2, and 5 years. Flares of IBD were those documented as such by the treating physician, and treatment changed accordingly. Results One hundred patients with IBD and prostate cancer were identified. Forty-seven were treated with either treatment with external beam radiation or brachytherapy, and 53 were treated with nonradiation modalities. Comparing cohorts with or without radiation treatment, there were no differences in baseline IBD characteristics, Charlson comorbidity index, or prostate cancer stage. Inflammatory bowel disease flares were 2-fold higher for radiation-treated patients within 6 months (10.6% vs 5.7%) and 6–12 months (4.3% vs 1.9%) after cancer diagnosis. On multiple logistic regression analysis, radiation treatment (adjusted odds ratio, 4.82; 95% confidence interval, 1.15–20.26) was a significant predictor of flares. However, rates of IBD-related hospitalizations or surgeries were not significantly different. Conclusions In this retrospective, multicenter study, 2-fold higher rates of flare were found within the first year after prostate cancer diagnosis for patients treated with radiation, but there were no differences in IBD-related hospitalizations or surgeries. Although patients should be counseled of these risks, avoidance of radiation therapy in IBD patients with prostate cancer is likely not necessary.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document