TY - JOUR
T1 - Screening Colonoscopy Association With Gastrointestinal Toxicity and Quality of Life After Prostate Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy
AU - Lischalk, Jonathan W.
AU - Santos, Vianca F.
AU - Vizcaino, Brianna
AU - Sanchez, Astrid
AU - Mendez, Christopher
AU - Maloney-Lutz, Kathleen
AU - Serouya, Sam
AU - Blacksburg, Seth R.
AU - Carpenter, Todd
AU - Tam, Moses
AU - Niglio, Scott
AU - Huang, William
AU - Taneja, Samir
AU - Zelefsky, Michael J.
AU - Haas, Jonathan A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 The Author(s)
PY - 2025/5
Y1 - 2025/5
N2 - Purpose: Screening colonoscopies (CS) performed before prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) allow for identifying synchronous malignancies and comorbid gastrointestinal (GI) conditions. Performing these procedures prior to radiation precludes the necessity of post-SBRT pelvic instrumentation, which may lead to severe toxicity and fistulization. We review compliance of CSs, incidence of GI pathology, and the impact of pretreatment CS findings on subsequent physician-reported toxicity and patient-reported quality of life (QoL). Methods and Materials: We reviewed an institutional database of patients treated for prostate cancer with SBRT including toxicity and QoL outcomes. A detailed review of pretreatment CS findings was reviewed including identification of diverticulosis, location of polyp resection, and presence of hemorrhoids. Pretreatment CS findings were then correlated with outcomes following SBRT. Results: Identification of comorbid GI conditions was a common event, with the presence of diverticulosis in 49.5% (n = 100), hemorrhoids in 67% (n = 136), and polyps in 48% (n = 98). More than half of patients with polyps removed had at least 1 removed from the rectosigmoid. Pretreatment CS did not introduce a delay in SBRT start date. Grade 1 toxicity was significantly lower in patients who underwent CS closer to the initiation of SBRT. There was no increased risk of physician-graded toxicity in the presence of diverticulosis, hemorrhoids, or polyps. Patient-reported GI QoL pattern in our screening cohort mimicked that seen in the previously published nonscreened population. There was no overt QoL detriment observed in patients who had GI pathology identified before SBRT. Conclusions: GI pathology identified in our elderly patient population was commonly identified on pretreatment CS. Screening CS may optimize bowel health for patients heading into radiation therapy. Toxicity and QoL for patients with GI pathologies identified on pretreatment CS do not preclude the delivery of prostate SBRT. We advocate for pretreatment CS in patients eligible prior to SBRT.
AB - Purpose: Screening colonoscopies (CS) performed before prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) allow for identifying synchronous malignancies and comorbid gastrointestinal (GI) conditions. Performing these procedures prior to radiation precludes the necessity of post-SBRT pelvic instrumentation, which may lead to severe toxicity and fistulization. We review compliance of CSs, incidence of GI pathology, and the impact of pretreatment CS findings on subsequent physician-reported toxicity and patient-reported quality of life (QoL). Methods and Materials: We reviewed an institutional database of patients treated for prostate cancer with SBRT including toxicity and QoL outcomes. A detailed review of pretreatment CS findings was reviewed including identification of diverticulosis, location of polyp resection, and presence of hemorrhoids. Pretreatment CS findings were then correlated with outcomes following SBRT. Results: Identification of comorbid GI conditions was a common event, with the presence of diverticulosis in 49.5% (n = 100), hemorrhoids in 67% (n = 136), and polyps in 48% (n = 98). More than half of patients with polyps removed had at least 1 removed from the rectosigmoid. Pretreatment CS did not introduce a delay in SBRT start date. Grade 1 toxicity was significantly lower in patients who underwent CS closer to the initiation of SBRT. There was no increased risk of physician-graded toxicity in the presence of diverticulosis, hemorrhoids, or polyps. Patient-reported GI QoL pattern in our screening cohort mimicked that seen in the previously published nonscreened population. There was no overt QoL detriment observed in patients who had GI pathology identified before SBRT. Conclusions: GI pathology identified in our elderly patient population was commonly identified on pretreatment CS. Screening CS may optimize bowel health for patients heading into radiation therapy. Toxicity and QoL for patients with GI pathologies identified on pretreatment CS do not preclude the delivery of prostate SBRT. We advocate for pretreatment CS in patients eligible prior to SBRT.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=105002489441&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=105002489441&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.adro.2025.101747
DO - 10.1016/j.adro.2025.101747
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:105002489441
SN - 2452-1094
VL - 10
JO - Advances in Radiation Oncology
JF - Advances in Radiation Oncology
IS - 5
M1 - 101747
ER -