Association between perirectal spacer use and complications following prostate radiation therapy: Results of a national real-world data analysis.

571 Background: By increasing distance between the rectum and prostate, perirectal spacers have been shown to reduce rectal doses during prostate radiotherapy and gastrointestinal toxicity in clinical trials. We aimed to assess rectal and urinary complications in a national sample of individuals receiving prostate radiotherapy with and without a rectal spacer. Methods: Within the Merative MarketScan Research Databases, we identified beneficiaries with prostate cancer receiving prostate radiotherapy from 2016 to 2022. Beneficiaries were classified based on whether they underwent rectal spacer placement before prostate radiotherapy. The primary outcome was the incidence of rectal and urinary toxicities within 12 months of treatment between beneficiaries with rectal spacer and those without. Multivariable Cox regression models assessed the association between urinary complications and rectal spacer use, controlling for age, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, insurance type, androgen deprivation therapy use, and radiation type. Results: We identified 47,734 eligible beneficiaries in the study period, including 6,681 (14.0%) with evidence of pre-treatment rectal spacers and 41,053 (86.0%) without. One-year incidence of radiation proctitis (0.9% vs. 1.3%, p<0.01), rectal bleeding (3.5% vs. 6.6%. p<0.01), urinary tract infection (5.6% vs. 6.3%, p=0.03) and urinary incontinence (1.0% vs. 1.4%, p<0.01) were lower in beneficiaries with rectal spacers compared to those without. No significant difference was seen in the incidence of hematuria (2.5% vs 2.6%, p=0.9). Receipt of a rectal spacer was associated with a lower hazard of radiation proctitis ((hazard ratio (HR) 0.57, 95% CI: 0.47-0.70, p<0.01), rectal bleeding (HR 0.70, 95% CI: 0.61-0.82, p<0.01), urinary tract infections (HR 0.86, 95% CI: 0.78-0.96, p<0.01) and urinary incontinence (HR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.57-0.90, p<0.01), but not hematuria (HR 0.92, 95% CI: 0.81-1.04, p=0.2). Conclusions: In this national observational study of beneficiaries receiving prostate radiotherapy, the analysis suggests that rectal spacer use is associated with a lower incidence of rectal and select urinary complications. Future studies incorporating patient-reported outcomes are needed to provide a better understanding of the effectiveness of these interventions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
JCO Oncology Practice
Published
2025-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/op.2025.21.10_suppl.571
Primary Topic
Advanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Association between perirectal spacer use and complications following prostate radiation therapy: Results of a national real-world data analysis.

Shayan Smani, Paweł Rajwa, Jaime A. Cavallo, Sanjay Aneja et al.
JCO Oncology Practice
Advanced Radiotherapy Techniques
article

Association between perirectal spacer use and complications following prostate radiation therapy: Results of a national real-world data analysis.

Shayan Smani, Paweł Rajwa, Jaime A. Cavallo, Sanjay Aneja, Tamás Fazekas, Xiwen Zhao, Marcin Miszczyk, Gabriela M. Diaz, Isaac Yi Kim, Nethusan Sivanesan, Yi An, Michael S. Leapman, Peter Soo Palencia, Xiangyi Xi
article en

Abstract

571 Background: By increasing distance between the rectum and prostate, perirectal spacers have been shown to reduce rectal doses during prostate radiotherapy and gastrointestinal toxicity in clinical trials. We aimed to assess rectal and urinary complications in a national sample of individuals receiving prostate radiotherapy with and without a rectal spacer. Methods: Within the Merative MarketScan Research Databases, we identified beneficiaries with prostate cancer receiving prostate radiotherapy from 2016 to 2022. Beneficiaries were classified based on whether they underwent rectal spacer placement before prostate radiotherapy. The primary outcome was the incidence of rectal and urinary toxicities within 12 months of treatment between beneficiaries with rectal spacer and those without. Multivariable Cox regression models assessed the association between urinary complications and rectal spacer use, controlling for age, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, insurance type, androgen deprivation therapy use, and radiation type. Results: We identified 47,734 eligible beneficiaries in the study period, including 6,681 (14.0%) with evidence of pre-treatment rectal spacers and 41,053 (86.0%) without. One-year incidence of radiation proctitis (0.9% vs. 1.3%, p<0.01), rectal bleeding (3.5% vs. 6.6%. p<0.01), urinary tract infection (5.6% vs. 6.3%, p=0.03) and urinary incontinence (1.0% vs. 1.4%, p<0.01) were lower in beneficiaries with rectal spacers compared to those without. No significant difference was seen in the incidence of hematuria (2.5% vs 2.6%, p=0.9). Receipt of a rectal spacer was associated with a lower hazard of radiation proctitis ((hazard ratio (HR) 0.57, 95% CI: 0.47-0.70, p<0.01), rectal bleeding (HR 0.70, 95% CI: 0.61-0.82, p<0.01), urinary tract infections (HR 0.86, 95% CI: 0.78-0.96, p<0.01) and urinary incontinence (HR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.57-0.90, p<0.01), but not hematuria (HR 0.92, 95% CI: 0.81-1.04, p=0.2). Conclusions: In this national observational study of beneficiaries receiving prostate radiotherapy, the analysis suggests that rectal spacer use is associated with a lower incidence of rectal and select urinary complications. Future studies incorporating patient-reported outcomes are needed to provide a better understanding of the effectiveness of these interventions.

JCO Oncology PracticeVol. 21(10_suppl)
Yale Cancer Center (US), Yale University (US), Comprehensive Cancer Center Vienna (AT), Medical University of Vienna (AT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 63%
Advanced Radiotherapy Techniques
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.