Management of men with lower urinary tract symptoms referred for prostate radiotherapy

Abstract

Objective: To report on the experience of the management of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men referred for prostate radiotherapy (RT) in a large tertiary referral centre. Methods: Between February and November 2018, 156 men referred for radiotherapy were seen and assessed according to their LUTS history: International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), flow rate (FR) and post-void residual (PVR). Patients with LUTS were offered management options depending on severity including lifestyle advice, oral medication or surgery. A subset of patients ( n = 102) were reassessed post-RT, and univariate and multivariate logistic regression was performed to predict symptoms improvement. Results: Prior to referral for RT and assessment at our dedicated LUTS clinic, 65% of men had a documented history of LUTS, 14% had completed an IPSS questionnaire and only 13% had a urinary FR; 17% (27/156) had prior treatment in the form of medication or surgery. In our assessment, 77/156 (49%) had mild, 66/156 (42%) moderate and 13/156 (8%) severe LUTS determined by IPSS. Out of 156, 71 (46%) had a quality-of-life score >3. Of the men, 81% were offered lifestyle advice, 47 patients were started on alpha blockers and 20 (12.8%) went onto Transurethral Resection of the Prostate prior to RT; 6 weeks following RT, 61 (50%) patients had higher IPSS scores. Patients who were started on alpha blockers ( p = 0.022) or had TURP ( p = 0.015) were less likely to have an increase in IPSS score on multivariate analysis. Conclusion: Men undergoing RT for prostate cancer often have co-existing LUTS. Consideration and evaluation of their LUTS and offer of treatment either medication or surgery could improve urinary symptoms in men undergoing prostate radiotherapy in the short term. Longer term data are still needed to understand the full long-term impact on patient’s symptoms and quality of life. We recommend that patients have formal LUTS assessment pre-RT. Level of evidence: Not applicable.