PURPOSE: Randomized studies have suggested that sucralfate is effective in mitigating diarrhea during pelvic radiation therapy (RT). This North Central Cancer Treatment Group study was undertaken to confirm the antidiarrheal effect of sucralfate. Several other measures of bowel function were also assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients receiving pelvic RT to a minimum of 45 Gy at 1.7 to 2.1 Gy/d were eligible for the study. Patients were assigned randomly, in double-blind fashion, to receive sucralfate (1.5 g orally every 6 hours) or an identical looking placebo during pelvic RT. RESULTS:One hundred twenty-three patients were randomly assigned and found assessable. Overall, there was no significant difference in patient characteristics between those receiving sucralfate and those receiving placebo. Moderate or worse diarrhea was observed in 53% of patients receiving sucralfate versus 41% of those receiving placebo. Compared with patients receiving placebo, more sucralfate-treated patients reported fecal incontinence (16% v 34%, respectively; P =. 04) and need for protective clothing (8% v 23%, respectively; P =. 04). The incidence and severity of nausea were worse among those taking sucralfate (P =.03). Analysis of patient-reported symptoms 10 to 12 months after RT showed a nonsignificant trend toward more problems in patients taking sucralfate than in those taking placebo (average, 2.3 v 1.9 problems, respectively; P =.34). CONCLUSION:Sucralfate did not decrease pelvic RT-related bowel toxicity by any of the end points measured and seems to have aggravated some gastrointestinal symptoms.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: Randomized studies have suggested that sucralfate is effective in mitigating diarrhea during pelvic radiation therapy (RT). This North Central Cancer Treatment Group study was undertaken to confirm the antidiarrheal effect of sucralfate. Several other measures of bowel function were also assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients receiving pelvic RT to a minimum of 45 Gy at 1.7 to 2.1 Gy/d were eligible for the study. Patients were assigned randomly, in double-blind fashion, to receive sucralfate (1.5 g orally every 6 hours) or an identical looking placebo during pelvic RT. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-three patients were randomly assigned and found assessable. Overall, there was no significant difference in patient characteristics between those receiving sucralfate and those receiving placebo. Moderate or worse diarrhea was observed in 53% of patients receiving sucralfate versus 41% of those receiving placebo. Compared with patients receiving placebo, more sucralfate-treated patients reported fecal incontinence (16% v 34%, respectively; P =. 04) and need for protective clothing (8% v 23%, respectively; P =. 04). The incidence and severity of nausea were worse among those taking sucralfate (P =.03). Analysis of patient-reported symptoms 10 to 12 months after RT showed a nonsignificant trend toward more problems in patients taking sucralfate than in those taking placebo (average, 2.3 v 1.9 problems, respectively; P =.34). CONCLUSION:Sucralfate did not decrease pelvic RT-related bowel toxicity by any of the end points measured and seems to have aggravated some gastrointestinal symptoms.
Authors: Babu Zachariah; Clement K Gwede; Jennifer James; Jaffer Ajani; Lisa J Chin; David Donath; Seth A Rosenthal; Brent L Kane; Marvin Rotman; Lawrence Berk; Lisa A Kachnic Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2010-03-25 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: P Delia; G Sansotta; V Donato; P Frosina; G Messina; C De Renzis; G Famularo Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2007-02-14 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Robert C Miller; Daniel G Petereit; Jeff A Sloan; Heshan Liu; James A Martenson; James D Bearden; Ronald Sapiente; Grant R Seeger; Rex B Mowat; Ben Liem; Matthew J Iott; Charles L Loprinzi Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2016-04-23 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Rachel J Gibson; Dorothy M K Keefe; Rajesh V Lalla; Emma Bateman; Nicole Blijlevens; Margot Fijlstra; Emily E King; Andrea M Stringer; Walter J F M van der Velden; Roger Yazbeck; Sharon Elad; Joanne M Bowen Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2012-11-10 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Pamela J Atherton; Michele Y Halyard; Jeff A Sloan; Robert C Miller; Richard L Deming; T H Patricia Tai; Kathy J Stien; James A Martenson Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2012-11-15 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: James A Martenson; Michele Y Halyard; Jeff A Sloan; Gary M Proulx; Robert C Miller; Richard L Deming; Stephen J Dick; Harold A Johnson; T H Patricia Tai; Angela W Zhu; Joan Keit; Kathy J Stien; Pamela J Atherton Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-09-02 Impact factor: 44.544