Sexual Health Problems and Discussion in Colorectal Cancer Patients Two Years After Diagnosis: A National Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is accompanied by specific treatment-related physical (ostomy, incontinence) and psychosexual (body image, depression) consequences on sexual health. AIM: To assess sexual health of patients with CRC 2 years after diagnosis. METHODS: We selected all patients with CRC from a French nationwide longitudinal study. Data sources included patient questionnaires, medical questionnaires, and medico-administrative databases. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: We evaluated sexual health using the Relationship and Sexuality Scale and assessed self-reported rates of discussion about sexuality with health care providers. RESULTS: Across the 487 patients, 258 were men and 229 were women; 77% were diagnosed with colon cancer and 23% with rectal cancer. Overall, 54% of patients reported a decrease in sexual desire, 61% a decrease in frequency of intercourse, and 48% a decrease in the possibility to reach an orgasm. Patients still experiencing fecal incontinence 2 years after diagnosis had decreases in all sexual desire, intercourse, orgasm, and satisfaction Relationship and Sexuality Scale items. Patients with rectal cancer had significantly more frequent troubles with desire and orgasm than did patients with colon cancer (P = .003 and P = .014, respectively). Regarding the discussion about sexuality, only 20% of men, 11% of women, 11% of patients with colon cancer, and 33% of patients with rectal cancer recalled having discussed sexuality with the medical team. Factors independently increasing the chance to have discussed sexuality with the medical team were younger age (odds ratio [OR] = 2.77 [1.31; 5.84]; P = .007), having an ostomy (OR = 2.93 [1.27; 6.73]; P = .011), and radiotherapy (OR = 2.78 [1.23; 6.27]; P = .014). CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: These results highlight the need for developing interventions to improve information delivery at cancer announcement and for managing sexual troubles during survivorship in patients with CRC, particularly those experiencing fecal incontinence. STRENGTH & LIMITATIONS: Strengths are the sample size and the national representation using the data of a large-scale nation-wide survey, with the possibility of comparing colon and rectal cancers. Limitations are the assessment of sexuality 2 years after diagnosis and using only self-reported measures. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the lack of discussion about sexuality with the oncology team and the need for specific sexual rehabilitation interventions, especially for patients with rectal cancer and fecal incontinence. Developing these aspects may help patients with CRC improve their sexual prognosis. Almont T, Bouhnik A-D, Charif AB, et al. Sexual Health Problems and Discussion in Colorectal Cancer Patients Two Years After Diagnosis: A National Cross-Sectional Study. J Sex Med 2019;16:96-110.

Sexual health and needs for sexology care in digestive cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy: a 4-month cross-sectional study in a French University Hospital.

PURPOSE: To assess sexual health and needs for sexology care of cancer patients during chemotherapy. METHODS: We performed a 4-month cross-sectional study in cancer patients treated by chemotherapy in the digestive cancer department of a regional university hospital. Patients were asked to fill out a self-administered questionnaire about their sexual health, Sexual Quality of Life Questionnaire for Male (SQoL-M) or Female (SQoL-F), and their needs for sexology care. RESULTS: The study sample was composed of 47 men and 31 women. Tumor locations were 36 colorectal (46%), 23 pancreatic (30%), and 19 other digestive cancers (24%). SQoL scores were lower in women (p < .001), in pancreatic and colorectal tumors (p = .041 and p = .033, respectively) compared to other digestive cancers, and in less-educated patients (p = .023). During chemotherapy, 40% of sexually active patients had less frequent sexual intercourse than before diagnosis, and 33% had completely stopped sexual activity. Sexuality care was desired by 44% of respondents. Among them, 83% favored a consultation with a medical sexologist and 63% with a psycho-sexologist, 54% wanted couple therapy, and 31% considered support groups. Patients with colorectal cancer had more frequent sexual intercourse without penetration at the time of survey (p = .036) and more often wanted couple therapy than patients with pancreatic cancer (p = .048). CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first determination of sexual health and sexual quality of life in digestive cancers. Targets for interventions during chemotherapy for digestive cancers include populations with lower sexual quality of life: women, pancreatic sites, patients with sexual troubles during chemotherapy, and less-educated patients.

FOLFIRI Followed by FOLFOX6 or the Reverse Sequence in Advanced Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized GERCOR Study.

PURPOSE: In metastatic colorectal cancer, phase III studies have demonstrated the superiority of fluorouracil (FU) with leucovorin (LV) in combination with irinotecan or oxaliplatin over FU + LV alone. This phase III study investigated two sequences: folinic acid, FU, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) followed by folinic acid, FU, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX6; arm A), and FOLFOX6 followed by FOLFIRI (arm B). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Previously untreated patients with assessable disease were randomly assigned to receive a 2-hour infusion of l-LV 200 mg/m2 or dl-LV 400 mg/m2 followed by a FU bolus 400 mg/m2 and 46-hour infusion 2,400 to 3,000 mg/m2 every 46 hours every 2 weeks, either with irinotecan 180 mg/m2 or with oxaliplatin 100 mg/m2 as a 2-hour infusion on day 1. At progression, irinotecan was replaced by oxaliplatin (arm A), or oxaliplatin by irinotecan (arm B). RESULTS: Median survival was 21.5 months in 109 patients allocated to FOLFIRI then FOLFOX6 versus 20.6 months in 111 patients allocated to FOLFOX6 then FOLFIRI (P = .99). Median second progression-free survival (PFS) was 14.2 months in arm A versus 10.9 in arm B (P = .64). In first-line therapy, FOLFIRI achieved 56% response rate (RR) and 8.5 months median PFS, versus FOLFOX6 which achieved 54% RR and 8.0 months median PFS (P = .26). Second-line FOLFIRI achieved 4% RR and 2.5 months median PFS, versus FOLFOX6 which achieved 15% RR and 4.2 months PFS. In first-line therapy, National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria grade 3/4 mucositis, nausea/vomiting, and grade 2 alopecia were more frequent with FOLFIRI, and grade 3/4 neutropenia and neurosensory toxicity were more frequent with FOLFOX6. CONCLUSION: Both sequences achieved a prolonged survival and similar efficacy. The toxicity profiles were different.

FOLFIRI followed by FOLFOX6 or the reverse sequence in advanced colorectal cancer: a randomized GERCOR study.

PURPOSE: In metastatic colorectal cancer, phase III studies have demonstrated the superiority of fluorouracil (FU) with leucovorin (LV) in combination with irinotecan or oxaliplatin over FU + LV alone. This phase III study investigated two sequences: folinic acid, FU, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) followed by folinic acid, FU, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX6; arm A), and FOLFOX6 followed by FOLFIRI (arm B). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Previously untreated patients with assessable disease were randomly assigned to receive a 2-hour infusion of l-LV 200 mg/m(2) or dl-LV 400 mg/m(2) followed by a FU bolus 400 mg/m(2) and 46-hour infusion 2,400 to 3,000 mg/m(2) every 46 hours every 2 weeks, either with irinotecan 180 mg/m(2) or with oxaliplatin 100 mg/m(2) as a 2-hour infusion on day 1. At progression, irinotecan was replaced by oxaliplatin (arm A), or oxaliplatin by irinotecan (arm B). RESULT: Median survival was 21.5 months in 109 patients allocated to FOLFIRI then FOLFOX6 versus 20.6 months in 111 patients allocated to FOLFOX6 then FOLFIRI (P =.99). Median second progression-free survival (PFS) was 14.2 months in arm A versus 10.9 in arm B (P =.64). In first-line therapy, FOLFIRI achieved 56% response rate (RR) and 8.5 months median PFS, versus FOLFOX6 which achieved 54% RR and 8.0 months median PFS (P =.26). Second-line FOLFIRI achieved 4% RR and 2.5 months median PFS, versus FOLFOX6 which achieved 15% RR and 4.2 months PFS. In first-line therapy, National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria grade 3/4 mucositis, nausea/vomiting, and grade 2 alopecia were more frequent with FOLFIRI, and grade 3/4 neutropenia and neurosensory toxicity were more frequent with FOLFOX6. CONCLUSION: Both sequences achieved a prolonged survival and similar efficacy. The toxicity profiles were different.