Systematic Reviews Session
AB136. SOH26AB_0465. The assessment of female sexual function in rectal cancer: a systematic review
Ellen Boyle1,2, Aaron O’Mahony1, Carolyn Cullinane1, Dara Kavanagh3, Christina Fleming1,4
1Department of Colorectal Surgery, University Hospital Limerick, Limerick, Ireland;
2RCSI Strategic Academic Recruitment (StAR) MD Programme, Royal College of Surgeons Ireland, Dublin, Ireland;
3Department of Surgical Affairs, Royal College of Surgeons Ireland, Dublin, Ireland;
4School of Medicine, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland
Background: Modern rectal cancer treatment involves a combination of multimodal therapy. Such interventions can have significant sequelae for pelvic organ function, causing sexual dysfunction. This review describes the current landscape of the assessment of female sexual function (FSF) in rectal cancer.
Methods: This review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (ID: CRD420251153300). A systematic review of published literature was performed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE (OvidSP), and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched. Rectal cancer studies reporting on sexual function (male or female) or quality of life (QoL) that had a sexual function element as part of its’ assessment tool were included. Reporting of male function and FSF was compared.
Results: Eighty-two studies were included. The primary aim of 34 studies was to report on sexual/urogenital function in rectal cancer. Eight studies reported exclusively on FSF in rectal cancer. The most common patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) used to assess FSF was the FSF Index. Overall, 51.6% (range, 13.9–100%) of female patients responded to the selected questionnaire, allowing inclusion in sexual function analysis. In comparison, 78.6% of male patients responded, allowing inclusion in the male sexual function analysis.
Conclusions: Compared to male function, FSF is under-represented in research on QoL outcomes in rectal cancer. Study heterogeneity, low response rates, lack of a tool that considers treatment impact, and lack of evidence on the clinical benefit of available tools are barriers. A PROM for FSF in rectal cancer, capturing the emotional, physical, and psychological aspects of FSF and the impact of rectal cancer treatment, is required.
Keywords: Rectal cancer; quality of life (QoL); sexual function; female sexual function (FSF); patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)
Acknowledgments
None.
Funding: None.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Ethical Statement: The authors are accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
doi: 10.21037/map-26-ab136
Cite this abstract as: Boyle E, O’Mahony A, Cullinane C, Kavanagh D, Fleming C. AB136. SOH26AB_0465. The assessment of female sexual function in rectal cancer: a systematic review. Mesentery Peritoneum 2026;10:AB136.
