Comparison of Nutritional and Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Head and Neck Cancer Undergoing Chemoradiotherapy Utilizing Prophylactic versus Reactive Nutrition Support Approaches

Revisiting Feeding Tube Utilization in Oropharynx Cancer: 6-Year Prospective Registry Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Patients treated for oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) have historically demonstrated high feeding tube rates for decreased oral intake and malnutrition. We re-examined feeding tube practices in these patients.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of prospective cohort from 2015 to 2021.

SETTING

Single-institution NCI-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center.

METHODS

With IRB approval, patients with new oropharyngeal squamous cell cancer or (unknown primary with neck metastasis) were enrolled. Baseline swallowing was assessed via videofluoroscopy and Performance Status Scale for Head and Neck Cancer (PSSHN). G-tubes or nasogastric tubes (NGT) were placed for weight loss before, during, or after treatment. Prophylactic NGT were placed during transoral robotic surgery (TORS). Tube duration was censored at last disease-free follow-up. Multivariate regression was performed for G-tube placement (odds ratio [OR] [95% confidence interval [CI]) and removal (Cox hazard ratio, hazard ratio [HR] [95% CI]).

RESULTS

Of 924 patients, most had stage I to II (81%), p16+ (89%), node-positive (88%) disease. Median follow-up was 2.6 years (interquartile range 1.5-3.9). Most (91%) received radiation/chemoradiation, and 16% received TORS. G-tube rate was 27% (5% after TORS). G-tube risk was increased with chemoradiation (OR 2.78 [1.87-4.22]) and decreased with TORS (OR 0.31 [0.15-0.57]) and PSSHN-Diet score ≥60 (OR 0.26 [0.15-0.45]). G-tube removal probability over time was lower for T3 to T4 tumors (HR 0.52 [0.38-0.71]) and higher for PSSHN-Diet score ≥60 (HR 1.65 [1.03-2.66]).

CONCLUSIONS

In this modern cohort of patients treated for OPC, 27% received G-tubes-50% less than institutional rates 10 years ago. Patients with preserved baseline swallowing and/or those eligible for TORS may have lower G-tube risk and duration.

A proposed framework for the implementation of head and neck cancer treatment at a new cancer center from a radiation oncology perspective

BACKGROUND

Establishing a new head and neck cancer (HNC) treatment center requires multidisciplinary team management and expertise. To our knowledge, there are no clear recommendations or guidelines in the literature for the commencement of HNC radiation therapy (RT) at a new cancer center. We propose a novel framework outlining the necessary components required to set-up a new radiation therapy HNC treatment.

METHODS

We reviewed the infrastructure and methodology in the commencement of HNC radiation therapy in our cancer care center and invited several external, experienced metropolitan head and neck radiation oncologists to develop a novel consensus guideline that may be used by new RT centers to treat HNC. Recommendations were presented to our internal and external staff specialists using a survey questionnaire with ratings utilized to determine consensus using pre-defined thresholds as per the American Society of Clinical Oncology Guidelines Methodology Manual.

CONCLUSION

This consensus recommendation aims to improve RT utilization whilst advocating for optimal patient outcomes by presenting a framework for new radiation therapy centers ready to step up and manage the treatment of head and neck cancer patients. We propose these evidence-based consensus guidelines endorsed by external HNC radiation oncologists.

Interdisciplinary Approach to Expedited Outpatient Gastrostomy Tube Placement in Head and Neck Cancer Patients: A Single Center Retrospective Study

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE

Treatment for head and neck cancer (HNC) can lead to decreased oral intake which often requires gastrostomy tube (g-tube) placement to provide nutritional support. A multidisciplinary team (MDT) consisting of interventional radiology (IR), HNC oncology and surgery, nutrition, and speech language pathology departments implemented an expedited outpatient g-tube placement pathway to reduce hospital stays and associated costs, initiate feeds sooner, and improve communication between care teams. This single center study investigates differences in complications, time to procedure and costs savings with implementing this pathway.

METHODS

142 patients with HNC who underwent elective image guided g-tube placement by IR from 2015 to 2022 were identified retrospectively. 52 patients underwent the traditional pathway, and 90 patients underwent the expedited pathway. Patient demographics, procedure characteristics, periprocedural costs and 90-day complication rates were collected and compared statistically.

RESULTS

The 90-day complication rate was comparable between groups (traditional=32.7%; expedited=22.2%; p-value=0.17). The expedited pathway decreased the time from consult to procedure by 11.1 days (95% CI 7.6 - 14.6; p < 0.001) and decreased charge per procedure by $2940 (95% CI $989-$4891; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

A MDT for the treatment of patients with HNC successfully provided enteral nutrition support faster, with fewer associated costs, and in a more patient centered approach than previously done at this institution.

Utility of Prophylactic Percutaneous Gastrostomy in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer Receiving Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy: A Multicenter Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) have an elevated incidence of cachexia and malnutrition due to the tumor's location interfering with oral feeding. Concurrent chemoradiation (CCRT) can have an emetic effect and cause dysphagia and oral mucositis. Adequate nutrition improves immunity, raises the response to therapy, reduces adverse effects, and improves survival. Numerous studies have suggested the utility of nutritional support from percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) in HNC patients. Although PEG is usually considered a safe procedure, it has a mortality rate of 0-2.2% and a risk of other procedure-related complications of 17-40%. Our work intends to evaluate the utility of PEG in patients with locally advanced HNC who underwent CCRT.

METHODS

We performed a cohort study at three institutions. We included patients with HNC who underwent definitive CCRT treatment from January 2013 to December 2022. The study consisted of an observational, descriptive, retrospective analysis of prespecified clinical data. Descriptive statistics were used to compare the data between the PEG group and the non-PEG group. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used for covariance analysis. Fisher's exact test was used to compare proportional data and Student's t-test was used to assess the differences in continuous data. Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier estimator. P-values of <0.05 were considered to be indicative of statistical significance. The SPSS Statistics version 28.0 (Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.) was used to perform all statistical evaluations.

RESULTS

 We identified 90 eligible patients diagnosed with local advanced HNC who had received definitive CCRT with three weekly cycles of cisplatin as follows: 44 with a prophylactic PEG tube and 46 without a prophylactic PEG tube. Most patients were male (84.4%) and 50% of patients were diagnosed with stage IVa HNC at the time of diagnosis. There wasn't an effect of PEG placement on BMI at the end of CCRT after controlling for the effect of baseline BMI (F {1.84}=0.065 {p=0.799}). In the study population, BMI was significantly lower after CCRT (21.30 kg/m2 vs. 23.97 kg/m2), t (86)=12.389, p<0.001. In the subgroup with baseline BMI <18.5 kg/m2 (15 patients), 90% of patients with prophylactic PEG were able to complete the three planned cycles of chemotherapy vs. 66.7% in the non-PEG group. Ten patients in the PEG group (22.7%) referred feeding tube dependency. Patients with dysphagia were 3.2 times more likely to have placed prophylactic PEG (p=0.007). The difference in overall survival and progression-free survival between the two groups was not statistically significant (p=0.57 and p=0.497, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In this study using real-world data, we found a potentially protective effect of PEG in underweight patients with locally advanced HNC performing CCRT in order to complete three cycles of treatment.

Impact of weight loss on treatment interruption and unplanned hospital admission in head and neck cancer patients undergoing curative (chemo)-radiotherapy in Hong Kong

PURPOSE

Malnutrition is highly prevalent in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients, with weight loss being one of the major nutritional indicators. The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of weight loss on treatment interruptions and unplanned hospital admissions in HNC patients undergoing radiotherapy (RT) with or without chemotherapy.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, consecutive HNC patients who started RT between January 2011 and December 2019 were included. Data from a total of 1086 subjects with 747 (68.8%) nasopharyngeal carcinomas (NPCs) and 31.2% (N=339) non-NPC patients were analysed. Body weight (BW) was measured before, during, and after RT treatment. Factors associated with ≥10% weight loss, treatment interruption, and unplanned admissions were analysed using multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

The prevalence of ≥10% weight loss was 26.8% (N=288), with 32.7% (N=243) in NPC and 13.5% (N=45) in non-NPC patients. The prevalence of RT delay in patients with ≥10% vs. <10% weight loss was 6.2% vs. 7.0% (p=0.668) in NPC patients and 42.2% vs. 50.5% (p=0.300) in non-NPC patients. The prevalence of unplanned admissions in patients with ≥10% vs. <10% weight loss was 51.9% vs. 25.3% (p<0.001) in NPC patients and 68.9% vs. 27.0% (p<0.001) in non-NPC patients.

CONCLUSION

In our study, ≥10% weight loss was found to be associated with a higher rate of unplanned admissions but not with RT delay or chemotherapy interruption.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

With the knowledge of the impact of weight loss on hospital admissions and the characteristics of patients with weight loss, nutritional intervention can be effectively focused on the stratification of patients for intensive nutritional support to reduce weight loss.

Investigating Predictive Factors of Dysphagia and Treatment Prolongation in Patients with Oral Cavity or Oropharyngeal Cancer Receiving Radiation Therapy Concurrently with Chemotherapy

Radiation therapy (RT) treatment for head and neck cancer has been associated with dysphagia manifestation leading to worse outcomes and decrease in life quality. In this study, we investigated factors leading to dysphagia and treatment prolongation in patients with primaries arising from oral cavity or oropharynx that were submitted to radiation therapy concurrently with chemotherapy. The records of patients with oral cavity or oropharyngeal cancer that received RT treatment to the primary and bilateral neck lymph nodes concurrently with chemotherapy were retrospectively reviewed. Logistic regression models were used to analyze the potential correlation between explanatory variables and the primary (dysphagia ≥ 2) and secondary (prolongation of total treatment duration ≥ 7 days) outcomes of interest. The Toxicity Criteria of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) were used to evaluate dysphagia. A total of 160 patients were included in the study. Age mean was 63.31 (SD = 8.24). Dysphagia grade ≥ 2 was observed in 76 (47.5%) patients, while 32 (20%) experienced treatment prolongation ≥ 7 days. The logistic regression analysis showed that the volume in the primary site of disease that received dose ≥ 60 Gy (≥118.75 cc, p < 0.001, (OR = 8.43, 95% CI [3.51-20.26]) and mean dose to the pharyngeal constrictor muscles > 40.6 Gy (p < 0.001, OR = 11.58, 95% CI [4.84-27.71]) were significantly associated with dysphagia grade ≥ 2. Treatment prolongation ≥ 7 days was predicted by higher age (p = 0.007, OR = 1.079, 95% CI [1.021-1.140]) and development of grade ≥ 2 dysphagia (p = 0.005, OR = 4.02, 95% CI [1.53-10.53]). In patients with oral cavity or oropharyngeal cancer that receive bilateral neck irradiation concurrently with chemotherapy, constrictors mean dose and the volume in the primary site receiving ≥ 60 Gy should be kept below 40.6 Gy and 118.75 cc, respectively, whenever possible. Elderly patients or those that are considered at high risk for dysphagia manifestation are more likely to experience treatment prolongation ≥ 7 days and they should be closely monitored during treatment course for nutritional support and pain management.

A review of unplanned admissions in head and neck cancer patients undergoing oncological treatment

AIM

Non-surgical treatment for head and neck cancer (HNC) often results in severe toxicities, which are detrimental to a patient's health and quality of life. There is limited published UK data on unplanned hospital admissions and reasons associated with admission. We aim to identify frequencies and reasons for unplanned hospital admissions, highlighting those patient groups who are most vulnerable.

METHODS

A retrospective study of unplanned hospital admissions of HNC patients receiving non-surgical treatment was completed. An inpatient admission was defined as ≥ 1 night spent in the hospital. To test potential demographic and treatment predictors of inpatient admission, a multiple regression model was constructed using the endpoint measure (unplanned admission), as the dependent variable.

RESULTS

A cohort of 216 patients was identified over a 7-month period, and 38 of these patients (17%) required an unplanned admission. Treatment type was the only statistically significant predictor of in-patient admission. The majority of admissions were patients receiving chemoradiotherapy (CRT) (58%) with predominant reasons for admission being nausea and vomiting (25.5%) and decreased oral intake/dehydration (30%). Of the patients admitted, 12 had a prophylactic PEG placed pre-treatment, and 18 of 26 admitted without prophylactic PEG required nasogastric tube feeding during their admission.

DISCUSSION

Almost one-fifth of HNC patients over this time period required hospital admission; the majority of which can be attributed to treatment toxicities when receiving CRT. This is concurrent with other studies which review the impact of radiotherapy versus CRT. Increased support and monitoring, particularly focused on nutrition, are required for patients with HNC who receive CRT.

KEY MESSAGE

This article describes a retrospective review of a patient undergoing non-surgical treatment for head and neck cancer. These patients frequently require unplanned hospital admission. The results indicate that patients undergoing (chemo)radiotherapy are most vulnerable to deterioration and additional support focused on nutrition for these patients is indicated.

Nutritional Management of Patients with Head and Neck Cancer-A Comprehensive Review

While surgical therapy for head and neck cancer (HNC) is showing improvement with the advancement of reconstruction techniques, the focus in these patients should also be shifting to supportive pre and aftercare. Due to the highly sensitive and anatomically complex region, these patients tend to exhibit malnutrition, which has a substantial impact on their recovery and quality of life. The complications and symptoms of both the disease and the therapy usually make these patients unable to orally intake food, hence, a strategy should be prepared for their nutritional management. Even though there are several possible nutritional modalities that can be administrated, these patients commonly have a functional gastrointestinal tract, and enteral nutrition is indicated over the parenteral option. However, after extensive research of the available literature, it seems that there is a limited number of studies that focus on this important issue. Furthermore, there are no recommendations or guidelines regarding the nutritional management of HNC patients, pre- or post-operatively. Henceforth, this narrative review summarizes the nutritional challenges and management modalities in this particular group of patients. Nonetheless, this issue should be addressed in future studies and an algorithm should be established for better nutritional care of these patients.

Impact of sarcopenia and myosteatosis on survival outcomes for patients with head and neck cancer undergoing curative-intent treatment

Malnutrition and sarcopenia are prevalent in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Pre-treatment sarcopenia and adverse oncological outcomes in this population are well described. The impact of myosteatosis and post-treatment sarcopenia is less well known. Patients with HNSCC (n = 125) undergoing chemoradiotherapy, radiotherapy alone and/or surgery were assessed for sarcopenia and myosteatosis, using cross-sectional computed tomography (CT) imaging at the third lumbar (L3) vertebra, at baseline and 3 months post-treatment. Outcomes were overall survival (OS) at 12 months and 5 years post-treatment. One hundred and one participants had a CT scan evaluable at one or two time points, of which sixty-seven (66 %) participants were sarcopenic on at least one time point. Reduced muscle attenuation affected 93 % (n = 92) pre-treatment compared with 97 % (n = 90) post-treatment. Five-year OS favoured those without post-treatment sarcopenia (hazard ratio, HR 0·37, 95 % CI 0·16, 0·88, P = 0·06) and those without both post-treatment myosteatosis and sarcopenia (HR 0·33, 95 % CI 0·13, 0·83, P = 0·06). Overall, rates of myosteatosis were high at both pre- and post-treatment time points. Post-treatment sarcopenia was associated with worse 5-year OS, as was post-treatment sarcopenia in those who had myosteatosis. Post-treatment sarcopenia should be evaluated as an independent risk factor for decreased long-term survival post-treatment containing radiotherapy (RT) for HNSCC.

Prophylactic feeding tube placement for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous endoscopic gastronomy (PEG) tubes are commonly used to administer enteral nutrition during head and neck cancer (HNC) treatment. However, the benefits of placing a prophylactic feeding tube (PFT; prior to radiotherapy [RT]) or reactive feeding tube (RFT, after RT initiation) are unclear. We sought to compare survival, body mass trends, and hospitalization rates between strategies.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 11,473 Veterans with stages III-IVC HNC treated with chemoradiotherapy. Patients with PEG tube placement within 30 days prior to treatment initiation (PFT) were compared to all other patients (non-PFT) or patients with PEG tube placement within 3 months after treatment initiation placement (RFT). We compared survival, longitudinal body mass changes, and hospitalization rates for PFT versus non-PFT or RFT patients in propensity score (PS)-matched Cox regression models.

RESULTS

3,186 (28 %) patients received PFT and 8,287 (72 %) were non-PFT, of which 1,874 (23 %) received RFT. After PS-matching, there were no significant differences in overall survival (HR 0.97, 95 % CI 0.92-1.02), HNC-specific survival (HR 0.98, 95 % CI 0.92-1.09), change in BMI (p = 0.24), or hospitalization rates between PFT and non-PFT groups. Significant differences in hospitalization rates between PFT and RFT groups persisted after PS-matching (-0.11 hospitalizations/month), but no differences were found for other outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Timing of PEG tube placement in Veterans with HNC was not associated with any significant survival or body mass advantage. However, patients who received PFT had a lower hospitalization rate than those who received RFT.

Development of a customisable 3D-printed intra-oral stent for head-and-neck radiotherapy

•

Advanced radiotherapy techniques have improved head-and-neck treatments.

•

More improvements are possible with intra-oral stents stabilising sensitive anatomy.

•

MRI imaging shows new modular 3D printed stents provide stable displacement.

•

Modular stents achieve positive outcomes within standard treatment workflow.

Intra-oral stents (including mouth-pieces and bite blocks) can be used to displace adjacent non-involved oral tissue and reduce radiation side effects from radiotherapy treatments for head-and-neck cancer. In this study, a modular and customisable 3D printed intra-oral stent was designed, fabricated and evaluated, to utilise the advantages of the 3D printing process without the interruption of clinical workflow associated with printing time. The stent design used a central mouth-opening and tongue-depressing main piece, with optional cheek displacement pieces in three different sizes, plus an anchor point for moulding silicone to fit individual patients’ teeth. A magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) study of one healthy participant demonstrated the tissue displacement effects of the stent, while providing a best-case indication of its comfort.

Utility of prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube in head and neck cancer patients undergoing concurrent chemoradiation: A prospective observational cohort

PURPOSE

The necessity of prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PPEG) before concurrent chemoradiation (CCRT) in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients remains uncertain. We evaluated the utilization rate of PPEG tube. Weight changes and tube dependence were also assessed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective cohort study evaluated the utilization rate of PPEG tube in patients with newly diagnosed HNC undergoing CCRT. Baseline characteristics, nutrition status, and weight loss data were collected and compared between use and non-use groups.

RESULTS

110 patients (94.8%) used PPEG tube (70 fully-used and 40 partially-used groups). Non-users had a tendency to lose weight more than partially and fully-used groups; 9.13%, 3.42%, and 1.95%, respectively (p = 0.085). Fully-used group had significantly longer time of tube dependence than partially-used group, 7.0 months versus 4.9 months (p = 0.012). The type of PPEG tube use (full use or partial use) and presence of dysphagia were significantly related to tube dependence. The time ratio of tube dependence for partially-used patients versus fully-used patients was 0.82 (95% CI: 0.68-0.99) (p = 0.039). The time ratio for patients with symptoms of dysphagia was 1.29 (95% CI: 1.02-1.63) (p = 0.032). At the end of CCRT, 96.6% of patients agreed that PPEG tube was necessary.

CONCLUSION

We recommend PPEG for patients undergoing CCRT. Partial use of PPEG with continuous oral intake as tolerated is strongly encouraged to maintain weight, and to reduce risk of tube dependence. Future study to evaluate effective swallowing exercise is warranted.

Prevalence and Trends in Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Placement: Results From a 10-Year, Nationwide Analysis

Background

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is the most commonly used access for long-term enteral nutrition. Only a few studies report the prevalence and epidemiology of PEG placements. No previous data concentrated on the healthcare system issues influencing the qualification rates and professional nutritional support for individuals with PEG.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective nationwide analysis of PEG placements in Poland from 2010 to 2020. The central data on ICD-10 coding of adult patients with PEG reported to the insurance company were used for the analysis of general and regional prevalence, age, and primary and secondary diseases. Rates of patients with home enteral nutrition (HEN) were calculated with a special focus on patients with cancer. A secondary aim was to determine the causes of regional disparities among administrative regions.

Results

A total number of 90,182 PEGs were placed during the observation period. The number was increasing each year with statistical significance. Malnutrition, dysphagia, and cardiorespiratory/metabolic diseases were the most frequently reported primary diseases. A total of 11.98% of all patients were diagnosed with cancer; 49.9% of oncological patients suffered from head and neck cancer (HNC) and 19.9% from esophageal cancer. In total, 6.61% of HNC and 27.46% of patients with esophageal cancer from the Polish National Cancer Registry (NCR) had PEG. The rates of patients in more advanced ages (65–74 and over 85 years) were growing and decreased in younger groups (18–24, 45–54, and 55–64 years). Overall, 27.6% of all (11.86% of cancer) patients with PEG were reimbursed HEN. A high number of patients in nursing care facilities, lower education of citizens, and lower number of hospital beds were associated with more PEG insertions in the administrative regions.

Conclusion

The number of PEG placements has been increasing, particularly in the elderly. Systemic solutions must be found to address the problems of regional disparities in PEG’s prevalence as well as the lack of inclusion criteria for nutritional support.

Enteral Nutrition Overview

Enteral nutrition (EN) provides critical macro and micronutrients to individuals who cannot maintain sufficient oral intake to meet their nutritional needs. EN is most commonly required for neurological conditions that impair swallow function, such as stroke, amytrophic lateral sclerosis, and Parkinson’s disease. An inability to swallow due to mechanical ventilation and altered mental status are also common conditions that necessitate the use of EN. EN can be short or long term and delivered gastrically or post-pylorically. The expected duration and site of feeding determine the type of feeding tube used. Many commercial EN formulas are available. In addition to standard formulations, disease specific, peptide-based, and blenderized formulas are also available. Several other factors should be considered when providing EN, including timing and rate of initiation, advancement regimen, feeding modality, and risk of complications. Careful and comprehensive assessment of the patient will help to ensure that nutritionally complete and clinically appropriate EN is delivered safely.

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy and jejunostomy: Indications and techniques

Nutritional support is essential in patients who have a limited capability to maintain their body weight. Therefore, oral feeding is the main approach for such patients. When physiological nutrition is not possible, positioning of a nasogastric, nasojejunal tube, or other percutaneous devices may be feasible alternatives. Creating a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is a suitable option to be evaluated for patients that need nutritional support for more than 4 wk. Many diseases require nutritional support by PEG, with neurological, oncological, and catabolic diseases being the most common. PEG can be performed endoscopically by various techniques, radiologically or surgically, with different outcomes and related adverse events (AEs). Moreover, some patients that need a PEG placement are fragile and are unable to express their will or sign a written informed consent. These conditions highlight many ethical problems that become difficult to manage as treatment progresses. The aim of this manuscript is to review all current endoscopic techniques for percutaneous access, their indications, postprocedural follow-up, and AEs.

Benefits of prophylactic percutaneous gastrostomy in patients with nasopharyngeal cancer receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy: A multicenter analysis

PURPOSE

Prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PPEG) is widely used for patients with head and neck cancer undergoing concurrent chemoradiation (CCRT). Nevertheless, the necessity of its use in patients with nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) is uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the benefits of PPEG on prevention of weight loss and treatment tolerance in patients with NPC receiving CCRT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective multicenter chart review of 904 patients, 378 in the PPEG group and 526 in the non-PPEG group, was conducted. Baseline characteristics, weight loss, and treatment tolerance were analyzed and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the mean baseline body mass index (BMI) between the groups. At the end of CCRT, no difference in weight loss was found between the 2 groups (non-PPEG group, 6.6%; PPEG group, 5.9%). Nonetheless, the subgroup analysis demonstrated that a baseline BMI < 18.5 kg/m² (underweight) and non-intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) technique were independent factors associated with prevention of weight loss by PPEG. More patients in the PPEG group were able to complete planned cycles of chemotherapy (73.3% vs. 49.0%, P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Although the benefits of PPEG on prevention of weight loss were not observed for the entire cohort, we found a potentially protective effect of PPEG in some subgroups of patients. Additionally, PPEG significantly enhanced chemotherapy tolerance. Therefore, PPEG tube insertion should be strongly considered for patients with NPC receiving CCRT, particularly for underweight patients and those undergoing a non-IMRT technique.

Prophylactic versus reactive percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma patients undergoing radical radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

Radiotherapy (RT) for oropharyngeal squamous cell cancer (OPSCC) is associated with malnutrition due to treatment-related mucositis and dysphagia. While percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) feeding can improve nutrition, it has acute and late complications, including dependence on PEG feeding. We retrospectively evaluated patient outcomes by whether gastrostomy placement was prophylactic (P-G) or reactive to RT complications (R-G).

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of OPSCC patients undergoing curative-intent RT at Waikato Hospital between 2010 and 2015.

RESULTS

Of 103 OPSCC patients treated with RT (+/- chemotherapy) 21 had P-G, 15 had R-G and 67 had none (No-G). P-G patients were significantly more likely to be female, older, have higher tumour stage and receive bilateral RT (all p < 0.05). P-G and No-G patients had similar rates and duration of hospital admission for complications during treatment, but both were significantly less than in R-G patients (admission rates 52.3%, 49.3% and 86.7%, and mean length of stay 3.5, 3.3 and 11.9 days, respectively; p < 0.001). R-G patients also had greater RT treatment delays than P-G or No-G patients (mean 1.1, 0.7 and 0.4 days, respectively, p < 0.05). No significant differences were noted between groups in PEG dependence or weight change during, or 1, 3 or 6 months after, RT. Weight loss was not significantly different with P-G than R-G despite more frequent use of bilateral RT fields in the former group.

CONCLUSIONS

P-G placement affords shorter and less frequent hospital admissions than R-G during RT for OPSCC, with no increased complications or gastrostomy-dependence rates.

Nutrition Impact Symptom Clusters in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer Receiving Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to identify the nutrition impact symptom (NIS) clusters in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) and explore their relationships with the weight loss rate (WLR).

METHODS

This longitudinal study included 169 patients. At baseline (T₁), the demographics, clinical information, and weight before radiotherapy (RT) were recorded. At the third week (T₂) and the end of RT (T₃), we assessed the weight, prevalence, severity, and interference of the NIS with the Head and Neck Patient Symptom Checklist. The mean scores of the severity of NIS at T₂ and T₃ were used as a whole to perform the exploratory factor analysis and identify the symptom clusters. Cronbach's α coefficient was used to evaluate the internal consistency of the symptom clusters. Generalized estimating equations were used to analyze the relationships between clusters and the WLR.

RESULTS

We extracted three clusters from 14 NISs: the RT-specific symptom cluster including pain, difficulty swallowing, oral mucositis, thick saliva, difficulty chewing, and dry mouth (Cronbach's α = 0.820); the gastrointestinal symptom cluster including nausea, loss of appetite, feeling full, vomiting, and taste change (Cronbach's α = 0.592); the psychological status cluster including depressed, anxious, and lack of energy (Cronbach's α = 0.710). The multivariable model showed that participants with more serious RT-specific symptom cluster (β = 1.020, 95% CI: 0.570-1.471, P < 0.001) had higher WLR.

CONCLUSIONS

The NIS had close internal connections with each other, so the strategies applied by healthcare professionals should focus on multiple related symptoms, especially to manage the RT-specific symptom cluster.

Radiation-induced swallowing dysfunction in patients with head and neck cancer: A literature review

Swallowing dysfunction is a prevailing state following radiotherapy in patients with head and neck cancer. Following the advancement of cancer treatment in recent years, the survival rate of head and neck cancer has gradually increased. Simultaneously, patients with head and neck cancer suffer due to the long-duration and more prominent swallowing dysfunction states. Based on an extensive literature review, we aimed to explore the mechanisms, risk factors, and clinical evaluations of swallowing dysfunction and their related symptoms following radiotherapy. These include functional changes of the muscles, trismus, xerostomia, neuropathy, and lymphedema. When swallowing dysfunction occurs, patients usually seek medical help and are referred for rehabilitation therapy, such as muscle strengthening and tongue resistance exercise. Furthermore, clinicians should discuss with patients how and when to place the feeding tube. Only through detailed evaluation and management can swallowing dysfunction resolve and improve the quality of life of patients with head and neck cancer following radiotherapy.

Predictors of the need for prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in head and neck cancer patients treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy

BACKGROUND

We investigated whether prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is used effectively for patients treated with definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) and the predictors of the need for PEG.

METHODS

326 patients with laryngeal, oropharyngeal or hypopharyngeal cancers were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

The PEG tube use group had more favorable results than the total parenteral nutrition and nasogastric tube groups in terms of rate of serum albumin loss, incidence of severe fever and aspiration pneumonia, CCRT completion rate and hospitalization period. However, it was inferior to oral intake. Analysis of the relative risk of requiring enteral or parenteral nutrition revealed that performance status (PS) 2, primary site (supraglottis, oropharynx, or hypopharynx), N3 disease, and cisplatin were predictors of the need for nutritional support.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic PEG is effective for patients treated with definitive CCRT and is especially required for patients with PS2 or oropharyngeal cancer.

Endoscopic management of enteral tubes in adult patients - Part 1: Definitions and indications. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

ESGE recommends considering the following indications for enteral tube insertion: (i) clinical conditions that make oral intake impossible (neurological conditions, obstructive causes); (ii) acute and/or chronic diseases that result in a catabolic state where oral intake becomes insufficient; and (iii) chronic small-bowel obstruction requiring a decompression gastrostomy.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends the use of temporary feeding tubes placed through a natural orifice (either nostril) in patients expected to require enteral nutrition (EN) for less than 4 weeks. If it is anticipated that EN will be required for more than 4 weeks, percutaneous access should be considered, depending on the clinical setting.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends the gastric route as the primary option in patients in need of EN support. Only in patients with altered/unfavorable gastric anatomy (e. g. after previous surgery), impaired gastric emptying, intolerance to gastric feeding, or with a high risk of aspiration, should the jejunal route be chosen.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.ESGE suggests that recent gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding due to peptic ulcer disease with risk of rebleeding should be considered to be a relative contraindication to percutaneous enteral access procedures, as should hemodynamic or respiratory instability.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE suggests that the presence of ascites and ventriculoperitoneal shunts should be considered to be additional risk factors for infection and, therefore, further preventive precautions must be taken in these cases.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends that percutaneous tube placement (percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy [PEG], percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy with jejunal extension [PEG-J], or direct percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy [D-PEJ]) should be considered to be a procedure with high hemorrhagic risk, and that in order to reduce this risk, specific guidelines for antiplatelet or anticoagulant use should be followed strictly.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends refraining from PEG placement in patients with advanced dementia.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends refraining from PEG placement in patients with a life expectancy shorter than 30 days.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence*.

Nutritional Support in Head and Neck Radiotherapy Patients Considering HPV Status

Malnutrition is a common problem in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC), including oropharyngeal cancer (OPC). It is caused by insufficient food intake due to dysphagia, odynophagia, and a lack of appetite caused by the tumor. It is also secondary to the oncological treatment of the basic disease, such as radiotherapy (RT) and chemoradiotherapy (CRT), as a consequence of mucositis with the dry mouth, loss of taste, and dysphagia. The severe dysphagia leads to a definitive total impossibility of eating through the mouth in 20–30% of patients. These patients usually require enteral nutritional support. Feeding tubes are a commonly used nutritional intervention during radiotherapy, most frequently percutaneous gastrostomy tube. Recently, a novel HPV-related type of OPC has been described. Patients with HPV-associated OPC are different from the HPV− ones. Typical HPV− OPC is associated with smoking and alcohol abuse. Patients with HPV+ OPC are younger and healthy (without comorbidities) at diagnosis compared to HPV− ones. Patients with OPC are at high nutritional risk, and therefore, they require nutritional support in order to improve the treatment results and quality of life. Some authors noted the high incidence of critical weight loss (CWL) in patients with HPV-related OPC. Other authors have observed the increased acute toxicities during oncological treatment in HPV+ OPC patients compared to HPV− ones. The aim of this paper is to review and discuss the indications for nutritional support and the kinds of nutrition, including immunonutrition (IN), in HNC, particularly OPC patients, undergoing RT/CRT, considering HPV status.

Malnutrition Prevalence according to the GLIM Criteria in Head and Neck Cancer Patients Undergoing Cancer Treatment

Malnutrition is highly prevalent in people with head and neck cancer (HCN) and is associated with poorer outcomes. However, variation in malnutrition diagnostic criteria has made translation of the most effective interventions into practice challenging. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of malnutrition in a HNC population according to the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria and assess inter-rater reliability and predictive validity. A secondary analysis of data available for 188 patients with HNC extracted from two cancer malnutrition point prevalence studies was conducted. A GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition was assigned when one phenotypic and one etiologic criterion were present. Phenotypic criteria were ≥5% unintentional loss of body weight, body mass index (BMI), and subjective evidence of muscle loss. Etiologic criteria were reduced food intake, and presence of metastatic disease as a proxy for inflammation. The prevalence of malnutrition was 22.6% (8.0% moderately malnourished; 13.3% severely malnourished). Inter-rater reliability was classified as excellent for the GLIM criteria overall, as well as for each individual criterion. A GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition was found to be significantly associated with BMI but was not predictive of 30 day hospital readmission. Further large, prospective cohort studies are required in this patient population to further validate the GLIM criteria.

The natural history of weight and swallowing outcomes in oropharyngeal cancer patients following radiation or concurrent chemoradiation therapy

PURPOSE

Patients treated for oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) are at increased risk for functional decline due to cancer-related impairments and treatment toxicities, often leading to recommendations for enteral nutritional support. This study investigated the natural history of weight and swallowing outcomes in patients with and without feeding tube (FT) placement.

METHODS

Data were collected from electronic medical records of OPC patients treated with (chemo)radiotherapy at a single regional cancer center between January 2013 and December 2015. Weight measurements, Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS) scores, Performance Status Scale for Head and Neck Cancer (PSS-HN) normalcy of diet scores, and M.D. Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI) composite scores were gathered at baseline and at 3-, 6-, and 12-months post-treatment. Patients were grouped based on FT placement and change over time was assessed using linear mixed effects analysis.

RESULTS

Of 122 eligible patients, 38 (31.1%) received a FT (FT group). Compared with baseline, weight decreased significantly at 3 and 6 months in both groups and at 12 months for patients without a FT (NFT group). Swallowing-related quality of life (QoL) decreased significantly at 3 and 6 months only in the NFT group.

CONCLUSION

OPC patients experience clinically relevant decreases in weight and swallowing-related QoL in the first-year post-treatment irrespective of FT placement. These findings will contribute to improved patient monitoring and communication within the clinical setting which may ultimately lead to better outcomes for those with OPC.

Patient and carer experience of nutrition care throughout treatment for head and neck cancer: a systematic qualitative review and thematic synthesis

Nutrition care plays a critical role in the provision of best practice care to head and neck cancer (HNC) patients, with carers playing an important role in supporting patients to maintain nutrition intake. This qualitative systematic review investigated patient and carer experience of nutrition care throughout and beyond HNC treatment. Five databases were systematically searched for qualitative studies reporting on patient and carer experience of nutrition care throughout HNC. Twenty-five studies including 435 patients and 46 carers were identified, revealing three themes: information and support in the healthcare setting, enteral feeding challenges and management, and life outside hospital. Findings highlight the importance of providing individualised person-centred nutrition care to patients with HNC and their carers. Further qualitative research is needed to inform healthcare professionals about the needs of patients and carers to provide appropriate support throughout the treatment trajectory across and between different treatment modalities.

To PEG or not to PEG that is the question

Nutrition support involves the use of oral supplements, enteral tube feeding or parenteral nutrition. These interventions are considered when oral intake alone fails to meet nutritional requirements. Special diets and oral supplements are usually the first approach to managing malnutrition; however, their role becomes limited when oral intake is restricted or if swallowing is unsafe. Enteral tube feeding or parenteral nutrition are alternative means of providing nutrition support for this select group of patients. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) feeding was introduced into clinical practice in 1980. It describes a feeding tube placed directly into the stomach under endoscopic guidance. It is an established means of providing enteral nutrition to those who have functionally normal gastrointestinal tracts, but who cannot meet their nutritional requirements due to inadequate oral intake. The intervention is usually reserved when nutritional intake is likely to be inadequate for more than 4-6 weeks. Although the benefits of PEG have been shown for a select group of patients, there currently exists concerns about the increasing frequency of this intervention, and also uncertainty about the long-term benefits for certain patients. The 2004 UK National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death report emphasised this concern, with almost a fifth of PEG being undertaken for futile indications that negatively influenced morbidity and mortality. The present review paper discusses the indications for, controversies surrounding and complications of gastrostomy feeding and provides practical advice on optimising patient selection for this intervention.

Systematic nutrition management for locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients undergoing radiotherapy

Objective

To evaluate the impact of systematic nutrition management (SNM) on nutritional status, treatment-related toxicity, quality of life (QoL), response rates, and survival in patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (LA-NPC) treated by radiotherapy (RT).

Methods

In this retrospective study, 56 patients with LA-NPC were selected as nutrition management group (NG) for SNM during RT till 1 month later. Another 56 patients with LA-NPC receiving RT without SNM as control group (CG) were identified from the hospital database and matched pairs with NG patients according to age, gender, stage, and body mass index (BMI) prior to RT.

Results

At 1 month after RT, the percentage of malnourished patients with BMI <18.5 kg/m² was statistically significant reduced in NG as compared to the CG group (35.7% vs 58.9%, P=0.014). Nutritional indexes of body weight, hemoglobin, prealbumin, and lymphocyte in the NG were statistically significant higher than those in the CG group (P<0.05). NG patients had statistically significant less grade 3–4 oral mucositis during RT compared with the CG group (32.1% vs 51.8%, P=0.035). Furthermore, at 1 month after RT, an improved QoL was observed in NG patients with respect to physical, role and social functions, symptom scales of fatigue and pain, and the global health status as compared to the CG group (P<0.05). With a median follow-up of 24.8 months, there were no statistical differences between NG and CG (P>0.05) for the 2-year progression-free survival and overall survival (84.2% versus 79.5% and 94.7% versus 92.3%, respectively.).

Conclusion

SNM for LA-NPC patients treated by RT resulted in better nutritional status, reduced treatment-related toxicity and improved QoL.

Enteral Nutrition in Pediatric High-risk Head and Neck Cancer Patients Receiving Proton Therapy: Identifying Risk Factors and Quality of Life Concerns to Optimize Care

BACKGROUND

Radiotherapy for pediatric head and neck tumors often results in mucositis and pain, limiting oral intake and compromising patients' nutrition. There are little pediatric data available regarding enteral tube use and risk factors. Our objective was to estimate nutrition needs, identify risk factors contributing to nutritional decline and explore quality of life measures regarding enteral nutrition during proton radiotherapy.

PROCEDURE

Nutritional metrics and status were collected throughout radiation treatment for 32 patients. We surveyed patients/caregivers about their perceptions of enteral nutrition. Risk factors for progression to non-oral nutrition or >5% weight loss were evaluated using univariate analysis.

RESULTS

Patients who received any esophageal radiation or >30 Gy mean dose to the pharyngeal constrictors were more likely to experience >5% weight loss. These patients, as well as those who received a mean dose >30 Gy to the oropharynx or concurrent chemotherapy, were also more likely to require non-oral supplementation. Patients expressed the importance of maximizing nutrition and feared pain associated with a tube placement.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric patients with head and neck cancer can be risk-stratified based on clinical and dosimetric factors. This data, combined with parent and patient perceptions, is key to the development of rational guidelines.

Prophylactic antibiotics reduce hospitalisations and cost in locally advanced head and neck cancer patients treated with chemoradiotherapy: A randomised phase 2 study

BACKGROUND

Platinum-based chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer (LAHNC) induces a high rate of acute toxicity, including dysphagia and aspiration pneumonia. We hypothesised that prophylactic antibiotics can prevent pneumonia and hospitalisations and can be cost-effective.

PATIENT AND METHODS

In this multicentre randomised trial, patients with LAHNC treated with chemoradiotherapy received prophylactic amoxicillin/clavulanic acid from day 29 after the start of treatment until 14 days after completion of chemoradiotherapy or standard care without prophylaxis. The primary objective was to observe a reduction in pneumonias. Secondary objectives were to evaluate the hospitalisation rate, adverse events, costs and health-related quality of life.

RESULTS

One hundred six patients were included; of which, 95 were randomised: 48 patients were allocated to the standard group and 47 patients to the prophylaxis group. A pneumonia during chemoradiotherapy and follow-up until 3.5 months was observed in 22 (45.8%) of 48 patients in the standard group and in 22 (46.8%) of 47 patients in the prophylaxis group (p = 0.54). Hospitalisation rate was significantly higher in the standard group versus the prophylaxis group, 19 of 48 pts (39.6%) versus 9 of 47 pts (19.1%), respectively (p = 0.03). Significantly more episodes with fever of any grade were observed in the standard group (29.2% vs 10.2%, p = 0.028). A significant difference in costs was found, with an average reduction of €1425 per patient in favour of the prophylaxis group.

CONCLUSION

Although prophylactic antibiotics during chemoradiotherapy for patients with LAHNC did not reduce the incidence of pneumonias, it did reduce hospitalisation rates and episodes with fever significantly and consequently tended to be cost-effective.

Prophylactic versus reactive gastrostomy tube placement in advanced head and neck cancer treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy: A systematic review

Although chemoradiotherapy (CRT) has improved disease outcomes in advanced head and neck cancer (aHNC), toxicity remains a major concern. Treatment interruptions and decreased quality of life (QOL) can occur due to malnutrition, secondary to mucositis, dysphagia and odynophagia. Gastrostomy tubes are used in many patients to improve nutrition during CRT. The optimal timing of PEG placement in patients with aHNC undergoing CRT remains controversial. Using the PubMed database, we performed a systematic review of published CRT series in aHNC to guide decision-making regarding optimal timing of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement. We aimed to compare outcomes when patients are treated with prophylactic PEG (pPEG) versus reactive PEG (rPEG). Twenty-two studies examining the role of PEG placement in CRT for aHNC were reviewed. pPEG reduces the number of malnourished patients (defined as >10% of body weight), but average weight loss at various time points following treatment appears similar to patients with rPEG. pPEG is also associated with improved QOL at 6 months, and greater long term PEG dependence. Clinical and dosimetric parameters that correlate with malnutrition in patients without pPEG include advanced age, percent weight loss preceding treatment, and radiation dose to the pharyngeal constrictor muscles. Based on this evidence, our institutional strategy is to encourage pPEG in those patients deemed at greatest risk of becoming malnourished during the course of treatment, and to approach the remainder of patients with rPEG.

Long-Term Quality of Life and Nutritional Status of Patients with Head and Neck Cancer

Disease and therapy of head and neck cancer impair quality of life (QOL). QOL varies profoundly during therapy and follow-up.

AIM

We sought to monitor QOL and nutritional status of patients before, during and after therapy (AT).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study evaluates QOL by using the EORTC-questionnaires QLQ-C30 and H&N35, body weight and plasma albumin up to two years AT.

RESULTS

Chemoradiotherapy is the period of the most profound QOL-impairment. Postoperative QOL almost reaches preoperative levels just before adjuvant therapy and does not differ significantly from pretherapeutic QOL. Long-term QOL is not significantly deteriorated. Patients have an average weight loss of 17%. Nutritional supplements are used continuously. Xerostomia and sticky saliva are chronic symptoms that persist AT.

CONCLUSIONS

QOL is an important parameter for the evaluation of therapy success. Head and neck cancer and its therapy cause permanent xerostomia, sticky saliva and need of nutritional supplements. Adequate patient information, psychooncological counseling, analgesia and nutritional support may alleviate QOL impairment.