Impact of choice of feeding tubes on long-term swallow function following chemoradiotherapy for oropharyngeal carcinoma

Expert Consensus Statement: Management of Dysphagia in Head and Neck Cancer Patients

OBJECTIVE

To develop an expert consensus statement (ECS) on the management of dysphagia in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients to address controversies and offer opportunities for quality improvement. Dysphagia in HNC was defined as swallowing impairment in patients with cancers of the nasal cavity, paranasal sinuses, nasopharynx, oral cavity, oropharynx, larynx, or hypopharynx.

METHODS

Development group members with expertise in dysphagia followed established guidelines for developing ECS. A professional search strategist systematically reviewed the literature, and the best available evidence was used to compose consensus statements targeted at providers managing dysphagia in adult HNC populations. The development group prioritized topics where there was significant practice variation and topics that would improve the quality of HNC patient care if consensus were possible.

RESULTS

The development group identified 60 candidate consensus statements, based on 75 initial proposed topics and questions, that focused on addressing the following high yield topics: (1) risk factors, (2) screening, (3) evaluation, (4) prevention, (5) interventions, and (6) surveillance. After 2 iterations of the Delphi survey and the removal of duplicative statements, 48 statements met the standardized definition for consensus; 12 statements were designated as no consensus.

CONCLUSION

Expert consensus was achieved for 48 statements pertaining to risk factors, screening, evaluation, prevention, intervention, and surveillance for dysphagia in HNC patients. Clinicians can use these statements to improve quality of care, inform policy and protocols, and appreciate areas where there is no consensus. Future research, ideally randomized controlled trials, is warranted to address additional controversies related to dysphagia in HNC patients.

Effect of Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy on Quality of Life after Chemoradiation for Locally Advanced Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Cross-Sectional Study

(1) Background: Prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) maintained nutritional status and improved survival of patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (LA-NPC). However, the role of PEG in patients’ quality of life (QoL) is still controversial. We aimed to investigate the effect of PEG on the QoL of patients with LA-NPC without progression. (2) Methods: Patients with LA-NPC between 1 June 2010 and 30 June 2014 in Fujian Cancer Hospital were divided into PEG and non-PEG groups. The QoL Questionnaire core 30 (QLQ-C30), incidence of adverse effects, weight, and xerostomia recovery were compared between the two groups of patients without progression as of 30 June 2020. (3) Results: No statistically significant difference in the scores of each QLQ-C30 scale between the two groups (p > 0.05). The incidence of xerostomia was higher in the PEG group than in the non-PEG group (p = 0.044), but the association was not seen after adjusting for gender, age, T, and N stage (OR: 0.902, 95%CI: 0.485−1.680). No significant difference in the incidence of other adverse effects as well as in weight and dry mouth recovery (p > 0.05). (4) Conclusion: PEG seems not to have a detrimental effect on long-term Qol, including the self-reported swallowing function of NPC patients without progressive disease.

Similar long-term swallowing outcomes for accelerated, mildly-hypofractionated radiotherapy compared to conventional fractionation in oropharynx cancer: a multi-centre study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

There is renewed interest in hypofractionated radiotherapy, but limited data and a lack of consensus to support use for head and neck cancer. In this multicentre analysis we compared outcomes for patients with oropharynx squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) treated with conventional and accelerated, mildly hypofractionated radiotherapy without chemotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multi-centre, observational study of consecutive OPSCCs treated between 2015 and 2018. Patients underwent curative-intent radiotherapy (oropharynx and bilateral neck) using conventionally fractionated (70 Gy in 35 fractions over 7 weeks, n = 97) or accelerated, mildly hypofractionated (65-66 Gy in 30 fractions over 6 weeks, n = 136) radiotherapy without chemotherapy. Locoregional control (LRC) and overall survival (OS) were compared. Patients alive and cancer-free at a minimum of 2 years post-radiotherapy (n = 151, 65%) were sent an MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI) questionnaire to assess swallow function.

RESULTS

LRC and OS were similar across schedules (p = 0.78 and 0.95 respectively, log-rank test). Enteral feeding rates during radiotherapy appeared higher in the 7-week group though this did not reach statistical significance (59% vs 48%, p = 0.08). Feeding rates were similar at 1 year post radiotherapy for both groups (10% vs 6%, p = 0.27). 107 patients returned MDADI questionnaires (71%); there were no differences between the 6- and 7-week groups for median global (60.0 vs 60.0, p = 0.99) and composite (65.8 vs 64.2, p = 0.44) MDADI scores.

CONCLUSION

Patients with OPSCC treated with radiotherapy alone have similar swallowing outcomes, LRC and OS following accelerated, mild hypofractionation and standard fractionation schedules, supporting its use as a standard-of-care option for patients unsuitable for concurrent chemotherapy.

Tube feeding in head and neck cancer patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Head and neck cancer patients are frequently malnourished at the time of diagnosis and prior to the beginning of treatment. In addition, chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) causes or exacerbates symptoms, such as alteration or loss of taste, mucositis, xerostomia, fatigue, nausea, and vomiting, with consequent worsening of malnutrition. If obstructing cancer and/or mucositis interfere with swallowing, enteral nutrition should be delivered by a nasogastric tube (NGT) or percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG).

AIM

To revise the studies comparing NGT and PEG in terms of nutritional outcomes, survival, hospitalizations, number of interruptions of radiotherapy, quality of life, swallowing function.

RESULTS

A total of 250 publications were identified via electronic databases. After screening the titles, abstracts and full texts, 26 manuscripts that met the inclusion criteria were included for analysis. We divided the analysis in two sections: 1) comparison of enteral nutrition through NGT or PEG and 2) comparison of reactive PEG (R-PEG) and prophylactic PEG (P-PEG).

RESULTS

Both PEG and NGT are an effective method of providing nutritional support during chemoradiotherapy for head and neck cancer. They are essentially comparable in terms of nutritional outcomes, number of radiotherapy interruptions, survival, and quality of life, whereas swallow function seems better with NGT. PEG may be associated with major complications such as exit site infection, malfunction, leakage, pain, and pulmonary infection and higher costs. Nevertheless, NGT dislodged more often, patients find it more inconvenient, may cause aspiration pneumonia and PEG has advantages over NGT of enhanced mobility and improved cosmesis. P-PEG and R-PEG are essentially similar in terms of nutritional outcomes, number of interruptions of radiotherapy, and survival. Conflicting results have been reported about quality of life.

CONCLUSION

PEG is not better than NGT in terms of nutritional, oncologic, and quality of life outcomes. Prophylactic feeding through NGT or PEG, compared to reactive feeding, does not offer significant advantages in terms of nutritional outcomes, interruptions of radiotherapy and survival. However, the number of prospective randomized studies on this topic is much limited and consequently definitive conclusions cannot be drawn. Overall, it seems that further adequate prospective, randomized studies are needed to define the better nutritional intervention in head and neck cancer patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

European white paper: oropharyngeal dysphagia in head and neck cancer

Purpose

To develop a European White Paper document on oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) in head and neck cancer (HNC). There are wide variations in the management of OD associated with HNC across Europe.

Methods

Experts in the management of specific aspects of OD in HNC across Europe were delegated by their professional medical and multidisciplinary societies to contribute to this document. Evidence is based on systematic reviews, consensus-based position statements, and expert opinion.

Results

Twenty-four sections on HNC-specific OD topics.

Conclusion

This European White Paper summarizes current best practice on management of OD in HNC, providing recommendations to support patients and health professionals. The body of literature and its level of evidence on diagnostics and treatment for OD in HNC remain poor. This is in the context of an expected increase in the prevalence of OD due to HNC in the near future. Contributing factors to increased prevalence include aging of our European population (including HNC patients) and an increase in human papillomavirus (HPV) related cancer, despite the introduction of HPV vaccination in various countries. We recommend timely implementation of OD screening in HNC patients while emphasizing the need for robust scientific research on the treatment of OD in HNC. Meanwhile, its management remains a challenge for European professional associations and policymakers.