Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Clinical Nutrition

Validation of an updated evidence-based protocol for proactive gastrostomy tube insertion in patients with head and neck cancer

European Journal of Clinical Nutrition volume 70, pages 574–581 (2016)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Background/Objectives:

Evidence-based practice guidelines are available to assist in the decision making for nutrition interventions in patients with head and neck cancer. Re-assessment of guideline recommendations is important with changing demographics, new treatment regimens, advancing radiotherapy techniques, such as helical intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and the emergence of new literature. The aim of this study was to validate the updated high-risk category definition in our local hospital protocol for the swallowing and nutrition management of patients with head and neck cancer to determine the ongoing predictive ability for identifying proactive gastrostomy requirement in a new cohort.

Subjects/Methods:

Patients attending a major tertiary hospital for head and neck cancer treatment from 2010 to 2011 were included (n=270). Data were collected on patient demographics (age and gender), clinical factors (tumour site, staging and treatment), nutrition outcome measures (weight, enteral feeding) and protocol adherence. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated and compared with the original validation study.

Results:

Proactive gastrostomy tubes were inserted in 86 patients. Overall protocol adherence was 93%. Sensitivity improved to 72% (increase of 18%) and specificity improved to 96% (increase of 3%) compared with the original validation study where patients received three-dimensional (3-D) conformal radiotherapy.

Conclusions:

The results of this study confirm that the updated high-risk category in the protocol for the swallowing and nutrition management of patients with head and neck cancer remains valid to predict proactive gastrostomy in a mixed population receiving helical intensity-modulated radiotherapy and 3-D conformal radiotherapy. The protocol has an improved sensitivity and specificity and hence remains just as relevant for advanced techniques of radiation treatment delivery.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it

$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

References

  1. Nugent B, Lewis S, O'Sullivan JM . Enteral feeding methods for nutritional management in patients with head and neck cancers being treated with radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; 1: CD007904.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Wang J, Liu M, Liu C, Ye Y, Huang G . Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy versus nasogastric tube feeding for patients with head and neck cancer: a systematic review. J Radiat Res 2014; 55: 559–567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Langius JA, Zandbergen MC, Eerenstein SE, van Tulder MW, Leemans CR, Kramer MH et al. Effect of nutritional interventions on nutritional status, quality of life and mortality in patients with head and neck cancer receiving (chemo)radiotherapy: a systematic review. Clin Nutr 2013; 32: 671–678.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Grant DG, Bradley PT, Pothier DD, Bailey D, Caldera S, Baldwin DL et al. Complications following gastrostomy tube insertion in patients with head and neck cancer: a prospective multi-institution study, systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Otolaryngol 2009; 34: 103–112.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Chang JH, Gosling T, Larsen J, Powell S, Scanlon R, Chander S . Prophylactic gastrostomy tubes for patients receiving radical radiotherapy for head and neck cancers: a retrospective review. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2009; 53: 494–499.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Rutter CE, Yovino S, Taylor R, Wolf J, Cullen KJ, Ord R et al. Impact of early percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement on nutritional status and hospitalization in patients with head and neck cancer receiving definitive chemoradiation therapy. Head Neck 2011; 33: 1441–1447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lewis SL, Brody R, Touger-Decker R, Parrott JS, Epstein J . Feeding tube use in head and neck cancer patients. Head Neck 2014; 36: 1789–1795.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Silander E, Nyman J, Bove M, Johansson L, Larsson S, Hammerlid E . Impact of prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy on malnutrition and quality of life in patients with head and neck cancer: a randomized study. Head Neck 2012; 34: 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Salas S, Baumstarck-Barrau K, Alfonsi M, Digue L, Bagarry D, Feham N et al. Impact of the prophylactic gastrostomy for unresectable squamous cell head and neck carcinomas treated with radio-chemotherapy on quality of life: Prospective randomized trial. Radiother Oncol 2009; 93: 503–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hughes BG, Jain VK, Brown T, Spurgin AL, Hartnett G, Keller J et al. Decreased hospital stay and significant cost savings after routine use of prophylactic gastrostomy for high-risk patients with head and neck cancer receiving chemoradiotherapy at a tertiary cancer institution. Head Neck 2012; 35: 436–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Baschnagel AM, Yadav S, Marina O, Parzuchowski A, Lanni Jr TB, Warner JN et al. Toxicities and costs of placing prophylactic and reactive percutaneous gastrostomy tubes in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancers treated with chemoradiotherapy. Head Neck 2014; 36: 1155–1161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kramer S, Newcomb M, Hessler J, Siddiqui F . Prophylactic versus reactive PEG tube placement in head and neck cancer. Otolaryngolo Head Neck Surg 2014; 150: 407–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Sheth CH, Sharp S, Walters ER . Enteral feeding in head and neck cancer patients at a UK cancer centre. J Hum Nutr Diet 2013; 26: 421–428.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Corry J, Poon W, McPhee N, Milner AD, Cruickshank D, Porceddu SV et al. Randomized study of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy versus nasogastric tubes for enteral feeding in head and neck cancer patients treated with (chemo)radiation. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2008; 52: 503–510.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Ward MC, Bhateja P, Nwizu T, Kmiecik J, Reddy CA, Scharpf J et al. The impact of feeding tube choice on severe late dysphagia after definitive chemoradiation for HPV-negative head and neck cancer. Head Neck 2015 doi:10.1002/hed.24157.

  16. Prestwich RJ, Teo MT, Gilbert A, Williams G, Dyker KE, Sen M . Long-term swallow function after chemoradiotherapy for oropharyngeal cancer: the influence of a prophylactic gastrostomy or reactive nasogastric tube. Clin Oncol 2014; 26: 103–109.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Crombie JM, Ng S, Spurgin AL, Ward EC, Brown TE, Hughes BG . Swallowing outcomes and PEG dependence in head and neck cancer patients receiving definitive or adjuvant radiotherapy +/- chemotherapy with a proactive PEG: A prospective study with long term follow up. Oral Oncol 2015; 51: 622–628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Brown TE, Spurgin AL, Ross L, Tripcony L, Keller J, Hughes BG et al. Validated swallowing and nutrition guidelines for patients with head and neck cancer: Identification of high-risk patients for proactive gastrostomy. Head Neck 2012; 35: 1385–1391.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Brown T, Ross L, Jones L, Hughes B, Banks M . Nutrition outcomes following implementation of validated swallowing and nutrition guidelines for patients with head and neck cancer. Suppor Care Cancer 2014; 22: 2381–2391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Isenring EA, Hill J, Davidson W, Brown T, Baumgartner L, Kaegi K et al. Evidence based practice guidelines for the nutritional management of patients receiving radiation therapy. Nutr Diet 2008; 65 (Suppl 1), S1–S20.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Brown T, Crombie J, Spurgin A, Tripcony L, Keller J, Hughes B et al. Improving guideline sensitivity and specificity for the identification of proactive gastrostomy placement in patients with head and neck cancer. Head Neck 2015 doi:10.1002/hed.24184.

  22. Capelle L, Mackenzie M, Field C, Parliament M, Ghosh S, Scrimger R . Adaptive radiotherapy using helical tomotherapy for head and neck cancer in definitive and postoperative settings: initial results. Clin Oncol 2012; 24: 208–215.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. van Vulpen M, Field C, Raaijmakers CP, Parliament MB, Terhaard CH, MacKenzie MA et al. Comparing step-and-shoot IMRT with dynamic helical tomotherapy IMRT plans for head-and-neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005; 62: 1535–1539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Jemal A, Simard EP, Dorell C, Noone AM, Markowitz LE, Kohler B et al. Annual Report to the Nation on the Status of Cancer, 1975-2009, featuring the burden and trends in human papillomavirus(HPV)-associated cancers and HPV vaccination coverage levels. J Natl Cancer Inst 2013; 105: 175–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Benson E, Li R, Eisele D, Fakhry C . The clinical impact of HPV tumor status upon head and neck squamous cell carcinomas. Oral Oncol 2013; 50: 565–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Petrelli F, Sarti E, Barni S . Predictive value of human papillomavirus in oropharyngeal carcinoma treated with radiotherapy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of 30 trials. Head Neck 2013; 36: 750–759.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Bonilla-Velez J, Mroz EA, Hammon RJ, Rocco JW . Impact of human papillomavirus on oropharyngeal cancer biology and response to therapy: implications for treatment. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2013; 46: 521–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Evans M, Newcombe R, Fiander A, Powell J, Rolles M, Thavaraj S et al. Human Papillomavirus-associated oropharyngeal cancer: an observational study of diagnosis, prevalence and prognosis in a UK population. BMC Cancer 2013; 13: 220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Ramqvist T, Dalianis T . Oropharyngeal cancer epidemic and human papillomavirus. Emerg Infect Dis 2010; 16: 1671–1677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Gillison ML, D'Souza G, Westra W, Sugar E, Xiao W, Begum S et al. Distinct risk factor profiles for human papillomavirus type 16–positive and human papillomavirus type 16–negative head and neck cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008; 100: 407–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Rischin D, Corry J . Weekly cetuximab/RT vs weekly cisplatin/RT in HPV-associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (HPVOropharynx). TROG Cancer Res 2013. Available from http://www.trog.com.au/TROG-1201-HPV.

  32. Strom T, Trotti AM, Kish J, Rao NG, McCaffrey J, Padhya TA et al. Risk factors for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement during chemoradiotherapy for oropharyngeal cancer. JAMA Otolaryngo Head Neck Surg 2013; 139: 1242–1246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Jack DR, Dawson FR, Reilly JE, Shoaib T . Guideline for prophylactic feeding tube insertion in patients undergoing resection of head and neck cancers. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2012; 65: 610–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Vergeer MR, Doornaert PA, Rietveld DH, Leemans CR, Slotman BJ, Langendijk JA . Intensity-modulated radiotherapy reduces radiation-induced morbidity and improves health-related quality of life: results of a nonrandomized prospective study using a standardized follow-up program. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009; 74: 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sanguineti G, Gunn GB, Parker BC, Endres EJ, Zeng J, Fiorino C . Weekly dose-volume parameters of mucosa and constrictor muscles predict the use of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy during exclusive intensity-modulated radiotherapy for oropharyngeal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011; 79: 52–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Romesser PB, Romanyshyn JC, Schupak KD, Setton J, Riaz N, Wolden SL et al. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in oropharyngeal cancer patients treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy with concurrent chemotherapy. Cancer 2012; 118: 6072–6078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Rusthoven KE, Raben D, Ballonoff A, Kane M, Song JI, Chen C . Effect of radiation techniques in treatment of oropharynx cancer. Laryngoscope 2008; 118: 635–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Fiorino C, Dell'Oca I, Pierelli A, Broggi S, De Martin E, Di Muzio N et al. Significant improvement in normal tissue sparing and target coverage for head and neck cancer by means of helical tomotherapy. Radiother Oncol 2006; 78: 276–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Sheng K, Molloy JA, Read PW . Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) dosimetry of the head and neck: a comparison of treatment plans using linear accelerator-based IMRT and helical tomotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006; 65: 917–923.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Lee TF, Fang FM, Chao PJ, Su TJ, Wang LK, Leung SW . Dosimetric comparisons of helical tomotherapy and step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Radiother Oncol 2008; 89: 89–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Loo H, Fairfoul J, Chakrabarti A, Dean JC, Benson RJ, Jefferies SJ et al. Tumour shrinkage and contour change during radiotherapy increase the dose to organs at risk but not the target volumes for head and neck cancer patients treated on the TomoTherapy HiArt system. Clin Oncol 2011; 23: 40–47.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Chao KS, Low DA, Perez CA, Purdy JA . Intensity-modulated radiation therapy in head and neck cancers: the Mallinckrodt experience. Int J Cancer 2000; 90: 92–103.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Chatterjee S, Mott JH, Smyth G, Dickson S, Dobrowsky W, Kelly CG . Clinical challenges in the implementation of a tomotherapy service for head and neck cancer patients in a regional UK radiotherapy centre. Br J Radiol 2011; 84: 358–366.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. You SH, Kim SY, Lee CG, Keum KC, Kim JH, Lee IJ et al. Is there a clinical benefit to adaptive planning during tomotherapy in patients with head and neck cancer at risk for xerostomia? Am J Clin Oncol 2012; 35: 261–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Duma MN, Kampfer S, Schuster T, Winkler C, Geinitz H . Adaptive radiotherapy for soft tissue changes during helical tomotherapy for head and neck cancer. Strahlenther Onkol 2012; 188: 243–247.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Brown T, Banks M, Hughes BG, Lin C, Kenny LM, Bauer JD . New radiotherapy techniques do not reduce the need for nutrition intervention in patients with head and neck cancer. Eur J Clin Nutr 2015; 69: 1119–1124.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. van den Berg MG, Rasmussen-Conrad EL, van Nispen L, van Binsbergen JJ, Merkx MA . A prospective study on malnutrition and quality of life in patients with head and neck cancer. Oral Oncol 2008; 44: 830–837.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Langius JA, van Dijk AM, Doornaert P, Kruizenga HM, Langendijk JA, Leemans CR et al. More than 10% weight loss in head and neck cancer patients during radiotherapy is independently associated with deterioration in quality of life. Nutr Cancer 2013; 65: 76–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Capuano G, Grosso A, Gentile PC, Battista M, Bianciardi F, Di Palma A et al. Influence of weight loss on outcomes in patients with head and neck cancer undergoing concomitant chemoradiotherapy. Head Neck 2008; 30: 503–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. de Arruda FF, Puri DR, Zhung J, Narayana A, Wolden S, Hunt M et al. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy for the treatment of oropharyngeal carcinoma: the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center experience. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006; 64: 363–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Amin N, Reddy K, Westerly D, Raben D, DeWitt P, Chen C . Sparing the larynx and esophageal inlet expedites feeding tube removal in patients with stage III-IV oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Laryngoscope 2012; 122: 2736–2742.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Arends J, Bodoky G, Bozzetti F, Fearon K, Muscaritoli M, Selga G et al. ESPEN Guidelines on Enteral Nutrition: Non-surgical oncology. Clin Nutr 2006; 25: 245–259.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Dr Tuan Ha, Radiation Oncology, for his assistance in data collection, Dr Lynda Ross for advice on writing the manuscript, Ann-Louise Spurgin and Jane Crombie, Speech Pathology, for their involvement in the initial development of the protocol, and the support of staff in medical records and the Combined Head and Neck Clinic at the Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital. Funding source: Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital PhD Scholarship.

Author contributions

TB initiated the study concept. TB, JB, MB and BH contributed to study design. VG, TB and CL participated in the acquisition of data. VG and TB analysed the data, and VG prepared the first draft of the manuscript. All the authors participated in the interpretation of the data, critical revision of the manuscript and the final approval of the submitted version. As corresponding author TB has full access to all the data in the study and has final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia,

    T E Brown & M D Banks

  2. Centre for Dietetics Research (C-DIET-R), School of Human Movement Studies, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    T E Brown, V Getliffe & J D Bauer

  3. Cancer Care Services, Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    B G M Hughes, C Y Lin & L M Kenny

  4. School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    B G M Hughes

Authors
  1. T E Brown
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. V Getliffe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M D Banks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. B G M Hughes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. C Y Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. L M Kenny
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. J D Bauer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to T E Brown.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

TB received a Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital PhD Scholarship. The funding body was not involved in the study design, data collection, analysis and interpretation of results, writing of the report or the decision to submit the article for publication. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Supplementary Information accompanies this paper on European Journal of Clinical Nutrition website

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Brown, T., Getliffe, V., Banks, M. et al. Validation of an updated evidence-based protocol for proactive gastrostomy tube insertion in patients with head and neck cancer. Eur J Clin Nutr 70, 574–581 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2015.230

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2015.230

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links