Risk factors for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement during chemoradiotherapy for oropharyngeal cancer
- PMID: 24136493
- DOI: 10.1001/jamaoto.2013.5193
Risk factors for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement during chemoradiotherapy for oropharyngeal cancer
Abstract
Importance: Patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma undergoing chemoradiotherapy may require percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube placement because of dehydration or significant weight loss.
Objectives: To determine the need for the reactive placement of a PEG tube during chemoradiotherapy for oropharyngeal cancer and to identify patient or tumor factors associated with reactively requiring the placement of a PEG tube.
Design, setting, and participants: Single-institution retrospective review of 297 patients treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy and concurrent chemotherapy for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma between May 1, 2004, and June 30, 2012, with a minimum follow-up period of 3 months.
Exposure: Placement of a PEG tube.
Main outcomes and measures: Logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent risk factors associated with symptomatic requirement for the reactive placement of a PEG tube.
Results: In total, 128 patients did not receive a prophylactic PEG tube within 10 days of initiation of chemoradiotherapy. Fifteen of 128 patients (11.7%) required the reactive placement of a PEG tube during or within 3 months of chemoradiotherapy. The median time to PEG tube removal was 3.3 months, and 14 of 15 patients had their PEG tube removed at the last follow-up analysis. Independent risk factors for PEG tube placement included the following: accelerated irradiation fractionation (odds ratio, 4.3; 95% CI, 1.1-16.5; P = .04), a tumor T classification of 3 or higher (odds ratio, 3.5; 95% CI, 1.0-11.9; P = .04), a cumulative cisplatin dose of 200 mg/m² or higher (odds ratio, 6.7; 95% CI, 1.2-36.7; P = .03), and a body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) of less than 25 (odds ratio, 5.8; 95% CI, 1.4-23.9; P = .02).
Conclusions and relevance: Although the overall risk is low, a body mass index of less than 25, accelerated irradiation fractionation, a tumor T classification of 3 or higher, and a cumulative cisplatin dose of 200 mg/m² or higher are associated with symptomatic need for the reactive placement of a PEG tube in patients with oropharyngeal cancer.
Similar articles
-
Prophylactic gastrostomy placement and early tube feeding may limit loss of weight during chemoradiotherapy for advanced head and neck cancer, a preliminary study.Clin Otolaryngol. 2007 Oct;32(5):384-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-4486.2007.01533.x. Clin Otolaryngol. 2007. PMID: 17883560
-
Gastrostomy tube placement in patients with oropharyngeal carcinoma treated with radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy: factors affecting placement and dependence.Head Neck. 2013 Nov;35(11):1634-40. doi: 10.1002/hed.23200. Epub 2013 Jan 16. Head Neck. 2013. PMID: 23322563
-
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 Aug;36(8):1155-61. doi: 10.1002/hed.23426. Epub 2013 Nov 27. Head Neck. 2014. PMID: 23852670
-
Metastatic head and neck carcinoma to a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy site.Head Neck. 2005 Apr;27(4):339-43. doi: 10.1002/hed.20159. Head Neck. 2005. PMID: 15712297 Review.
-
Prophylactic versus reactive gastrostomy tube placement in advanced head and neck cancer treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy: A systematic review.Oral Oncol. 2018 Dec;87:77-81. doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2018.10.028. Epub 2018 Oct 25. Oral Oncol. 2018. PMID: 30527247
Cited by
-
Gastrostomy tubes: Fundamentals, periprocedural considerations, and best practices.World J Gastrointest Surg. 2022 Apr 27;14(4):286-303. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v14.i4.286. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2022. PMID: 35664365 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Narrative review of the management of oral mucositis during chemoradiation for head and neck cancer.Ann Transl Med. 2021 May;9(10):916. doi: 10.21037/atm-20-3931. Ann Transl Med. 2021. PMID: 34164550 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Pretreatment factors associated with functional oral intake and feeding tube use at 1 and 6 months post-radiotherapy (+/- chemotherapy) for head and neck cancer.Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2017 Jan;274(1):507-516. doi: 10.1007/s00405-016-4241-9. Epub 2016 Aug 6. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2017. PMID: 27498203
-
Predictors of Gastrostomy Tube Placement in Head and Neck Cancer Patients Undergoing Radiation or Chemoradiotherapy: A Systematic Review.Head Neck. 2025 Mar;47(3):1006-1017. doi: 10.1002/hed.28010. Epub 2024 Nov 25. Head Neck. 2025. PMID: 39587806 Free PMC article.
-
Age most significant predictor of requiring enteral feeding in head-and-neck cancer patients.Radiat Oncol. 2015 Apr 18;10:93. doi: 10.1186/s13014-015-0408-6. Radiat Oncol. 2015. PMID: 25896830 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical