A prospective study comparing prophylactic gastrostomy to nutritional counselling with a therapeutic feeding tube if required in head and neck cancer patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy in Thai real-world practice.

P Pramyothin, S Manyanont, A Trakarnsanga, J Petsuksiri, S Ithimakin

Journal: Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association 2018;29(6):768-776

PMID: 27028666

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is the standard treatment for head and neck (HN) cancer patients. Most patients experience malnutrition and weight loss during treatment because of mucositis and difficulty in swallowing. Prevention of malnutrition may allow more patients to complete their treatment. The present study aimed to examine whether prophylactic gastrostomy tube (PGT) could reduce treatment interruption, prevent malnutrition and maintain quality of life, especially in Thai patients who generally do not accept feeding tubes.

METHODS

A prospective study was performed on HN cancer patients undergoing CRT at a tertiary hospital in Thailand (n = 95). Before starting CRT, all patients received nutritional assessment and were counselled about the risks and benefits of PGT. According to patient discretion, they chose to have a PGT (experimental group) or only nutritional counselling with a therapeutic feeding tube if required (control group). During CRT, weight, degree of mucositis, delayed chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy, and nutritional status were recorded. Quality of life (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Head and Neck Scale; FACT-H&N) was compared between two groups.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the rates of delayed treatment. Mean weight loss was 3.1 and 4.8 kg in the experimental and control groups, respectively (P = 0.04). A higher proportion of patients in the control group experienced ≥10% weight loss (24% versus 4%; P = 0.03). In terms of quality of life, no significant difference in FACT-H&N score was found.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the present study suggest that PGT provided similar quality of life without a reduction in treatment interruption. However, patients with PGT had significantly less weight loss (P = 0.04) during CRT.

© 2016 The British Dietetic Association Ltd.

Address: Division of Nutrition, Department of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.; Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.; Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.; Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.