Radiation technique influence on percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube dependence: Comparison between two radiation schemes

Georges F. Hatoum, Andre Abitbol, Inas Elattar, Alan Lewin, Michael Troner, Frank Kronberg, Luis E. Raez, Donald Weed, May Abdel-Wahab

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background. Our aim was to determine whether percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) dependence was significantly different between 2 prospective trials with different radiation fractionation schemes. Methods. Stage III or IV locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinomas arising from the oral cavity, hypopharynx, oropharynx, nasopharynx, paranasal sinuses, or larynx were treated using hyperfractionation (A-3 protocol) or accelerated fractionation (A-4 protocol) with chemotherapy. Amifostine was administered 15 to 30 minutes preradiation, at a dose of 500 mg/day in both protocols. It was given as an infusion over 5 to 7 minutes (A-3 protocol) or subcutaneously (A-4 protocol). Data regarding PEG placement and removal were collected prospectively. Results. Thirty-five evaluable A-3 protocol patients, 14 evaluable A-4 protocol patients, and 6 patients treated per A-4 protocol guidelines, but without amifostine as they refused the medication, were included in the analysis. Pretreatment characteristics, such as sex, age, race, T classification, N classification, American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage, were compared between the 2 groups of patients. The only significant difference between the 2 groups was AJCC stage. Thirty-five A-3 patients and 20 A-4 patients had overall survivals of 88% versus 80%, 82% versus 75%, and 66% versus 67.5% at 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively (p = .958). With regard to PEG dependence, no significant differences were seen between the 2 groups at 6, 12, or 18 months. Conclusion. PEG dependence was not significantly different between the 2 study groups. Type of altered fractionation scheme may not influence PEG dependence in patients treated with similar protocols. Future randomized studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)944-948
Number of pages5
JournalHead and Neck
Volume31
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2009

Fingerprint

Gastrostomy
Radiation
Amifostine
Hypopharynx
Oropharynx
Nasopharynx
Paranasal Sinuses
Larynx
Mouth
Neoplasms
Guidelines
Drug Therapy
Survival

Keywords

  • Accelerated-concomitant boost radiation
  • Head and neck cancer
  • Hyperfractionated radiation
  • PEG tube

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Otorhinolaryngology

Cite this

Hatoum, G. F., Abitbol, A., Elattar, I., Lewin, A., Troner, M., Kronberg, F., ... Abdel-Wahab, M. (2009). Radiation technique influence on percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube dependence: Comparison between two radiation schemes. Head and Neck, 31(7), 944-948. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.21056

Radiation technique influence on percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube dependence : Comparison between two radiation schemes. / Hatoum, Georges F.; Abitbol, Andre; Elattar, Inas; Lewin, Alan; Troner, Michael; Kronberg, Frank; Raez, Luis E.; Weed, Donald; Abdel-Wahab, May.

In: Head and Neck, Vol. 31, No. 7, 01.07.2009, p. 944-948.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hatoum, GF, Abitbol, A, Elattar, I, Lewin, A, Troner, M, Kronberg, F, Raez, LE, Weed, D & Abdel-Wahab, M 2009, 'Radiation technique influence on percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube dependence: Comparison between two radiation schemes', Head and Neck, vol. 31, no. 7, pp. 944-948. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.21056
Hatoum, Georges F. ; Abitbol, Andre ; Elattar, Inas ; Lewin, Alan ; Troner, Michael ; Kronberg, Frank ; Raez, Luis E. ; Weed, Donald ; Abdel-Wahab, May. / Radiation technique influence on percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube dependence : Comparison between two radiation schemes. In: Head and Neck. 2009 ; Vol. 31, No. 7. pp. 944-948.
@article{8b584b02019e4708869730210fb28f23,
title = "Radiation technique influence on percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube dependence: Comparison between two radiation schemes",
abstract = "Background. Our aim was to determine whether percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) dependence was significantly different between 2 prospective trials with different radiation fractionation schemes. Methods. Stage III or IV locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinomas arising from the oral cavity, hypopharynx, oropharynx, nasopharynx, paranasal sinuses, or larynx were treated using hyperfractionation (A-3 protocol) or accelerated fractionation (A-4 protocol) with chemotherapy. Amifostine was administered 15 to 30 minutes preradiation, at a dose of 500 mg/day in both protocols. It was given as an infusion over 5 to 7 minutes (A-3 protocol) or subcutaneously (A-4 protocol). Data regarding PEG placement and removal were collected prospectively. Results. Thirty-five evaluable A-3 protocol patients, 14 evaluable A-4 protocol patients, and 6 patients treated per A-4 protocol guidelines, but without amifostine as they refused the medication, were included in the analysis. Pretreatment characteristics, such as sex, age, race, T classification, N classification, American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage, were compared between the 2 groups of patients. The only significant difference between the 2 groups was AJCC stage. Thirty-five A-3 patients and 20 A-4 patients had overall survivals of 88{\%} versus 80{\%}, 82{\%} versus 75{\%}, and 66{\%} versus 67.5{\%} at 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively (p = .958). With regard to PEG dependence, no significant differences were seen between the 2 groups at 6, 12, or 18 months. Conclusion. PEG dependence was not significantly different between the 2 study groups. Type of altered fractionation scheme may not influence PEG dependence in patients treated with similar protocols. Future randomized studies are needed to confirm these findings.",
keywords = "Accelerated-concomitant boost radiation, Head and neck cancer, Hyperfractionated radiation, PEG tube",
author = "Hatoum, {Georges F.} and Andre Abitbol and Inas Elattar and Alan Lewin and Michael Troner and Frank Kronberg and Raez, {Luis E.} and Donald Weed and May Abdel-Wahab",
year = "2009",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/hed.21056",
language = "English",
volume = "31",
pages = "944--948",
journal = "Head and Neck",
issn = "1043-3074",
publisher = "Wiley-Liss Inc.",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Radiation technique influence on percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube dependence

T2 - Comparison between two radiation schemes

AU - Hatoum, Georges F.

AU - Abitbol, Andre

AU - Elattar, Inas

AU - Lewin, Alan

AU - Troner, Michael

AU - Kronberg, Frank

AU - Raez, Luis E.

AU - Weed, Donald

AU - Abdel-Wahab, May

PY - 2009/7/1

Y1 - 2009/7/1

N2 - Background. Our aim was to determine whether percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) dependence was significantly different between 2 prospective trials with different radiation fractionation schemes. Methods. Stage III or IV locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinomas arising from the oral cavity, hypopharynx, oropharynx, nasopharynx, paranasal sinuses, or larynx were treated using hyperfractionation (A-3 protocol) or accelerated fractionation (A-4 protocol) with chemotherapy. Amifostine was administered 15 to 30 minutes preradiation, at a dose of 500 mg/day in both protocols. It was given as an infusion over 5 to 7 minutes (A-3 protocol) or subcutaneously (A-4 protocol). Data regarding PEG placement and removal were collected prospectively. Results. Thirty-five evaluable A-3 protocol patients, 14 evaluable A-4 protocol patients, and 6 patients treated per A-4 protocol guidelines, but without amifostine as they refused the medication, were included in the analysis. Pretreatment characteristics, such as sex, age, race, T classification, N classification, American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage, were compared between the 2 groups of patients. The only significant difference between the 2 groups was AJCC stage. Thirty-five A-3 patients and 20 A-4 patients had overall survivals of 88% versus 80%, 82% versus 75%, and 66% versus 67.5% at 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively (p = .958). With regard to PEG dependence, no significant differences were seen between the 2 groups at 6, 12, or 18 months. Conclusion. PEG dependence was not significantly different between the 2 study groups. Type of altered fractionation scheme may not influence PEG dependence in patients treated with similar protocols. Future randomized studies are needed to confirm these findings.

AB - Background. Our aim was to determine whether percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) dependence was significantly different between 2 prospective trials with different radiation fractionation schemes. Methods. Stage III or IV locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinomas arising from the oral cavity, hypopharynx, oropharynx, nasopharynx, paranasal sinuses, or larynx were treated using hyperfractionation (A-3 protocol) or accelerated fractionation (A-4 protocol) with chemotherapy. Amifostine was administered 15 to 30 minutes preradiation, at a dose of 500 mg/day in both protocols. It was given as an infusion over 5 to 7 minutes (A-3 protocol) or subcutaneously (A-4 protocol). Data regarding PEG placement and removal were collected prospectively. Results. Thirty-five evaluable A-3 protocol patients, 14 evaluable A-4 protocol patients, and 6 patients treated per A-4 protocol guidelines, but without amifostine as they refused the medication, were included in the analysis. Pretreatment characteristics, such as sex, age, race, T classification, N classification, American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage, were compared between the 2 groups of patients. The only significant difference between the 2 groups was AJCC stage. Thirty-five A-3 patients and 20 A-4 patients had overall survivals of 88% versus 80%, 82% versus 75%, and 66% versus 67.5% at 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively (p = .958). With regard to PEG dependence, no significant differences were seen between the 2 groups at 6, 12, or 18 months. Conclusion. PEG dependence was not significantly different between the 2 study groups. Type of altered fractionation scheme may not influence PEG dependence in patients treated with similar protocols. Future randomized studies are needed to confirm these findings.

KW - Accelerated-concomitant boost radiation

KW - Head and neck cancer

KW - Hyperfractionated radiation

KW - PEG tube

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=67650470940&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=67650470940&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/hed.21056

DO - 10.1002/hed.21056

M3 - Article

C2 - 19309724

AN - SCOPUS:67650470940

VL - 31

SP - 944

EP - 948

JO - Head and Neck

JF - Head and Neck

SN - 1043-3074

IS - 7

ER -