Efficacy and cost-effectiveness analysis of pretreatment percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in unresectable locally advanced esophageal cancer patients treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy (GASTO 1059)

4Citations
Citations of this article
23Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: We launched a single-arm phase II study to determine the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) before concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Methods: Eligible patients received pretreatment PEG and enteral nutrition during CCRT. The primary outcome was the change of weight during CCRT. The secondary outcome included nutrition status, loco-regional objective response rate (ORR), loco-regional progression-free survival (LRFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicities. A 3-state Markov model was applied for cost-effectiveness analysis. Eligible patients were matched and compared with those who had nasogastric tube feeding (NTF) or oral nutritional supplements (ONS). Results: Sixty-three eligible patients received pretreatment PEG-based CCRT. The mean change of weight during CCRT was −1.4% (standard deviation, 4.4%), and after CCRT, 28.6% of patients gained weight and 98.4% had normal albumin levels. The loco-regional ORR and 1-year LRFS were 98.4% and 88.3%. The incidence of grade ≥3 esophagitis was 14.3%. After matching, another 63 patients were included in the NTF group and 63 in the ONS group. More patients gained weight after CCRT in the PEG group (p = 0.001). The PEG group showed higher loco-regional ORR (p = 0.036) and longer 1-year LRFS (p = 0.030). In cost analysis, the PEG group showed an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $3457.65 per quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) compared with the ONS group with a probability of cost-effectiveness of 77.7% at the $10,000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. Conclusion: Pretreatment PEG is associated with better nutritional status and treatment outcome in ESCC patients treated with CCRT compared with ONS and NTF. Pretreatment of PEG can be cost-effective because of its significant clinical benefits.

References Powered by Scopus

Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries

66879Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Recommendations for conduct, methodological practices, and reporting of cost-effectiveness analyses: Second panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine

2317Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

ESPEN guidelines on nutrition in cancer patients

2100Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

TRAIL agonists rescue mice from radiation-induced lung, skin, or esophageal injury

0Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Comparison of enteral nutrition methods with weight improvement in patients with T4b esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

0Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Interdisciplinary Approach to Expedited Outpatient Gastrostomy Tube Placement in Head and Neck Cancer Patients: A Single Center Retrospective Study

0Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ai, X. L., Zhang, P. X., Xie, X. M., Qiu, B., Zhu, Y. J., Zhao, L., … Liu, H. (2023). Efficacy and cost-effectiveness analysis of pretreatment percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in unresectable locally advanced esophageal cancer patients treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy (GASTO 1059). Cancer Medicine, 12(14), 15000–15010. https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.6136

Readers over time

‘23‘24‘2506121824

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 1

100%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Sports and Recreations 4

67%

Nursing and Health Professions 2

33%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
News Mentions: 1

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0