Enteral feeding methods for nutritional management in patients with head and neck cancers being treated with radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy

Background: This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in The Cochrane Library in Issue 3, 2010.
For many patients with head and neck cancer, oral nutrition will not provide adequate nourishment during treatment with radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy due to the acute toxicity of treatment, obstruction caused by the tumour, or both. The optimal method of enteral feeding for this patient group has yet to be established.

Objectives: To compare the effectiveness of different enteral feeding methods used in the nutritional management of patients with head and neck cancer receiving radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy using the clinical outcomes, nutritional status, quality of life and rates of complications.

Search methods: Our extensive search included the Cochrane ENT Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED and ISI Web of Science. The date of the most recent search was 13 February 2012.

Selection criteria:Randomised controlled trials comparing one method of enteral feeding with another, e.g. nasogastric (NG) or percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) feeding, for adult patients with a diagnosis of head and neck cancer receiving radiotherapy and/or chemoradiotherapy.

Data collection and analysis:Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data using standardised forms. We contacted study authors for additional information.

Main results: One randomised controlled trial met the criteria for inclusion in this review. No further studies were identified when we updated the searches in 2012.
Patients diagnosed with head and neck cancer, being treated with chemoradiotherapy, were randomised to PEG or NG feeding. In total only 33 patients were eligible for analysis as the trial was terminated early due to poor accrual. A high degree of bias was identified in the study.
Weight loss was greater for the NG group at six weeks post-treatment than for the PEG group (P = 0.001). At six months post-treatment, however, there was no significant difference in weight loss between the two groups. Anthropometric measurements recorded six weeks post-treatment demonstrated lower triceps skin fold thickness for the NG group compared to the PEG group (P = 0.03). No statistically significant difference was found between the two different enteral feeding techniques in relation to complication rates or patient satisfaction. The duration of PEG feeding was significantly longer than for the NG group (P = 0.0006). In addition, the study calculated the cost of PEG feeding to be 10 times greater than that of NG, though this was not found to be significant. There was no difference in the treatment received by the two groups. However, four PEG fed patients and two NG fed patients required unscheduled treatment breaks of a median of two and six days respectively.
We identified no studies of enteral feeding involving any form of radiologically inserted gastrostomy (RIG) feeding or comparing prophylactic PEG versus PEG for inclusion in the review.

Authors' conclusions: There is not sufficient evidence to determine the optimal method of enteral feeding for patients with head and neck cancer receiving radiotherapy and/or chemoradiotherapy. Further trials of the two methods of enteral feeding, incorporating larger sample sizes, are required.

BRCA1 Functions as a Differential Modulator of Chemotherapy-induced Apoptosis

We have evaluated the role played by BRCA1 in mediating the phenotypic response to a range of chemotherapeutic agents commonly used in cancer treatment. Here we provide evidence that BRCA1 functions as a differential mediator of chemotherapy-induced apoptosis. Specifically, we demonstrate that BRCA1 mediates sensitivity to apoptosis induced by antimicrotubule agents but conversely induces resistance to DNA-damaging agents. These data are supported by a variety of experimental models including cells with inducible expression of BRCA1, siRNA-mediated inactivation of endogenous BRCA1, and reconstitution of BRCA1-deficient cells with wild-type BRCA1. Most notably we demonstrate that BRCA1 induces a 10–1000-fold increase in resistance to a range of DNA-damaging agents, in particular those that give rise to double-strand breaks such as etoposide or bleomycin. In contrast, BRCA1 induces a >1000-fold increase in sensitivity to the spindle poisons, paclitaxel and vinorelbine. Fluorescence-activated cell sorter analysis demonstrated that BRCA1 mediates G2/M arrest in response to both antimicrotubule and DNA-damaging agents. However, poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase and caspase-3 cleavage assays indicate that the differential effect mediated by BRCA1 in response to these agents occurs through the inhibition or induction of apoptosis. Therefore, our data suggest that BRCA1 acts as a differential modulator of apoptosis depending on the nature of the cellular insult.

Chemotherapy and TRAIL-mediated colon cancer cell death: the roles of p53, TRAIL receptors, and c-FLIP.

Tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand (TRAIL) has recently attracted attention as a potential therapeutic agent in the treatment of cancer. We assessed the roles of p53, TRAIL receptors, and cellular Fas-associated death domain-like interleukin-1beta-converting enzyme inhibitory protein (c-FLIP) in regulating the cytotoxic effects of recombinant TRAIL (rTRAIL) alone and in combination with chemotherapy [5-fluorouracil (5-FU), oxaliplatin, and irinotecan] in a panel of colon cancer cell lines. Using clonogenic survival and flow cytometric analyses, we showed that chemotherapy sensitized p53 wild-type, mutant, and null cell lines to TRAIL-mediated apoptosis. Although chemotherapy treatment did not modulate mRNA or cell surface expression of the TRAIL receptors death receptor 4, death receptor 5, decoy receptor 1, or decoy receptor 2, it was found to down-regulate expression of the caspase-8 inhibitor, c-FLIP. Stable overexpression of the long c-FLIP splice form but not the short form was found to inhibit chemotherapy/rTRAIL-induced apoptosis. Furthermore, siRNA-mediated down-regulation of c-FLIP, particularly the long form, was found to sensitize colon cancer cells to rTRAIL-induced apoptosis. In addition, treatment of a 5-FU-resistant cell line with 5-FU down-regulated c-FLIP expression and sensitized the chemotherapy-resistant cell line to rTRAIL. We conclude that TRAIL-targeted therapies may be used to enhance conventional chemotherapy regimens in colon cancer regardless of tumor p53 status. Furthermore, inhibition of c-FLIP may be a vital accessory strategy for the optimal use of TRAIL-targeted therapies.

c-FLIP inhibits chemotherapy-induced colorectal cancer cell death

c-FLIP inhibits caspase 8 activation and apoptosis mediated by death receptors such as Fas and DR5. We studied the effect of c-FLIP on the apoptotic response to chemotherapies used in colorectal cancer (CRC) (5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin and irinotecan). Simultaneous downregulation of both c-FLIP splice forms c-FLIP(L) and c-FLIP(S) with siRNA synergistically enhanced chemotherapy-induced apoptosis in p53 wild-type (HCT116p53(+/+), RKO), null (HCT116p53(-/-)) and mutant (H630) CRC cell lines. Furthermore, overexpression of c-FLIP(L), but not c-FLIP(S), potently inhibited apoptosis induced by chemotherapy in HCT116p53(+/+) cells, suggesting that c-FLIP(L) was the more important splice form in mediating chemoresistance. In support of this, siRNA specifically targeted against c-FLIP(L) synergistically enhanced chemotherapy-induced apoptosis in a manner similar to the siRNA targeted against both splice forms. Inhibition of caspase 8 blocked the enhanced apoptosis induced by c-FLIP-targeted (FT) siRNA and chemotherapy. Furthermore, we found that downregulating cell surface DR5, but not Fas, also inhibited apoptosis induced by FT siRNA and chemotherapy. Interestingly, these effects were not dependent on activation of DR5 by its ligand TRAIL. These results indicate that c-FLIP inhibits TRAIL-independent, DR5- and caspase 8-dependent apoptosis in response to chemotherapy in CRC cells. Moreover, targeting c-FLIP in combination with existing chemotherapies may have therapeutic potential for the treatment of CRC.

Effect of p53 Status and STAT1 on Chemotherapy-Induced, Fas-Mediated Apoptosis in Colorectal Cancer

We investigated the role of p53 and the signal transducer and activator of transcription 1 (STAT1) in regulating Fas-mediated apoptosis in response to chemotherapies used to treat colorectal cancer. We found that 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and oxaliplatin only sensitized p53 wild-type (WT) colorectal cancer cell lines to Fas-mediated apoptosis. In contrast, irinotecan (CPT-11) and tomudex sensitized p53 WT, mutant, and null cells to Fas-mediated cell death. Furthermore, CPT-11 and tomudex, but not 5-FU or oxaliplatin, up-regulated Fas cell surface expression in a p53-independent manner. In addition, increased Fas cell surface expression in p53 mutant and null cell lines in response to CPT-11 and tomudex was accompanied by only a slight increase in total Fas mRNA and protein expression, suggesting that these agents trigger p53-independent trafficking of Fas to the plasma membrane. Treatment with CPT-11 or tomudex induced STAT1 phosphorylation (Ser727) in the p53-null HCT116 cell line but not the p53 WT cell line. Furthermore, STAT1-targeted small interfering RNA (siRNA) inhibited up-regulation of Fas cell surface expression in response to CPT-11 and tomudex in these cells. However, we found no evidence of altered Fas gene expression following siRNA-mediated down-regulation of STAT1 in drug-treated cells. This suggests that STAT1 regulates expression of gene(s) involved in cell surface trafficking of Fas in response to CPT-11 or tomudex. We conclude that CPT-11 and tomudex may be more effective than 5-FU and oxaliplatin in the treatment of p53 mutant colorectal cancer tumors by sensitizing them to Fas-mediated apoptosis in a STAT1-dependent manner.

Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Activity Determines Response of Colorectal Cancer Cells to Gefitinib Alone and in Combination with Chemotherapy.

Purpose: Up to now, there have been no established predictive markers for response to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR/HER1/erbB1) inhibitors alone and in combination with chemotherapy in colorectal cancer. To identify markers that predict response to EGFR-based chemotherapy regimens, we analyzed the response of human colorectal cancer cell lines to the EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor, gefitinib (Iressa, AstraZeneca, Wilmington, DE), as a single agent and in combination with oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). Experimental Design: Cell viability was assessed using 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide and crystal violet cell viability assays and analyzed by ANOVA. Apoptosis was measured by flow cytometry, poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase, and caspase 3 cleavage. EGFR protein phosphorylation was detected by Western blotting. Results: Cell lines displaying high constitutive EGFR phosphorylation (a surrogate marker for EGFR activity) were more sensitive to gefitinib. Furthermore, in cell lines exhibiting low constitutive EGFR phosphorylation, an antagonistic interaction between gefitinib and oxaliplatin was observed, whereas in cell lines with high basal EGFR phosphorylation, the interaction was synergistic. In addition, oxaliplatin treatment increased EGFR phosphorylation in those cell lines in which oxaliplatin and gefitinib were synergistic but down-regulated EGFR phosphorylation in those lines in which oxaliplatin and gefitinib were antagonistic. In contrast to oxaliplatin, 5-FU treatment increased EGFR phosphorylation in all cell lines and this correlated with synergistic decreases in cell viability when 5-FU was combined with gefitinib. Conclusions: These results suggest that phospho-EGFR levels determine the sensitivity of colorectal cancer cells to gefitinib alone and that chemotherapy-mediated changes in phospho-EGFR levels determine the nature of interaction between gefitinib and chemotherapy.

Cellular FLICE-inhibitory protein regulates chemotherapy-induced apoptosis in breast cancer cells

Combination treatment regimens that include topoisomerase-II-targeted drugs, such as doxorubicin, are widely used in the treatment of breast cancer. Previously, we demonstrated that IFN-� and doxorubicin co-treatment synergistically induced apoptosis in MDA435 breast cancer cells in a STAT1-dependent manner. In this study, we found that this synergy was caspase 8-dependent. In addition, we found that IFN-γ down-regulated the expression of the caspase 8 inhibitor c-FLIP. Furthermore, IFN-� down-regulated c-FLIP in a manner that was dependent on the transcription factors STAT1 and IRF1. However, IFN-� had no effect on c-FLIP mRNA levels, indicating that c-FLIP was down-regulated at a post-transcriptional level following IFN-� treatment. Characterisation of the functional significance of c-FLIP modulation by siRNA gene silencing and stable over-expression studies, revealed it to be a key regulator of IFN-γ- and doxorubicin-induced apoptosis in MDA435 cells. Analysis of a panel of breast cancer cell lines indicated that c-FLIP was an important general determinant of doxorubicin- and IFN-�-induced apoptosis in breast cancer cells. Furthermore, c-FLIP gene silencing sensitised MDA435 cells to other chemotherapies, including etoposide, mitoxantrone and SN-38. These results suggest that c-FLIP plays a pivotal role in modulating drug-induced apoptosis in breast cancer cells.