Interventions for preventing oral candidiasis for patients with cancer receiving treatment

Changing face of Candida colonization pattern in pediatric patients with hematological malignancy during repeated hospitalizations, results of a prospective observational study (2016-2017) in shiraz, Iran

Background

Surveillance of current changes in the epidemiology of Invasive Fungal Diseases (IFDs) as an important component of the antifungal stewardship programs (ASP), requires careful regular monitoring, especially in high-risk settings such as oncology centers. This study aimed to examine Candida colonization status and corresponding current changes in children with malignancy during repeated admissions and also investigate the possible epidemiological shifts after the implementation of ASP.

Methods

In this prospective observational study, all eligible patients younger than 18 years were recruited during 2016–2017 at Amir Medical Oncology Center (AMOC) in Shiraz, Iran. Totally, 136 patients were enrolled and 482 samples were collected from different sites (oral/nasal discharges, urine and stool). Weekly regular sampling was carried out during hospitalization. Candida colonization status and epidemiological changes were monitored during repeated admissions. Samples were cultivated on Sabouraud Dextrose agar medium and identified by Polymerase Chain Reaction -Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism (PCR-RFLP).

Results

Estimated Candida colonization incidence was 59.9% (82/136) in our patients. Candida colonization was found to be higher in oral cavity and rectum than that in nasal cavity. Among those long-term follow ups and repetitive hospitalizations, a significant number of patients exhibited changes in their colonization patterns (37.7%). Candida colonization did not reveal any significant relationship with age, sex, oncologic diseases and degree of neutropenia. C. albicans (72.0%) was found as the most common Candida species in colonized patients, followed by C. krusei, C. kefyr, C. glabrata and C. parapsilosis.

Conclusion

Given the high incidence of Candida infections in children with cancers, close monitoring of epidemiologic changes is essential for judicious management, based on local surveillance data and improvement of overall quality of care in high risk patients.

Common oral complications of head and neck cancer radiation therapy: mucositis, infections, saliva change, fibrosis, sensory dysfunctions, dental caries, periodontal disease, and osteoradionecrosis

Patients undergoing radiation therapy for the head and neck are susceptible to a significant and often abrupt deterioration in their oral health. The oral morbidities of radiation therapy include but are not limited to an increased susceptibility to dental caries and periodontal disease. They also include profound and often permanent functional and sensory changes involving the oral soft tissue. These changes range from oral mucositis experienced during and soon after treatment, mucosal opportunistic infections, neurosensory disorders, and tissue fibrosis. Many of the oral soft tissue changes following radiation therapy are difficult challenges to the patients and their caregivers and require life-long strategies to alleviate their deleterious effect on basic life functions and on the quality of life. We discuss the presentation, prognosis, and management strategies of the dental structure and oral soft tissue morbidities resulting from the administration of therapeutic radiation in head and neck patient. A case for a collaborative and integrated multidisciplinary approach to the management of these patients is made, with specific recommendation to include knowledgeable and experienced oral health care professionals in the treatment team.

Identification of Candida species in patients with oral lesion undergoing chemotherapy along with minimum inhibitory concentration to fluconazole

Background:

Various species of Candida, especially Candida albicans was known as the most important etiological agent of fungal infections. Oral candidiasis is the most common fungal infection in patients undergoing chemotherapy. The purpose of this study was to identify Candida species from oral lesions of these patients and antifungal susceptibility of the clinical isolates.

Materials and Methods:

Among 385 patients with cancer, 55 (14.3%) showed oral lesions. Oral swabs were performed to identify the yeasts using direct smear and CHROMagar medium. Micro dilution method was prepared in different concentrations of fluconazole and minimum inhibitory concentration and minimum fungicidal concentration of each species were compared.

Results:

Oral candidiasis confirmed in 36 cases by direct examination and culture. C. albicans and non-albicans represented in 26 (72.2%) and 10 (27.8%) of the isolates, respectively. 76.5% of C. albicans and 23.5% non-albicans isolates were resistant to fluconazole. Data were shown that 62% and 30.7% of resistant strains of C. albicans were found in patient with gastrointestinal cancer and lymphoma respectively.

Conclusion:

Data were shown that C. albicans is the most commonly identified species in oral candidiasis and majority of fluconazole resistant C. albicans were found in patients with gastrointestinal cancer and lymphoma. Therefore, we recommend an alternative drug instead of fluconazole as a first line of treatment for these type of cancers and administration of fluconazole in patients undergoing chemotherapy should be prescribed in accordance with the type of cancer.

A critical assessment of oral care protocols for patients under radiation therapy in the regional University Hospital Network of Madrid (Spain)

BACKGROUND

This research was aimed to critically evaluate, under the light of the available scientific evidence, the oral care protocols recommended by different hospitals in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients under radiation therapy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A questionnaire requesting all the relevant information for the oral care of these patients was sent to the 9 University Hospitals in Madrid. The answers were categorized and analyzed. In addition, an electronic search was conducted to identify the most relevant papers (systematic reviews [SR] and randomized clinical trials [RCTs]) assessing oral care protocols for patients treated for HNC with radiation therapy.

RESULTS

Eight out of nine centers answered the questionnaire and the retrieved information was tabulated and compared. These recommendations were analyzed by a computerized search on MEDLINE and the Cochrane Oral Health Collaboration Database. The results of the analysis clearly shown a great heterogeneity, in terms of oral health care protocols, regarding the management of irradiated patients (for HNC) within the Hospitals of Madrid region. In addition, some of the recommendations lack solid scientific support.

CONCLUSIONS

The present survey revealed that the recommendations provided by the different hospitals were clearly different. The available evidence, supported by SR and RCTs, suggested the need of an oral assessment before cancer treatment, in order to prevent and treat dental pathologies and avoiding potential complications; during cancer treatment, it is relevant monitoring the patient in order to decrease the severity of the side effects, and to avoid any tooth extraction or surgery and special attention should be paid to mucositis, xerostomia and candidiasis; after cancer treatment, the following are relevant aspects: the risk of osteoradionecrosis, trismus, caries and the risks associated to dental implants.

KEY WORDS

Head and neck cancer, supportive care in cancer, radiotherapy complications, management and oral care on cancer treatment.

Candidiasis (oropharyngeal)

INTRODUCTION

Candida is a fungus present in the mouths of up to 60% of healthy people, but overt infection is associated with immunosuppression, diabetes, broad-spectrum antibiotics, and corticosteroid use. In most people, untreated candidiasis persists for months or years unless associated risk factors are treated or eliminated. In neonates, spontaneous cure of oropharyngeal candidiasis usually occurs after 3 to 8 weeks.

METHODS AND OUTCOMES

We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of interventions to prevent and treat oropharyngeal candidiasis in: adults undergoing treatments that cause immunosuppression; infants and children; people with dentures; and people with HIV infection? Which antifungal treatments reduce the risk of acquiring resistance to antifungal drugs? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to July 2013 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).

RESULTS

We found 47 RCTs or systematic reviews of RCTs that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review, we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: antifungals (absorbed, partially or topically absorbed, or non-absorbed; for example, imidazole [ketoconazole, clotrimazole, toiconazole, miconazole], polyene [amphotericin B, nystatin], triazole [fluconazole, itraconazole], melaleuca and posaconazole), intermittent or continuous prophylaxis, or treatment, and denture hygiene.

Epidemiology and prevalence of oropharyngeal candidiasis in Spanish patients with head and neck tumors undergoing radiotherapy treatment alone or in combination with chemotherapy

OBJECTIVE

To describe the oropharyngeal candidiasis (OPC) prevalence in Spanish patients with head and neck cancer undergoing radiotherapy, alone or combined with chemotherapy. Secondary objectives were to determine the prevalence of Candida species colonization, and to explore whether different Candida species colonizing the oral cavity and the treatment were associated with a higher prevalence of OPC.

METHODS

This is an observational, cross-sectional, multicentre study, conducted in Spanish radiation oncology units. Patients were diagnosed with head and neck cancer and started a radiotherapy treatment alone or combined with chemotherapy at the moment of their inclusion (N = 92).

RESULTS

The OPC prevalence was 26 %. The identification of colonizing pathogens was performed in 49 patients, and Candida albicans was the dominant yeast (69 %), while non-albicans Candida was only found in 15 patients (31 %). Patients with C. albicans colonization had a significant higher prevalence of OPC compared to patients colonized by non-albicans Candida (p = 0.0273), but no difference was found regarding the OPC prevalence in patients receiving only radiotherapy compared to patients with both radiotherapy and chemotherapy treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data represent a step further in the knowledge of Candida species present in Spanish patients with head and neck tumors under radiation therapy. This is an essential step to manage the prophylaxis and treatment of OPC, since it might lead to severe clinical complications causing treatment interruption and, thus, representing a reduction in anti-tumor efficacy.

Interventions for preventing oral mucositis for patients with cancer receiving treatment

BACKGROUND

Treatment of cancer is increasingly more effective but is associated with short and long term side effects. Oral side effects remain a major source of illness despite the use of a variety of agents to prevent them. One of these side effects is oral mucositis (mouth ulcers).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of prophylactic agents for oral mucositis in patients with cancer receiving treatment, compared with other potentially active interventions, placebo or no treatment.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic searches of Cochrane Oral Health Group and PaPaS Trials Registers (to 16 February 2011), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 1), MEDLINE via OVID (1950 to 16 February 2011), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 16 February 2011), CINAHL via EBSCO (1980 to 16 February 2011), CANCERLIT via PubMed (1950 to 16 February 2011), OpenSIGLE (1980 to 2005) and LILACS via the Virtual Health Library (1980 to 16 February 2011) were undertaken. Reference lists from relevant articles were searched and the authors of eligible trials were contacted to identify trials and obtain additional information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of interventions to prevent oral mucositis in patients receiving treatment for cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Information regarding methods, participants, interventions, outcome measures, results and risk of bias were independently extracted, in duplicate, by two review authors. Authors were contacted for further details where these were unclear. The Cochrane Collaboration statistical guidelines were followed and risk ratios calculated using random-effects models.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 131 studies with 10,514 randomised participants are now included. Overall only 8% of these studies were assessed as being at low risk of bias. Ten interventions, where there was more than one trial in the meta-analysis, showed some statistically significant evidence of a benefit (albeit sometimes weak) for either preventing or reducing the severity of mucositis, compared to either a placebo or no treatment. These ten interventions were: aloe vera, amifostine, cryotherapy, granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF), intravenous glutamine, honey, keratinocyte growth factor, laser, polymixin/tobramycin/amphotericin (PTA) antibiotic pastille/paste and sucralfate.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Ten interventions were found to have some benefit with regard to preventing or reducing the severity of mucositis associated with cancer treatment. The strength of the evidence was variable and implications for practice include consideration that benefits may be specific for certain cancer types and treatment. There is a need for further well designed, and conducted trials with sufficient numbers of participants to perform subgroup analyses by type of disease and chemotherapeutic agent.

Oropharyngeal candidiasis in head and neck cancer patients treated with radiation: update 2011

BACKGROUND

Oropharyngeal candidiasis (OPC) is a major cause of morbidity in patients with malignancies. It is a common complication of head and neck radiation therapy and can result in pain, dysgeusia (taste changes), anorexia, malnutrition, and esophageal or systemic dissemination. Clinicians should be aware of current epidemiology, elements of diagnosis, and therapeutic trials guiding the recent recommendations for prophylaxis and management of OPC, a disease often incorrectly perceived as benign.

METHODS

This review discusses OPC with focus in head and neck cancer patients receiving radiotherapy.

RESULTS

Local treatments are recommended as first-line therapy in milder forms of OPC. In the setting of local therapy, products that provide prolonged contact time and are not sucrose sweetened may result in successful prevention and management with low risk of oral/dental complications.

CONCLUSION

Diagnosis and management of OPC is required in head and neck cancer patients treated with radiation. Local therapy is suggested as first-line treatment for OPC, unless severe clinical infection or high risk immune suppression necessitate systemic therapy. The availability of effective locally delivered (topical) medications may provide potential for prophylaxis for carriers of Candida species in head and cancer patients during radiation therapy.

Interventions for treating oral mucositis for patients with cancer receiving treatment

BACKGROUND

Treatment of cancer is increasingly effective but associated with short and long term side effects. Oral side effects, including oral mucositis (mouth ulceration), remain a major source of illness despite the use of a variety of agents to treat them.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions for treating oral mucositis or its associated pain in patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy or both.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic searches of Cochrane Oral Health Group and PaPaS Trials Registers (to 1 June 2010), CENTRAL via The Cochrane Library (to Issue 2, 2010), MEDLINE via OVID (1950 to 1 June 2010), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 1 June 2010), CINAHL via EBSCO (1980 to 1 June 2010), CANCERLIT via PubMed (1950 to 1 June 2010), OpenSIGLE (1980 to 1 June 2010) and LILACS via the Virtual Health Library (1980 to 1 June 2010) were undertaken. Reference lists from relevant articles were searched and the authors of eligible trials were contacted to identify trials and obtain additional information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials comparing agents prescribed to treat oral mucositis in people receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy or both. Outcomes were oral mucositis, time to heal mucositis, oral pain, duration of pain control, dysphagia, systemic infection, amount of analgesia, length of hospitalisation, cost and quality of life.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were independently extracted, in duplicate, by two review authors. Authors were contacted for details of randomisation, blindness and withdrawals. Risk of bias assessment was carried out on six domains. The Cochrane Collaboration statistical guidelines were followed and risk ratio (RR) values calculated using fixed-effect models (less than 3 trials in each meta-analysis).

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-two trials involving 1505 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. Three comparisons for mucositis treatment including two or more trials were: benzydamine HCl versus placebo, sucralfate versus placebo and low level laser versus sham procedure. Only the low level laser showed a reduction in severe mucositis when compared with the sham procedure, RR 5.28 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.30 to 12.13).Only 3 comparisons included more than one trial for pain control: patient controlled analgesia (PCA) compared to the continuous infusion method, therapist versus control, cognitive behaviour therapy versus control. There was no evidence of a difference in mean pain score between PCA and continuous infusion, however, less opiate was used per hour for PCA, mean difference 0.65 mg/hour (95% CI 0.09 to 1.20), and the duration of pain was less 1.9 days (95% CI 0.3 to 3.5).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is weak and unreliable evidence that low level laser treatment reduces the severity of the mucositis. Less opiate is used for PCA versus continuous infusion. Further, well designed, placebo or no treatment controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of interventions investigated in this review and new interventions for treating mucositis are needed.

Audit to monitor the uptake of national mouth care guidelines for children and young people being treated for cancer

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to review current oral care practices in children being treated for cancer against audit criteria derived from national guidelines, and to compare findings with data from a baseline survey carried out in 2002 prior to implementation of the national guidelines.

METHODS

A telephone survey was carried out of all 21 haematology-oncology (HO) centres and seven bone marrow transplant (BMT) units within the UK Children's Cancer Study Group focusing on key audit themes of: availability of evidence-based guidelines, oral and dental care prior to and during cancer treatment, oral assessment, prevention and treatment of oral complications.

RESULTS

The national guidelines were used in 19/25 (76%) settings that employed written guidelines. There was little variation in advice given to patients/parents on basic oral hygiene, and this advice was commensurate with guideline recommendations. Inconsistencies in oral care assessment, reported at baseline, remained commonplace across the majority of settings. In only 10/21 HO centres, it was usual practice for children to undergo dental assessment prior to commencing cancer treatment, indicating no improvement since baseline survey. Few therapies outside of the guideline recommendations were being used. The routine use of preventive nystatin, not recommended in the guideline, had significantly decreased from baseline (by 40%).

CONCLUSIONS

Uptake of national guidelines by HO/BMT settings was good however certain oral care practices fell short of the guideline recommendations. Routine dental checks need to be embedded in practice. Further consideration is needed as to how oral assessment might be used more effectively in informing treatment.

Interventions for treating oral candidiasis for patients with cancer receiving treatment

BACKGROUND

Treatment of cancer is increasingly effective but is associated with short and long term side effects. Oral and gastrointestinal side effects, including oral candidiasis, remain a major source of illness despite the use of a variety of agents to treat them.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions for the treatment of oral candidiasis for patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy or both.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Computerised searches of Cochrane Oral Health Group and PaPaS Trials Registers (to 1 June 2010), CENTRAL via the Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2010, 1 June 2010), MEDLINE via OVID (1 June 2010), EMBASE via OVID (1 June 2010), CINAHL via EBSCO (1 June 2010), CANCERLIT via PubMed (1 June 2010), OpenSIGLE (1 June 2010) and LILACS via Virtual Health Library (1 June 2010) were undertaken. Reference lists from relevant articles were searched and the authors of eligible trials were contacted to identify trials and obtain additional information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials comparing agents prescribed to treat oral candidiasis in people receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy for cancer. The outcomes were eradication of oral candidiasis, dysphagia, systemic infection, amount of analgesia, length of hospitalisation, cost and patient quality of life.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were independently extracted, in duplicate, by two review authors. Trial authors were contacted for details of randomisation and withdrawals and a quality assessment was carried out. Risk ratios (RR) were calculated using fixed-effect models.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten trials involving 940 patients, satisfied the inclusion criteria and are included in this review. Drugs absorbed from the gastrointestinal (GI) tract were beneficial in eradication of oral candidiasis compared with drugs not absorbed from the GI tract (three trials: RR = 1.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09 to 1.52), however there was significant heterogeneity. A drug absorbed from the GI tract, ketoconazole, was more beneficial than placebo in eradicating oral candidiasis (one trial: RR = 3.61, 95% CI 1.47 to 8.88). Clotrimazole, at a higher dose of 50 mg was more effective than a lower 10 mg dose in eradicating oral candidiasis, when assessed mycologically (one trial: RR = 2.00, 95% CI 1.11 to 3.60). Only one of the ten trials was assessed as at low risk of bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to claim or refute a benefit for any antifungal agent in treating candidiasis. Further well designed, placebo-controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of old and new interventions for treating oral candidiasis are needed. Clinicians need to make a decision on whether to prevent or treat oral candidiasis in patients receiving treatment for cancer.

Caries-preventive effect of glass ionomer and resin-based fissure sealants on permanent teeth: a meta analysis

The purpose of this quantitative systematic review was to appraise the evidence on the caries-preventive effect of glass ionomer cement (GIC) in relation to resin-based fissure sealants. Nine English and two Portuguese databases were searched (15 January 2008). Randomized clinical trials and systematic reviews were considered for inclusion. Trial exclusion criteria were: drop-out rates > 33%; no randomization; baseline differences in groups not statistically adjusted; and no clinically important outcomes were presented. Two authors reviewed the articles independently. The outcome measure for the caries preventive effect was caries absence on sealed teeth. Of the 112 identified articles, 25 were selected for review. Of these, 14 were excluded and 11 accepted (8 trials; 3 systematic reviews). The accepted reviews provided no evidence of superiority of either sealant material. Six trials were included for meta-analysis. The pooled odds ratio was 0.96, 95% CI 0.62-1.49, indicating no difference in the caries-preventive effect of GIC and resin-based fissure sealant material. This systematic review with meta-analysis found no evidence that either material was superior to the other in the prevention of dental caries. Thus, both materials appear equally suitable for clinical application as a fissure sealant material.

Interventions for preventing oral candidiasis for patients with cancer receiving treatment

BACKGROUND

Treatment of cancer is increasingly more effective but is associated with short and long term side effects. Oral side effects remain a major source of illness despite the use of a variety of agents to prevent and treat them. One of these side effects is oral candidiasis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions (which may include placebo or no treatment) for the prevention of oral candidiasis for patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy or both.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Computerised searches of Cochrane Oral Health Group and PAPAS Trials Registers, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CANCERLIT, SIGLE and LILACS were undertaken. Reference lists from relevant articles were searched and the authors of eligible trials were contacted to identify trials and obtain additional information. Date of the most recent searches: June 2006: CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2006, Issue 2).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials were selected if they met the following criteria: design - random allocation of participants; participants - anyone receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy treatment for cancer; interventions - agents prescribed to prevent oral candidiasis; primary outcome - prevention of oral candidiasis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were recorded on the following secondary outcomes if present: relief of pain, amount of analgesia, relief of dysphagia, incidence of systemic infection, duration of stay in hospital (days), cost of oral care, patient quality of life, death, use of empirical antifungal treatment, toxicity and compliance. Information regarding methods, participants, interventions, outcome measures and results were independently extracted, in duplicate, by two review authors. The Cochrane Oral Health Group statistical guidelines were followed and risk ratios (RR) calculated using random-effects models. Potential sources of heterogeneity were examined in random-effects metaregression analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-eight trials involving 4226 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. Drugs absorbed and partially absorbed from the gastrointestinal (GI) tract were found to prevent oral candidiasis when compared to a placebo, or a no treatment control group, with RR for absorbed drugs = 0.47 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29 to 0.78). For absorbed drugs in populations with an incidence of 20% (mid range of results in control groups), this implies a NNT of 9 (95% CI 7 to 13) patients need to be treated to avoid one patient getting oral candidiasis. There was no significant benefit shown for drugs not absorbed from the GI tract.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is strong evidence, from randomised controlled trials, that drugs absorbed or partially absorbed from the GI tract prevent oral candidiasis in patients receiving treatment for cancer. There is also evidence that these drugs are significantly better at preventing oral candidiasis than drugs not absorbed from the GI.