Double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study of chlorhexidine prophylaxis for 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis with nonblinded randomized comparison to oral cooling (cryotherapy) in gastrointestinal malignancies

Cryotherapy for oral mucositis in cancer: review of systematic reviews and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

One of the most common side effects of cancer treatment is oral mucositis. Although studies have shown that oral cryotherapy has a favourable effect on oral mucositis, the reliability of the results is questionable.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this umbrella review was to provide insight into the effects of oral cryotherapy against oral mucositis in patients with cancer, as well as to assess the certainty of this evidence.

METHOD

Studies were searched for through PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science, with no restrictions until August 2021. The risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI for each meta-analysis were recalculated using a random-effects model, and the certainty of the evidence was judged using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.

RESULTS

Ten meta-analyses including 25 original RCTs that fit our inclusion criteria were included. The use of oral cryotherapy markedly reduced the occurrence of overall (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.83, n=20 trials), moderate to severe (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.80, n=16 trials) and severe oral mucositis (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.67, n=16 trials), as well as average severity score of oral mucositis (standardised mean difference=-0.94, 95% CI -1.28 to -0.59, n=4 trials) in comparison to a control group; however, the certainty of evidence for all outcomes was rated very low.

CONCLUSION

In patients with cancer, oral cryotherapy appears to greatly lower the severity and occurrence of oral mucositis, but, with very low certainty of evidence.

Effectiveness of Cryotherapy on Cancer Therapy-Induced Oral Mucositis: An Umbrella Review

BACKGROUND

Oral mucositis (OM) considerably affects the experience of patients with cancer during treatment. This study investigated the effects of cryotherapy on cancer therapy-induced OM.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to systematically appraise evidence on whether cryotherapy can reduce the incidence and severity of OM.

METHODS

We conducted an umbrella review to examine the effect of cryotherapy on cancer-related OM. The primary outcome was the incidence and severity of OM. We performed a subgroup analysis including solid cancers and hematological malignancies.

RESULTS

Five meta-analyses were included. Cryotherapy could more effectively reduce the incidence of severe OM (risk ratio [RR], 0.37; 95% prediction interval [PI], 0.22-0.64). In the subgroup analyses of solid cancers or hematological malignancies, cryotherapy significantly reduced the incidence of grades 2 to 4 OM in patients with solid cancers (RR, 0.51; 95% PI, 0.34-0.78 and RR, 0.52; 95% PI, 0.36-0.74). However, no significant difference was observed in the incidence of OM in patients with hematological malignancies regarding any grade or grade 3 or 4 OM. Moreover, cryotherapy did not significantly reduce the OM duration (mean difference, -0.13; 95% PI, -20.89 to 20.63; mean difference, -2.99, 95% PI, -8.10 to 2.12).

CONCLUSION

Cryotherapy can reduce the incidence of severe OM induced by chemotherapy or radiotherapy.

IMPLICATION FOR PRACTICE

We recommend the inclusion of this safe, simple, and convenient intervention in chemotherapy or radiotherapy plans. Additional clinical trials are warranted to extend the limited evidence on the effectiveness of cryotherapy in reducing the severity and duration of OM.

Mucositis and Infection in Hematology Patients

Survival in patients with hematological malignancies has improved over the years, both due to major developments in anticancer treatment, as well as in supportive care. Nevertheless, important and debilitating complications of intensive treatment regimens still frequently occur, including mucositis, fever and bloodstream infections. Exploring potential interacting mechanisms and directed therapies to counteract mucosal barrier injury is of the utmost importance if we are to continue to improve care for this increasingly growing patient population. In this perspective, I highlight recent advances in our understanding of the relation of mucositis and infection.

Potential Role of Natural Antioxidant Products in Oncological Diseases

Nutrition has a significant effect and a crucial role in disease prevention. Low consumption of fruit and vegetables and a sedentary lifestyle are closely related with the onset and development of many types of cancer. Recently, nutraceuticals have gained much attention in cancer research due to their pleiotropic effects and relatively non-toxic behavior. In fact, although in the past there have been conflicting results on the role of some antioxidant compounds as allies against cancer, numerous recent clinical studies highlight the efficacy of dietary phytochemicals in the prevention and treatment of cancer. However, further investigation is necessary to gain a deeper understanding of the potential anticancer capacities of dietary phytochemicals as well as the mechanisms of their action. Therefore, this review examined the current literature on the key properties of the bioactive components present in the diet, such as carotenoids, polyphenols, and antioxidant compounds, as well as their use in cancer therapy. The review focused on potential chemopreventive properties, evaluating their synergistic effects with anticancer drugs and, consequently, the side effects associated with current cancer treatments.

Interventions for the Prevention of Oral Mucositis in Patients Receiving Cancer Treatment: Evidence from Randomised Controlled Trials

Oral mucositis is a common and most debilitating complication associated with cancer therapy. Despite the significant clinical and economic impact of this condition, there is little to offer to patients with oral mucositis, and the medications used in its management are generally only palliative. Given that mucositis is ultimately a predictable and, therefore, potentially preventable condition, in this study we appraised the scientific literature to evaluate effective methods of prevention that have been tested in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Published high-level evidence shows that multiple preventative methods are potentially effective in the prevention of oral mucositis induced by radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or both. Anti-inflammatory medications (including benzydamine), growth factors and cytokines (including palifermin), cryotherapy, laser-and-light therapy, herbal medicines and supplements, and mucoprotective agents (including oral pilocarpine) showed some degree of efficacy in preventing/reducing the severity of mucositis with most anticancer treatments. Allopurinol was potentially effective in the prevention of radiotherapy-induced oral mucositis; antimicrobial mouthwash and erythropoietin mouthwash were associated with a lower risk of development of severe oral mucositis induced by chemotherapy. The results of our review may assist in highlighting the efficacy and testing the effectiveness of low-cost, safe preventative measures for oral mucositis in cancer patients.

Effects of various treatments for preventing oral mucositis in cancer patients: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Oral mucositis (OM) is a common side effect of chemotherapy and radiotherapy in patients with cancers. The prevention or treatment of OM in cancer patients is crucial in the treatment of cancer.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for the randomized control trials (RCTs) of interventions for preventing and treating OM. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) from both direct and indirect evidence. The prespecified primary efficacy outcome was the treatment effect of moderate to severe oral mucositis with 12 interventions. The outcome was moderate to a severe grade of OM.

RESULTS

This study included 55 RCTs with 3,552 participants. The results showed that honey significantly lowered the risk of chemo/radiotherapy-induced moderate to severe oral mucositis than placebo (OR: 0.01, 95%CI 0.00 to 0.45), followed by lignocaine (OR: 0.07, 95%CI 0.00 to 0.95). The surface under cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values for honey were 0.95, followed by lignocaine (SUCRA, 0.81) and benzydamine (SUCRA, 0.78).

CONCLUSIONS

The honey is effective for patients with cancer undergoing chemotherapy or radiotherapy-induced oral mucositis.

The effect of cryotherapy on oral mucositis management in patients undergoing stem cell transplantation: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

AIM

This study aimed to investigate the effect of cryotherapy on oral mucositis management in patients undergoing stem cell transplantation.

BACKGROUND

Oral mucositis is among the most common symptoms of stem cell transplantation. Cryotherapy may be an important treatment option in the oral mucositis process.

DESIGN

A systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

A literature review of studies published in the English language was conducted on Web of Science, Springer Link, Science Direct, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Scopus, ProQuest, Ovid, EBSCOhost/CINAHL Complete and MEDLINE databases until April 2022. The studies reviewed covered the years between 2006 and 2020. The data were summarized narratively.

REVIEW METHODS

This systematic review was organized in accordance with the Cochrane 2022 guidelines and reported using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

RESULTS

Nine studies were included in the systematic review. No significant publication bias was found in the main results. The results showed that the cryotherapy intervention had a positive effect on oral mucositis in patients undergoing stem cell transplantation.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review of nine randomized controlled trials, the majority of the studies show that cryotherapy intervention can be an effective method for reducing oral mucositis in patients undergoing stem cell transplantation.

A Narrative Review about Nutritional Management and Prevention of Oral Mucositis in Haematology and Oncology Cancer Patients Undergoing Antineoplastic Treatments

Cancer is a prevalent disease worldwide, and treatments such as radiotherapy and chemotherapy sometimes lead to adverse events. Oral mucositis is one of the most disabling adverse events, and clinical guidelines do not take into account nutritional interventions. The primary endpoint was to gather the evidence about the efficacy of nutritional interventions in the prevention and/or treatment of antineoplastic-induced oral mucositis in oncological patients. A bibliographic review was carried out in the PubMed data base by combining MeSH terms with Boolean operators. Articles were selected based on inclusion and exclusion criteria; 50 final articles were found. Although further evidence is needed, glutamine, honey, and vitamins appear to be good therapeutic options. The rest of the compounds presented controversial or insufficient results, making it difficult to draw conclusions over their utilization as prevention or treatment options. Little evidence is reported about oral mucositis nutritional interventions in spite of them being attainable and affordable compounds. Scarce evidence is shown in paediatric patients compared with adults. Developing higher quality studies and combinations with the compounds researched is necessary for creating a stronger body of evidence.

Efficacy of Oral Cryotherapy in the Prevention of Oral Mucositis Associated with Cancer Chemotherapy: Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis

BACKGROUND

This review aimed to evaluate the efficacy of oral cryotherapy in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis using meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis, as well as to assess the quality of the results by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of three databases including Medline, Embase and Central was performed to identify randomized controlled trials that used oral cryotherapy for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis. The primary outcome was the incidence of oral mucositis for trials employing oral cryotherapy as the intervention for the prevention of oral mucositis. The meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects model and random errors of the meta-analyses were detected by trial sequential analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 14 RCTs with 1577 participants were included in the present meta-analysis. Patients treated with oral cryotherapy were associated with a significantly lower risk of developing oral mucositis of any grade (risk ratio (RR), 0.67 (95% CI: 0.56-0.81, p < 0.05)). Findings from the subgroup analyses showed that oral cryotherapy significantly reduced the risk of oral mucositis in patients undergoing bone marrow transplantation (RR 0.69, CI: 0.54-0.89, p < 0.05) as well as chemotherapy (RR 0.66, CI: 0.58-0.75, p < 0.05). Findings from the trial sequential analysis suggested that the evidence on oral cryotherapy as a preventive intervention for oral mucositis in patients with solid malignancies receiving conventional chemotherapy was conclusive.

CONCLUSION

Oral cryotherapy is effective in preventing oral mucositis in patients undergoing chemotherapy for the management of solid malignancies. The use of oral cryotherapy in preventing oral mucositis in bone marrow transplantation settings showed promising efficacy, but the evidence is not conclusive and requires more high-quality randomized controlled trials.

Liposomalization of Oxaliplatin Exacerbates the Non-Liposomal Formulation-Induced Decrease of Sweet Taste Sensitivity in Rats

Here, we investigated whether or not the characteristics of the oxaliplatin-induced sweet taste sensitivity were altered by PEGylated liposomalization of oxaliplatin (liposomal oxaliplatin), which enhances its anticancer efficacy. Liposomal oxaliplatin and oxaliplatin were intravenously and intraperitoneally, respectively, administered to male Sprague-Dawley rats at the total dose of 8 mg/kg. A brief-access test for evaluation of sweet taste sensitivity on day 7 revealed that both liposomal oxaliplatin and oxaliplatin decreased the sensitivity of rats, the degree with the former being greater than in the case of the latter. Liposomalization of oxaliplatin increased the accumulation of platinum in lingual non-epithelial tissues, through which taste nerves passed. The lingual platinum accumulation induced by not only liposomal oxaliplatin but also oxaliplatin was decreased on cooling of the tongue during the administration. In the current study, we revealed that liposomalization of oxaliplatin exacerbated the oxaliplatin-induced decrease of sweet taste sensitivity by increasing the accumulation of platinum/oxaliplatin in lingual non-epithelial tissues. These findings may suggest that reduction of liposomal oxaliplatin distribution to the tongue on cooling during the administration prevents exacerbation of the decrease of sweet taste sensitivity, maintaining the quality of life and chemotherapeutic outcome in patients.

Effectiveness of low level laser therapy versus cryotherapy in cancer patients with oral mucositis: Systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this network meta-analysis was to analyze the relative effects of low level laser therapy (LLLT) and/or cryotherapy in cancer patients with oral mucositis (OM).

METHODS

This literature search followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines using MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) up to 2020. Only randomized control trials which involved comparisons of groups receiving the interventions of combined cryotherapy and LLLT, LLLT, cryotherapy and usual care (the control group) in patients with cancer were eligible for inclusion. The effect sizes are presented as odds ratios for the occurrence of severe, moderate and none/mild OM. The mixed treatment comparison was conducted using generalized linear mixed models to analyze the direct and indirect comparisons of interventions. The critical appraisal was assessed using Cochrane Collaboration's tool. Heterogeneity between studies was assessed using I² statistics, and publication bias was evaluated by constructing a funnel plot.

RESULTS

Twenty-six randomized controlled trials with a total enrollment of 1830 cancer patients with OM were included. The outcome of none/mild OM is desirable, and odds ratios of more than 1 favor the intervention group. Moderate and severe OM are defined as adverse outcomes, and ORs less than 1 favor the intervention group. The treatment effects of the combined cryotherapy and LLLT were better than those of usual care for none/mild and severe OM (ORs = 106.23 [95% CI = 12.15 to 929.17] and 0.01 [95% CI = 0 to 0.57], respectively). Treatment effects with cryotherapy alone and LLLT alone were better than those with usual care for none/mild and severe OM (ORs = 3.13 [95%CI = 1.56 to 6.27]; ORs = 7.56 [95%CI = 3.84 to 14.88] and 0.25 [95%CI = 0.11 to 0.54]; ORs = 0.13 [95%CI = 0.07 to 0.24], respectively). Nevertheless, for patients with none/mild OM, treatment effects with combined use of cryotherapy and LLLT were better than those with only LLT or cryotherapy (ORs = 14.06 [95%CI = 1.79 to 110.30] and 33.95 [95%CI = 3.50 to 329.65], respectively). For patients with moderate OM, treatment effect did not reach statistical significance among comparisons. The limitations include the wide variability in treatment protocols and the non-uniform outcome measurements across the studies examined.

CONCLUSION

Compared with no intervention, the treatment effects of combined cryotherapy and LLLT, laser alone, and cryotherapy alone are beneficial for the reduction of severe OM. There is no difference in treatment effects among cryotherapy and/or LLLT intervention in cancer patients with moderate OM. Results of this study provide an implicative basis for LLLT and cryotherapy as viable interventions that can significantly improve severe OM.

A Bioadhesive Barrier-Forming Oral Liquid Gel Improved Oral Mucositis and Nutritional Status in Patients With Head and Neck Cancers Undergoing Radiotherapy: A Retrospective Single Center Study

Background

Episil^® is a bioadhesive barrier-forming oral liquid gel that can relieve oral mucositis (OM) caused by radiotherapy (RT) and hence relieves pain effectively. In this study, we observed the effects of Episil^® on the OM and nutritional status of patients with head and neck cancers (HNCs) undergoing RT.

Methods

A total of 50 HNC patients were divided into the Episil^® (25 patients) and control (25 patients) groups. Patients in the Episil^® group were sprayed with Episil^®. In the control group, the kangfuxin solution or Kangsu™ oral gargle was used. Medical staff assessed the OM extent and timing as well as the nutritional status during treatment and recorded adverse reactions other than OM. The nutritional status assessment included the following indicators: Patient Generated-Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) score, body mass index (BMI), body weight, albumin levels, and other hematological indicators.

Results

The incidence of high-level OM (III–IV) after RT was lower in the Episil^® group than in the control group (P < 0.05). Nutritional status assessments showed that the Episil^® group had a lower percentage of weight loss than the control group at weeks 4 and 7 after RT. Similar results were also obtained for BMI and albumin levels (P < 0.05). Moreover, according to PG-SGA scores, fewer patients in the Episil^® group were malnourished and more patients were well-nourished (P < 0.05) compared with the control group.

Conclusion

Episil^® effectively improved OM and malnutrition in HNC patients who received RT and has a good clinical application value.

Nursing Procedures for the Prevention and Treatment of Mucositis Induced by Cancer Therapies: Clinical Practice Guideline Based on an Interdisciplinary Consensus Process and a Systematic Literature Search

Background:

Patients with cancer receiving tumor therapy often suffer from oral mucositis.

Objectives:

The aim of this project was to summarize experiences with nursing procedures by experts in integrative oncology and to establish recommendations for nursing interventions that can prevent or cure mucositis.

Methods:

The study design was an interdisciplinary consensus process based on a systematic literature search.

Results:

The panel discussed and agreed on 19 nursing procedures, which included mouthwashes, such as teas, supplements, oil applications, and different kinds of ice cubes to suck, as well as flaxseed solution, propolis, and mare milk. Twelve interventions were classified as effective, with effectiveness for OraLife, propolis, sea buckthorn pulp oil, marshmallow root tea also for xerostomia, Helago chamomile oil, mare milk, and Saliva Natura rated as highly effective in clinical experience. In the systematic literature search, a total of 12 out of 329 randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses on chamomile (n = 3), Calendula (n = 1) and sage (n = 1), propolis (n = 2), and sucking ice cubes (cryotherapy; n = 5) met all inclusion criteria. Trial evidence for effectiveness in oral mucositis was revealed for propolis and cryotherapy.

Conclusions:

The current evidence supports the use of some nursing procedures (f.e. propolis for 2 and 3 grade mucositis) for improving oral mucositis during cancer therapies. There is still a need to define general clinical practice guidelines for the supportive treatment of mucositis, as well as for more interdisciplinary research in this area.

Can cryoprevention of oral mucositis be obtained at a higher temperature?

OBJECTIVES

Ice chips (IC) have successfully been used to prevent the development of chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis (OM). Although effective, IC entails several shortcomings and may open avenues for systemic infections as the water used may be contaminated by microorganisms, which may jeopardise the medical rehabilitation of an already immunosuppressed patient. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and tolerability profile of a novel intraoral cooling device (ICD).

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

In total, 20 healthy volunteers were enrolled in this randomised crossover study. Intraoral temperatures were registered using an IR camera, at baseline and following 30 and 60 min of cooling with the ICD, set to 8 °C or 15 °C. Following each cooling session, tolerability was assessed using a questionnaire.

RESULTS

A statistically significant difference in the intraoral temperature was observed using 8 °C compared with 15 °C, following both 30 (1.87 °C, p < 0.001) and 60 min (2.48 °C, p < 0.001) of cooling. Thus, the difference of the intraoral temperatures was less than the 7 °C difference between 8 °C and 15 °C. Furthermore, 60 min of cooling with 15 °C compared with 8 °C was better tolerated and preferred by 15 out of 20 participants (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Cooling was better tolerated when the ICD was set to 15 °C compared with 8 °C, although the difference in reduction of the intraoral mucosal temperature was marginal and may not affect cryoprevention of oral mucositis.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The ICD has the potential to improve the care for patients with cancer at high risk of developing OM.

Efficacy and safety of propolis mouthwash in management of radiotherapy induced oral mucositis; A randomized, double blind clinical trial

AIM AND BACKGROUND

Propolis has been used for the management of oral mucositis in a number of studies. Due to lack of sufficient evidence especially in radiotherapy induced oral mucositis, the present study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of propolis mouthwash in oral mucositis and dysphagia in patients undergoing head and neck radiotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was a prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. The patients randomly divided into two groups receiving either the propolis or the placebo mouthwash. Patients were advised to rinse their mouth with 15 mL three times daily for four weeks. Severity of mucositis and dysphagia were evaluated by the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC) and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), respectively.

RESULTS

Thirty patients completed the study. Each group consisted of 15 patients. Although, there is not any significant difference between two groups in the first week of radiotherapy, a significant difference was seen in the second, the third and the fourth week (p = 0.03, 0.02, 0.02, respectively). Dysphagia reported as a mild score in the propolis group only in the fourth week which is significant compared with the placebo group (p = 0.01). There is not any serious adverse effect related to propolis or placebo during the study.

CONCLUSION

It seems that propolis mouthwash is an effective and safe medication for alleviation of oral mucositis and dysphagia in patients under head and neck radiotherapy.

Comparative prevention potential of 10 mouthwashes on intolerable oral mucositis in cancer patients: A Bayesian network analysis

BACKGROUND

There is a wide variety of mouthwashes currently available for the prevention of intolerable oral mucositis (OM) onset. Because of a lack of evidence from head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the relative effects of these mouthwashes in intolerable OM patients remain unclear. This study compared the preventive effect of ten mouthwashes in intolerable OM.

METHODS

A literature search was performed of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, and MEDLINE (PubMed) databases. Reports published from 1990 to 2019 focusing on mouthwashes for preventing OM were identified. Authors assessed the studies' risk of bias in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, and followed the PRISMA for Network Meta-Analyses Statement. Authors estimated summary odds ratios (ORs) using pairwise and Bayesian network meta-analysis with random effects.

RESULTS

Thirty-six RCTs, with a total of 2594 patients, were included in the present study. Bayesian network analysis showed that honey (Odd Ratio [OR] 0.17, 95%CI 0.09 to 0.30), chamomile (OR 0.09, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.52), curcumin (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.67) and benzydamine (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.54) mouthwashes were superior to placebo. Honey mouthwashes were more efficacious than chlorhexidine (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.92), sucralfate (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.96) and povidone-iodine (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.82) mouthwashes. Other mouthwashes showed no significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the analysis of rank probabilities, chamomile, honey, curcumin and benzydamine mouthwashes may be the most advantageous in terms of the prevention of intolerable OM.

Effects of 9 oral care solutions on the prevention of oral mucositis: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Oral mucositis (OM) is a common, disabling, and severe early effect of chemotherapy and radiotherapy that limits the effectiveness of anticancer therapy. The prevention and treatment of OM in patients with malignant tumors is an urgent problem in the field of anticancer therapy.

METHODS

Databases including PubMed, Embase, Scopus, The Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were searched to collect published randomized control trials (RCTs) about the effects of different oral care solutions on the prevention of OM from inception to January 2019. We used the Cochrane Handbook to assess the methodological quality of the RCTs. Two of the authors independently extracted the articles and predefined data. Network meta-analysis was then performed using Stata 15.0 software.

RESULTS

A total of 28 RCTs involving 1861 patients were included. The results of network meta-analysis showed that chlorhexidine, benzydamine, honey, and curcumin were more effective than placebo (P < .05) and that honey and curcumin were more effective than povidone-iodine (P < .05). Probability ranking according to the Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking curve showed the following treatments: curcumin, honey, benzydamine, chlorhexidine, allopurinol, sucralfate, granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor, povidone-iodine, and aloe.

CONCLUSION

Our preliminary results indicate that curcumin and honey may serve as the preferred options for patients to prevent OM. The findings may offer an important theoretical basis for clinical prevention and treatment. However, this conclusion still requires an RCT with a larger sample size for further verification.

Current topical trends and novel therapeutic approaches and delivery systems for oral mucositis management

Oral mucositis (OM) is an extremely serious and challenging complication of chemoradiotherapy, which may limit the efficacy of cancer treatment. Complications related to OM include potential nutrition impairment, high economic burden, and negative impacts on patients' quality of life. Current therapeutic options with local traditional pharmaceutical formulations are largely focused on controlling symptoms, and only few agents are available for treatment. Several local supportive and palliative agents are used for the prevention of OM; however, a standard treatment for the disease has not been confirmed yet. The efficacy of treatment could be improved through the introduction of new medical agents with updated dosage forms that can enhance and optimize local drug delivery and create greater therapeutic effects with fewer side effects. The focus of this review was to provide clear and direct information about the currently available topical therapeutic agents in clinical practice used to cure and/or reduce the incidence of ulcerative symptoms of OM, excluding the associated pain and other coexisting complications such as bacterial and fungal infections. The review also provides recent evidences regarding agents that could be used as promising novel therapies in updated local delivering systems. This will support further encouraging options and approaches for the management of OM and will improve compliance that could be translated in better disease control and survival.

Comparative efficacy and safety of interventions for preventing chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis in adult cancer patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Objective

To examine the comparative efficacy and safety of interventions for preventing chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis (OM) in adult cancer patients.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Central systematically for the randomised control trials (RCTs) of interventions for preventing OM. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to estimate risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) from both direct and indirect evidence. The primary outcome was any grade of OM. Secondary outcomes were mild-moderate OM, severe OM and adverse events, such as taste disturbance and gastrointestinal adverse events. This study was registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42016052489.

Results

A total of 29 RCTs with 2348 patients (median age, 56.1 years; 57.5% male) were included. Cryotherapy was associated with a significantly lower risk of OM than control (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.68), and zinc sulphate (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.97), but not significantly lower than sucralfate and palifermin. No significant differences were observed between cryotherapy and control for taste disturbance and gastrointestinal adverse events. Palifermin was associated with the highest risk of taste disturbance.

Conclusions

This NMA suggests that cryotherapy was the most effective intervention for preventing chemotherapy-induced OM with a safety profile similar to control, but not significantly lower than sucralfate and palifermin. Large RCTs are needed to confirm these findings.

Prevention of oral mucositis with cryotherapy in children undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantations-a feasibility study and randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate the feasibility of oral cryotherapy (OC) in children and to investigate if OC reduces the incidence of severe oral mucositis (OM), oral pain, and opioid use in children undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT).

METHODS

Fifty-three children, 4-17 years old, scheduled for HSCT in Sweden were included and randomized to OC or control using a computer-generated list. OC instructions were to cool the mouth with ice for as long as possible during chemotherapy infusions with an intended time of ≥ 30 min. Feasibility criteria in the OC group were as follows: (1) compliance ≥ 70%; (2) considerable discomfort during OC < 20%; (3) no serious adverse events; and (4) ice administered to all children. Grade of OM and oral pain was recorded daily using the WHO-Oral Toxicity Scale (WHO-OTS), Children's International Oral Mucositis Evaluation Scale, and Numerical Rating Scale. Use of opioids was collected from the medical records.

RESULTS

Forty-nine children (mean age 10.5 years) were included in analysis (OC = 26, control = 23). The feasibility criteria were not met. Compliance was poor, especially for the younger children, and only 15 children (58%) used OC as instructed. Severe OM (WHO-OTS ≥ 3) was recorded in 26 children (OC = 15, control = 11). OC did not reduce the incidence of severe OM, oral pain, or opioid use.

CONCLUSION

The feasibility criteria were not met, and the RCT could not show that OC reduces the incidence of severe OM, oral pain, or opioid use in pediatric patients treated with a variety of conditioning regimens for HSCT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov id: NCT01789658.

Potential Role of Oral Rinses Targeting the Viral Lipid Envelope in SARS-CoV-2 Infection

Emerging studies increasingly demonstrate the importance of the throat and salivary glands as sites of virus replication and transmission in early COVID-19 disease. SARS-CoV-2 is an enveloped virus, characterized by an outer lipid membrane derived from the host cell from which it buds. While it is highly sensitive to agents that disrupt lipid biomembranes, there has been no discussion about the potential role of oral rinsing in preventing transmission. Here, we review known mechanisms of viral lipid membrane disruption by widely available dental mouthwash components that include ethanol, chlorhexidine, cetylpyridinium chloride, hydrogen peroxide, and povidone-iodine. We also assess existing formulations for their potential ability to disrupt the SARS-CoV-2 lipid envelope, based on their concentrations of these agents, and conclude that several deserve clinical evaluation. We highlight that already published research on other enveloped viruses, including coronaviruses, directly supports the idea that oral rinsing should be considered as a potential way to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Research to test this could include evaluating existing or specifically tailored new formulations in well-designed viral inactivation assays, then in clinical trials. Population-based interventions could be undertaken with available mouthwashes, with active monitoring of outcome to determine efficacy. This is an under-researched area of major clinical need.

Systematic review of oral cryotherapy for the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients and clinical practice guidelines

PURPOSE

To update the 2013 Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO) clinical practice guidelines on oral cryotherapy for the management of oral mucositis (OM) caused by cancer therapies.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted by the Mucositis Study Group of MASCC/ISOO. The evidence for each intervention for specific cancer treatment modalities was assigned a level of evidence (LoE). The findings were added to the database used to develop the 2013 MASCC/ISOO clinical practice guidelines. Based on the LoE, the guidelines were set as: recommendation, suggestion, or no guideline possible.

RESULTS

A total of 114 papers were identified: 44 from PubMed and 70 from Web of Science. After abstract triage and merging with the 2013 database, 36 papers were reviewed. The LoE for prevention of OM with oral cryotherapy in patients undergoing autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant using high-dose melphalan conditioning protocols was upgraded, and the guideline changed to recommendation. Additionally, the recommendation for prevention of OM with oral cryotherapy in patients receiving bolus 5-fluorouracil for the treatment of solid tumors was confirmed. No guidelines were possible for other clinical settings.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence supports recommendations for the use of oral cryotherapy for the prevention of OM for either (i) patients undergoing autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant with high-dose melphalan conditioning protocols or (ii) patients receiving bolus 5-fluorouracil chemotherapy.

A simple ex vivo bioassay for 5-FU transport into healthy buccal mucosal cells

PURPOSE

Fluorouracil (5-FU), a chemotherapeutic agent widely used in the treatment of numerous common malignancies, causes oral mucositis in a proportion of patients. The contribution of drug transport processes to the development of this toxicity is currently unknown. This work aimed to establish and optimise a simple phenotyping assay for 5-FU uptake into primary buccal mucosal cells (BMC).

METHODS

The uptake kinetics of radiolabelled 5-FU were determined in pooled BMC freshly collected from healthy volunteers. The inter- and intra-individual variability in 5-FU uptake was then assessed across a cohort that included both healthy volunteers and cancer patients.

RESULTS

5-FU uptake into pooled primary BMC was both time and concentration dependent. An Eadie-Hofstee analysis suggested two components; a high-affinity (K_M = 3.3 µM) low-capacity ([Formula: see text] = 57.8 pmol min^-1 10⁵ viable cells^-1) transporter, and a high-capacity ([Formula: see text] = 1230 pmol min^-1 10⁵ viable cells^-1) low-affinity (K_M = 3932 µM) transporter. There was 180-fold variation in the rate of 5-FU uptake into BMC (0.10-17.86 pmol min^-1 10⁵ viable cells^-1) across the 34 subjects (healthy participants N = 24, cancer patients N = 10). Notably, retesting of a subset of these participants (N = 16) multiple times over a period of up to 140 days demonstrated poor stability of the uptake phenotype within individuals.

CONCLUSION

The uptake of 5-FU into healthy oral mucosal cells is a highly variable process facilitated by membrane transporters at pharmacologically relevant concentrations. This bioassay is simple, minimally invasive, and suitable for phenotypic analysis of drug transport in healthy primary cells.

Meta-analysis of oral cryotherapy in preventing oral mucositis associated with cancer therapy

AIMS

To review scientific evidence related to oral cryotherapy to prevent oral mucositis after cancer therapy.

BACKGROUND

Oral mucositis is a common complication of cancer therapy. In the most severe form of oral mucositis, patients cannot eat or drink at all and must receive nutrition and fluid replacement through parenteral support. Topical cooling of the oral mucosa may be an option for the prevention of oral mucositis.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

The literature search was performed using the Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL Complete electronic databases for articles published up to 2017. The reference lists of all retrieved articles were manually reviewed to identify additional relevant studies.

RESULTS

Of 353 publications, 15 randomized controlled trials, involving 919 cancer patients, conducted between 1994 and 2017 were included in the present meta-analysis. Oral cryotherapy, applied during treatment of solid cancers, led to a statistically lower level (P < .05) of oral mucositis overall, and of the more severe grades (3-4 and 2-4).

CONCLUSIONS

Results of this study provide a scientific basis for oral cryotherapy as a viable nursing intervention that can significantly reduce the occurrence of severe oral mucositis.

Mucosal Injury during Anti-Cancer Treatment: From Pathobiology to Bedside

Mucositis is one of the most common debilitating side effects related to chemotherapy (CT), radiation therapy (RT), targeted agents and immunotherapy. It is a complex process potentially involving any portion of the gastrointestinal tract and injuring the mucosa, leading to inflammatory or ulcerative lesions. Mechanisms and clinical presentation can differ according both to the anatomic site involved (oral or gastrointestinal) and the treatment received. Understanding the pathophysiology and management of mucosal injury as a secondary effect of anti-cancer treatment is an important area of clinical research. Prophylaxis, early diagnosis, and adequate management of complications are essential to increase therapeutic success and, thus, improve the survival outcomes of cancer patients. This review focuses on the pathobiology and management guidelines for mucositis, a secondary effect of old and new anti-cancer treatments, highlighting recent advances in prevention and discussing future research options.

Prevention and Treatment of Chemotherapy and Radiotherapy Induced Oral Mucositis

Background and objectives: Oral mucositis is one of the main adverse events of cancer treatment with chemotherapy or radiation therapy. It presents as erythema, atrophy or/and ulceration of oral mucosa. It occurs in almost all patients, who receive radiation therapy of the head and neck area and from 20% to 80% of patients who receive chemotherapy. There are few clinical trials in the literature proving any kind of treatment or prevention methods to be effective. Therefore, the aim of this study is to perform systematic review of literature and examine the most effective treatment and prevention methods for chemotherapy or/and radiotherapy induced oral mucositis. Materials and methods: Clinical human trials, published from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2017 in English, were included in this systematic review of literature. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) protocol was followed while planning, providing objectives, selecting studies and analyzing data for this systematic review. "MEDLINE" and "PubMed Central" databases were used to search eligible clinical trials. Clinical trials researching medication, oral hygiene, cryotherapy or laser therapy efficiency in treatment or/and prevention of oral mucositis were included in this systematic review. Results: Results of the studies used in this systematic review of literature showed that laser therapy, cryotherapy, professional oral hygiene, antimicrobial agents, Royal jelly, L. brevis lozenges, Zync supplementation and Benzydamine are the best treatment or/and prevention methods for oral mucositis. Conclusions: Palifermin, Chlorhexidine, Smecta, Actovegin, Kangfuxin, L. brevis lozenges, Royal jelly, Zync supplement, Benzydamine, cryotherapy, laser therapy and professional oral hygiene may be used in oral mucositis treatment and prevention.

Potential Benefits of Oral Cryotherapy for Chemotherapy-Induced Mucositis

Mucositis is a common side effect of cancer therapies that causes painful, erythematous lesions to develop in the gastrointestinal tract. These lesions can lead to malnutrition, increased risk for serious infection, prolonged hospital stays, and reduced quality of life. Oral cryotherapy, or the use of ice chips to cool the mucous membranes during bolus chemotherapy infusions (e.g., 5-fluorouracil [Adrucil®] and melphalan [Alkeran®]), is the most readily accessible and cost-effective intervention available. Although many factors may contribute to the development of mucositis during cancer treatment, studies have found a reduction in the incidence and the severity of mucositis with the use of oral cryotherapy.


New Frontiers in the Pathobiology and Treatment of Cancer Regimen-Related Mucosal Injury

Mucositis is a common complication of chemotherapy, radiotherapy and targeted agents. It often affects compliance to anticancer therapies as it frequently causes schedule delays, interruptions or discontinuations of treatment. Moreover, the economic impact related to the management of mucositis is topical and several estimations of additional hospital costs due to this clinical condition have been recently reported. The ability to determine risk factors for mucositis, to early detect its onset, to assess correctly the degree of this toxicity and to plan its multidisciplinary management are all key elements to guarantee the quality of life of patients and to avoid useless dose reduction or interruption of treatment. The pathogenesis of mucositis is multifactorial and it is classily subdivided into oral and gastrointestinal mucositis according to its anatomic presentation. Treatment and patients’ related factors might help in predicting the frequency and the potential degree of symptoms onset. Here we discuss about clinical presentation and pathogenesis of mucositis in relation to different kinds of treatments. Moreover, we focus on therapeutic and prevention strategies, describing past and present management according to international guidelines and the most promising new data about agents potentially able to further improve the treatment of mucositis in the next future.

A morphometric study of the protective effect of cryotherapy on oral mucositis in cancer patients treated with 5-fluorouracil

We investigated cytological changes in oral mucosa smears from patients treated with cryotherapy to determine whether cryotherapy prevented mucositis caused by 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) therapy. Patients with gastrointestinal malignancies were divided into four groups; control patients before 5-FU therapy, patients after 5-FU therapy without cryotherapy, patients with cryotherapy before 5-FU therapy and patients with cryotherapy after 5-FU therapy. Oral mucosa samples from all patients were assessed at the beginning and on day 14 of chemotherapy. We used exfoliative cytology to evaluate cellular changes in the oral mucosa that were caused by 5-FU. Smears from each patient were stained using the Papanicolaou method and analyzed using stereology. Smears were taken from each group before and after 5-FU infusion. We found that nuclear volume was decreased significantly in cells of the 5-FU therapy after cryotherapy patients compared to the 5-FU therapy before cryotherapy patients. We also found significantly decreased cytoplasmic volumes in the 5-FU therapy after cryotherapy patients compared to the 5-FU therapy before cryotherapy patients. The results of cytomorphometric estimations revealed that cryotherapy may be used to prevent damage to oral tissue and may decrease the frequency and duration of oral mucositis caused by 5-FU.

Chamomile infusion cryotherapy to prevent oral mucositis induced by chemotherapy: a pilot study

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to compare cryotherapy made only with water and cryotherapy made with chamomile infusion for prevention and reduction of intensity of oral mucositis in patients with cancer receiving 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin.

METHOD

This is a randomized pilot study with two groups: cryotherapy made only with water (control group, n = 18) and cryotherapy made with chamomile infusion (chamomile group, n = 20). Both groups were instructed to swish the ice around in their oral cavity for at least 30 min during chemotherapy. Assessment of oral mucosa occurred on days 8, 15, and 22 after the first day of chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Fifty percent of the patients in the control and 30 % in the chamomile group developed oral mucositis. Mouth pain score was higher in patients in the control group on all evaluations (p = 0.02 for day 8, p = 0.09 for day 15, and p = 0.14 for day 22). Patients in the chamomile group never developed mucositis with grade 2 or higher. Presence of ulceration was statistically significant on day 8 (16 % in the control vs. 0 % in the chamomile group, p = 0.10), but not in days 15 and 22, although 11 % still had ulcerations in the control group and none in the chamomile group.

CONCLUSION

The occurrence of oral mucositis was lower in patients in the chamomile group than in the control group. When compared to the controls, the chamomile group presented less mouth pain and had no ulcerations. Cryotherapy was well tolerated by both groups, and no toxicity related to chamomile was identified.

Comparison of efficacy of cryotherapy and chlorhexidine to oral nutrition transition time in chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of cryotherapy and chlorhexidine to oral nutrition transition time in chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis. This randomised controlled trial with random assignments to the experimental and control groups was conducted with cancer patients. Study data were collected from 90 cancer patients. The first experimental group (n = 30) received chlorhexidine mouthwash, the second experimental group (n = 30) received oral cryotherapy and the control group (n = 30) received routine care. To collect data we used the 'Mucositis Rating Index'. Changes in patients' oral mucosa in each group were checked and oral feeding transition periods were recorded. There was an important statistical difference between the times of transition to oral nutrition for patients (P < 0.01). Oral nutrition transition time of patients in the first experimental group who had applied chlorhexidine was shorter than in other groups. Following the tests, we detected a significant shortening in oral nutrition transition time of patients in first group who used chlorhexidine gargle as compared to the second group and control group. There was no significant difference between cryotherapy application and control group. In parallel with these findings, we detected that the degree of oral mucositis decreased.

Treatment of oral mucositis due to chemotherapy

INTRODUCTION

The management of oral mucositis is a challenge, due to its complex biological nature. Over the last 10 years, different strategies have been developed for the management of oral mucositis caused by chemotherapy in cancer patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An exhaustive search was made of the PubMed-Medline, Cochrane Library and Scopus databases, crossing the key words "oral mucositis", "prevention" and "treatment" with the terms "chemotherapy" and "radiotherapy" by means of the boolean operators "AND" and "NOT". A total of 268 articles were obtained, of which 96 met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Several interventions for the prevention of oral mucositis, such as oral hygiene protocols, amifostine, benzidamine, calcium phosphate, cryotherapy and iseganan, among others, were found to yield only limited benefits. Other studies have reported a decrease in the appearance and severity of mucositis with the use of cytoprotectors (sucralfate, oral glutamine, hyaluronic acid), growth factors, topical polyvinylpyrrolidone, and low power laser irradiation.

CONCLUSIONS

Very few interventions of confirmed efficacy are available for the management of oral mucositis due to chemotherapy. However, according to the reviewed literature, the use of palifermin, cryotherapy and low power laser offers benefits, reducing the incidence and severity of oral mucositis - though further studies are needed to confirm the results obtained.

KEY WORDS

Chemotherapy-Induced Oral Mucositis Treatment.

Interventions for preventing oral mucositis in patients with cancer receiving treatment: oral cryotherapy

BACKGROUND

Oral mucositis is a side effect of chemotherapy, head and neck radiotherapy, and targeted therapy, affecting over 75% of high risk patients. Ulceration can lead to severe pain and difficulty eating and drinking, which may necessitate opioid analgesics, hospitalisation and nasogastric or intravenous nutrition. These complications may lead to interruptions or alterations to cancer therapy, which may reduce survival. There is also a risk of death from sepsis if pathogens enter the ulcers of immunocompromised patients. Ulcerative oral mucositis can be costly to healthcare systems, yet there are few preventive interventions proven to be beneficial. Oral cryotherapy is a low-cost, simple intervention which is unlikely to cause side-effects. It has shown promise in clinical trials and warrants an up-to-date Cochrane review to assess and summarise the international evidence.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of oral cryotherapy for preventing oral mucositis in patients with cancer who are receiving treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases: the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 17 June 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 5), MEDLINE via Ovid (1946 to 17 June 2015), EMBASE via Ovid (1980 to 17 June 2015), CANCERLIT via PubMed (1950 to 17 June 2015) and CINAHL via EBSCO (1937 to 17 June 2015). We searched the US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry, and the WHO Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel-design randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of oral cryotherapy in patients with cancer receiving treatment. We used outcomes from a published core outcome set registered on the COMET website.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the results of electronic searches, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We contacted study authors for information where feasible. For dichotomous outcomes, we reported risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). For continuous outcomes, we reported mean differences (MD) and 95% CIs. We pooled similar studies in random-effects meta-analyses. We reported adverse effects in a narrative format.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 14 RCTs analysing 1280 participants. The vast majority of participants did not receive radiotherapy to the head and neck, so this review primarily assesses prevention of chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis. All studies were at high risk of bias. The following results are for the main comparison: oral cryotherapy versus control (standard care or no treatment). Adults receiving fluorouracil-based (5FU) chemotherapy for solid cancersOral cryotherapy probably reduces oral mucositis of any severity (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.72, 5 studies, 444 analysed, moderate quality evidence). In a population where 728 per 1000 would develop oral mucositis, oral cryotherapy would reduce this to 444 (95% CI 379 to 524). The number needed to treat to benefit one additional person (NNTB), i.e. to prevent them from developing oral mucositis, is 4 people (95% CI 3 to 5).The results were similar for moderate to severe oral mucositis (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.65, 5 studies, 444 analysed, moderate quality evidence). NNTB 4 (95% CI 4 to 6).Severe oral mucositis is probably reduced (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.61, 5 studies, 444 analysed, moderate quality evidence). Where 300 per 1000 would develop severe oral mucositis, oral cryotherapy would reduce this to 120 (95% CI 81 to 183), NNTB 6 (95% CI 5 to 9). Adults receiving high-dose melphalan-based chemotherapy before haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT)Oral cryotherapy may reduce oral mucositis of any severity (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.01, 5 studies, 270 analysed, low quality evidence). Where 824 per 1000 would develop oral mucositis, oral cryotherapy would reduce this to 486 (95% CI reduced to 289 to increased to 833). The NNTB is 3, although the uncertainty surrounding the effect estimate means that the 95% CI ranges from 2 NNTB, to 111 NNTH (number needed to treat in order to harm one additional person, i.e. for one additional person to develop oral mucositis).The results were similar for moderate to severe oral mucositis (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.09, 5 studies, 270 analysed, low quality evidence). NNTB 3 (95% CI 2 NNTB to 17 NNTH).Severe oral mucositis is probably reduced (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.72, 5 studies, 270 analysed, moderate quality evidence). Where 427 per 1000 would develop severe oral mucositis, oral cryotherapy would reduce this to 162 (95% CI 85 to 308), NNTB 4 (95% CI 3 to 9).Oral cryotherapy was shown to be safe, with very low rates of minor adverse effects, such as headaches, chills, numbness/taste disturbance, and tooth pain. This appears to contribute to the high rates of compliance seen in the included studies.There was limited or no evidence on the secondary outcomes of this review, or on patients undergoing other chemotherapies, radiotherapy, targeted therapy, or on comparisons of oral cryotherapy with other interventions or different oral cryotherapy regimens. Therefore no further robust conclusions can be made. There was also no evidence on the effects of oral cryotherapy in children undergoing cancer treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are confident that oral cryotherapy leads to large reductions in oral mucositis of all severities in adults receiving 5FU for solid cancers. We are less confident in the ability of oral cryotherapy to reduce oral mucositis in adults receiving high-dose melphalan before HSCT. Evidence suggests that it does reduce oral mucositis in these adults, but we are less certain about the size of the reduction, which could be large or small. However, we are confident that there is an appreciable reduction in severe oral mucositis in these adults.This Cochrane review includes some very recent and currently unpublished data, and strengthens international guideline statements for adults receiving the above cancer treatments.

Prophylaxis for mucositis induced by ambulatory chemotherapy: systematic review

AIM

The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of clinical trials covering interventions used as prophylaxis for oral mucositis induced by ambulatory antineoplastic chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND

Oral mucositis in patients undergoing chemotherapy is a side effect that can impact the quality of treatment and can interfere with eating and therapeutic adherence.

DESIGN

Quantitative systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

Relevant databases were searched, from January 2002-July 2013, by using the combination of the keywords mucositis, stomatitis, neoplasms, antineoplastic agents, drug therapy, prevention and control and chemotherapy.

REVIEW METHODS

Two researchers independently read the titles and abstracts from every cross-reference. The quality of the included studies was analysed by the Jadad Scale and the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool. Data were extracted from the selected studies with a data collection form developed specifically for this purpose.

RESULTS

Of the 23 controlled clinical trials that were identified in this study, five articles evaluated the use of oral cryotherapy to prevent oral mucositis and three studies analysed the prophylactic use of glutamine. Interventions of protocols for oral care, palifermin, allopurinol and chlorhexidine were evaluated by two articles each. Interventions of zinc sulphate, amifostine, chewing gum, sucralfate, recombination human intestinal trefoil factor, kefir and vitamin E were evaluated by one article each.

CONCLUSION

There is strong evidence that cryotherapy can prevent oral mucositis arising from ambulatory treatment with 5-flurouracil chemotherapy. Other interventions, although showing positive results in preventing oral mucositis, require further study to confirm their conclusions.

Double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized phase II study of TJ-14 (Hangeshashinto) for infusional fluorinated-pyrimidine-based colorectal cancer chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis

Purpose

Hangeshashinto (TJ-14, a Kampo medicine), which reduces the level of prostaglandin E2 and affects the cyclooxygenase activity, alleviates chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis (COM). We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized comparative trial to investigate whether TJ-14 prevents and controls COM in patients with colorectal cancer.

Methods

Ninety-three patients with colorectal cancer who developed moderate-to-severe COM (WHO grade ≧1) during any cycle of chemotherapy using FOLFOX, FOLFIRI, and/or XELOX treatment were randomly assigned to receive either TJ-14 (n = 46) or placebo (n = 47). Patients received the administration of placebo or TJ-14 for 2 weeks at the start of the next course of chemotherapy. Patients were assessed three times per week for safety and for COM incidence and its severity using the WHO grading.

Results

Ninety eligible patients (TJ-14; 43, placebo; 47) per protocol set analysis were included in the analysis after the key-opening. Although the incidence of grade ≧2 oral mucositis was lower for patients treated with TJ-14 compared to those treated with placebo, there was no significant difference (48.8 vs. 57.4 %; p = 0.41). The median duration of grade ≧2 mucositis was 5.5 versus 10.5 days (p = 0.018). No difference in other treatment toxicity was observed between the two groups, and patients exhibited high compliance in dosing administration.

Conclusion

The present study results did not meet the primary endpoint. However, TJ-14 demonstrated a significant effect in the treatment of grade ≧2 mucositis in patients with colorectal cancer compared to the placebo.

Cost-effective analysis of topical chlorhexidine in hematologic patients at risk for oral mucositis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to explore whether management of mucositis with Chlorhexidine (CHX) mouthwash could be a cost-effective method to decrease the risk of mortality and economic burden in hemato-oncologic or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) patients.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness analysis model of prophylactic CHX mouthwash use versus no-CHX mouthwash use for the prevention of oral mucositis was developed for patients undergoing cytotoxic therapy or HSCT. The outcome variable was survival. The primary variables were CHX mouthwash use, probability of mucositis, probability of increased hospital stay, and length of hospital stay. Probability and cost data were obtained from the literature.

RESULTS

Our analysis selected CHX mouthwash use during anticancer treatment as the preferred strategy for the base-case analysis as compared to no CHX mouthwash (marginal value 0.032). There was a $14,391 cost difference per patient between the two strategies.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest that CHX mouthwash use during anticancer treatment results in an increased survival and decreased cost for the population studied. Using our base-case data, an additional 32 of every 1,000 hemato-oncologic or HSCT patients will survive when employing the preferred strategy of prophylactic CHX mouthwash.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

CHX mouthwash should be offered for hematologic patients undergoing HSCT or administered with chemotherapy.

The role of Smad7 in oral mucositis

Oral mucositis, a severe oral ulceration, is a common toxic effect of radio- or chemoradio-therapy and a limiting factor to using the maximum dose of radiation for effective cancer treatment. Among cancer patients, at least 40% and up to 70%, of individuals treated with standard chemotherapy regimens or upper-body radiation, develop oral mucositis. To date, there is no FDA approved drug to treat oral mucositis in cancer patients. The key challenges for oral mucositis treatment are to repair and protect ulcerated oral mucosa without promoting cancer cell growth. Oral mucositis is the result of complex, multifaceted pathobiology, involving a series of signaling pathways and a chain of interactions between the epithelium and submucosa. Among those pathways and interactions, the activation of nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-κB) is critical to the inflammation process of oral mucositis. We recently found that activation of TGFβ (transforming growth factor β) signaling is associated with the development of oral mucositis. Smad7, the negative regulator of TGFβ signaling, inhibits both NF-κB and TGFβ activation and thus plays a pivotal role in the prevention and treatment of oral mucositis by attenuating growth inhibition, apoptosis, and inflammation while promoting epithelial migration. The major objective of this review is to evaluate the known functions of Smad7, with a particular focus on its molecular mechanisms and its function in blocking multiple pathological processes in oral mucositis.

Supportive cryotherapy: a review from head to toe

CONTEXT

Conventional chemotherapy leads to multiple adverse mucocutaneous complications such as oral mucositis, alopecia, ocular toxicity, and onycholysis. Limited pharmacologic interventions are available for preventing these clinical problems.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to critically review the role of cryotherapy (regional hypothermia) for alleviating these adverse symptoms.

METHODS

A narrative review was performed, with an emphasis on randomized controlled trials. A comprehensive search using PubMed, Ovid, Embase, and MEDLINE(®) was completed. References of all cited articles also were reviewed. Data from the review were composed of articles published between 1970 and May 2013.

RESULTS

Available evidence suggests that regional hypothermia decreases the burden of chemotherapy-related oral mucositis, alopecia, ocular toxicity, and onycholysis. The major limitations of studies include the absence of blinded control groups and variable clinical end points.

CONCLUSION

Regional hypothermia decreases the burden of these four chemotherapy-induced complications and is well tolerated. More research is needed to determine what subgroups of cancer patients are most likely to respond to different types of regional hypothermia, the ideal duration of cooling needed, and further improve the ease of use of the cooling devices.

Prevention and treatment of oral mucositis in patients receiving chemotherapy

Oral mucositis is one of the most common side effects of cancer treatment (chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy). It is an inflammatory process that affects the mucosa of the oral cavity, giving rise to erythematous areas in combination with ulcers that can reach a large size. The true importance of oral mucositis is the complications it causes - fundamentally intense pain associated to the oral ulcers, and the risk of overinfection. This in turn may require reduction or even suspension of the antineoplastic treatment, with the risk of seriously worsening the patient prognosis. This points to the importance of establishing therapeutic tools of use in the prevention and/or treatment of mucositis. The present study offers a literature review of all the articles published over the last 10 years referred to the prevention and/or treatment of oral mucositis associated to chemotherapy. Key words:Oral mucositis, management, prevention, treatment, chemotherapy.

Systematic review of oral cryotherapy for management of oral mucositis caused by cancer therapy

PURPOSE

This systematic review analyzed the strength of the literature and defined clinical practice guidelines for the use of oral cryotherapy for the prevention and/or treatment of oral mucositis caused by cancer therapy.

METHODS

A systematic review on relevant oral cryotherapy studies indexed prior to 31 December 2010 was conducted by the Mucositis Study Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society for Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO) using OVID/MEDLINE, with publications selected for review based on defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Findings from the reviewed studies were integrated into guidelines based on the overall level of evidence for each intervention. Guidelines were classified into three types: recommendation, suggestion, or no guideline possible.

RESULTS

Twenty-two clinical studies and two meta-analyses were analyzed. Results were compared with the MASCC/ISOO guidelines published in 2007. The recommendation for the use of oral cryotherapy to prevent oral mucositis in patients receiving bolus fluorouracil (5-FU) was maintained, in agreement with the 2007 guidelines. A suggestion for use of oral cryotherapy to prevent oral mucositis in patients receiving high-dose melphalan as conditioning regimen with or without total body irradiation for HCST was revised from the 2007 guidelines. No guideline was possible for any other intervention, due to insufficient evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence continues to support the use of oral cryotherapy for prevention of oral mucositis in patients receiving bolus 5-FU chemotherapy or high-dose melphalan. This intervention is consistent with the MASCC/ISOO guidelines published in 2007. The literature is limited by the fact that utilization of a double-blind study design is not feasible. Future studies that compare efficacy of oral cryotherapy with other mucositis agents in patients receiving chemotherapy with relatively short plasma half-lives would be useful.

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.