Mucositis reduction by selective elimination of oral flora in irradiated cancers of the head and neck: a placebo-controlled double-blind randomized study

The Role of the Innate Immune Response in Oral Mucositis Pathogenesis

Oral mucositis (OM) is a significant complication of cancer therapy with limited management strategies. Whilst inflammation is a central feature of destructive and ultimately ulcerative pathology, to date, attempts to mitigate damage via this mechanism have proven limited. A relatively underexamined aspect of OM development is the contribution of elements of the innate immune system. In particular, the role played by barriers, pattern recognition systems, and microbial composition in early damage signaling requires further investigation. As such, this review highlights the innate immune response as a potential focus for research to better understand OM pathogenesis and development of interventions for patients treated with radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Future areas of evaluation include manipulation of microbial-mucosal interactions to alter cytotoxic sensitivity, use of germ-free models, and translation of innate immune-targeted agents interrogated for mucosal injury in other regions of the alimentary canal into OM-based clinical trials.

Distinctive microbiota of delayed healing of oral mucositis after radiotherapy of nasopharyngeal carcinoma

Background

Oral mucositis is the most common complication after radiotherapy of nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Previous studies had revealed that oral microbiota took great alteration soon after and during radiotherapy. Here, we aimed to investigate if the alteration of oral microbiota was related to delayed healing of oral mucositis after six month of radiotherapy.

Methods

We recruited 64 NPC patients and collected samples after six month of radiotherapy. 32 patients were included into normal healing group (N), 22 patients were mild delayed healing group (M), while 10 patients were severe delayed healing group (S). 16S rRNA gene sequencing was used to assess and identify oral microbiota alteration.

Results

The diversity of oral microbial communities was not significantly different. Composition of oral microbial was huge different among S group, for the Actinobacteria and Veillonella were significantly increased, which showed significant dysbiosis of the oral microbiome. Functional analysis of metabolic pathways of oral microbiota demonstrated that degradation of organic acids and amino acids were significantly increased in S group. Moreover, phenotype analysis found that relative abundance of aerobic and biofilm formation were higher in S group. We also found the Actinobacteria co-occurred with Veillonellaceae, but anti-occurred with other biofilm oral bacteria. These two biomarkers may be predictable for severe delayed healing of oral mucositis after radiotherapy.

Conclusion

This study suggests a potential association between oral microbiome and delayed healing of oral mucositis. The Actinobacteria and Veillonellaceae may be biomarkers in predicting the risks for the severe delayed healing of oral mucositis after radiotherapy of NPC.

Oral-Gut Microbiome Axis in the Pathogenesis of Cancer Treatment-Induced Oral Mucositis

Oral mucositis (OM) is one of the most common and debilitating oral complications of cancer treatments including chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. It is associated with severe pain and difficulties in chewing, swallowing, and speech. This leads to impairment of basic oral functions and could result in unplanned treatment interruption or modification. As such, OM negatively impacts both patients' quality of life as well as tumor prognostic outcomes. Understanding pathways underlying OM pathogenesis help identify new targets for intervention or prevention. The pathophysiology of OM has been widely studied over past decades with several pathways related to oxidative stress, inflammation, and molecular and cellular signaling being implicated. In this mini-review, we will discuss the emerging role of the oral-gut microbiome axis in the development of OM. Particularly, we will elaborate on how the alterations in the oral and gut microbiota as well as intestinal dysfunction caused by cancer treatments could contribute to the pathogenesis of OM. Further, we will briefly discuss the potential methods for targeting the oral-gut microbiome axis to improve OM outcomes.

Pathogenesis and Amelioration of Radiation-Induced Oral Mucositis

OPINION STATEMENT

Oral mucositis (OM) causes significant detriment to patient quality of life. Despite advances in RT, chemotherapy, and surgery for HNC which have led to improved local control and survival, management of certain toxicities such as OM have not kept pace. Numerous strategies have emerged with demonstrable benefit in preventing severe OM. However, ones which are not only effective, but practical and affordable to implement are rare. For example, infusion of growth factors or free radical scavengers, and daily treatment of intra-oral sites with lasers are supported by high-quality evidence but have not become widely adopted. It falls to familiarity of the physician with the available preventative measures and ultimately, patient preference in accepting which strategies for OM amelioration are used. In this review, we present a pathophysiological-based review of prevention techniques available for reducing the incidence and duration of severe OM.

An Integrative Review of the Role of the Oral and Gut Microbiome in Oral Health Symptomatology During Cancer Therapy

PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION

Both chemotherapy and radiation therapy cause considerable symptom burden on patients' oral health, influencing nutritional status and quality of life. The role of the oral and gut microbiome in oral health alterations during cancer therapy is an emerging area of science in symptom management.

LITERATURE SEARCH

PubMed®, CINAHL®, and Scopus® were searched for articles published from January 2000 through July 2020.

DATA EVALUATION

Articles published in English that were focused on chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy were included in the review.

SYNTHESIS

Of the 22 identified studies, 12 described oral health symptoms during chemotherapy and radiation therapy for head and neck cancer. Ten studies assessed symptoms during treatment for a variety of solid tumors and blood cancers, with four of these describing microbial interventions for the management of oral mucositis. Interventions varied, but the results supported the benefits of probiotics and synbiotics in reducing mucositis severity. Overall, less diverse oral and gut microbiome environments were associated with increased severity of oral health symptomatology.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Additional research is needed to determine how the oral and gut microbiome and microbial interventions may be used to improve oral health management during cancer treatment.

Radiotherapy-Specific Chronic Pain Syndromes in the Cancer Population: An Evidence-Based Narrative Review

While radiation therapy is increasingly utilized in the treatment paradigm of many solid cancers, the chronic effects of radiation therapies are poorly characterized. Notably, understanding radiation-specific chronic pain syndromes is paramount given that the diagnosis and management of these conditions can serve to prevent long-standing functional impairments, optimize quality of life, and even allow for continued radiotherapy candidacy. These radiation-specific chronic pain phenomena include dermatitis, mucositis, enteritis, connective tissue fibrosis, lymphedema, and neuropathic pain syndromes. It is necessary to maintain a low threshold of suspicion for appropriately diagnosing these conditions as there exists a variance in when these symptoms arise after radiation. However, we present key epidemiological data delineating vulnerable cancer populations for each pain syndrome along with the available evidence for the management for each specific condition.

The Role of the Microbiome in Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma with Insight into the Microbiome-Treatment Axis

Oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) is one of the leading presentations of head and neck cancer (HNC). The first part of this review will describe the highlights of the oral microbiome in health and normal development while demonstrating how both the oral and gut microbiome can map OSCC development, progression, treatment and the potential side effects associated with its management. We then scope the dynamics of the various microorganisms of the oral cavity, including bacteria, mycoplasma, fungi, archaea and viruses, and describe the characteristic roles they may play in OSCC development. We also highlight how the human immunodeficiency viruses (HIV) may impinge on the host microbiome and increase the burden of oral premalignant lesions and OSCC in patients with HIV. Finally, we summarise current insights into the microbiome–treatment axis pertaining to OSCC, and show how the microbiome is affected by radiotherapy, chemotherapy, immunotherapy and also how these therapies are affected by the state of the microbiome, potentially determining the success or failure of some of these treatments.

Impact of antibiotic use during curative treatment of locally advanced head and neck cancers with chemotherapy and radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

Pre-clinical evidence suggests reduced efficacy of anticancer treatment in patients exposed to broad-spectrum antibiotics. It is hypothesised that this phenomenon may be explained by the effects of antibiotics on the composition of the microbiota. To assess this in a clinical setting, we analysed the impact of antibiotics in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer (LAHNC) treated with curative intent with chemotherapy and radiotherapy (RT).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective data for LAHNC patients treated with curative intent (245 induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation [CRT], 17 surgery followed by post-operative CRT, six CRT, three RT alone and one RT with concurrent cetuximab) were analysed. We evaluated the impact of antibiotics prescribed during primary anti-cancer treatment on progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) rates by multivariate Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression analysis.

RESULTS

Among 272 patients, those receiving antibiotics between within 1 week before and 2 weeks after treatment (N = 124) progressed significantly earlier and had lower OS and DSS rates. In the multivariate analysis, administration of antibiotics was independently associated with reduced PFS (hazards ratio [HR] 1.98, P = 0.001), OS (HR 1.85, P = 0.001) and DSS (HR 1.95, P = 0.004). This effect was maintained with independence of reason for prescription, type and time of antibiotic prescription. The negative impact was greater for patients who received two or more courses of antibiotics. Antibiotic treatment was correlated with increased risk of locoregional relapse.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest a negative impact of antibiotic therapy on treatment outcomes following CRT with curative intent in patients with LAHNC. This potential harm should be considered when prescribing broad-spectrum and prophylactic antibiotics for such patients.

Gut microbiota: implications for radiotherapy response and radiotherapy-induced mucositis

Radiotherapy is a mainstay of solid tumor management but can be associated with unacceptable levels of off-target tissue toxicity which impact treatment outcomes and patients' quality of life. Tumour response to radiotherapy and the frequency and severity of radiotherapy-induced toxicities, especially mucositis, varies among patients. Gut microbiota has been found to modulate both the efficacy and toxicity of some types of cancer chemotherapies and immunotherapies but has yet to be investigated thoroughly in the setting of radiotherapy. Area covered: In this review, we discuss the potential role of gut microbiota on modulating radiotherapy-induced oral and gastrointestinal mucositis and the anti-tumor response to radiotherapy through modulation of immune responses. Expert opinion: The gut microbiota plays a major role in the modulation of systemic immune responses, which influence both radiotherapy response and gastrointestinal toxicities such as mucositis. Hence, investigating the gut microbiota link to the variation in radiotherapy responses and toxicities among patients is warranted. Future targeting of these responses with a patient-tailored restoration of optimal microbial composition could lead to a new era of mucositis prevention and enhanced tumor responses.

Potential Therapeutic Effects of Gut Hormones, Ghrelin and Obestatin in Oral Mucositis

Chemotherapy and/or head and neck radiotherapy are frequently associated with oral mucositis. Oral pain, odynophagia and dysphagia, opioid use, weight loss, dehydration, systemic infection, hospitalization and introduction of a feeding tube should be mentioned as the main determinated effect of oral mucositis. Oral mucositis leads to a decreased quality of life and an increase in treatment costs. Moreover, oral mucositis is a life-threatening disease. In addition to its own direct life-threatening consequences, it can also lead to a reduced survival due to the discontinuation or dose reduction of anti-neoplasm therapy. There are numerous strategies for the prevention or treatment of oral mucositis; however, their effectiveness is limited and does not correspond to expectations. This review is focused on the ghrelin and obestatin as potentially useful candidates for the prevention and treatment of chemo- or/and radiotherapy-induced oral mucositis.

Bacterial endotoxins and microorganisms in the oral cavities of patients on cancer therapy

OBJECTIVES

This study investigated the presence of Streptococci, Staphylococci, aerobic gram negative bacteria (AGNB), Candida and bacterial endotoxins in the oral cavities of patients receiving chemo- and/or radiotherapy for cancer.

METHODS

Samples of oral cavity rinse were collected from 100 patients on cancer treatment and 70 healthy individuals. Demographic and clinical data were recorded. Samples were cultured onto various agar plates for qualitative and quantitative analysis and tested for the presence of endotoxin. Results were analysed using the Mann-Whitney and chi-square tests.

RESULTS

In cancer patients, S. aureus counts were high and 66.7% of patients on chemo- and radiotherapy carried these bacteria (p=<0.05). The Candida carrier rate was significantly (p < 0.01) high in cancer patients (54%). No significant difference was found in the carrier rate of Streptococci and AGNB between the healthy and cancer group as well as between the cancer patients with chemo and radio- and chemotherapy alone. No significant difference was found in the level of endotoxin between the cancer patients and healthy individuals, and cancer patients with and without AGNB.

CONCLUSIONS

No differences in the prevalence of bacteria and bacterial endotoxins were found between the cancer patients and healthy individuals. Oral cavity endotoxins did not correlate with the carriage of AGNB. However, due to the high prevalence in cancer patients, the role of Candida species and S. aureus in the pathology may not be excluded.

Distinct shifts in the oral microbiota are associated with the progression and aggravation of mucositis during radiotherapy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Oral mucositis remains one of the most common complications of radiation therapy for patients with head and neck cancer. This study aimed to investigate the dynamic shifts in the oral mucosal microbiota and their association with the progression and aggravation of mucositis in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) undergoing radiotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this study, oropharyngeal mucosa of patients were examined regularly, and sampled longitudinally in eight stages of their radiation treatment program: before radiation, and then after 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, and 70 Gy. Based on 16S rRNA gene sequencing and bioinformatics analysis, the characteristics of dynamic variations in oral microbiota during their treatment were investigated.

RESULTS

The results showed that the mucosal bacterial alpha diversity (richness and evenness) did not change significantly during the entire course of these patient treatments. Notwithstanding 20 genera were found to be significantly positively associated with their radiation dose, whereas 10 genera were negatively associated with it. Notably, two bacterial co-abundance groups (CAG 1 and 2) were identified and the majority of bacteria clustered within the CAG 2 were indeed periodontal disease-associated genera. Most strikingly, many of them, especially Prevotella, Fusobacterium, Treponema and Porphyromonas, showed obvious dynamic synchronous variations in their abundances throughout the course of radiation therapy, where their peaks frequently coincided with the onset of severe mucositis.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that dysbiosis of oral mucosal microbiota may contribute to exacerbating the severity of mucositis in patients undergoing radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

The Potential Effect of Oral Microbiota in the Prediction of Mucositis During Radiotherapy for Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma

Background

Oral mucositis is probably the most debilitating complication that can arise in treating a patient with head and neck cancer. Little is known about the impacts of oral microbiota on the initiation and progression of mucositis.

Methods

Based on 16S rRNA gene sequencing, dynamic changes in oral bacterial profile as well as correlations between the severity of mucositis and bacterial shifts during radiotherapy were investigated.

Findings

Our results revealed that bacterial community structure altered progressively during radiation therapy, in parallel with a marked increase in the relative abundance of some Gram-negative bacteria. Patients who eventually developed severe mucositis harbored a significantly lower bacterial alpha diversity and higher abundance of Actinobacillus during the phase of erythema – patchy mucositis. Accordingly, a random forest model for predicting exacerbation of mucositis was generated, which achieved a high predictive accuracy (AUC) of 0.89.

Interpretation

Oral microbiota changes correlate with the progression and aggravation of radiotherapy-induced mucositis in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Microbiota-based strategies can be used for the early prediction and prevention of the incidence of severe mucositis during radiotherapy.

•

The oral microbiota of NPC patients are different to that of healthy persons.

•

The biodiversity of oral microbiota changed significantly as mucositis progressed during radiotherapy.

•

Oral microbiota represents a potential strategy for predicting the aggravation of severe mucositis during radiotherapy.

Oral or oropharyngeal mucositis is the most common side effect of radiation therapy for head and neck cancers. In this prospective cohort study, we found that changes in an oral microbial community correlated with the progression and aggravation of radiotherapy-induced mucositis in the patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma; and patients who eventually developed severe mucositis transiently harbored a notably higher proportion of Actinobacillus during a mild phase of mucositis, which may potentially play a role in the aggravation of severe mucosal lesions. Moreover, our findings also showed that microbiota-based strategies can be used for the early prediction of the incidence of severe mucositis during radiotherapy.

Preventive Intervention Possibilities in Radiotherapy- and Chemotherapy-induced Oral Mucositis: Results of Meta-analyses

The aim of these meta-analyses was to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions for the prevention of oral mucositis in cancer patients treated with head and neck radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy, with a focus on randomized clinical trials. A literature search was performed for reports of randomized controlled clinical studies, published between 1966 and 2004, the aim of which was the prevention of mucositis in cancer patients undergoing head and neck radiation, chemotherapy, or chemoradiation. The control group consisted of a placebo, no intervention, or another intervention group. Mucositis was scored by either the WHO, the National Cancer Institute-Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC) score, or the absence or presence of ulcerations, or the presence or absence of grades 3 and 4 mucositis. The meta-analyses included 45 studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria, in which 8 different interventions were evaluated: i.e., local application of chlorhexidine; iseganan; PTA (polymyxin E, tobramycine, and amphotericin B); granulocyte macrophage-colony-stimulating factor/granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF/G-CSF); oral cooling; sucralfate and glutamine; and systemic administration of amifostine and GM-CSF/G-CSF. Four interventions showed a significant preventive effect on the development or severity of oral mucositis: PTA with an odds ratio (OR) = 0.61 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39–0.96); GM-CSF, OR = 0.53 (CI: 0.33–0.87); oral cooling, OR = 0.3 (CI: 0.16–0.56); and amifostine, OR = 0.37 (CI: 0.15–0.89). To date, no single intervention completely prevents oral mucositis, so combined preventive therapy strategies seem to be required to ensure more successful outcomes.

Host-Microbiome Cross-talk in Oral Mucositis

Oral mucositis (OM) is among the most common, painful, and debilitating toxicities of cancer regimen-related treatment, resulting in the formation of ulcers, which are susceptible to increased colonization of microorganisms. Novel discoveries in OM have focused on understanding the host-microbial interactions, because current pathways have shown that major virulence factors from microorganisms have the potential to contribute to the development of OM and may even prolong the existence of already established ulcerations, affecting tissue healing. Additional comprehensive and disciplined clinical investigation is needed to carefully characterize the relationship between the clinical trajectory of OM, the local levels of inflammatory changes (both clinical and molecular), and the ebb and flow of the oral microbiota. Answering such questions will increase our knowledge of the mechanisms engaged by the oral immune system in response to mucositis, facilitating their translation into novel therapeutic approaches. In doing so, directed clinical strategies can be developed that specifically target those times and tissues that are most susceptible to intervention.

Liaison between micro-organisms and oral cancer

Oral cancer which is a subtype of head and neck, cancer is any neoplastic tissue growth in the oral cavity. It comprises an abnormal mass of cells that foists genetic mutation and impedes the normal cell cycle, resulting in its unrestrained growth. Various studies on the plausible link between oral microbial flora and cancer notwithstanding, our understanding of their link remains obscure and inadequate. The multitude of mechanisms by which the microflora initiate or spur Carcinogenesis are still under study and scrutiny. As is widely known, the oral cavity is an abode to a wide assortment of microbes, each present in contrasting amounts. It is observed that increased growth of the microflora is concomitant with known clinical risk factors for oral cancer. Manifold bacterial species have been found to interfere directly with eukaryotic cellular signaling, adopting a style typical of tumor promoters. Bacteria are also known to impede apoptosis thereby potentially promoting carcinogenesis. The viral role in carcinogenesis (by annulling of p53 tumor suppressor gene and other cellular proteins with subsequent alteration in host genome function) is well documented. Furthermore, the changes occurring in the commensal microflora in accompaniment with cancer development could possibly be used as a diagnostic indicator for early cancer detection. The intention of this review is to obtain a better understanding of the "role" that micro-organisms play in oral cancer etiology.

Microbiota and their role in the pathogenesis of oral mucositis

Oral mucositis in patients undergoing cancer therapy is a significant problem. Its prevalence ranges between 20 and 100%, depending on treatment type and protocols and patient-based variables. Mucositis is self-limiting when uncomplicated by infection. Unfortunately, the incidence of developing a local or systemic infection during the course of the treatment is very high. At this stage, it is unclear which role oral microbiota play in the onset, duration, and severity of oral mucositis. Nevertheless, there is growing interest in this underexplored topic, and new studies are being undertaken to unravel their impact on the pathogenesis of mucositis.

Systematic review of antimicrobials, mucosal coating agents, anesthetics, and analgesics for the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients

PURPOSE

The aim of this project was to develop clinical practice guidelines on the use of antimicrobials, mucosal coating agents, anesthetics, and analgesics for the prevention and management of oral mucositis (OM) in cancer patients.

METHODS

A systematic review of the available literature was conducted. The body of evidence for the use of each agent, in each setting, was assigned a level of evidence. Based on the evidence level, one of the following three guideline determinations was possible: recommendation, suggestion, or no guideline possible.

RESULTS

A recommendation was developed in favor of patient-controlled analgesia with morphine in hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) patients. Suggestions were developed in favor of transdermal fentanyl in standard dose chemotherapy and HSCT patients and morphine mouth rinse and doxepin rinse in head and neck radiation therapy (H&N RT) patients. Recommendations were developed against the use of topical antimicrobial agents for the prevention of mucositis. These included recommendations against the use of iseganan for mucositis prevention in HSCT and H&N RT and against the use of antimicrobial lozenges (polymyxin-tobramycin-amphotericin B lozenges/paste and bacitracin-clotrimazole-gentamicin lozenges) for mucositis prevention in H&N RT. Recommendations were developed against the use of the mucosal coating agent sucralfate for the prevention or treatment of chemotherapy-induced or radiation-induced OM. No guidelines were possible for any other agent due to insufficient and/or conflicting evidence.

CONCLUSION

Additional well-designed research is needed on prevention and management approaches for OM.

Effectiveness of oral hygiene interventions against oral and oropharyngeal reservoirs of aerobic and facultatively anaerobic gram-negative bacilli

BACKGROUND

Aerobic and facultatively anaerobic gram-negative bacilli (AGNB) are opportunistic pathogens and continue to cause a large number of hospital-acquired infections. AGNB residing in the oral cavity and oropharynx have been linked to nosocomial pneumonia and septicemia. Although AGNB are not considered members of the normal oral and oropharyngeal flora, medically compromised patients have been demonstrated to be susceptible to AGNB colonization.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted to retrieve articles that evaluated the effectiveness of oral hygiene interventions in reducing the oral and oropharyngeal carriage of AGNB in medically compromised patients.

RESULTS

Few studies have documented the use of mechanical oral hygiene interventions alone against AGNB. Although a number of studies have employed oral hygiene interventions complemented by antiseptic agents such as chlorhexidine and povidone iodine, there appears to be a discrepancy between their in vitro and in vivo effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

With the recognition of the oral cavity and oropharynx as a reservoir of AGNB and the recent emergence of multidrug and pandrug resistance in hospital settings, there is a pressing need for additional high-quality randomized controlled trials to determine which oral hygiene interventions or combination of interventions are most effective in eliminating or reducing AGNB carriage.

Cancer treatment-induced oral mucositis: a critical review

Head and neck cancer represents one of the main oncological problems. Its treatment, radiotherapy and chemotherapy leads to mucositis, and other side effects. The authors reviewed high-quality evidence published over the last 25 years on the treatment of cancer treatment-induced oral mucositis. A Medline search for double blind randomized controlled clinical trials between 1985 and 2010 was carried out. The keywords were oral mucositis, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and head and neck. The different therapeutic approaches found for cancer treatment-induced oral mucositis included: intensive oral hygiene care; use of topical antiseptics and antimicrobial agents; use of anti-inflammatory agents; cytokines and growth factors; locally applied non-pharmacological methods; antioxidants; immune modulators; and homoeopathic agents. To date, no intervention has been able to prevent and treat oral mucositis on its own. It is necessary to combine interventions that act on the different phases of mucositis. It is still unclear which strategies reduce oral mucositis, as there is not enough evidence that describes a treatment with a proven efficiency and is superior to the other treatments for this condition.

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.

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 1 June 2010), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 2), 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 2005) 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

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. Nine 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 nine interventions were: allopurinol, aloe vera, amifostine, cryotherapy, glutamine (intravenous), honey, keratinocyte growth factor, laser, and polymixin/tobramycin/amphotericin (PTA) antibiotic pastille/paste.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Nine 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.

Regional Cancer Pain Syndromes

Cancer pain often presents in a body region. This review summarizes articles from 1999-2004 relevant to cancer pain syndromes in the head and neck, chest, back, abdomen, pelvis, and limbs. Although the evidence is limited, progress is being made in further development of the evidence base to support and guide current practice.

Use of topical misoprostol to reduce radiation-induced mucositis: Results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Radiation-induced mucositis is an acute reaction of the mucosa of patients undergoing head and neck radiotherapy. It can have debilitating and dose-limiting consequences. There is no consensus on an accepted intervention that significantly reduces its severity. Misoprostol is a synthetic prostaglandin E1 analogue, with properties of a mucosal cytoprotectant. We designed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of misoprostol in patients with head and neck cancer. The aim of this study was to determine if topical misoprostol was effective in reducing the severity of radiation-induced mucositis in patients receiving radical dose radiotherapy. The effect of this intervention on a patient's general well-being was also investigated. The primary end-point of the study was the incidence of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group grade 3 mucositis. Between 1999 and 2002, 83 patients were recruited into the study at Westmead and Nepean Hospitals, Sydney. Forty-two patients were randomized to receive misoprostol and 41 to receive a placebo. Most patients received radiotherapy in the adjuvant setting (52 of the 83) and had either an oral cavity (42 of the 83) or an oropharyngeal (16 of the 83) cancer. We could not identify any significant difference in the incidence of severe mucositis based on whether patients were allocated to receive misoprostol or placebo. There was no significant difference in the mean area under the mucositis curve (13.2 vs 16.6; P = 0.1). Patients allocated to misoprostol did report slightly increased soreness (7.6 vs 6.9; P = 0.04) and a greater use of analgesics. However, this difference did not translate into a worse feeling of general well-being as measured by a simple visual analogue scale (5.8 vs 5.2; P = 0.3). In conclusion, we were unable to identify a reduction in radiation-induced mucositis in patients receiving misoprostol. There is a paucity of high-level evidence on potentially useful interventions and a continued need for new and innovative research, incorporating quality-of-life measurements, in patients experiencing radiation-induced mucositis.

Randomized phase II study of GM-CSF to reduce mucositis caused by accelerated radiotherapy of laryngeal cancer

Acute mucositis is dose-limiting in many accelerated radiotherapy schedules for head and neck cancer. Cytokines may be one means of reducing the severity of mucositis. A study was designed to assess the effect of subcutaneous molgramostin (granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factor; GM-CSF) injections on acute radiation morbidity in patients undergoing accelerated radiotherapy for laryngeal cancer. A prospective, randomized, observer-blind, controlled trial was conducted in 29 patients who were to receive radical radiotherapy over 3 weeks for early stage laryngeal cancer. Patients were randomized to receive 150 microg (approximately 2 microg kg(-1)) GM-CSF subcutaneously once daily for 14 days after the second week of radiotherapy, or no GM-CSF. Patients were assessed weekly for grade of mucositis, skin reactions and related parameters. The severity of mucositis was reduced in the GM-CSF arm (p<0.05). No other end-points reached statistical significance. Two patients failed to complete their courses of GM-CSF. Three developed influenza type symptoms and in one an allergic reaction was noted. There was no difference in tumour control rates. Subcutaneous GM-CSF reduced the severity of mucositis in patients undergoing accelerated radiotherapy. Injections were well tolerated. Further studies of cytokines are warranted, to assess the feasibility of increasing the total doses of accelerated radiotherapy given, with the aim of improving tumour cure rates.

Oral mucositis

Mucositis and xerostomia are the most common oral complications of the non-surgical therapy of cancer. Mucositis, a common sequel of radio- (DXR), chemo-(CXR) and radiochemo-therapy in patients with cancer, or patients requiring haemopoietic stem cell transplants (HSCT), has a direct and significant impact on the quality of life and cost of care, and also affects survival--because of the risk of infection. Apart from dose reduction, preventive and treatment options for mucositis are scarce, although multiple agents have been tested. Evidence suggests that cryotherapy, topical benzydamine and amifostine might provide some benefit in specific situations. The recombinant human keratinocyte growth factor Palifermin (Kepivance) was recently approved as a mucositis intervention in patients receiving conditioning regimens before HSCT for the treatment of haematological malignancies. A number of mechanistically based interventions are in various stages of development. Unfortunately, many other approaches have not been rigorously tested. This paper reviews the clinical features, prevalence, diagnosis, complications, pathogenesis, prophylaxis and management of mucositis.

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

The Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched. Reference lists from relevant articles were scanned and the authors of eligible studies were contacted to identify trials and obtain additional information. Date of most recent searches: April 2004.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials were selected if they met the following criteria: design - random allocation of participants; participants - anyone with cancer receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy treatment for cancer; interventions - agents prescribed to prevent oral mucositis; outcomes - prevention of mucositis, pain, amount of analgesia, dysphagia, systemic infection, length of hospitalisation, cost and patient quality of life.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Information regarding methods, participants, interventions and outcome measures and results were independently extracted, in duplicate, by two review authors. Authors were contacted for details of randomisation and withdrawals and a quality assessment was carried out. The Cochrane Oral Health Group statistical guidelines were followed and risk ratios (RR) calculated using random-effects models.

MAIN RESULTS

Two hundred and two studies were eligible. One hundred and thirty two were excluded for various reasons, usually as there was no useable information on mucositis. Of the 71 useable studies all had data for mucositis comprising 5217 randomised patients. Interventions evaluated were: acyclovir, allopurinol mouthrinse, aloe vera, amifostine, antibiotic pastille or paste, benzydamine, beta carotene, calcium phosphate, camomile, chlorhexidine, clarithromycin, folinic acid, glutamine, GM-CSF, honey, hydrolytic enzymes, ice chips, iseganan, keratinocyte GF, misonidazole, oral care, pentoxifylline, povidone, prednisone, propantheline, prostaglandin, sucralfate, traumeel and zinc sulphate. Of the 29 interventions included in trials, 10 showed some evidence of a benefit (albeit sometimes weak) for either preventing or reducing the severity of mucositis. Interventions where there was more than one trial in the meta-analysis finding a significant difference when compared with a placebo or no treatment were: amifostine which provided minimal benefit in preventing moderate and severe mucositis RR = 0.84 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75 to 0.95) and 0.60 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.97), antibiotic paste or pastille demonstrated a moderate benefit in preventing mucositis RR = 0.87 (95% CI 0.79 to 0.97), hydrolytic enzymes reduced moderate and severe mucositis with RRs = 0.52 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.74) and 0.17 (95% CI 0.06 to 0.52), and ice chips prevented mucositis at all levels RR = 0.63 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.91), 0.43 (95% CI 0.23 to 0.81), 0.27 (95% CI 0.11 to 0.68). Other interventions showing some benefit with only one study were: benzydamine, calcium phosphate, honey, oral care protocols, povidone and zinc sulphate. The number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one patient experiencing moderate or severe mucositis over a baseline incidence of 60% for amifostine is 10 (95% CI 7 to 33), antibiotic paste or pastille 13 (95% CI 8 to 56), hydrolytic enzyme 4 (95% CI 3 to 6) and ice chips 5 (95% CI 3 to 19). When the baseline incidence is 40%/90% the NNTs for amifostine are 16/7, for antibiotic paste or pastille 19/7, for hydrolytic enzyme 5/3 and for ice chips 7/3. The general reporting of RCTs was poor. However, the assessments of the quality of the randomisation improved when the authors provided additional information.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Several of the interventions were found to have some benefit at 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 well designed and conducted trials with sufficient numbers of participants to perform subgroup analyses by type of disease and chemotherapeutic agent.

Antifungal prophylaxis with azoles in high-risk, surgical intensive care unit patients: A meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled trials*

OBJECTIVE

The use of antifungal prophylaxis remains controversial in most populations including surgical intensive care unit patients. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was performed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of azoles as antifungal prophylaxis in high-risk patients receiving treatment in the surgical intensive care unit.

DATA SOURCE

Data were obtained from PubMed, Current Contents, Cochrane central register of controlled trials, and references from relevant articles.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials using azoles as antifungal prophylaxis vs. placebo were included in the study.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two independent reviewers extracted data concerning the development of fungal infections (superficial or invasive), adverse effects, and mortality.

SYNTHESIS

Six randomized controlled trials were included in the main analysis. Publication bias and statistically significant heterogeneity were not observed among the analyzed studies. Patients receiving antifungal prophylaxis developed fewer episodes of candidemia (odds ratio [OR] = 0.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09-0.86), nonbloodstream invasive fungal infections (OR = 0.26, 95% CI 0.12-0.53), and noninvasive (superficial) fungal infections (OR = 0.22, 95% CI 0.11-0.43), respectively. No reduction in mortality was observed among patients who received azole prophylaxis (OR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.52-1.05). There was no significant difference in reported adverse effects (OR = 1.28, 95% CI 0.82-1.98).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite its limitations, our meta-analysis suggests that the prophylactic use of azoles in high-risk surgical intensive care unit patients is associated with a reduction of fungal infections but not in all-cause mortality. However, although not noted in the analyzed randomized controlled trials, there is concern about the use of azoles due to possible shift toward non-albicans species and development of resistance to azoles.

Herpes simplex virus-1 (HSV-1) infection in radiation-induced oral mucositis

GOAL OF WORK

The aim of the study was to investigate the incidence of herpes simplex virus-1 (HSV-1) infection in mucositis during head and neck cancer radiotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Sixty patients with malignant head and neck tumor, eligible to receive radiotherapy, who were referred to the Dental Oncology Unit, entered the study. Sixteen patients (26.6%) received concomitant chemotherapy. Mucositis was recorded weekly. Smears taken from the ulcers of mucositis grade 2, or 3, or 4 were stained with Papanicolaou and alkaline phosphatase/antialkaline phosphatase immunocytochemical method to identify HSV-1.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-eight of all 60 patients developed ulcerative mucositis. Smear was available from 29 of 48 patients with ulcerations. HSV-1 infection was identified in 14 of 29 smears available (48.2%). Mucositis healed or was reduced after 1 week of antiviral treatment in 11 of those 14 HSV-1-positive patients; 3 patients responded to 1 g/day of valacyclovir, 7-2 g/day, and 1 patient responded to i.v. acyclovir. Ulcerations recurred after quitting antivirals. Three patients did not respond to 1 g/day of valacyclovir. No HSV-1-negative patient responded to acyclovir (P = 0.000).

CONCLUSION

HSV-1 was isolated from 14 of 29 available smears taken from 48 patients with ulcerative mucositis. The incidence of HSV-1 infection during radiotherapy was estimated as being 14 of all 48 patients at risk (29.1%). Healing or reduction in the grade of mucositis after antivirals in HSV-1 positive patients, combined with the negative response to antivirals in HSV-1 negative patients, denoted that HSV-1 infection was a component of ulcerative radiation mucositis in those HSV-1-positive patients.

Prospective study of the long term change of the oral flora after radiation therapy

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the long term change in oral pathogens following radiation therapy.

METHODS

Twenty-two patients with planned radiation therapy (>30 Gy) of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma were included. Before radiation therapy, after 3, 6, and 12 months samples from the deepest periodontal pocket were drawn. Five major periodontal pathogens were studied using DNA probes (Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans, Porphyromonas gingivalis, Prevotella intermedia, Bacteriodes forsythus, Treponema denticola). Stimulated saliva was sampled for the microbiologic study of caries pathogens (streptococci and lactobacilli). Plaque index and decayed, missing, filled tooth surfaces (DMF-S) were recorded.

RESULTS

A normalisation of the caries bacteria is not found correlating to a significant increase in the number of affected teeth (DMF-S) from 80.7 to 88.5 after 12 months. The plaque index remained unchanged. The incidence of periodontal pathogens did not significantly change during the follow up.

CONCLUSION

In contrast to radiation caries there seems to be no microbiological evidence for "radiation periodontitis". Despite of the intensive oral hygiene no reduction of the high number of caries pathogens is found, which leads to a high risk of tooth decay even 12 months after radiation.

Induction of Apoptosis Using Inhibitors of Lysophosphatidic Acid Acyltransferase- and Anti-CD20 Monoclonal Antibodies for Treatment of Human Non-Hodgkin's Lymphomas

PURPOSE

Lysophosphatidic acid acyltransferase-beta (LPAAT-beta) is a transmembrane enzyme critical for the biosynthesis of phosphoglycerides whose product, phosphatidic acid, plays a key role in raf and AKT/mTor-mediated signal transduction.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

LPAAT-beta may be a novel target for anticancer therapy, and, thus, we examined the effects of a series of inhibitors of LPAAT-beta on multiple human non-Hodgkin's lymphoma cell lines in vitro and in vivo.

RESULTS

We showed that five LPAAT-beta inhibitors at doses of 500 nmol/L routinely inhibited growth in a panel of human lymphoma cell lines in vitro by >90%, as measured by [3H]thymidine incorporation. Apoptotic effects of the LPAAT-beta inhibitors were evaluated either alone or in combination with the anti-CD20 antibody, Rituximab. The LPAAT-beta inhibitors induced caspase-mediated apoptosis at 50 to 100 nmol/L in up to 90% of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma cells. The combination of Rituximab and an LPAAT-beta inhibitor resulted in a 2-fold increase in apoptosis compared with either agent alone. To assess the combination of Rituximab and a LPAAT-beta inhibitor in vivo, groups of athymic mice bearing s.c. human Ramos lymphoma xenografts were treated with the LPAAT-beta inhibitor CT-32228 i.p. (75 mg/kg) daily for 5 d/wk x 4 weeks (total 20 doses), Rituximab i.p. (10 mg/kg) weekly x 4 weeks (4 doses total), or CT-32228 plus Rituximab combined. Treatment with either CT-32228 or Rituximab alone showed an approximate 50% xenograft growth delay; however, complete responses were only observed when the two agents were delivered together.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that Rituximab, combined with a LPAAT-beta inhibitor, may provide enhanced therapeutic effects through apoptotic mechanisms.

Effect of fluconazole antifungal prophylaxis on oral mucositis in head and neck cancer patients receiving radiotherapy

GOAL OF WORK

The aim of the study is to evaluate the effect of fluconazole antifungal prophylaxis on the severity of mucositis in head and neck cancer patients receiving radiotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Sixty-three patients, with malignant head and neck tumor, eligible to receive radiotherapy, entered the study. Thirty-four patients (group A) received 100 mg/day of fluconazole prophylaxis during radiotherapy and were compared with 29 patients, who received radiotherapy alone (group B). The two groups were similar in terms of patients and radiotherapy characteristics. Smear to test for Candida carriage was taken before and after radiotherapy. Oral candidiasis was diagnosed using the criteria described before. Oral mucositis was recorded according to EORTC/RTOG criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

A significant reduction of severe mucositis at the end of radiotherapy (14.7 vs 44.8%, p=0.018) and of interruptions (0 vs 17.2%, p=0.017) was observed in group A. Candidiasis was prevented (0 vs 34.5%, p=0.001), with a significant reduction of Candida carriage of 40.7% (p=0.001).

CONCLUSION

Fluconazole prophylaxis showed a significant beneficial impact on the severity of mucositis and on radiotherapy interruptions in this group of patients. The current study provides data on the build of a randomized controlled trial on the effect of fluconazole prophylaxis on treatment schedule and quality of life of the patients during head and neck radiotherapy.

Failure of anti-infective mouth rinses and concomitant antibiotic prophylaxis to decrease oral mucosal colonization in autologous stem cell transplantation

Autologous stem cell transplantation has augmented treatment successes. However, high-dose chemotherapy is still accompanied by dose-limiting toxicities, for example, severe mucositis. Mucosal lesions serve as portals of entry for infections. In order to reduce the oral microbial burden, we prospectively evaluated the microbiological impact of a complex regimen of mouth rinses consisting of concomitantly applied polyene antifungals, povidone-iodine, chlorhexidine, sage tea, and prophylactic ciprofloxacin and fluconazole. A total of 15 patients were enrolled into this longitudinal evaluation. Colony-forming units (CFU) were quantitated from saliva, buccal and palatinal swabs during high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation. The number of CFU did not show any significant changes after initiation of the mouth rinses and the prophylactic antibiotics. The median CFU count was 268 x 10(6)/ml saliva before chemotherapy and decreased after initiation of intravenous antibiotics only. Neither prophylactic nor therapeutic antifungals significantly reduced the number of cultures positive for yeasts. Since 90% of our patients had febrile neutropenia at some time point during the observation period, the approach evaluated cannot be recommended as prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia as such.

The comparative effects of povidone-iodine and normal saline mouthwashes on oral mucositis in patients after high-dose chemotherapy and APBSCT—results of a randomized multicentre study

Antimicrobial solutions are widely used in the nursing care of chemotherapy induced oral mucositis (OM). There is little evidence, however, supporting their use for reducing mucosal damage. In our study, 132 patients were randomized to use normal saline (n=65) or povidone-iodine diluted 1:100 (n=67) mouthwashes for OM prophylaxis and treatment after high-dose chemotherapy comprising BEAM or HD-L-PAM followed by autologous peripheral stem cell transplantation. The study groups were well balanced in respect of age, sex, chemotherapy and the number of CD34+ cells in the graft. No significant difference was found between the groups in respect of OM characteristics, fever of unknown origin (FUO) and other infections. The antimicrobial solution was less tolerable for patients. OM occurred significantly more often in females than in males (86% vs 60%, P=0.0016) and was worse and of longer duration. The mechanical effect of mouthwashes might have a certain importance in FUO prevention. When indicating oral rinses, the patient's individual preference and tolerance of solutions offered should be considered.

Oral mucositis

Oral mucositis refers to erythematous, erosive, and ulcerative lesions of the oral mucosa seen in two patient populations: (1) head and neck cancer patients undergoing radiation therapy to fields involving the oral cavity, and (2) patients receiving high-dose chemotherapy for cancer. Oral mucositis is a significant and dose-limiting toxicity of cancer therapy, with important clinical and economic implications. This article reviews the current knowledge on the pathogenesis, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and management of oral mucositis.

Quality of life, mucositis, and xerostomia from radiotherapy for head and neck cancers: A report from the NCIC CTG HN2 randomized trial of an antimicrobial lozenge to prevent mucositis

BACKGROUND

The National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group undertook a multicenter, randomized, double-blind controlled trial of an oral antimicrobial versus placebo to prevent and treat mucositis. We present the quality of life (QOL) analysis for this trial.

METHODS

One hundred thirty-eight patients were randomly assigned. QOL data were collected every 2 weeks before, during, and after radiotherapy. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and a Trial Specific Checklist (TSC) were used.

RESULTS

The antimicrobial lozenge did not impact QOL. The principal acute side effect of radiotherapy is oral pain, affecting more than 90% of patients. Role function is impacted during treatment, and patients experience fatigue. Appetite was reported to markedly increase during radiotherapy. There was a dramatic and persistent increase in dry mouth.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the benefits of combining the EORTC QLQ-30 with an "oral" TSC in a randomized controlled trial and provides valuable baseline data for their use with an objective mucositis scoring system.

Phase II double-blind randomized study comparing oral aloe vera versus placebo to prevent radiation-related mucositis in patients with head-and-neck neoplasms

PURPOSE

In a single-institution, double-blind, prospective, randomized trial, we determined whether oral aloe vera gel can reduce radiation-induced mucositis in head-and-neck cancer patients.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We randomized 58 head-and-neck cancer patients between oral aloe vera and placebo. To be included in this Phase II protocol, patients had to be treated with radiotherapy with curative intent at Stanford University between February 1999 and March 2002. We examined patients biweekly for mucositis at 15 head-and-neck subsites and administered quality-of-life questionnaires.

RESULTS

Patients in the aloe and placebo groups were statistically identical in baseline characteristics. By the end of treatment, the two groups were also statistically identical in maximal grade of toxicity, duration of Grade 2 or worse mucositis, quality-of-life scores, percentage of weight loss, use of pain medications, hydration requirement, oral infections, and prolonged radiation breaks.

CONCLUSION

In our randomized study, oral aloe vera was not a beneficial adjunct to head-and-neck radiotherapy. The mean quality-of-life scores were greater in the aloe vera group, but the differences were not statistically significant. Oral aloe vera did not improve tolerance to head-and-neck radiotherapy, decrease mucositis, reduce soreness, or otherwise improve patient well-being.

Oral mucositis: a challenging complication of radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and radiochemotherapy: part 1, pathogenesis and prophylaxis of mucositis

BACKGROUND

Oral mucositis is a common sequel of radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and radiochemotherapy in patients with cancer or patients requiring hemopoietic stem cell transplants. Mucositis has a direct and significant impact on the duration of disease remission and cure rates, because it is a cancer treatment-limiting toxicity. Mucositis also affects survival because of the risk of infection and has a significant impact on the quality of life and cost of care.

METHODS

This article reviews publications on the etiopathogenesis and prevention of oral mucositis accessible from a MEDLINE search using as key words, mucositis, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, hemopoietic stem cell transplant, and oral.

CONCLUSIONS

Of the current available products, ice chips and benzydamine have the strongest scientific evidence of support for prophylaxis of mucositis.

Radiation induced mucositis: co-ordinating a research agenda

AIMS

A one-day workshop was hosted by the Symptom Control Committee of the National Cancer Institute of Canada, Clinical Trials Group (NCIC-CTG), in conjunction with the October 2002 annual meeting of the Canadian Association of Radiation Oncologists in Toronto, Ontario. The primary intention of the workshop was to direct the future research agenda of the Symptom Control Committee. Large group presentations were held initially to review the contemporary research issues of four selected areas of interest: fatigue, brain metastasis, bone metastasis and radiation-induced mucositis. Panel members were then charged with the identification of specific research proposals that could be considered for further development. Research questions were to be clinically relevant and currently appropriate. Any additional information needed before the launch of any potential trial was also requested. In this paper, we will review and summarise the outcomes from the radiation-induced mucositis sessions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-four participants participated in the large group sessions and contributed to one of four panel discussions on selected supportive care issues relevant to radiation oncologists.

RESULTS

Three potential and non-overlapping research questions were identified; two involving mucositis management in patients receiving radical radiation for head and neck cancer, and a third for patients with advanced lung cancer undergoing combined radiation and chemotherapy and at risk for the development of symptomatic oesophagitis.

CONCLUSION

The workshop successfully identified three potential research questions. The large group and the smaller panel discussions successfully established consensus on important aspects of future study designs. The current 'standard of care', appropriate experimental treatments, primary outcomes of interest and study population parameters were each important issues that were discussed. The importance of developing meaningful biological assays was reviewed, as was the need to ensure the appropriate storage of biological samples from patients for future study.

Rotterdam and Brussels CT-based neck nodal delineation compared with the surgical levels as defined by the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE

Rotterdam and Brussels have independently published guidelines for the definition and delineation of CT-based neck nodal Levels I-VI. This paper first reports on the adequacy of contouring of the Rotterdam delineation protocol. Rotterdam and Brussels differed slightly in translating the original surgical level definitions as proposed by the 2002 American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (AAO-HNS) to CT guidelines. To adapt to the surgical level definitions to come to a unifying concept, adjustments of both CT-based classifications are proposed.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The clinical neck nodal target volumes of patients irradiated in Rotterdam by three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) between December 1998 and March 2001 were reviewed. Thirty-four patients with N0 and 27 patients with N+ disease with primary tumors located in the oral cavity (n = 1) oropharynx (n = 24), hypopharynx (n = 7), and larynx (n = 29) were evaluated. Seven patients underwent unilateral (3 N0 patients, 4 N+ patients) and 54 underwent bilateral (31 N0 patients, 23 N+ patients) irradiation of the neck. In 11 N+ patients, 3D-CRT of the neck was followed by unilateral neck dissection. The dose to the primary and nonresected N+ necks was 70 Gy and to the N0 neck was 46 Gy. Neck levels were analyzed for adequacy of contouring, dose distribution, and patterns of relapse. The mean dose and the percentage of the volume receiving a minimum of 95% (V95) or >107% (V107) of the prescribed dose was computed.

RESULTS

In 4 patients treated with bilateral 3D-CRT, contouring was not in concordance with the guidelines of the protocol. The V95 and V107 in the 81 adequately contoured N0 necks (63 irradiated N0 necks from 33 N0 patients, 18 irradiated N0 necks from 24 N+ patients) was 95.6% and 6.3%, respectively. For the 26 N+ necks (15 N+ necks from 13 N+ RT-only patients, 11 N+ necks from 11 preoperatively irradiated patients), the V95 and V107 was 94.6% and 6.7%, respectively. With a median follow-up of 29 months, in 4 (8.6%) of 46 patients treated by 3D-CRT only, regional relapse was found. An actuarial regional and locoregional relapse-free survival and disease-free survival rate at 3 years of 90%, 78%, and 68%, respectively, was observed. All regional relapses were observed in the N0 necks of patients with supraglottic laryngeal carcinoma. Taking the surgical 2002 AAO-HNS classification as a reference, adjustments are proposed for the Rotterdam and Brussels delineation protocols to arrive at a unified CT-based neck nodal classification.

CONCLUSION

Adequate dose coverage for the Rotterdam CT-based contours of the neck nodal levels was found. In the RT-only patients, only four failures were observed: one regional and three locoregional relapses. As a next step in optimizing the current Rotterdam and Brussels CT-based delineation protocols, adaptations are proposed to resolve the discrepancies compared with the 2002 AAO-HNS surgical classification.

Antimicrobial therapy to prevent or treat oral mucositis

Oral mucositis represents a significant source of morbidity after chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Since infection may have an important role in the pathophysiology of oral mucositis, several antimicrobial agents have been investigated for their efficacy in preventing and treating this disease. We sought to establish the weight of evidence for antimicrobial treatment and identified 31 prospectively designed clinical trials of which 13 reported some benefit and 15 did not. No clear pattern was identified regarding patient type, cancer treatment, or type of antimicrobial agent used, and inconsistent assessment of oral mucositis made comparison of outcomes difficult. Newer drugs, such as the topical antimicrobial peptide iseganan HCl initially showed promise in reducing mucositis and the related oral pain but the results of a phase 3 trial were disappointing and the line of enquiry was abandoned altogether. Hence, there is a need to better understand the role of the microflora in the cause of oral mucositis if an antimicrobial agent for prevention and treatment of this disease is to be developed.