Prevention of Acute Radiation-Induced Skin Reaction with NPE® Camellia Sinensis Nonfermentatum Extract in Female Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Postoperative Radiotherapy: A Single Centre, Prospective, Open-Label Pilot Study

Understanding therapeutic radiographers' confidence in assessing, managing & teaching radiation induced skin reactions (RISR): A national survey in the UK

INTRODUCTION

The standard toxicity tools adopted for assessing Radiation Induced Skin Reactions (RISR) do not currently reflect how skin changes occur across all skin tones. A one size fits all approach is adopted currently for RISR assessment. The aim of this study was to understand what evidence-based practice and RISR tools are being used across the therapeutic radiography workforce and the levels of confidence in using these tools.

METHODS

A survey using Likert scales to assess confidence in RISR assessment and management was made available to 77 departments in the UK between August-November 2021. Descriptive statistics were used to understand respondents' confidence in assessing, managing, and teaching RISR between white, brown, and black skin tones; Fisher's exact test was used to assess the significance of differences between groups.

RESULTS

Complete responses were received from 406 therapeutic radiographers. Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) was the most used RISR assessment tool (58% of respondents n = 237). Most respondents (74.2% n = 303) reported use of locally produced patient information on skin care, rather than the Society and College of Radiographers evidence-based patient leaflets. Confidence in assessing and managing RISR in white skin was higher than that in brown and black skin. Similarly, confidence was higher in teaching of appropriate RISR assessment and management in white skin tones when compared to brown and black skin.

CONCLUSION

White skin tones appear to be more confidently assessed and managed for RISR along with taught appropriate assessment and management, than brown and black skin tones in the sample of the workforce that responded.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

A greater understanding of the reasons for these differences is required but this study aims to instigate change and positive growth within this area.

MASCC clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and management of acute radiation dermatitis: part 1) systematic review

Acute radiation dermatitis (ARD) commonly develops in cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy and is often characterized by erythema, desquamation, and pain. A systematic review was conducted to summarize the current evidence on interventions for the prevention and management of ARD. Databases were searched from 1946 to September 2020 to identify all original studies that evaluated an intervention for the prevention or management of ARD, with an updated search conducted in January 2023. A total of 235 original studies were included in this review, including 149 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Most interventions could not be recommended due to a low quality of evidence, lack of supporting evidence, or conflicting findings across multiple trials. Photobiomodulation therapy, Mepitel® film, mometasone furoate, betamethasone, olive oil, and oral enzyme mixtures showed promising results across multiple RCTs. Recommendations could not be made solely based on the published evidence due to limited high-quality evidence. As such, Delphi consensus recommendations will be reported in a separate publication.

Plant and Herbal Extracts as Ingredients of Topical Agents in the Prevention and Treatment Radiodermatitis: A Systematic Literature Review

Background: The use of herbal extracts as the source of antioxidant substances capable of neutralizing free radicals and providing protection from ionizing radiation appears to be an alternative therapy for radiodermatitis. As concerns the prevention and treatment of side effects, a lot of recommendations are based on proper experience of radiotherapy centers. We summarize recent research aiming at reducing radiation-induced skin injuries by use of proper skin care, using topical preparations with herbal extracts including onco-cosmetics. Methods: This article is limited to a critical analysis of scientific and professional literature. It concerns preparations in different physicochemical forms, e.g., gels, emulsions, ointments. We stress the connection between the type of applied skin care (type of preparation, its composition, the dose), the properties of the herbal extract and the evaluation of its efficiency in preventing and treating radiation reaction on skin. Conclusions: Herbal extracts can be added to recipes because they are part of a category of cosmeceutical supplements and can be introduced into preparations without prescription. The effectiveness evaluation for herbal extracts in radiotherapy is not an easy task since there are no strict guidelines. Studies should be preceded by the analysis of herbal extracts and recipe in terms of physicochemical, dermatological and performance characteristics.

Radiation induced skin reactions during and following radiotherapy: A systematic review of interventions

INTRODUCTION

Radiation induced skin reactions (RISR) are a common adverse effect of radiotherapy that can impact on patient quality of life. The aim of this systematic review was to identify new research evidence on interventions for RISR to guide health practitioners on best practice skin care for people receiving radiotherapy.

METHODS

A narrative systematic review was adopted including published research since 2014. The MESH search terms used in the 2014 College of Radiographers skin care systematic review were supplemented with terms identified through a pearl growing search technique.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies were identified and reviewed, 13(39.4%) were assessed as having a high risk of bias 6(18.2%) moderate risk of bias, and 13(39.4%) low risk of bias; one pilot study was not assessed. Twenty-one of the studies were randomised controlled trials, 2 feasibility studies, 9 non-randomised trials, and 1 a pilot study.

CONCLUSION

Evidence from well conducted studies identified prophylactic use of steroid cream for patients, at high risk of RISR, as being the most efficacious in reducing acute skin reactions. Further research is needed on photo biomodulation therapy, studied within standard dose fractionation schedules, before it is recommended for use in practice. There is insufficient evidence to support the use of barrier films or any topical emollients currently in practice to reduce RISRs. Despite the number of new studies in this area there is limited good comparative research of RISR that accounts for predictive risk and new radiotherapy techniques.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Practitioners are encouraged to risk assess patients prior to radiotherapy to guide interventions and record and monitor patient skin toxicity regularly during treatment, comparing toxicity changes with scores recorded at baseline and support patient self-monitoring of skin reactions.