Phenytoin mouthwash to treat cancer therapy-induced oral mucositis: A pilot studyPrimary neuroendocrine carcinoma of breast: A rare tumor

Did you choose appropriate mouthwash for managing chemoradiotherapy-induced oral mucositis? The therapeutic effect compared by a Bayesian network meta-analysis

Background

Oral mucositis (OM) is one of the most common adverse effects of radiotherapy and chemotherapy. It greatly affects the patients' quality of life and hinders cancer treatment implementation. Treating OM with mouthwash is a widely used strategy that can effectively relieve symptoms and promote healing. However, the wide mouthwash selection confuses clinicians. This Bayesian network meta-analysis aimed to compare the effects of various mouthwash types used to treat OM and provide high-level evidence-based recommendations for OM treatment.

Methods

Database search included PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science from inception to April 21, 2022. The primary outcome was OM score improvement following the World Health Organization grades. The randomized controlled trial (RCT) bias risk assessment tool provided in the Cochrane Handbook assessed the studies' risk of bias. We performed pairwise and Bayesian network meta-analysis with random effects following the PRISMA guideline.

Results

The study included 13 RCTs with 570 patients. Pairwise comparisons showed that povidone-iodine was more effective than chlorhexidine (weighted mean difference [WMD], -2.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.72 to -2.56) but inferior to granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF; WMD, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.06-0.34) after one week of mouthwash treatment. Vitamin E (WMD, -0.94; 95% CI, -1.03 to -0.85), natural drugs (WMD, -0.93; 95% CI, -1.46 to -0.40), and phenytoin (WMD, -0.38; 95% CI, -0.59 to -0.17) exhibited better therapeutic effects than a placebo after three weeks of treatment. Bayesian network meta-analysis showed that povidone-iodine was superior to chlorhexidine in treating OM (WMD, 2.63; 95% CI, 0.20-5.01). Other mouthwashes showed no significant differences. Rank probability indicated that the best OM therapeutic mouthwashes were GM-CSF (54%), vitamin E (24%), and natural drugs (43%) after one, two, and three weeks of treatment, respectively.

Conclusion

GM-CSF was the most effective mouthwash type for OM treatment. When considering the cost and effectiveness, povidone-iodine and sodium bicarbonate might be the most advantageous. Furthermore, natural drugs have the same potential in treating OM. Safety and acceptability are their most outstanding characteristic.

Topical Treatment of Oral Mucositis in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Evidence-based protocols of topical therapy for oral mucositis (OM) induced by chemoradiotherapy (CRT) are continuously established and updated. Thus, the present systematic review aims to evaluate the scientific literature in terms of effectiveness of topical treatment of OM in cancer patients undergoing CRT.  Materials and Methods: This systematic review was based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Checklist. Randomized clinical trials were identified through electronic database searches on CINAHL, Cochrane Library, LILACS, Livivo, PubMed, SCOPUS, and Web of Science. Grey literature was also assessed on Google Scholar, Open Grey, and ProQuest. The risk of bias in the included studies was assessed by the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool.

RESULTS

Twenty-three randomized clinical trials (n=1169 patients) met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-three different topical agents were examined and categorized into five groups: analgesics (30.4%), natural agents (21.7%), other topical agents (21.7%), antimicrobial agents (17.4%), and growth factors (8.8%). Of the included studies, 50% presented a resolution of OM within 14 days. Topical natural agents yielded good results with average resolution time of 3-7 days. The included studies generally demonstrated that patients treated with mouthwashes presented superior benefits compared to the control, depending on OM severity.

CONCLUSION

Topical agents effectively reduced the severity of OM lesions and pain intensity in patients receiving chemoradiotherapy, although the effects varied by agent type. However, the heterogeneity in the results of these topical intervention studies underscores the need for standardized clinical trial methodologies.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Topical agents were effective in patients with severe OM lesions receiving chemoradiotherapy and are a good alternative of home care in relation to pain control, reduction of inflammation and consequent improvement in quality of life.<br />.

Systematic review of natural and miscellaneous agents, for the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients and clinical practice guidelines - part 2: honey, herbal compounds, saliva stimulants, probiotics, and miscellaneous agents

OBJECTIVE

To update the clinical practice guidelines for the management of oral mucositis (OM) that were developed by the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO). This part focuses on honey, herbal compounds, saliva stimulants, probiotics, and miscellaneous agents.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted by the Mucositis Study Group of MASCC/ISOO. The body of evidence for each intervention, in each clinical setting, was assigned an evidence level. The findings were added to the database used to develop the 2014 MASCC/ISOO clinical practice guidelines. Based on the evidence level, one of the following guidelines were determined: Recommendation, Suggestion, No Guideline Possible.

RESULTS

A total of 78 papers were identified within the scope of this section, of which 49 were included in this review and merged with nine publications that were reported in the previous guidelines update. A new Suggestion was made for honey (combined topical and systemic delivery) for the prevention of OM in head and neck cancer patients receiving radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy. A new Suggestion clarified that chewing gum is not effective for the prevention of OM in pediatric patients with hematological or solid cancer treated with chemotherapy. No guideline was possible for other interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Numerous natural products and herbal remedies were studied for the management of OM. Of the agents reviewed in this systematic review, a guideline in favor was made for honey (combined topical and systemic), while a guideline against was made for chewing gum. Additional research is warranted to clarify the potential of other interventions.

Effects of phenytoin spray in prevention of fistula formation following cleft palate repair

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of topical phenytoin has been reported for the treatment of oral biopsy ulcers, chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis, and chronic periodontitis. This study aimed to investigate the effects of topical phenytoin 2% on the prevention of fistula formation after cleft palate repair.

METHOD

This randomized clinical trial studied patients with nonsyndromic cleft palate who were referred to a tertiary center and underwent cleft palate repair from March 2010 to February 2015. Patients in the phenytoin group received phenytoin spray 2% for 8 weeks and were compared with an age- and sex-matched control group.

RESULTS

A total of 160 patients in two phenytoin and control groups (n = 80 for each group) were recruited to the study. The mean ages of patients in the phenytoin and control groups were 11.42 ± 1.30 and 11.08 ± 1.25 months, respectively. The results showed that six patients (7.5%) in the phenytoin group and 15 patients (18.8%) in the control group formed fistulas during the 6-month follow-up period. There was a significant difference in fistula formation between the phenytoin and control groups (p = 0.035). Furthermore, fistula size was significantly smaller in the phenytoin group compared with the control group (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

More frequent use of phenytoin spray can be considered, although there is insufficient information on the long-term side-effects of the chosen drug.

The effectiveness of rebamipide mouthwash therapy for radiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy-induced oral mucositis in patients with head and neck cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Oral mucositis is a frequent and severe adverse event in patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy for head and neck cancers, especially grade 3 or 4 mucositis. Occurrence may result in drop-out from treatment, thereby reducing survival. We aimed to clarify the effectiveness and safety of rebamipide mouthwash for oral mucositis in patients with head and neck cancer receiving treatment.

Methods

We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of patients with head and neck cancer who were treated with rebamipide mouthwash. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trial Registry Platform. The primary outcome was the incidence of severe oral mucositis, and secondary outcomes were time from treatment start to onset of oral mucositis, the response rate of radiotherapy, and any adverse events.

Results

We included three studies comparing rebamipide versus placebo, all of which evaluating chemoradiotherapy induced oral mucositis. The chemotherapeutic agent was docetaxel in one study and cisplatin in the remaining two. Radiotherapy in each study consisted of 3D-conformal radiation therapy, intensity modulated radiation therapy and conventional radiation therapy, respectively. The calculated odds ratio was 0.29 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.15 to 0.55], showing a positive association in the three studies between the incidence of grade 3–4 oral mucositis and chemotherapy for head and neck cancer. One study reported an onset of oral mucositis and the time to onset was 14.6 ± 6.4 days for the rebamipide group and 11.2 ± 4.4 days for placebo. One study reported a complete response of 8.3% for placebo and 16.7% for the rebamipide the group, and the partial response was 91.7 and 75.0%, respectively. Adverse events were reported in two studies to be 6.1 and 11.6% for placebo, and 19.4 and 26.0% in the rebamipide group, respectively.

Conclusions

Rebamipide mouthwash is effective in the prevention of severe mucositis and stomatitis. However, evaluation of adverse events in observational studies are needed.