Photobiomodulation effects on head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) in an orthotopic animal model

Secondary lesions of the mucous membrane of the oral cavity as a side effect of complex anticancer treatment: a literature review

Today, both Ukraine and the world at large are faced with a significant number of oncological diseases with various localizations. The current state of diagnosis, prevention, early detection, and access to treatment leads to a substantial number of people in each country's healthcare system who require comprehensive cancer treatments. Modern medical and diagnosis protocols in oncology involve the usage of ionizing radiation and aggressive toxic chemotherapeutic agents which can significantly disrupt the physiology of the mucous membrane of the digestive tract during treatment, especially of the oral cavity. The most common complication of complex anticancer therapy is the development of various lesions of the oral cavity, including mucositis, which harms the patient's quality of life, limits the doses of chemotherapy and radiation therapy the patient can receive, and also negatively affects the effectiveness of complex therapy treatment. Acute oral mucositis is observed among almost 100% of treatment cases. This is a significant problem for clinical oncology as it may also reduce patient compliance with comprehensive anticancer treatment. The results indicate the presence of oral problems in 100% of patients receiving specialized antitumor chemotherapy and radiotherapy, as well as the presence of a high need for specialized dental treatment.

Impact of photobiomodulation in a patient-derived xenograft model of oral squamous cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) is an effective method for the prevention of oral mucositis. However, the effects of PBMT on oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) have not yet been fully elucidated. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of PBMT in an OSCC-patient-derived xenograft (OSCC-PDX) model.

METHODS

BALB/c nude mice with OSCC-PDX models were divided into Control, without PBMT (n = 8); Immediate irradiation, PBMT since one week after tumor implantation (n = 6); and Late irradiation, PBMT after tumors reached 200 mm³ (n = 6). OSCC-PDX were daily irradiated (660 nm; 100 mW; 6 J/cm² ; 0,2 J/point) for 12 weeks. The tumors were collected and submitted to volumetric, histological, immunohistochemistry, and cell cycle analysis.

RESULTS

No significant differences in the volumetric measurements (p = 0.89) and in the histopathological grade (p > 0.05) were detected between the groups. The immunohistochemical analysis of Ki-67 (p = 0.9661); H3K9ac (p = 0.3794); and BMI1 (p = 0.5182), and the evaluation of the cell cycle phases (p > 0.05) by flow cytometry also did not demonstrate significant differences between the irradiated and non-irradiated groups.

CONCLUSION

In this study, PBMT did not impact the behavior of OSCC-PDX models. This is an important preclinical outcome regarding safety concerns of the use of PBMT in cancer patients.

Photobiomodulation Therapy in the Prevention and Treatment of Radiodermatitis in Breast Cancer Patients: Systematic Review

Introduction: Radiodermatitis (RD) is the most common side-effect of radiation therapy, yet its prevention and treatment through photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) have demonstrated promising results. This study aimed to synthesize the evidence concerning the use of PBMT in managing RD among breast cancer patients undergoing radiation therapy. Methods: This is a systematic review with no time restrictions, based on the methodology proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI), including such databases as PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus, and CINAHL. The studies were selected based on the following inclusion criteria: female participants over 18 years of age and females having breast cancer and undergoing radiation therapy using a three-dimensional technique or an intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) technique. Two reviewers assessed the methodological quality using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist, and the report was described based on PRISMA guidelines. Results: Red and infrared wavelengths were used. Device power ranged from 1.1 W to 0.08 W for continuous modes and 25 W for pulsed mode, resulting in a 3 and 4 J/cm² fluence, applied throughout radiation therapy, leading to a reduced severity in cutaneous reactions. Conclusion: PBMT can reduce the severity of RD. New clinical trials are required to standardize protocols, given the scarcity of studies for the adopted site and methodological diversity.

Photobiomodulation therapy in management of cancer therapy-induced side effects: WALT position paper 2022

Disclaimer

This article is based on recommendations from the 12th WALT Congress, Nice, October 3-6, 2018, and a follow-up review of the existing data and the clinical observations of an international multidisciplinary panel of clinicians and researchers with expertise in the area of supportive care in cancer and/or PBM clinical application and dosimetry. This article is informational in nature. As with all clinical materials, this paper should be used with a clear understanding that continued research and practice could result in new insights and recommendations. The review reflects the collective opinion and, as such, does not necessarily represent the opinion of any individual author. In no event shall the authors be liable for any decision made or action taken in reliance on the proposed protocols.

Objective

This position paper reviews the potential prophylactic and therapeutic effects of photobiomodulation (PBM) on side effects of cancer therapy, including chemotherapy (CT), radiation therapy (RT), and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT).

Background

There is a considerable body of evidence supporting the efficacy of PBM for preventing oral mucositis (OM) in patients undergoing RT for head and neck cancer (HNC), CT, or HSCT. This could enhance patients’ quality of life, adherence to the prescribed cancer therapy, and treatment outcomes while reducing the cost of cancer care.

Methods

A literature review on PBM effectiveness and dosimetry considerations for managing certain complications of cancer therapy were conducted. A systematic review was conducted when numerous randomized controlled trials were available. Results were presented and discussed at an international consensus meeting at the World Association of photobiomoduLation Therapy (WALT) meeting in 2018 that included world expert oncologists, radiation oncologists, oral oncologists, and oral medicine professionals, physicists, engineers, and oncology researchers. The potential mechanism of action of PBM and evidence of PBM efficacy through reported outcomes for individual indications were assessed.

Results

There is a large body of evidence demonstrating the efficacy of PBM for preventing OM in certain cancer patient populations, as recently outlined by the Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO). Building on these, the WALT group outlines evidence and prescribed PBM treatment parameters for prophylactic and therapeutic use in supportive care for radiodermatitis, dysphagia, xerostomia, dysgeusia, trismus, mucosal and bone necrosis, lymphedema, hand-foot syndrome, alopecia, oral and dermatologic chronic graft-versus-host disease, voice/speech alterations, peripheral neuropathy, and late fibrosis amongst cancer survivors.

Conclusions

There is robust evidence for using PBM to prevent and treat a broad range of complications in cancer care. Specific clinical practice guidelines or evidence-based expert consensus recommendations are provided. These recommendations are aimed at improving the clinical utilization of PBM therapy in supportive cancer care and promoting research in this field. It is anticipated these guidelines will be revised periodically.

[Low-level laser therapy in oncology - what's new? Analysis of 2018-2021 publications]

Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) is included in the Federal project «Fight against oncological diseases», which provides for equipping all specialized medical institutions in Russia with the appropriate devices until 2026.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

Publications analysis on the use of LLLT in oncology.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

To search for publications, databases and libraries were used: PubMed, Scopus, ResearchGate, Google Scholar, J-STAGE, eLibrary.ru for the period 2018-2021. For analysis, publications were selected that are of interest from the point of view of improving the methodology of LLLT, the prospects for the development of this method in the prevention, treatment and rehabilitation of patients. A total of 223 publications were found, including 39 reviews and meta-analyses, mostly in English (165) and Portuguese (41).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The inclusion of LLLT in the ISOO/MASCC/ASCO recommendations for the treatment of complications such as mucositis, salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia caused by non-surgical methods of treating cancer patients should be considered as a promising trend. An extremely low level of quality of LLLT techniques was noted, most often the replacement with meaningless «doses», «fluences» instead of the necessary parameters: wavelength, operating mode, power, frequency, exposure, etc. The use of only local illumination instead of systemic methods of LLLT does not allow obtaining the best results of treatment and prevention. Eliminating the shortcomings of treatment protocols with a focus on Russian experience, when laser blood illumination (intravenously or externally) and laser acupuncture are also necessarily carried out with local illumination of the lesion, will bring the effectiveness of LLLT to a qualitatively new, higher level.

Conservative treatment of lymphedema: the state of the art

This article aims to discuss the possibilities of conservative and non-pharmacological treatments for lymphedema. A non-systematic review of the literature was carried out, including studies involving human subjects with different types of lymphedema. Several approaches to lymphedema treatment have been reported and Complex Decongestive Therapy (CDT) has been considered the most effective treatment for limb lymphedema. Other conservative treatments have been proposed such as Taping, Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy, Acupuncture, Photobiomodulation Therapy, Endermologie, Intermittent Pneumatic Compression, and Low-frequency, Low-intensity Electrotherapy. The choice of the therapeutic approach to be employed should consider lymphedema characteristics, the therapist's experience, and the patient's wishes. In addition, since this is a chronic condition, the patient must adhere to the treatment. To this end, the therapeutic proposal may be the key to better control of limb volume.

Tumor radiosensitization by photobiomodulation

PURPOSE

To investigate the safety of photobiomodulation therapy (PBM) in tumors and its potential as a radiosensitizer when combined with radiotherapy.

METHODS

We have performed in vitro experiments in A431 cells to assess proliferation and cell cycle after PBM, as well as clonogenic assay and H2AX-gamma immunolabeling to quantify double strand breaks after the combination of PBM and radiation. In vivo experiments in xenografts included Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, optical coherence tomography (OCT) and histological analysis.

RESULTS

PBM did not induce proliferation in vitro, but increased the G2/M fraction by 27% 24h after illumination, resulting in an enhancement of 30% in radiation effect in the clonogenic assay. The median survival of the PBM-RT group increased by 4 days and the hazard ratio was 0.417 (CI 95%: 0.173-1.006) when compared to radiation alone. OCT analysis over time demonstrated that PBM increases tumor necrosis due to radiation, and histological analysis showed that illumination increased cell differentiation and angiogenesis, which may play a role in the synergetic effect of PBM and radiation.

CONCLUSION

PBM technique may be one of the most appropriate approaches for radiosensitizing tumors while protecting normal tissue because of its low cost and low training requirements for staff.

Safety and efficacy of photobiomodulation therapy in oncology: A systematic review

We performed a systematic review of the current literature addressing the safety and efficacy of photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) in cancer patients. In this systematic review, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used. In vitro, in vivo, and clinical studies, which investigated the effect of PBMT on cell proliferation/differentiation, tumor growth, recurrence rate, and/or overall survival were included. The Medline/PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases were searched through April 2020. A total of 67 studies met the inclusion criteria with 43 in vitro, 15 in vivo, and 9 clinical studies identified. In vitro studies investigating the effect of PBMT on a diverse range of cancer cell lines demonstrated conflicting results. This could be due to the differences in used parameters and the frequency of PBM applications. In vivo studies and clinical trials with a follow‐up period demonstrated that PBMT is safe with regards to tumor growth and patient advantage in the prevention and treatment of specific cancer therapy‐related complications. Current human studies, supported by most animal studies, show safety with PBMT using currently recommended clinical parameters, including in Head & Neck cancer (HNC) in the area of PBMT exposure. A significant and growing literature indicates that PBMT is safe and effective, and may even offer a benefit in patient overall survival. Nevertheless, continuing research is indicated to improve understanding and provide further elucidation of remaining questions regarding PBM use in oncology.