Prophylaxis of oral mucositis in irradiated head-and-neck cancer patients: a proposed classification scheme of interventions and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Nutritional interventions for the prevention and treatment of cancer therapy-induced oral mucositis: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analysis

CONTEXT

To date, the efficacy of nutritional interventions on oral mucositis (OM) in patients with cancer, and the quality of this evidence have not been explored.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this umbrella review was to provide a comprehensive evaluation of nutritional interventions for patients with cancer with OM, as well as to assess the quality of this evidence.

DATA SOURCES

Meta-analyses were searched for using PubMed, Scopus, and ISI Web of Science databases until December 2021, with no time restrictions.

DATA EXTRACTION

Meta-analyses of randomized control trials that evaluated the effects of nutritional interventions on the incidence of OM in patients with cancer had inclusion criteria for this umbrella review. Data extraction, quality assessment of meta-analyses, and primary studies were done independently by 2 authors. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation technique was used to grade the certainty of evidence.

DATA ANALYSIS

A total of 26 meta-analyses were included in this umbrella review. The results showed that honey, glutamine, and propolis can reduce the incidence of severe OM, based on moderate evidence quality. In addition, zinc supplementation significantly reduced the incidence of OM, regardless of symptom severity; however, low certainty of the evidence was observed. The effects of vitamin E, curcumin, and probiotics on OM were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

This umbrella review shows that honey, glutamine, and propolis can significantly reduce the incidence of severe OM. These findings need to be confirmed with well-designed, longitudinal randomized controlled trials.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration no. CRD42022301010.

Prevention of radiotherapy-related oral mucositis with zinc and polyherbal mouthwash: a double-blind, randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

A significant percentage of head and neck cancer (HNCs) patients receiving RT experience oral mucositis (OM). This study aimed to evaluate the effect of the polyherbal (containing chamomile, peppermint oil, Aloe vera, and honey) and zinc mouthwashes in comparison to the control (chlorhexidine) and placebo groups for prevention of radiation-induced OM.

METHODS

This study was a double-blinded randomized clinical trial, conducted on 67 patients with HNCs undergoing radiotherapy. The eligible participants were randomized to receive either one of the following; zinc sulfate, polyherbal, chlorhexidine (Vi-one 0.2% CHX), or placebo mouthwash for 6 weeks. Follow-up evaluation of oral hygiene and the checklists of OM and the intensity of pain were filled out according to WHO assessment tool, Oral Mucositis Assessment Scale (OMAS), and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) in all the participants weekly for seven consecutive weeks.

RESULTS

The results of present clinical trial demonstrated that the use of either zinc sulfate or polyherbal mouthwash significantly reduced the scores of OM and the severity of pain during weeks 2 to 7 after consumption compared with the CHX or placebo mouthwashes (P < 0.05). According to the post hoc analysis and compared with the placebo, a significantly better result was reported for zinc sulfate and polyherbal mouthwashes at weeks 2 to 7, but not for the CHX mouthwash.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that the use of zinc sulfate or polyherbal mouthwashes is effective in prevention of both OM severity scores and pain related to OM intensity at weeks 2 to 7 following consumption in HNCs patients. Trial registration IRCT20190123042475N1 and IRCT20190123042475N2. Registration date: 2019-06-09, 2019-07-26.

Radiobiological comparison of flattening filter (FF) and flattening filter-free (FFF) beam in rat laryngeal tissue

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to investigate the radioprotective effect of melatonin by analyzing histopathological changes and serum biochemical levels on experimental rat models exposed to flattening filter (FF) and flattening filter-free (FFF) beam.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-eight healthy adult Sprague Dawley rats were randomly divided into six groups. The control (Group 1) was given no treatment, the melatonin (Group 2) was given 10 mg/kg melatonin only, the FF (Group 3) and FFF (Group 5) were given fractionated dose (Total 32 Gy, 5 consecutive days) radiotherapy only, and the FF plus melatonin (Group 4) and FFF plus melatonin (Group 6) were given 10 mg/kg melatonin 15 minutes prior to irradiation. Rats were examined for histopathology and biochemical analysis 10 days after irradiation.

RESULTS

When results of FF and FFF radiotherapy only groups are compared to control group, statistically significant difference in histopathological and biochemical parameters are observed; however, melatonin administration in radiotherapy plus melatonin groups improved these parameters (p <.05). In addition, there was no statistically significant difference between FF and FFF beams (p > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The effect of low- and high-dose beams on the rat larynx and serum samples were investigated histopathologically and biochemically for the first time. We observed that melatonin supplemented before FF and FFF radiotherapy protected early period radiotherapy-induced laryngeal mucosal damage. Since the radiobiological results of FF and FFF beams are similar, FFF beams can be safely applied in laryngeal irradiation. However, more experimental rat and clinical studies are needed to clarify the radiobiological uncertainy concerning dose rate on cancerous and healthy tissue.

The point of pain in head and neck cancer

Head and neck cancer (HNC) can have a devastating impact on patient's lives as both disease and treatment may affect the ability to speak, swallow and breathe. These conditions limit the oral intake of food and drugs, reduce social functioning and impact on patient's quality of life. Up to 80% of patients suffering from HNC have pain due to the spread of the primary tumor, because of consequences of surgery, or by developing oral mucositis, dysphagia or neuropathy as toxic side effects of radiotherapy, chemotherapy or both. All healthcare professionals caring for HNC patients should assess palliative and supportive care needs in initial treatment planning and throughout the disease, with awareness when specialist palliative care expertise is needed. This paper focuses on assessment, characterizations and clinical management of pain in advanced HNC patients undergoing surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy, also underlining the importance of symptom assessment in HNC survivors and the need of clinical research in this field.

Prophylaxis With Oral Zinc Sulfate Against Radiation Induced Oral Mucositis in Patients With Head and Neck Cancers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Four Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: Oral mucositis is an inevitable and distressing adverse event patients, who were treated with irradiation for head and neck cancer, face. Although several studies have investigated the potential of oral zinc sulfate in preventing radiation-induced oral mucositis in patients with head and neck cancers, conclusive results have not yet been found.

Objective: The aim of the present study is to determine whether oral zinc sulfate is effective in preventing radiation-induced oral mucositis, in patients with head and neck cancers.

Methods: We electronically searched all potential citations in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and EBSCO from their inception to December 2018. After the search and checked literatures, extracted data and appraised risk of bias, RevMan software version 5.3 was used to perform meta-analysis.

Results: Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 162 patients were included. A meta-analysis showed that zinc sulfate did not decrease the incidence (RR [relative risk], 0.97; 95% CI [confidence interval], 0.74–1.28), and did not relieve the moderate and severe grade of radiation induced oral mucositis (moderate and severe oral mucositis: RR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.14–4.87; severe oral mucositis: RR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.00–38.98). A qualitative analysis suggested that zinc sulfate was associated with the onset of oral mucositis.

Conclusions: Based on limited evidence, zinc sulfate may not have the benefit of prophylaxis against radiation-induced oral mucositis, in patients with head and neck cancers. However, further RCTs with larger sample sizes and more rigorous methodologies are needed to enhance the evidence of these results.

Prophylaxis with oral zinc sulfate against radiation-induced oropharyngeal mucositis in patients with head and neck cancer: Protocol for a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Oropharyngeal mucositis is considered to be an inevitable and the most troubling side effect of head and neck irradiation, which is caused by the direct toxic action of radiation on oral mucosa. Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have investigated the efficacy of zinc sulfate in prevention of radiation-induced oropharyngeal mucositis in patients with head and neck cancer. However, the definite conclusions have not been confirmed. The systematic review and meta-analysis will be performed to comprehensively evaluate whether zinc sulfate is effective in prevention of radiation-induced oropharyngeal mucositis in patients with head and neck cancer.

METHODS

Relevant information will be identified by a comprehensive search of the following electronic databases: PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, and EBSCO from their inception to October 2018. Only RCTs which evaluated whether zinc sulfate is effective in prevention of radiation-induced oropharyngeal mucositis in patients with head and neck cancer will be eligible. Two independent investigators will be assigned to search literature, screen information, extract data, and appraise the risk of bias. The primary investigator will use Revman 5.3 software to perform all statistical analyses. We designed this systematic review and meta-analysis on June 5. 2018, and expect to complete the full-text on December 20, 2018.

RESULTS

This protocol has been registered with a unique identifier of CRD42018108533. We will submit this systematic review and meta-analysis to a peer-reviewed journal. Meanwhile, we also will dissemination the whole findings in topic-related conferences.

CONCLUSION

As the first systematic review and metaanalysis, the present study will elucidate current evidence of the role of oral zinc for the prevention and treatment of radiation-induced oropharyngeal mucositis in the head and neck cancer.

Oral Mucositis Induced By Anticancer Therapies

Oral mucositis induced by conventional cytotoxic cancer therapies is a common and significant clinical problem in oncology. Mucositis symptoms, which include severe pain, may lead to dose reductions and unplanned interruptions of chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy, and often affect patients' quality of life. In addition, ulcerative mucositis represents a risk factor for local or systemic infectious complications that may be life-threatening in immunosuppressed patients. The development of biologically based targeted cancer therapies, which aim to block the growth, spread, and survival of tumors by interfering with specific molecular targets, may have reduced mucosal injury, but did not eliminate it. This article will review the epidemiology, pathobiology, and management of oral mucositis associated with conventional cytotoxic therapies for malignant diseases and will briefly summarize emerging information on oral mucosal injury associated with targeted therapies. Considerations for future research aimed at the development of more efficient and effective supportive care approaches will be presented, with emphasis on the contribution of dental researchers and clinicians in these efforts.

Reliability of 3 assessment tools used to evaluate randomized controlled trials for treatment of neck pain

STUDY DESIGN

Pragmatic, cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the interrater reliability of 3 tools used by the Cervical Overview Group (COG) for the assessment of the internal validity of randomized controlled trials (RCTs): Jadad, van Tulder, and risk of bias (RoB).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

For clinicians to implement evidence-based practice, they need to critically appraise health care literature. Checklists, scales, and domain-based criteria exist to evaluate the internal validity of RCTs for rehabilitation studies, but there is a lack of research reporting the reliability of existing assessment tools.

METHODS

Four members of the COG with multiprofessional and methodological background independently evaluated the internal validity of 54 RCTs using prepiloted Jadad and van Tulder reporting forms, and 18 RCTs using RoB, from June 2003 to May 2009. The κ statistic was calculated for each combination of raters and assessment tools. Standard agreement categorizations were used.

RESULTS

For Jadad, 4 of 7 items demonstrated mean κ statistic ranges from moderate to substantial agreement (mean values, 0.42-0.78), as did 8 of 11 items on the van Tulder tool (mean values, 0.44-0.77). The RoB demonstrated moderate to substantial (mean values, 0.56-0.76) agreement on 3 of 12 items. Consistent substantial agreement was found across all assessment tools for the domain "allocation concealment": Jadad 0.69 (mean range, 0.60-0.77); van Tulder 0.77 (mean range, 0.73-0.81); RoB 0.76 (mean range, 0.65-0.88); and moderate to substantial across 2 tools for the domain "sequence generation": van Tulder 0.53 (mean range, 0.37-0.66) and RoB 0.66 (mean range, 0.45-0.88). Other domains demonstrated slight or fair agreement.

CONCLUSION

Consistent interrater agreement was found across the 3 assessment tools for allocation concealment and for 2 tools for sequence generation. However, users should acknowledge that moderate variation exists within other items requiring more judgment. When evaluating rehabilitation RCTs, clinicians should consider limitations of rating certain items within the selected assessment tool.

Prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in patients with advanced head and neck tumors treated by combined chemoradiotherapy

CONTEXT

Few studies have evaluated outcomes of combined chemoradiotherapy for Stage III-IV head and neck squamous cell carcinoma in terms of the use of nutritional support by means of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG).

OBJECTIVES

To compare nutritional status and treatment interruption because of acute toxicity in patients with advanced head and neck tumors who were treated by combined chemoradiotherapy and received or did not receive prophylactic PEG tubes.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study that evaluated data obtained from a cancer center in Montpellier, France. A total of 139 consecutive patients treated for Stage III-IV head and neck squamous cell carcinoma from January 1, 1998 to June 30, 2003 were evaluated in terms of nutritional status before and after therapy, treatment interruption because of toxicity, and duration of hospitalization.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight of the 139 patients (58%) did not receive prophylactic PEG feeding, and 61 patients (44%) received PEG feeding. Pretreatment nutritional status was worse in the PEG group. Compared with the initial nutritional status, nutritional status at the end of treatment was unchanged in the PEG group and much worse in the group that did not receive the PEG (P<0.05). Cumulative incidence of treatment interruption because of toxicity was significantly lower in the PEG group than in the no-PEG group (100 and 236 days of interruption, respectively, P=0.03) and hospitalization was significantly shorter (P=0.003).

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic PEG sustains nutritional status and reduces the cumulative incidence of treatment interruption caused by toxicity and duration of hospitalization. A randomized study is warranted to validate these results.

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.

Discrepancy of the effects of zinc supplementation on the prevention of radiotherapy-induced mucositis between patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma and those with oral cancers: subgroup analysis of a double-blind, randomized study

The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of zinc supplementation on radiation-induced mucositis in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) and those with oral cancers (OC). A total of 100 patients with head and neck cancers engaged in a randomized double blind study. All participants were placed into two randomized groups (experimental and control). The experimental group received a standard dose of zinc supplements, and the control group was given a placebo. Subgroup analyses were performed between 40 NPC and 43 OC patients. It was found that patients with OC in the control group developed Grade 2 and Grade 3 mucositis sooner than those in the experimental group. However, the benefits were not found to extend to patients with NPC. The results indicated that zinc supplementation prescribed in conjunction with radiotherapy postponed the development of severe mucositis solely for patients with OC. The pretreatment oral mucosa condition and areca chewing habit might account for such discrepancy.

Interventions for treating oral mucositis for patients with cancer receiving treatment

BACKGROUND

Treatment of cancer is increasingly effective but associated with short and long term side effects. Oral side effects, including oral mucositis (mouth ulceration), remain a major source of illness despite the use of a variety of agents to treat them.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions for treating oral mucositis or its associated pain in patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy or both.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic searches of Cochrane Oral Health Group and PaPaS Trials Registers (to 1 June 2010), CENTRAL via The Cochrane Library (to Issue 2, 2010), 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 1 June 2010) 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

All randomised controlled trials comparing agents prescribed to treat oral mucositis in people receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy or both. Outcomes were oral mucositis, time to heal mucositis, oral pain, duration of pain control, dysphagia, systemic infection, amount of analgesia, length of hospitalisation, cost and quality of life.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were independently extracted, in duplicate, by two review authors. Authors were contacted for details of randomisation, blindness and withdrawals. Risk of bias assessment was carried out on six domains. The Cochrane Collaboration statistical guidelines were followed and risk ratio (RR) values calculated using fixed-effect models (less than 3 trials in each meta-analysis).

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-two trials involving 1505 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. Three comparisons for mucositis treatment including two or more trials were: benzydamine HCl versus placebo, sucralfate versus placebo and low level laser versus sham procedure. Only the low level laser showed a reduction in severe mucositis when compared with the sham procedure, RR 5.28 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.30 to 12.13).Only 3 comparisons included more than one trial for pain control: patient controlled analgesia (PCA) compared to the continuous infusion method, therapist versus control, cognitive behaviour therapy versus control. There was no evidence of a difference in mean pain score between PCA and continuous infusion, however, less opiate was used per hour for PCA, mean difference 0.65 mg/hour (95% CI 0.09 to 1.20), and the duration of pain was less 1.9 days (95% CI 0.3 to 3.5).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is weak and unreliable evidence that low level laser treatment reduces the severity of the mucositis. Less opiate is used for PCA versus continuous infusion. Further, well designed, placebo or no treatment controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of interventions investigated in this review and new interventions for treating mucositis are needed.

Understanding the results of meta-analyses in the treatment of head and neck squamous cell cancer

Clinical trials evaluating therapies in patients who have head and neck cancer are often challenged by low power and competing clinical outcomes, which makes interpretation difficult. Meta-analyses that combine the results of independent trials have the potential to provide high-quality, evidence-based information on what should be considered best practice beyond that of any one trial. In this summary of published meta-analyses, the authors review the evidence supporting the use of concurrent chemotherapy and fractionated radiotherapy for patients who have locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity, oropharynx, hypopharynx, and larynx.

Clinical evaluation of the effects of radiotherapy on oral mucosa and gingiva

Introduction:The use of radiotherapy, alone or in conjunction with surgical resection, is common in treating head and neck tumours. However, ionising radiation induces unavoidable changes in the surrounding normal tissues, causing severe complications. Therefore, we decided to study different effects of radiotherapy on gingiva and oral mucosa.

Methods and Materials:This prospective analytical study was performed on 30 patients with head and neck cancers referred to the radiotherapy department of Ghaem Hospital from March to October 2006. Data were collected by means of interviews, clinical examinations and patients’ medical file investigation. The impact of different dosages of radiation on gingiva and oral mucosa was investigated. Data analysis was performed using general linear model (GLM), Cochran and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) tests via SPSS V. 11.5 software.

Results:A direct relationship between increase in radiation dosage, irritation of oral mucosa, ulcer development and mucositis was observed. But there was no significant relationship between NUG (necrotising ulcerative gingivitis) and perlèche and radiation dosage. Periodontal index (PI), gingival index (GI) and papillary bleeding index (PBI) were increased, but due to limited time of study (6–7 weeks), no change in gingival recession was observed. Plaque index (PLI) decreased during treatment process because of oral hygiene instructions.

Conclusion:The oral and periodontal health status of head and neck cancer patients before and during radiotherapy has been described in this article. The authors believe that prevention or reduction of side-effects of radiation should be an integral part of treatment as they may have tremendous effect on the patient's quality of life. This study supports the need for dental assessment and treatment planning before radiation therapy.

Scales to assess the quality of randomized controlled trials: a systematic review

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is commonly evaluated in order to assess the risk of biased estimates of treatment effects. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify scales used to evaluate the methodological quality of RCTs in health care research and summarize the content, construction, development, and psychometric properties of these scales.

METHODS

Extensive electronic database searches, along with a manual search, were performed.

RESULTS

One hundred five relevant studies were identified. They accounted for 21 scales and their modifications. The majority of scales had not been rigorously developed or tested for validity and reliability. The Jadad Scale presented the best validity and reliability evidence; however, its validity for physical therapy trials has not been supported.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Many scales are used to evaluate the methodological quality of RCTs, but most of these scales have not been adequately developed and have not been adequately tested for validity and reliability. A valid and reliable scale for the assessment of the methodological quality of physical therapy trials needs to be developed.

Apoptotic and inflammation markers in oral mucositis in head and neck cancer patients receiving radiotherapy: preliminary report

GOAL OF WORK

The aim of this study was to investigate the expression of pro-apoptotic protein p53 and anti-apoptotic proteins BCl-2 and MCl-1, as well as the expression of pro-inflammatory cytokines tumor necrosis factor (TNF) and interleukin-1beta (IL-1beta) in patients developing mucositis during radiotherapy for head and neck cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-five patients receiving radiotherapy for head/neck cancer were included in this study. Patients were examined before radiotherapy. Oral mucositis was recorded weekly during radiotherapy. Cytologic smears from the oral cavity were taken with a brush. Immunocytochemical staining was performed by the use of p53, BCl-2, MCl-1 TNF and IL-1beta monoclonal antibodies.

MAIN RESULTS

P53 was expressed in 1 of 15 smears before the initiation of radiotherapy (6.5%) compared to 3 of 7 smears from patients with grade III mucositis (43%) during radiotherapy. BCl-2 was expressed in 15 of 15 smears before radiotherapy (100%) and in three of seven patients with grade III mucositis (43%) during radiotherapy. MCl-1 was expressed in 10 of 14 samples before radiotherapy (71.5%) and in two of seven patients with grade III (28.5%) mucositis during radiotherapy. TNF was expressed in 9 of 14 patients before radiotherapy (64%) and in six of seven patients with grade III mucositis during radiotherapy (86%). IL-1beta was detected in 7 of 14 patients before radiotherapy (50%) compared to 6 of 7 patients with grade III mucositis during radiotherapy (86%).

CONCLUSION

Our preliminary results indicate an induction of apoptosis and inflammation in the oral mucosa in patients developing mucositis during radiotherapy for head/neck cancer.

A study to evaluate nurse-led on-treatment review for patients undergoing radiotherapy for head and neck cancer

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To evaluate a nurse-led clinic for patients undergoing radiotherapy to the head and neck.

BACKGROUND

The side effects of radiotherapy to the head and neck are superimposed on already significant physical and psychological morbidity. Medical review clinics tend to focus on treatment complications and there is evidence that specialist nurses can provide more holistic care for patients. However, doubts have been raised about the appropriateness of nurse-led review in this highly symptomatic and complex group.

DESIGN

This evaluation compared medical on-treatment review (Phase 1) with a nurse-led clinic (Phase 2) for patients having radiotherapy to the head and neck, using an historical control group.

METHODS

Twenty patients were reviewed by their consultant and 23 by a nurse specialist, using a clinic protocol. A mixed-method approach to data collection was taken. Patients completed weekly quality of life questionnaires and were asked about their experiences of support and care. General practitioners completed a questionnaire about the communication received from the clinic. Checklists assessed the content of clinic consultations.

RESULTS

Patients valued the relationship developed with the nurse specialist, had longer, more frequent consultations and were more often referred to the multidisciplinary team. The nurse specialist managed 83% of consultations without referral to the consultant. Few significant differences in quality of life were found between the groups. There were indications that oral and nutritional problems were managed more effectively in the nurse-led clinic, although emotional functioning was higher in the medical group. GPs were positive about the timing and content of information received.

CONCLUSIONS

On-treatment review for patients with head and neck cancer can be effectively managed by a nurse specialist. Relevance to Practice. Radiotherapy nurse specialists make an important contribution to the supportive care of patients with head and neck cancer. More investment is required to maximize their contribution.

Mucosite bucal rádio e quimioinduzida

O aumento da intensidade da quimioterapia e radioterapia no tratamento do câncer tem elevado a incidência de efeitos colaterais, em especial da mucosite bucal. OBJETIVO E MÉTODO: Através de revisão bibliográfica realizou-se atualizar informações quanto à definição, características clínicas, incidência, etiologia, patofisiologia, morbidade associada, prevenção e tratamento dessa manifestação clínica. RESULTADOS: Estudos atuais definem a mucosite bucal como uma inflamação e ulceração dolorosa bastante freqüente na mucosa bucal apresentando formação de pseudomembrana. Sua incidência e severidade são influenciadas por variáveis associadas ao paciente e ao tratamento a que ele é submetido. A mucosite é conseqüência de dois mecanismos maiores: toxicidade direta da terapêutica utilizada sobre a mucosa e mielossupressão gerada pelo tratamento. Sua patofisiologia é composta por quatro fases interdependentes: fase inflamatória/vascular, fase epitelial, fase ulcerativa/bacteriológica e fase de reparação. É considerada fonte potencial de infecções com risco de morte, sendo a principal causa de interrupção de tratamentos antineoplásicos. Algumas intervenções mostraram-se potencialmente efetivas para sua prevenção e tratamento. Entretanto, faz-se necessária a realização de novos estudos clínicos mais bem conduzidos para obtenção de melhor evidência científica acerca do agente terapêutico de escolha para o controle da mucosite bucal, permitindo a realização da quimioterapia e radioterapia do câncer em parâmetros ideais.

Radiation therapy and chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis

Increasing the intensity of radiation therapy and chemotherapy in the management of cancer has increased the incidence of adverse effects, especially oral mucositis.

AIM AND METHODS

a bibliographical review was conducted on the definition of oral mucositis, its clinical findings, the incidence, its etiology, the pathophysiology, associated morbidity, prevention and treatment.

RESULTS

current studies define oral mucositis as a very frequent and painful inflammation with ulcers on the oral mucosa that are covered by a pseudo membrane. The incidence and severity of lesions are influenced by patient and treatment variables. Oral mucositis is a result of two major mechanisms: direct toxicity on the mucosa and myelosuppression due to the treatment. Its pathophysiology is composed of four interdependent phases: an initial inflammatory/vascular phase; an epithelial phase; an ulcerative/bacteriological phase; and a healing phase. It is considered a potential source of life-threatening infection and often is a dose-limiting factor in anticancer therapy. Some interventions have been shown to be potentially effective to prevent and treat oral mucositis. Further intensive research through well-structured clinical trials to obtain the best scientific evidence over the standard therapy of oral mucositis is necessary to attain ideal parameters for radiotherapy and chemotherapy.

Interventions for treating oral mucositis for patients with cancer receiving treatment

BACKGROUND

Treatment of cancer is increasingly effective but associated with short and long term side effects. Oral side effects, including oral mucositis (mouth ulceration), remain a major source of illness despite the use of a variety of agents to treat them.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions for treating oral mucositis or its associated pain in patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy or both.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Computerised searches of Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register; Cochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care Group's Trials Register; CENTRAL; MEDLINE and EMBASE were undertaken. Reference lists from relevant articles were searched and the authors of eligible trials were contacted to identify trials and obtain additional information. Date of the most recent searches June 2006: CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2006, Issue 2).

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials comparing agents prescribed to treat oral mucositis in people receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy or both. Outcomes were oral mucositis, time to heal mucositis, oral pain, duration of pain control, dysphagia, systemic infection, amount of analgesia, length of hospitalisation, cost and quality of life.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were independently extracted, in duplicate, by two review authors. Authors were contacted for details of randomisation, blindness and withdrawals. Quality assessment was carried out on these three criteria. The Cochrane Oral Health Group statistical guidelines were followed and risk ratio (RR) values calculated using fixed effect models.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-six trials involving 1353 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. Four agents, each in single trials, were found to be effective for improving (allopurinol RR 3.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.06 to 10.49; granulocyte macrophage-colony stimulating factor RR 4.23, 95% CI 1.35 to 13.24; immunoglobulin RR 1.81, 95% CI 1.24 to 2.65; human placentral extract RR 4.50, 95% CI 2.29 to 8.86) or eradicating mucositis (allopurinol RR 19.00, 95% CI 1.17 to 307.63). Three of these trials were rated as at moderate risk of bias and one as at high risk of bias. The following agents were not found to be effective: benzydamine HCl, sucralfate, tetrachlorodecaoxide, chlorhexidine and 'magic' (lidocaine solution, diphenhydramine hydrochloride and aluminum hydroxide suspension). Six trials compared the time to heal and mucositis was found to heal more quickly with two interventions: granulocyte macrophage-colony stimulating factor when compared to povidone iodine, with mean difference -3.5 days (95% CI -4.1 to -2.9) and allopurinol compared to placebo, with mean difference -4.5 days (95% CI -5.8 to -3.2). Three trials compared patient controlled analgesia (PCA) to the continuous infusion method for controlling pain. There was no evidence of a difference, however, less opiate was used per hour for PCA, and the duration of pain was shorter. One trial demonstrated that pharmacokinetically based analgesia (PKPCA) reduced pain compared with PCA: however, more opiate was used with PKPCA.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is weak and unreliable evidence that allopurinol mouthwash, granulocyte macrophage-colony stimulating factor, immunoglobulin or human placental extract improve or eradicate mucositis. There is no evidence that patient controlled analgesia (PCA) is better than continuous infusion method for controlling pain, however, less opiate was used per hour, and duration of pain was shorter, for PCA. Further, well designed, placebo-controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of allopurinol mouthwash, granulocyte macrophage-colony stimulating factor, immunoglobulin, human placental extract, other interventions investigated in this review and new interventions for treating mucositis are needed.

Oral mucositis and quality of life of Hong Kong Chinese patients with cancer therapy

Oral mucositis associated with cancer therapy often has devastating impact on patients' quality of life (QoL), affecting multiple spheres of daily and psychosocial functioning. This descriptive cross-sectional study aimed at describing the severity and distress of oral mucositis, as well as QoL of Hong Kong Chinese patients treated with cancer therapy, and identifying the extent to which oral mucositis correlated with QoL. A convenience sample of 38 in-patients and 50 out-patients with solid tumors and during the peak phase of oral mucositis was recruited. The severity and distress of oral mucositis were assessed by a 4-point rating scale ranging from 1 (mild) to 4 (very severe) and 5-point rating scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much), respectively. The QoL was assessed by the Chinese version Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General questionnaires (Ch-FACT-G). The mean+/-SD severity and distress scores of oral mucositis were 2.1+/-0.9 and 1.6+/-1.2, respectively. The total mean+/-SD scores of physical, social/family, emotional, and functional subscales of the Ch-FACT-G were 15.1+/-5.9, 16.3+/-4.1, 15.7+/-4.5, and 11.9+/-6.8 separately. The physical subscale of the Ch-FACT-G significantly correlated with the severity (r=0.305, P<0.01) and the distress (r=0.355, P<0.01) of oral mucositis. A significantly mild positive correlation was also found between the emotional subscale of the Ch-FACT-G and the severity of oral mucositis (r=0.314, P<0.01). Subjects receiving radiotherapy reported a lower range of total social/family, emotional, and functional subscale scores than that of those receiving chemotherapy or chemo-radiotherapy, but these differences were not statistically significant (P>0.05). In conclusion, QoL, especially the functional sphere, was compromised for patients with oral mucositis. The data also support the correlations between oral mucositis and the physical sphere of QoL, as well as oral mucositis and the emotional sphere of QoL.

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.

Is there a “mucosa-sparing” benefit of IMRT for head-and-neck cancer?

PURPOSE

To investigate whether intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) allows more mucosal sparing than standard three-field technique (3FT) radiotherapy for early oropharyngeal cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Whole-field IMRT plans were generated for 5 patients with early-stage oropharyngeal cancer according to Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0022 (66 Gy/30 fractions/6 weeks) guidelines with and without a dose objective on the portion of mucosa not overlapping any PTV. 3FT plans were also generated for the same 5 patients with two fractionation schedules: conventional fractionation (CF) to 70 Gy/35 fractions/7 weeks and concomitant boost (CB) to 72 Gy/40 fractions/6 weeks. Cumulative dose volume histograms (DVHs) of the overall mucosal volume (as per in-house definition) from all trials were compared after transformation into the linear quadratic equivalent dose at 2 Gy per fraction with a time factor correction.

RESULTS

Compared with IMRT without dose objective on the mucosa, a 30-Gy maximum dose objective on the mucosa allows approximately 20% and approximately 12% mean absolute reduction in the percentage of mucosa volume exposed to a dose equivalent to 30 Gy (p < 0.01) and 70 Gy (p < 0.01) at 2 Gy in 3 and 7 weeks, respectively, without detrimental effect on the coverage of other regions of interest. Without mucosal dose objective, IMRT is associated with a larger amount of mucosa exposed to clinically relevant doses compared with both concomitant boost and conventional fractionation; however, if a dose objective is placed, the reverse is true, with up to approximately 30% reduction in the volume of the mucosa in the high-dose region compared with both concomitant boost and conventional fractionation (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy can be potentially provide more mucosal sparing than traditional approaches.

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.

A Pilot Study of Chlorhexidine and Benzydamine Oral Rinses for the Prevention and Treatment of Irradiation Mucositis in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer

This pilot study was designed to compare the efficacy of 0.2% wt/vol chlorhexidine gluconate and 0.15% wt/vol benzydamine hydrochloride oral rinses in alleviating irradiation oropharyngeal mucositis for patients with head and neck cancer. This was a prospective, randomized, and double-blinded study. Fourteen subjects were stratified based on nasopharyngeal cancer and non-nasopharyngeal head and neck cancer, and were randomly assigned to receive oral care protocol either containing with chlorhexidine (n = 7) or benzydamine (n = 7) from the first day to 2 weeks after the completion of radiotherapy. Subjects were evaluated twice weekly through days 1 to 64 using the World Health Organization mucositis scale and the 10 cm visual analogue scale for mouth pain and dysphagia. In the chlorhexidine arm, 4 subjects (57%) had grade 2, and 3 subjects (43%) had grade 3 mucositis. In the benzydamine arm, 5 subjects (71%) had grade 2, and 2 subjects (29%) had grade 3 mucositis (P > .05). The mean area-under-the-curve values of mucositis were 26.5 +/- 13.6 (median 26) and 24.1 +/- 6.1 (median 22) in the chlorhexidine group and benzydamine group, respectively (P > .05). The mean area-under-the-curve values of pain and dysphagia were 70.8 +/- 33 (median 88.5) and 71.5 +/- 39 (median 101), and 62.1 +/- 17.2 (median 72) and 66 +/- 22.3 (median 57.5) in the chlorhexidine and benzydamine groups, respectively (P > .05). A trend has emerged of a lessening of severity of mucositis, pain, and dysphagia for patients with head and neck cancer receiving benzydamine oral rinse. The beneficial effects, however, need to be confirmed in a larger trial.

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.

Mucositis pain induced by radiation therapy: prevalence, severity, and use of self-care behaviors

Pain from radiation therapy (RT)-induced mucositis is a significant clinical problem for patients with head and neck cancer (HNC). The purpose of this study was to determine the pattern, severity, and time course of RT-induced mucositis pain; self-care behaviors (SCBs) used to manage mucositis pain; and the effectiveness of these behaviors in relieving such pain. Forty-nine patients with HNC were assessed using the MacDibbs Mouth Assessment Tool to determine the severity of RT-induced mucositis pain over their course of RT and at a one-month follow-up visit. All patients developed pain due to RT-induced mucositis. A Self-Care Diary was used weekly by patients to record SCBs and their effectiveness. The most effective SCBs for RT-induced mucositis pain were mouth rinsing and using oral analgesics. However, more severe pain with swallowing was not managed well throughout the study. Future studies need to test more effective strategies to manage RT-induced mucositis pain.

Zinc supplementation to improve mucositis and dermatitis in patients after radiotherapy for head-and-neck cancers: A double-blind, randomized study

PURPOSE

To determine whether zinc supplementation can accelerate the healing of mucositis and dermatitis after radiotherapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

In this double-blind study, patients were placed into two randomized groups (experimental and control) of 50 patients each. The groups were homogeneous with respect to medical history, tumor characteristics, and therapeutic details. The experimental group received a standard dose of a zinc supplement, and the control group was given a placebo.

RESULTS

Patients in the control group developed Grade 2 mucositis and dermatitis earlier and sooner than patients in the experimental group. There was also a significant difference in the development of Grade 3 mucositis and dermatitis between the two groups. Patients in the experimental group were found to have milder mucositis and dermatitis. Zinc supplementation did not show much benefit in those patients receiving concurrent chemotherapy or make a substantial impact on weight changes.

CONCLUSIONS

Zinc supplementation used in conjunction with radiotherapy could postpone the development of severe mucositis and dermatitis for patients with cancers of the head and neck. Zinc supplementation can also alleviate the degree of mucositis and dermatitis. The impact of zinc on tumor growth and patient survival is under further investigation.

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.

Several therapies may prevent or reduce the severity of oral mucositis associated with cancer treatment

DATA SOURCES

The Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline and Embase were searched to April 2006. Reference lists from relevant articles were scanned and the authors of eligible studies were contacted to identify trials and obtain additional information.

STUDY SELECTION

For inclusion, an article had to satisfy the following criteria: document a randomised controlled trial (RCT); participants should be people receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy treatment for cancer; prescribe agents to prevent oral mucositis; and have the primary outcome of preventing mucositis.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data were extracted independently and in duplicate. Authors were contacted for details of randomisation and withdrawals and a quality assessment was carried out. For dichotomous outcomes, risk ratios (RR) were calculated using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

The search identified 202 articles, of which 71 studies had useable data comprising 5217 patients. Of the 29 interventions included in the trials, 10 studies showed some evidence of a weak benefit for preventing or reducing the severity of mucositis. Interventions where more than one trial in the meta-analysis found a significant difference compared with placebo/ no treatment were as follows: amifostine: provided minimal benefit in preventing moderate and severe mucositis (RR, 0.84 and 0.60, respectively); antibiotic paste or pastille: demonstrated moderate benefit in preventing mucositis (RR, 0.87); hydrolytic enzymes: reduced moderate and severe mucositis (RR, 0.52 and 0.17, respectively); and ice chips: prevented mucositis at all levels (RR, 0.63, 0.43 and 0.27). Other interventions showing some benefit in only one study were benzydamine, calcium phosphate, honey, oral care protocols, povidone and zinc sulphate.

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 RCT with sufficient numbers of participants to perform subgroup analyses by type of disease and chemotherapeutic agent.

Effective health care: management of head and neck cancers

The management of head and neck cancer, published in a recent issue of Effective Health Care, is reviewed.

Life-threatening graft-vs-host disease

Hematopoietic stem cell transplant (SCT) is considered standard therapy for a variety of malignant and nonmalignant diseases. Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) still represents today a major complication of hematopoietic SCT. Two types of GVHD have traditionally been recognized on the basis of the time of onset following transplantation, distinct pathobiological pathways, and different clinical presentations. The acute form commonly breaks out 2 to 6 weeks after transplantation, affecting up to 60% of patients receiving allogeneic transplants from HLA identical donors. Transfer of immunocompetent donor T cells contained in the graft may undergo alloreactivity against recipient cells because of major or minor histocompatibility antigens disparities between the donor and the immunosuppressed host. Target specificity in acute GVHD involves preferential injury to epithelial surfaces of the skin and mucous membranes, biliary ducts of the liver, and crypts of the intestinal tract. Chronic GVHD affects approximately 30% to 80% of patients surviving 6 months or longer after stem cell transplantation and is the leading cause of nonrelapse deaths occurring more than 2 years after transplantation. Chronic GVHD is a multiorgan syndrome with clinical features suggesting some autoimmune diseases, and possibly both alloreactive and autoreactive T cell clones are involved in its pathophysiology. Although GVHD may convey beneficial graft-versus-leukemia/lymphoma effects, it also entails a significant risk of morbidity and mortality. Patients with mild GVHD need only minimal, if any, immunosuppressive treatment, whereas prognosis of patients with extensive disease or resistant to standard immunosuppressive treatment may be dismal. Early recognition of GVHD followed by prompt therapeutic intervention may prevent the progression to higher-grade disease and improve the outcome for patients receiving hematopoietic SCT.

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.