Cryotherapy for oral mucositis in cancer: review of systematic reviews and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

One of the most common side effects of cancer treatment is oral mucositis. Although studies have shown that oral cryotherapy has a favourable effect on oral mucositis, the reliability of the results is questionable.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this umbrella review was to provide insight into the effects of oral cryotherapy against oral mucositis in patients with cancer, as well as to assess the certainty of this evidence.

METHOD

Studies were searched for through PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science, with no restrictions until August 2021. The risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI for each meta-analysis were recalculated using a random-effects model, and the certainty of the evidence was judged using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.

RESULTS

Ten meta-analyses including 25 original RCTs that fit our inclusion criteria were included. The use of oral cryotherapy markedly reduced the occurrence of overall (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.83, n=20 trials), moderate to severe (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.80, n=16 trials) and severe oral mucositis (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.67, n=16 trials), as well as average severity score of oral mucositis (standardised mean difference=-0.94, 95% CI -1.28 to -0.59, n=4 trials) in comparison to a control group; however, the certainty of evidence for all outcomes was rated very low.

CONCLUSION

In patients with cancer, oral cryotherapy appears to greatly lower the severity and occurrence of oral mucositis, but, with very low certainty of evidence.

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.

Oral cryotherapy for management of chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis in haematopoietic cell transplantation: a systematic review

Background

Oral mucositis (OM) is known to be the most common and challenging side effect of conditioning chemotherapy in haematopoietic cell transplant (HCT). This side effect causes significant morbidity and may delay the treatment plan, as well as increase therapeutic expenses. There are few clinical trials in the literature that indicate any kind of treatment or prevention methods are effective. Therefore, the aim of this study is to perform a systematic review of literature and examine the effectiveness of oral cryotherapy (OC) in management of chemotherapy-induced OM in patients with haematological malignancies undergoing a HCT.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted, using the electronic databases PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE and Scopus. A total of 322 papers were identified and 9 papers were analysed based on defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The quality of the chosen primary studies was appraised using the COCHRANE risk of bias assessment tool.

Results

Nine randomized controlled trials, analysing 658 participants; control group (n = 289, age mean ± SD; 41.15 ± 21) and treatment group (n = 369, age mean ± SD; 39.15 ± 20), were included in this systematic review. Seven studies had significantly addressed the effectiveness of OC (p value < 0.05), in reducing the incidence of developing severe OM in the adult population undergoing HCT, especially when the conditioning regimen protocols included high dose of alkylating agent such as melphalan.

Conclusion

This review supports the use of OC for prevention of OM in patients undergoing HCT, with high-dose of melphalan conditioning protocols. It is recommended that more studies be conducted to compare efficacy and duration of OC with other chemotherapeutic agents with relatively short plasma half-lives. The heterogeneity of the trials demonstrated the need to regulate the validated assessment tools and similar interventions that would enable comparisons and analyses of treatment effects based on well-designed RCTs.

Effectiveness of low level laser therapy versus cryotherapy in cancer patients with oral mucositis: Systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this network meta-analysis was to analyze the relative effects of low level laser therapy (LLLT) and/or cryotherapy in cancer patients with oral mucositis (OM).

METHODS

This literature search followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines using MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) up to 2020. Only randomized control trials which involved comparisons of groups receiving the interventions of combined cryotherapy and LLLT, LLLT, cryotherapy and usual care (the control group) in patients with cancer were eligible for inclusion. The effect sizes are presented as odds ratios for the occurrence of severe, moderate and none/mild OM. The mixed treatment comparison was conducted using generalized linear mixed models to analyze the direct and indirect comparisons of interventions. The critical appraisal was assessed using Cochrane Collaboration's tool. Heterogeneity between studies was assessed using I² statistics, and publication bias was evaluated by constructing a funnel plot.

RESULTS

Twenty-six randomized controlled trials with a total enrollment of 1830 cancer patients with OM were included. The outcome of none/mild OM is desirable, and odds ratios of more than 1 favor the intervention group. Moderate and severe OM are defined as adverse outcomes, and ORs less than 1 favor the intervention group. The treatment effects of the combined cryotherapy and LLLT were better than those of usual care for none/mild and severe OM (ORs = 106.23 [95% CI = 12.15 to 929.17] and 0.01 [95% CI = 0 to 0.57], respectively). Treatment effects with cryotherapy alone and LLLT alone were better than those with usual care for none/mild and severe OM (ORs = 3.13 [95%CI = 1.56 to 6.27]; ORs = 7.56 [95%CI = 3.84 to 14.88] and 0.25 [95%CI = 0.11 to 0.54]; ORs = 0.13 [95%CI = 0.07 to 0.24], respectively). Nevertheless, for patients with none/mild OM, treatment effects with combined use of cryotherapy and LLLT were better than those with only LLT or cryotherapy (ORs = 14.06 [95%CI = 1.79 to 110.30] and 33.95 [95%CI = 3.50 to 329.65], respectively). For patients with moderate OM, treatment effect did not reach statistical significance among comparisons. The limitations include the wide variability in treatment protocols and the non-uniform outcome measurements across the studies examined.

CONCLUSION

Compared with no intervention, the treatment effects of combined cryotherapy and LLLT, laser alone, and cryotherapy alone are beneficial for the reduction of severe OM. There is no difference in treatment effects among cryotherapy and/or LLLT intervention in cancer patients with moderate OM. Results of this study provide an implicative basis for LLLT and cryotherapy as viable interventions that can significantly improve severe OM.