-
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Jan 2019Background and o: Oral mucositis is one of the main adverse events of cancer treatment with chemotherapy or radiation therapy. It presents as erythema, atrophy or/and...
Background and o: Oral mucositis is one of the main adverse events of cancer treatment with chemotherapy or radiation therapy. It presents as erythema, atrophy or/and ulceration of oral mucosa. It occurs in almost all patients, who receive radiation therapy of the head and neck area and from 20% to 80% of patients who receive chemotherapy. There are few clinical trials in the literature proving any kind of treatment or prevention methods to be effective. Therefore, the aim of this study is to perform systematic review of literature and examine the most effective treatment and prevention methods for chemotherapy or/and radiotherapy induced oral mucositis. : Clinical human trials, published from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2017 in English, were included in this systematic review of literature. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) protocol was followed while planning, providing objectives, selecting studies and analyzing data for this systematic review. "MEDLINE" and "PubMed Central" databases were used to search eligible clinical trials. Clinical trials researching medication, oral hygiene, cryotherapy or laser therapy efficiency in treatment or/and prevention of oral mucositis were included in this systematic review. : Results of the studies used in this systematic review of literature showed that laser therapy, cryotherapy, professional oral hygiene, antimicrobial agents, Royal jelly, L. brevis lozenges, Zync supplementation and Benzydamine are the best treatment or/and prevention methods for oral mucositis. : Palifermin, Chlorhexidine, Smecta, Actovegin, Kangfuxin, L. brevis lozenges, Royal jelly, Zync supplement, Benzydamine, cryotherapy, laser therapy and professional oral hygiene may be used in oral mucositis treatment and prevention.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Antineoplastic Agents; Clinical Trials as Topic; Cryotherapy; Fatty Acids; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Humans; Laser Therapy; Oral Hygiene; Radiotherapy; Stomatitis
PubMed: 30678228
DOI: 10.3390/medicina55020025 -
Pediatric Blood & Cancer Mar 2019One of the most common complications of cancer chemotherapy is oral mucositis (OM). OM affects more than 75% of patients undergoing chemotherapy and represents a... (Review)
Review Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
One of the most common complications of cancer chemotherapy is oral mucositis (OM). OM affects more than 75% of patients undergoing chemotherapy and represents a significant burden to patients and caregivers. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies to investigate the effects of agents and techniques in reducing OM.
PROCEDURE
This systematic review investigated, critically appraised, and rated the evidence on agents used to manage OM in children undergoing cancer therapy. A comprehensive search of the relevant literature was performed from January 2006 to December 2017. MEDLINE, Scopus, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, and the Web of Science were searched. Nine eligible studies were identified. Using random-effects models, standardized mean difference was estimated between treated and control groups across all studies. The Cochran test and the I index were performed for heterogeneity between studies. The significance level was set at P = 0.05.
RESULTS
Palifermin reduced the incidence (OR = 4.131, P = 0.000), duration (St diff mean = 0.803, P = 0.000), and severity (St diff mean = 0.637, P = 0.000) of OM in pediatric cancer patients significantly. However, the laser did not show significant efficacy in decreasing the incidence rate of OM (OR = 2.870, P = 0.364).
CONCLUSION
This review provided a comprehensive examination of available options for children who have OM. The results support the possibility of a positive effect of palifermin on reducing OM in children receiving cancer therapy.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Child; Disease Management; Fibroblast Growth Factor 7; Humans; Neoplasms; Prognosis; Stomatitis
PubMed: 30421549
DOI: 10.1002/pbc.27403 -
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Jan 2013The aim of this project was to review the literature and define clinical practice guidelines for the use of cytokines and growth factor agents for the prevention or... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The aim of this project was to review the literature and define clinical practice guidelines for the use of cytokines and growth factor agents for the prevention or treatment of oral mucositis induced by cancer chemotherapy or radiotherapy.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted by the Mucositis Study Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society for Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO). The body of evidence for each intervention, in each cancer treatment setting, was assigned an evidence level. Based on the evidence level, one of the following three guideline determinations was possible: Recommendation, Suggestion, No guideline possible.
RESULTS
Sixty-four clinical studies across 11 interventions were evaluated. A recommendation was made for the use of recombinant human KGF-1 (palifermin) at a dose of 60 μg/kg per day for 3 days prior to conditioning treatment and for 3 days post-transplant for prevention of oral mucositis in patients receiving high-dose chemotherapy and total body irradiation followed by autologous stem cell transplantation for hematological malignancies. A suggestion was made against using granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor mouthwash for the prevention of oral mucositis in the setting of high-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous or allogeneic stem cell transplantation. No guideline was possible for any other cytokine or growth factor agents due to inconclusive evidence.
CONCLUSIONS
Of the cytokine and growth factor agents studied for oral mucositis, the evidence only supports use of palifermin in the specific population listed above. Additional well-designed research is needed on other cytokine and growth factor interventions and in other cancer treatment settings.
Topics: Cytokines; Evidence-Based Medicine; Fibroblast Growth Factor 7; Fibroblast Growth Factors; Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor; Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor; Humans; Intercellular Signaling Peptides and Proteins; Mouthwashes; Neoplasms; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Stomatitis
PubMed: 22987094
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-012-1594-5 -
European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy :... Mar 2020To examine the comparative efficacy and safety of interventions for preventing chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis (OM) in adult cancer patients. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
Comparative efficacy and safety of interventions for preventing chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis in adult cancer patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
To examine the comparative efficacy and safety of interventions for preventing chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis (OM) in adult cancer patients.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Central systematically for the randomised control trials (RCTs) of interventions for preventing OM. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to estimate risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) from both direct and indirect evidence. The primary outcome was any grade of OM. Secondary outcomes were mild-moderate OM, severe OM and adverse events, such as taste disturbance and gastrointestinal adverse events. This study was registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42016052489.
RESULTS
A total of 29 RCTs with 2348 patients (median age, 56.1 years; 57.5% male) were included. Cryotherapy was associated with a significantly lower risk of OM than control (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.68), and zinc sulphate (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.97), but not significantly lower than sucralfate and palifermin. No significant differences were observed between cryotherapy and control for taste disturbance and gastrointestinal adverse events. Palifermin was associated with the highest risk of taste disturbance.
CONCLUSIONS
This NMA suggests that cryotherapy was the most effective intervention for preventing chemotherapy-induced OM with a safety profile similar to control, but not significantly lower than sucralfate and palifermin. Large RCTs are needed to confirm these findings.
Topics: Adult; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Agents; Cryotherapy; Female; Humans; Male; Mouth Mucosa; Mucositis; Neoplasms; Network Meta-Analysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32133137
DOI: 10.1136/ejhpharm-2018-001649 -
Journal of Advanced Nursing Apr 2016The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of clinical trials covering interventions used as prophylaxis for oral mucositis induced by ambulatory... (Review)
Review
AIM
The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of clinical trials covering interventions used as prophylaxis for oral mucositis induced by ambulatory antineoplastic chemotherapy.
BACKGROUND
Oral mucositis in patients undergoing chemotherapy is a side effect that can impact the quality of treatment and can interfere with eating and therapeutic adherence.
DESIGN
Quantitative systematic review.
DATA SOURCES
Relevant databases were searched, from January 2002-July 2013, by using the combination of the keywords mucositis, stomatitis, neoplasms, antineoplastic agents, drug therapy, prevention and control and chemotherapy.
REVIEW METHODS
Two researchers independently read the titles and abstracts from every cross-reference. The quality of the included studies was analysed by the Jadad Scale and the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool. Data were extracted from the selected studies with a data collection form developed specifically for this purpose.
RESULTS
Of the 23 controlled clinical trials that were identified in this study, five articles evaluated the use of oral cryotherapy to prevent oral mucositis and three studies analysed the prophylactic use of glutamine. Interventions of protocols for oral care, palifermin, allopurinol and chlorhexidine were evaluated by two articles each. Interventions of zinc sulphate, amifostine, chewing gum, sucralfate, recombination human intestinal trefoil factor, kefir and vitamin E were evaluated by one article each.
CONCLUSION
There is strong evidence that cryotherapy can prevent oral mucositis arising from ambulatory treatment with 5-flurouracil chemotherapy. Other interventions, although showing positive results in preventing oral mucositis, require further study to confirm their conclusions.
Topics: Allopurinol; Ambulatory Care; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Antineoplastic Agents; Chlorhexidine; Controlled Clinical Trials as Topic; Cryotherapy; Fibroblast Growth Factor 7; Glutamine; Humans; Neoplasms; Oral Hygiene; Stomatitis
PubMed: 26626711
DOI: 10.1111/jan.12867 -
Growth factors and cytokines in the prevention and treatment of oral and gastrointestinal mucositis.Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Jun 2006Growth factors and cytokines may be useful in preventing chemotherapy (CT)- and radiotherapy (RT)-induced oral and gastrointestinal mucositis. Two systematic reviews of... (Review)
Review
GOALS OF WORK
Growth factors and cytokines may be useful in preventing chemotherapy (CT)- and radiotherapy (RT)-induced oral and gastrointestinal mucositis. Two systematic reviews of the medical literature on growth factors and cytokines for the amelioration of CT- and RT-induced mucositis throughout the alimentary tract were performed by the Mucositis Study Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society for Oral Oncology. The aim of these evidence-based scientific reviews was to critically evaluate the literature and create evidence-based guidelines for the use of growth factors and cytokines in the prevention or treatment of CT- and RT-induced mucositis.
METHOD
The two reviews covered articles on clinical trials from January 1966 through May 2002 and preclinical studies from June 2002 through May 2005, respectively. The systematic review process was based on a well-established method for evaluating scientific literature.
MAIN RESULTS
The number of articles in the first review was 29. In the second review, 23 articles were evaluated, 14 preclinical and 9 clinical studies. It was concluded from the first review that there was no sufficient evidence to provide any recommendations for clinical practice guidelines regarding growth factors and cytokines. From the second review, a guideline could be presented recommending the use of recombinant human keratinocyte growth factor-1 (palifermin) to prevent oral mucositis in patients receiving high-dose CT and total body irradiation followed by stem cell transplantation for haematological malignancies. A guideline could also be provided suggesting that granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor mouthwash not be used for the prevention of oral mucositis in the transplant setting with high-dose CT and autologous or allogeneic stem cell transplantation.
CONCLUSIONS
These systematic reviews have provided clarity and shown exciting new results. Further studies will provide new options for this debilitating side-effect of cancer therapy.
Topics: Animals; Antineoplastic Agents; Clinical Trials as Topic; Cytokines; Disease Models, Animal; Drug Evaluation; Evidence-Based Medicine; Fibroblast Growth Factor 7; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor; Growth Substances; Humans; Medical Oncology; Mice; Mouthwashes; Mucositis; Neoplasms; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Primary Prevention; Radiotherapy; Stem Cell Transplantation; Stomatitis; Whole-Body Irradiation
PubMed: 16775647
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-006-0052-7 -
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Oct 2019The aim of this study was to update the clinical practice guidelines for the use of agents for the prevention and/or treatment of gastrointestinal mucositis (GIM).
PURPOSE
The aim of this study was to update the clinical practice guidelines for the use of agents for the prevention and/or treatment of gastrointestinal mucositis (GIM).
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted by the Mucositis Study Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society for Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO). The body of evidence for each intervention, in each cancer treatment setting, was assigned an evidence level. Based on the evidence level, one of the following three guideline determinations was possible: Recommendation, Suggestion, and No Guideline Possible.
RESULTS
A total of 78 papers across 13 interventions were examined of which 25 were included in the final review. No new guidelines were possible for any agent due to inadequate and/or conflicting evidence. Existing guidelines for probiotics and hyperbaric oxygen were unchanged.
CONCLUSIONS
Of the agents studied for the prevention and treatment of GIM, the evidence continues to support use of probiotics containing Lactobacillus spp. for prevention of chemoradiotherapy and radiotherapy-induced diarrhea in patients with pelvic malignancy, and hyperbaric oxygen therapy to treat radiation-induced proctitis. Additional well-designed research is encouraged to enable a decision regarding palifermin, glutamine, sodium butyrate, and dietary interventions, for the prevention or treatment of GIM.
Topics: Butyric Acid; Chemoradiotherapy; Fibroblast Growth Factor 7; Glutamine; Humans; Hyperbaric Oxygenation; Mucositis; Neoplasms; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Proctitis; Stomatitis
PubMed: 31286233
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-019-04892-0 -
Cancers Apr 2024Children undergoing antineoplastic treatment often present severe side effects due to the dosage and duration of treatments, with oral mucositis emerging as one of the... (Review)
Review
Children undergoing antineoplastic treatment often present severe side effects due to the dosage and duration of treatments, with oral mucositis emerging as one of the most prevalent and painful inflammatory conditions. There is a growing body of evidence on therapeutic interventions such as cryotherapy, low-level laser therapy, and natural compounds for this condition. The aim of this systematic review was to identify and compare therapies for the management of cancer treatment-induced oral mucositis in pediatric patients. From 2655 articles obtained in initial searches, 39 articles were considered in this systematic review, after applying inclusion/exclusion criteria. Low-level laser therapy, palifermin, honey, and zinc demonstrated reductions in oral mucositis incidence, duration, severity, and pain reported by the patient. Although there are several therapies in place for the prevention and treatment of oral mucositis in children, evidence of their efficacy is still inconclusive to establish accurate clinical protocols.
PubMed: 38672630
DOI: 10.3390/cancers16081548 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2017Salivary gland dysfunction is an 'umbrella' term for the presence of either xerostomia (subjective sensation of dryness), or salivary gland hypofunction (reduction in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Salivary gland dysfunction is an 'umbrella' term for the presence of either xerostomia (subjective sensation of dryness), or salivary gland hypofunction (reduction in saliva production). It is a predictable side effect of radiotherapy to the head and neck region, and is associated with a significant impairment of quality of life. A wide range of pharmacological interventions, with varying mechanisms of action, have been used for the prevention of radiation-induced salivary gland dysfunction.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of pharmacological interventions for the prevention of radiation-induced salivary gland dysfunction.
SEARCH METHODS
Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 14 September 2016); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 8) in the Cochrane Library (searched 14 September 2016); MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 14 September 2016); Embase Ovid (1980 to 14 September 2016); CINAHL EBSCO (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature; 1937 to 14 September 2016); LILACS BIREME Virtual Health Library (Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database; 1982 to 14 September 2016); Zetoc Conference Proceedings (1993 to 14 September 2016); and OpenGrey (1997 to 14 September 2016). We searched the US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials, irrespective of their language of publication or publication status. Trials included participants of all ages, ethnic origin and gender, scheduled to receive radiotherapy on its own or in addition to chemotherapy to the head and neck region. Participants could be outpatients or inpatients. We included trials comparing any pharmacological agent regimen, prescribed prophylactically for salivary gland dysfunction prior to or during radiotherapy, with placebo, no intervention or an alternative pharmacological intervention. Comparisons of radiation techniques were excluded.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 39 studies that randomised 3520 participants; the number of participants analysed varied by outcome and time point. The studies were ordered into 14 separate comparisons with meta-analysis only being possible in three of those.We found low-quality evidence to show that amifostine, when compared to a placebo or no treatment control, might reduce the risk of moderate to severe xerostomia (grade 2 or higher on a 0 to 4 scale) at the end of radiotherapy (risk ratio (RR) 0.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19 to 0.67; P = 0.001, 3 studies, 119 participants), and up to three months after radiotherapy (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.92; P = 0.01, 5 studies, 687 participants), but there is insufficient evidence that the effect is sustained up to 12 months after radiotherapy (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.23; P = 0.21, 7 studies, 682 participants). We found very low-quality evidence that amifostine increased unstimulated salivary flow rate up to 12 months after radiotherapy, both in terms of mg of saliva per 5 minutes (mean difference (MD) 0.32, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.55; P = 0.006, 1 study, 27 participants), and incidence of producing greater than 0.1 g of saliva over 5 minutes (RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.86; P = 0.004, 1 study, 175 participants). However, there was insufficient evidence to show a difference when looking at stimulated salivary flow rates. There was insufficient (very low-quality) evidence to show that amifostine compromised the effects of cancer treatment when looking at survival measures. There was some very low-quality evidence of a small benefit for amifostine in terms of quality of life (10-point scale) at 12 months after radiotherapy (MD 0.70, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.20; P = 0.006, 1 study, 180 participants), but insufficient evidence at the end of and up to three months postradiotherapy. A further study showed no evidence of a difference at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months postradiotherapy. There was low-quality evidence that amifostine is associated with increases in: vomiting (RR 4.90, 95% CI 2.87 to 8.38; P < 0.00001, 5 studies, 601 participants); hypotension (RR 9.20, 95% CI 2.84 to 29.83; P = 0.0002, 3 studies, 376 participants); nausea (RR 2.60, 95% CI 1.81 to 3.74; P < 0.00001, 4 studies, 556 participants); and allergic response (RR 7.51, 95% CI 1.40 to 40.39; P = 0.02, 3 studies, 524 participants).We found insufficient evidence (that was of very low quality) to determine whether or not pilocarpine performed better or worse than a placebo or no treatment control for the outcomes: xerostomia, salivary flow rate, survival, and quality of life. There was some low-quality evidence that pilocarpine was associated with an increase in sweating (RR 2.98, 95% CI 1.43 to 6.22; P = 0.004, 5 studies, 389 participants).We found insufficient evidence to determine whether or not palifermin performed better or worse than placebo for: xerostomia (low quality); survival (moderate quality); and any adverse effects.There was also insufficient evidence to determine the effects of the following interventions: biperiden plus pilocarpine, Chinese medicines, bethanechol, artificial saliva, selenium, antiseptic mouthrinse, antimicrobial lozenge, polaprezinc, azulene rinse, and Venalot Depot (coumarin plus troxerutin).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is some low-quality evidence to suggest that amifostine prevents the feeling of dry mouth in people receiving radiotherapy to the head and neck (with or without chemotherapy) in the short- (end of radiotherapy) to medium-term (three months postradiotherapy). However, it is less clear whether or not this effect is sustained to 12 months postradiotherapy. The benefits of amifostine should be weighed against its high cost and side effects. There was insufficient evidence to show that any other intervention is beneficial.
Topics: Amifostine; Drugs, Chinese Herbal; Female; Fibroblast Growth Factor 7; Humans; Male; Pilocarpine; Quality of Life; Radiation-Protective Agents; Radiotherapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Saliva, Artificial; Salivary Gland Diseases; Salivary Glands; Salivation; Xerostomia
PubMed: 28759701
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012744 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2017Oral mucositis is a side effect of chemotherapy, head and neck radiotherapy, and targeted therapy, affecting over 75% of high-risk patients. Ulceration can lead to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Oral mucositis is a side effect of chemotherapy, head and neck radiotherapy, and targeted therapy, affecting over 75% of high-risk patients. Ulceration can lead to severe pain and difficulty with eating and drinking, which may necessitate opioid analgesics, hospitalisation and supplemental nutrition. These complications may disrupt cancer therapy, which may reduce survival. There is also a risk of death from sepsis if pathogens enter the ulcers of immunocompromised patients. Ulcerative oral mucositis can be costly to healthcare systems, yet there are few preventive interventions proven to be beneficial. Cytokines and growth factors may help the regeneration of cells lining of the mouth, thus preventing or reducing oral mucositis and its negative effects.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of cytokines and growth factors for preventing oral mucositis in patients with cancer who are receiving treatment.
SEARCH METHODS
Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (searched 10 May 2017); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 4) in the Cochrane Library (searched 10 May 2017); MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 10 May 2017); Embase Ovid (7 December 2015 to 10 May 2017); CINAHL EBSCO (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature; 1937 to 10 May 2017); and CANCERLIT PubMed (1950 to 10 May 2017). The US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included parallel-design randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of cytokines and growth factors in patients with cancer receiving treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened the results of electronic searches, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. For dichotomous outcomes, we reported risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). For continuous outcomes, we reported mean differences (MD) and 95% CIs. We pooled similar studies in random-effects meta-analyses. We reported adverse effects in a narrative format.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 35 RCTs analysing 3102 participants. Thirteen studies were at low risk of bias, 12 studies were at unclear risk of bias, and 10 studies were at high risk of bias.Our main findings were regarding keratinocyte growth factor (KGF) and are summarised as follows.There might be a reduction in the risk of moderate to severe oral mucositis in adults receiving bone marrow/stem cell transplantation after conditioning therapy for haematological cancers (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.99; 6 studies; 852 participants; low-quality evidence). We would need to treat 11 adults with KGF in order to prevent one additional adult from developing this outcome (95% CI 6 to 112). There might be a reduction in the risk of severe oral mucositis in this population, but there is also some possibility of an increase in risk (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.11; 6 studies; 852 participants; low-quality evidence). We would need to treat 10 adults with KGF in order to prevent one additional adult from developing this outcome (95% CI 5 to prevent the outcome to 14 to cause the outcome).There is probably a reduction in the risk of moderate to severe oral mucositis in adults receiving radiotherapy to the head and neck with cisplatin or fluorouracil (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.00; 3 studies; 471 participants; moderate-quality evidence). We would need to treat 12 adults with KGF in order to prevent one additional adult from developing this outcome (95% CI 7 to infinity). It is very likely that there is a reduction in the risk of severe oral mucositis in this population (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.90; 3 studies; 471 participants; high-quality evidence). We would need to treat 7 adults with KGF in order to prevent one additional adult from developing this outcome (95% CI 5 to 15).It is likely that there is a reduction in the risk of moderate to severe oral mucositis in adults receiving chemotherapy alone for mixed solid and haematological cancers (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.70; 4 studies; 344 participants; moderate-quality evidence). We would need to treat 4 adults with KGF in order to prevent one additional adult from developing this outcome (95% CI 3 to 6). There might be a reduction in the risk of severe oral mucositis in this population (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.65; 3 studies; 263 participants; low -quality evidence). We would need to treat 10 adults with KGF in order to prevent one additional adult from developing this outcome (95% CI 8 to 19).Due to the low volume of evidence, single-study comparisons and insufficient sample sizes, we found no compelling evidence of a benefit for any other cytokines or growth factors and there was no evidence on children. There did not appear to be any serious adverse effects of any of the interventions assessed in this review.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We are confident that KGF is beneficial in the prevention of oral mucositis in adults who are receiving: a) radiotherapy to the head and neck with cisplatin or fluorouracil; or b) chemotherapy alone for mixed solid and haematological cancers. We are less confident about a benefit for KGF in adults receiving bone marrow/stem cell transplant after conditioning therapy for haematological cancers because of multiple factors involved in that population, such as whether or not they received total body irradiation (TBI) and whether the transplant was autologous (the patients' own cells) or allogeneic (cells from a donor). KGF appears to be a relatively safe intervention.Due to limited research, we are not confident that there are any beneficial effects of other cytokines and growth factors. There is currently insufficient evidence to draw any conclusions about the use of cytokines and growth factors in children.
Topics: Adult; Cytokines; Fibroblast Growth Factor 7; Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor; Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor; Humans; Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stomatitis
PubMed: 29181845
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011990.pub2