-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2019Osteoradionecrosis (ORN) of the jaws is among the most serious oral complications of head and neck cancer radiotherapy, arising from radiation-induced fibro-atrophic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Osteoradionecrosis (ORN) of the jaws is among the most serious oral complications of head and neck cancer radiotherapy, arising from radiation-induced fibro-atrophic tissue injury, manifested by necrosis of osseous tissues and failure to heal, often secondary to operative interventions in the oral cavity. It is associated with considerable morbidity and has important quality of life ramifications. Since ORN is very difficult to treat effectively, preventive measures to limit the onset of this disease are needed; however, the effects of various preventive interventions has not been adequately quantified.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of interventions for preventing ORN of the jaws in adult patients with head and neck cancer undergoing curative or adjuvant (i.e. non-palliative) radiotherapy.
SEARCH METHODS
Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 5 November 2019), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 10) in the Cochrane Library (searched 5 November 2019), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 5 November 2019), Embase Ovid (1980 to 5 November 2019), Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED) Ovid (1985 to 5 November 2019), Scopus (1966 to 5 November 2019), Proquest Dissertations and Theses International (1861 to 5 November 2019) and Web of Science Conference Proceedings (1990 to 5 November 2019). 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. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs of adult patients 18 years or older with head and neck cancer who had undergone curative or adjuvant radiotherapy to the head and neck, who had received an intervention to prevent the onset of ORN. Eligible patients were those subjected to pre- or post-irradiation dental evaluation. Management of these patients was to be with interventions independent of their cancer therapy, including but not limited to local, systemic, or behavioural interventions.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected trials from search results, assessed risk of bias, and extracted relevant data for inclusion in the review. Authors of included studies were contacted to request missing data. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
Four studies were identified that met pre-determined eligibility criteria, evaluating a total of 342 adults. From the four studies, all assessed as at high risk of bias, three broad interventions were identified that may potentially reduce the risk of ORN development: one study showed no reduction in ORN when using platelet-rich plasma placed in the extraction sockets of prophylactically removed healthy mandibular molar teeth prior to radiotherapy (odds ratio (OR) 3.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58 to 19.09; one trial, 44 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Another study involved comparing fluoride gel and high-content fluoride toothpaste (1350 parts per million (ppm)) in prevention of post-radiation caries, and found no difference between their use as no cases of ORN were reported (one trial, 220 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The other two studies involved the use of perioperative hyperbaric oxygen (HBO) therapy and antibiotics. One study showed that treatment with HBO caused a reduction in the development of ORN in comparison to patients treated with antibiotics following dental extractions (risk ratio (RR) 0.18, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.76; one trial, 74 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Another study found no difference between combined HBO and antibiotics compared to antibiotics alone prior to dental implant placement (RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.14 to 65.16; one trial, 26 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Adverse effects of the different interventions were not reported clearly or were not important.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Given the suboptimal reporting and inadequate sample sizes of the included studies, evidence regarding the interventions evaluated by the trials included in this review is uncertain. More well-designed RCTs with larger samples are required to make conclusive statements regarding the efficacy of these interventions.
Topics: Head and Neck Neoplasms; Humans; Jaw Diseases; Oral Health; Osteoradionecrosis; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31745986
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011559.pub2 -
BMJ Open Jun 2015Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have given contradictory results about the efficacy and safety of ibandronate in treating metastatic bone disease (MBD) or multiple... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have given contradictory results about the efficacy and safety of ibandronate in treating metastatic bone disease (MBD) or multiple myeloma. This review meta-analysed the literature to gain a more comprehensive picture.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis of ibandronate compared with placebo or zoledronate.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched to identify RCTs published up to March 2015 evaluating ibandronate to treat MBD or multiple myeloma.
REVIEW METHOD
10 RCTs involving 3474 patients were included. Six RCTs were placebo-controlled and four compared ibandronate with zoledronate. The studies included in this review were mainly from European countries.
RESULTS
Intravenous ibandronate (6 mg) or oral drug (50 mg) decreased the risk of skeletal-related events compared to placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.90, p=0.002). It also reduced the bone pain score below baseline significantly more than did placebo at 96 weeks (weighted mean difference -0.41, 95% CI -0.56 to -0.27, p<0.001). The incidence of diarrhoea, nausea and adverse renal events was similar between the ibandronate and placebo groups, but ibandronate was associated with greater risk of abdominal pain. Ibandronate was associated with similar risk of skeletal-related events as another bisphosphonate drug, zoledronate (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.26, p=0.87). The incidence of nausea, jaw osteonecrosis and fatigue was similar for the two drugs, but the incidence of adverse renal events was significantly lower in the ibandronate group.
CONCLUSIONS
Ibandronate significantly reduces the incidence of skeletal-related events and bone pain in patients with MBD or multiple myeloma relative to placebo. It is associated with a similar incidence of skeletal-related events as zoledronate.
Topics: Bone Density Conservation Agents; Bone Neoplasms; Bone Resorption; Diphosphonates; Europe; Humans; Ibandronic Acid; Multiple Myeloma; Musculoskeletal Pain; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26038356
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-007258 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2020Different bone-modifying agents like bisphosphonates and receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappa B ligand (RANKL)-inhibitors are used as supportive treatment in men... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Different bone-modifying agents like bisphosphonates and receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappa B ligand (RANKL)-inhibitors are used as supportive treatment in men with prostate cancer and bone metastases to prevent skeletal-related events (SREs). SREs such as pathologic fractures, spinal cord compression, surgery and radiotherapy to the bone, and hypercalcemia lead to morbidity, a poor performance status, and impaired quality of life. Efficacy and acceptability of the bone-targeted therapy is therefore of high relevance. Until now recommendations in guidelines on which bone-modifying agents should be used are rare and inconsistent.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of bisphosphonates and RANKL-inhibitors as supportive treatment for prostate cancer patients with bone metastases and to generate a clinically meaningful treatment ranking according to their safety and efficacy using network meta-analysis.
SEARCH METHODS
We identified studies by electronically searching the bibliographic databases Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase until 23 March 2020. We searched the Cochrane Library and various trial registries and screened abstracts of conference proceedings and reference lists of identified trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials comparing different bisphosphonates and RANKL-inihibitors with each other or against no further treatment or placebo for men with prostate cancer and bone metastases. We included men with castration-restrictive and castration-sensitive prostate cancer and conducted subgroup analyses according to this criteria.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the quality of trials. We defined proportion of participants with pain response and the adverse events renal impairment and osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) as the primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes were SREs in total and each separately (see above), mortality, quality of life, and further adverse events such as grade 3 to 4 adverse events, hypocalcemia, fatigue, diarrhea, and nausea. We conducted network meta-analysis and generated treatment rankings for all outcomes, except quality of life due to insufficient reporting on this outcome. We compiled ranking plots to compare single outcomes of efficacy against outcomes of acceptability of the bone-modifying agents. We assessed the certainty of the evidence for the main outcomes using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
Twenty-five trials fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Twenty-one trials could be considered in the quantitative analysis, of which six bisphosphonates (zoledronic acid, risedronate, pamidronate, alendronate, etidronate, or clodronate) were compared with each other, the RANKL-inhibitor denosumab, or no treatment/placebo. By conducting network meta-analysis we were able to compare all of these reported agents directly and/or indirectly within the network for each outcome. In the abstract only the comparisons of zoledronic acid and denosumab against the main comparator (no treatment/placebo) are described for outcomes that were predefined as most relevant and that also appear in the 'Summary of findings' table. Other results, as well as results of subgroup analyses regarding castration status of participants, are displayed in the Results section of the full text. Treatment with zoledronic acid probably neither reduces nor increases the proportion of participants with pain response when compared to no treatment/placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 2.32; per 1000 participants 121 more (19 less to 349 more); moderate-certainty evidence; network based on 4 trials including 1013 participants). For this outcome none of the trials reported results for the comparison with denosumab. The adverse event renal impairment probably occurs more often when treated with zoledronic acid compared to treatment/placebo (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.45; per 1000 participants 78 more (10 more to 180 more); moderate-certainty evidence; network based on 6 trials including 1769 participants). Results for denosumab could not be included for this outcome, since zero events cannot be considered in the network meta-analysis, therefore it does not appear in the ranking. Treatment with denosumab results in increased occurrence of the adverse event ONJ (RR 3.45, 95% CI 1.06 to 11.24; per 1000 participants 30 more (1 more to 125 more); high-certainty evidence; 4 trials, 3006 participants) compared to no treatment/placebo. When comparing zoledronic acid to no treatment/placebo, the confidence intervals include the possibility of benefit or harm, therefore treatment with zoledronic acid probably neither reduces nor increases ONJ (RR 1.88, 95% CI 0.73 to 4.87; per 1000 participants 11 more (3 less to 47 more); moderate-certainty evidence; network based on 4 trials including 3006 participants). Compared to no treatment/placebo, treatment with zoledronic acid (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.97) and denosumab (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.96) may result in a reduction of the total number of SREs (per 1000 participants 75 fewer (131 fewer to 14 fewer) and 131 fewer (215 fewer to 19 fewer); both low-certainty evidence; 12 trials, 5240 participants). Treatment with zoledronic acid and denosumab likely neither reduces nor increases mortality when compared to no treatment/placebo (zoledronic acid RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.01; per 1000 participants 48 fewer (97 fewer to 5 more); denosumab RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.11; per 1000 participants 34 fewer (111 fewer to 54 more); both moderate-certainty evidence; 13 trials, 5494 participants). Due to insufficient reporting, no network meta-analysis was possible for the outcome quality of life. One study with 1904 participants comparing zoledronic acid and denosumab showed that more zoledronic acid-treated participants than denosumab-treated participants experienced a greater than or equal to five-point decrease in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General total scores over a range of 18 months (average relative difference = 6.8%, range -9.4% to 14.6%) or worsening of cancer-related quality of life.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
When considering bone-modifying agents as supportive treatment, one has to balance between efficacy and acceptability. Results suggest that Zoledronic acid likely increases both the proportion of participants with pain response, and the proportion of participants experiencing adverse events However, more trials with head-to-head comparisons including all potential agents are needed to draw the whole picture and proof the results of this analysis.
Topics: Adult; Alendronate; Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal; Bisphosphonate-Associated Osteonecrosis of the Jaw; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Bone Neoplasms; Clodronic Acid; Denosumab; Diphosphonates; Etidronic Acid; Humans; Male; Network Meta-Analysis; Pamidronate; Prostatic Neoplasms; Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant; Quality of Life; RANK Ligand; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risedronic Acid; Zoledronic Acid
PubMed: 33270906
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013020.pub2 -
The Oncologist 2013The purpose of the study was to estimate the impact on survival and fracture rates of the use of zoledronic acid versus no use (or delayed use) in the adjuvant treatment... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The purpose of the study was to estimate the impact on survival and fracture rates of the use of zoledronic acid versus no use (or delayed use) in the adjuvant treatment of patients with early-stage (stages I-III) breast cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Trials were located through PubMed, ISI, Cochrane Library, and major cancer scientific meeting searches. All trials that randomized patients with primary breast cancer to undergo adjuvant treatment with zoledronic acid versus nonuse, placebo, or delayed use of zoledronic acid as treatment to individuals who develop osteoporosis were considered eligible. Standard meta-analytic procedures were used to analyze the study outcomes.
RESULTS
Fifteen studies were considered eligible and were further analyzed. The use of zoledronic acid resulted in a statistically significant better overall survival outcome (five studies, 6,414 patients; hazard ratio [HR], 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70-0.94). No significant differences were found for the disease-free survival outcome (seven studies, 7,541 patients; HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.70-1.06) or incidence of bone metastases (seven studies, 7,543 patients; odds ratio [OR], 0.94; 95% CI, 0.64-1.37). Treatment with zoledronic acid led to a significantly lower overall fracture rate (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.63-0.96). Finally, the rate of osteonecrosis of the jaw was 0.52%.
CONCLUSION
Zoledronic acid as adjuvant therapy in breast cancer patients appears to not only reduce the fracture risk but also offer a survival benefit over placebo or no treatment.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Diphosphonates; Disease-Free Survival; Female; Fractures, Bone; Humans; Imidazoles; Neoplasm Staging; Osteoporosis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome; Zoledronic Acid
PubMed: 23404816
DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2012-0261 -
PloS One 2012Ameloblastoma is a locally aggressive odontogenic neoplasm. With local recurrence rates reaching 90%, only completeness of excision can facilitate cure. Surgical... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
BACKGROUND
Ameloblastoma is a locally aggressive odontogenic neoplasm. With local recurrence rates reaching 90%, only completeness of excision can facilitate cure. Surgical clearance has widely been based on pre-operative imaging to guide operative excision margins, however use of intra-operative specimen x-ray or frozen-section has been sought to improve clearance rates, and advanced imaging technologies in this role have been proposed. This manuscript aims to quantify the evidence for evaluating intra-operative resection margins and present the current standard in this role.
METHOD
The current study comprises the first reported comparison of imaging modalities for assessing ameloblastoma margins. A case is presented in which margins are assessed with each of clinical assessment based on preoperative imaging, intra-operative specimen x-ray, intra-operative specimen computed tomography (CT) and definitive histology. Each modality is compared quantitatively. These results are compared to the literature through means of systematic review of current evidence.
RESULTS
A comparative study highlights the role for CT imaging over plain radiography. With no other comparative studies and a paucity of high level evidence establishing a role for intra-operative margin assessment in ameloblastoma in the literature, only level 4 evidence supporting the use of frozen section and specimen x-ray, and only one level 4 study assesses intra-operative CT.
CONCLUSION
The current study suggests that intra-operative specimen CT offers an improvement over existing techniques in this role. While establishing a gold-standard will require higher level comparative studies, the use of intra-operative CT can facilitate accurate single-stage resection.
Topics: Ameloblastoma; Female; Frozen Sections; Histocytochemistry; Humans; Intraoperative Period; Jaw Neoplasms; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Surgery, Computer-Assisted; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; Young Adult
PubMed: 23094099
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0047897 -
Indian Journal of Dental Research :... 2018Ameloblastoma is a benign locally aggressive type of odontogenic tumor derived exclusively from the epithelium. Histologically, ameloblastoma is classified into many...
Ameloblastoma is a benign locally aggressive type of odontogenic tumor derived exclusively from the epithelium. Histologically, ameloblastoma is classified into many variants, of which granular cell ameloblastoma (GCA) is a rare type, characterized by nest of large eosinophilic granular cells. This article describes a case of GCA in a 50-year-old female patient with clinical, radiological, and histological features along with a systematic review of the literature.
Topics: Ameloblastoma; Diagnosis, Differential; Female; Granular Cell Tumor; Humans; Jaw Neoplasms; Mandibular Osteotomy; Middle Aged; Photomicrography; Plastic Surgery Procedures; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30589015
DOI: 10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_407_17 -
Medicina Oral, Patologia Oral Y Cirugia... Mar 2024Segmental surgical resection is a frequently indicated procedure to treat aggressive mandibular tumors. One of the most important complications derived from this...
BACKGROUND
Segmental surgical resection is a frequently indicated procedure to treat aggressive mandibular tumors. One of the most important complications derived from this technique is permanent paresthesia of the inferior alveolar nerve (IAN), which significantly affects the quality of life of patients who experience it. This could be avoided through maneuvers that preserve the IAN. The objective of this paper is to review the main techniques for IAN preservation and to present 2 cases with the technique used by the author.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines, apropos of two clinical cases reported in this study. The MEDLINE/PubMed and Scopus databases were searched. Several variables were considered and are presented in detail in the form of tables and figures. In addition, 2 case reports with NAI preservation techniques are presented.
RESULTS
13 articles were finally obtained for analysis. 127 patients were evaluated, reporting mandibular resections associated with various pathologies. Various surgical techniques were used, all with the same goal of maintaining the IAN. In most of the patients, the maintenance of sensitivity was achieved, which was verified with different methods.
CONCLUSIONS
Preservation of the IAN in maxillofacial surgical procedures where surgical resection of the mandibular bone has been performed is an alternative that has demonstrated successful results in terms of reducing postoperative sequelae and is currently positioned as a necessary and feasible procedure.
Topics: Humans; Quality of Life; Mandible; Mandibular Nerve; Mandibular Neoplasms; Tooth Extraction
PubMed: 37823290
DOI: 10.4317/medoral.26239