Search

Purpose: This systematic review aimed to assess the updated literature for the prevention of salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia induced by non-surgical cancer therapies., Methods: Electronic databases of MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) that investigated interventions to prevent salivary gland hypofunction and/or xerostomia. Literature search began from the 2010 systematic review publications from the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO) up to February 2024. Two independent reviewers extracted information regarding study design, study population, cancer treatment modality, interventions, outcome measures, methods, results, risk of bias (RoB version 2), and conclusions for each article., Results: A total of 51 publications addressing preventive interventions were included. Eight RCTs on tissue-sparing radiation modalities were included showing significant lower prevalence of xerostomia, with unclear effect on salivary gland hypofunction. Three RCTs on preventive acupuncture showed reduced prevalence of xerostomia but not of salivary gland hypofunction. Two RCTs on muscarinic agonist stimulation with bethanechol suggested a preventive effect on saliva flow rate and xerostomia in patients undergoing head and neck radiation or radioactive iodine therapy. Two studies on submandibular gland transfer showed higher salivary flow rates compared to pilocarpine and lower prevalence of xerostomia compared to no active intervention. There is insufficient evidence on the effectiveness of vitamin E, amifostine, photobiomodulation, and miscellaneous preventive interventions., Conclusion: This systematic review continues to support the potential of tissue-sparing tecniques and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) to preserve salivary gland function in patients with head and neck cancer, with limited evidence on other preventive strategies, including acupuncture and bethanecol. Preventive focus should be on optimized and new approaches developed to further reduce radiation dose to the parotid, the submandibular, and minor salivary glands. As these glands are major contributors to moistening of the oral cavity, limiting the radiation dose to the salivary glands through various modalities has demonstrated reduction in prevalence and severity of salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia. There remains no evidence on preventive approaches for checkpoint inhibitors and other biologicals due to the lack of RCTs., Competing Interests: Declarations. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests., (© 2025. The Author(s).)

Background: Oral mucositis is a painful and debilitating condition that occurs in the majority of head and neck cancer patients receiving radiation and/or chemotherapy. While some patient and treatment related factors are known to contribute to the incidence and severity of disease, reliable biomarkers remain elusive. In the following study, we investigated the association of salivary DNA methylation derived biological aging, cellular frequency and protein concentration measures with the severity of oral mucositis and overall survival in a cohort of head and neck cancer (HNC) patients (n = 103)., Methods: DNA methylation profiling was performed on saliva samples obtained prior to treatment. Biological aging measures included Horvath2, PhenoAge, FitAge and GrimAge, and cellular frequency included epithelial and specific immune cell populations., Results: Severe mucositis (i.e. grade 3 or 4) occurred in nearly half of patients. For malignant HNC patients (n = 84), every 1-SD increase in GrimAge was associated with 2.62-times risk of severe mucositis (95 % CI: 1.38, 5.57), while a 1-SD increase in monocyte frequency was associated with a decreased risk (OR [95 %CI]: 0.40 [0.18, 0.80]). Over a median follow-up of 53 months, 39 of 103 participants died. Six protein scores (TNFSF14, GCSF, MATN3, GDF8, nCDase, TNF-β) were associated with survival at q < 0.15., Conclusion: We provide evidence that the risk-related biological aging measure GrimAge may be a useful predictor of mucositis severity in HNC patients. Salivary monocyte frequency may be protective against mucositis, and this measure could be used as a predictive biomarker while also providing clues into the pathobiology of the disease., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Candidiasis is a highly pervasive infection posing major health risks, especially for immunocompromised populations. Pathogenic Candida species have evolved intrinsic and acquired resistance to a variety of antifungal medications. The primary goal of this literature review is to summarize the molecular mechanisms associated with antifungal resistance in Candida species. Resistance can be conferred via gain-of-function mutations in target pathway genes or their transcriptional regulators. Therefore, an overview of the known gene mutations is presented for the following antifungals: azoles (fluconazole, voriconazole, posaconazole and itraconazole), echinocandins (caspofungin, anidulafungin and micafungin), polyenes (amphotericin B and nystatin) and 5-fluorocytosine (5-FC). The following mutation hot spots were identified: (1) ergosterol biosynthesis pathway mutations (ERG11 and UPC2), resulting in azole resistance; (2) overexpression of the efflux pumps, promoting azole resistance (transcription factor genes: tac1 and mrr1 ; transporter genes: CDR1, CDR2, MDR1, PDR16 and SNQ2); (3) cell wall biosynthesis mutations (FKS1, FKS2 and PDR1), conferring resistance to echinocandins; (4) mutations of nucleic acid synthesis/repair genes (FCY1, FCY2 and FUR1), resulting in 5-FC resistance; and (5) biofilm production, promoting general antifungal resistance. This review also provides a summary of standardized inhibitory breakpoints obtained from international guidelines for prominent Candida species. Notably, N. glabrata , P. kudriavzevii and C. auris demonstrate fluconazole resistance.

Smoking during cancer treatment is associated with reduced treatment response and cancer recurrence in patients with tobacco-related cancers. The purpose of this study was to examine smoking characteristics in head and neck cancer patients ( n = 503) with a history of smoking and examine the impact of an intensive clinical tobacco intervention to patients who were currently smoking. All participants completed an interviewer-administered questionnaire at study enrollment which examined smoking behaviours, motivations to quit, and strategies used to cessate smoking. Follow-up assessments were completed at 6- and 12-months which monitored whether patients had quit smoking, remained cessated, or continued to smoke since study recruitment. For those who were currently smoking ( n = 186, 37.0%), an intensive clinical tobacco intervention that utilized the 3A's-Ask, Advise, Arrange-and the Opt-Out approach was offered to assist with smoking cessation at their new patient visit and followed-up weekly during their head and neck radiation therapy for 7 weeks. At 6 months, 23.7% ( n = 41) of those who were smoking successfully quit; 51.2% quit 'cold turkey' (defined as using no smoking cessation assistance, aids or pharmacotherapy to quit), while 34.9% used pharmacotherapy (varenicline (Champix)) to quit. On average, it took those who were smoking 1-5 attempts to quit, but once they quit they remained cessated for the duration of the study. Although the head and neck cancer patients in this study reported high levels of nicotine dependence, many were able to successfully cessate.

Background: Oral lichen planus (OLP) is a chronic inflammatory disorder of the oral mucosa. Currently there is no approved treatment for OLP. We report on the efficacy and safety of a novel mucoadhesive clobetasol patch (Rivelin ® -CLO) for the treatment of OLP., Methods: Patients with confirmed OLP and measurable symptomatic ulcer(s) participated in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter clinical trial testing a novel mucoadhesive clobetasol patch (Rivelin ® -CLO) in OLP across Europe, Canada, and the United States. Patients were randomized to placebo (nonmedicated), 1, 5, 20 µg Clobetasol/patch, twice daily, for 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was change in total ulcer area compared to baseline. Secondary endpoints included improvement from baseline in pain, disease activity, and quality of life., Results: Data were analyzed and expressed as mean [SD]. One hundred thirty-eight patients were included in the study; 99 females and 39 males, mean age was 61.1 [11.6] years. Statistical analyses revealed that treatment with 20-μg Rivelin ® -CLO patches demonstrated significant improvement with ulcer area (p = 0.047), symptom severity (p = 0.001), disease activity (p = 0.022), pain (p = 0.012), and quality of life (p = 0.003) as compared with placebo. Improvement in OLP symptoms from beginning to the end of the study was reported as very much better (best rating) in the 20-µg group (25/32) patients compared to the placebo group (11/30), (p = 0.012). Adverse events were mild/moderate. Candidiasis incidence was low (2%)., Conclusions: Rivelin ® -CLO patches were superior to placebo demonstrating statistically significant, clinically relevant efficacy in objective and subjective improvement and, with a favorable safety profile., (© 2022 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Purpose: To provide evidence-based recommendations for prevention and management of salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia induced by nonsurgical cancer therapies., Methods: Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO) and ASCO convened a multidisciplinary Expert Panel to evaluate the evidence and formulate recommendations. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials published between January 2009 and June 2020. The guideline also incorporated two previous systematic reviews conducted by MASCC/ISOO, which included studies published from 1990 through 2008., Results: A total of 58 publications were identified: 46 addressed preventive interventions and 12 addressed therapeutic interventions. A majority of the evidence focused on the setting of radiation therapy for head and neck cancer. For the prevention of salivary gland hypofunction and/or xerostomia in patients with head and neck cancer, there is high-quality evidence for tissue-sparing radiation modalities. Evidence is weaker or insufficient for other interventions. For the management of salivary gland hypofunction and/or xerostomia, intermediate-quality evidence supports the use of topical mucosal lubricants, saliva substitutes, and agents that stimulate the salivary reflex., Recommendations: For patients who receive radiation therapy for head and neck cancer, tissue-sparing radiation modalities should be used when possible to reduce the risk of salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia. Other risk-reducing interventions that may be offered during radiation therapy for head and neck cancer include bethanechol and acupuncture. For patients who develop salivary gland hypofunction and/or xerostomia, interventions include topical mucosal lubricants, saliva substitutes, and sugar-free lozenges or chewing gum. For patients with head and neck cancer, oral pilocarpine and oral cevimeline, acupuncture, or transcutaneous electrostimulation may be offered after radiation therapy.Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines., Competing Interests: Reprint Requests:2318 Mill Road, Suite 800, Alexandria, VA 22314; guidelines@asco.org Jessica BaumanConsulting or Advisory Role: Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Kura Oncology, Merck, BeiGene, Lilly, Turning Point Therapeutics, Blueprint Medicines, JanssenResearch Funding: Bristol Myers SquibbTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Trident Pharmaceuticals Michael T. BrennanConsulting or Advisory Role: MedImmune, DermtreatResearch Funding: Dermtreat, ActoGeniX, Meira Tx Niels JessenOther Relationship: Health Care Select Sector Barbara MurphyHonoraria: Merck, RegeneronConsulting or Advisory Role: TactileResearch Funding: Tactile Medical, Amgen David I. RosenthalConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck Arjan VissinkResearch Funding: Colgate, Bristol Myers Squibb, European Community (Horizon 2020), Durch arthritis Foundation, IMI Necessity Jonn WuHonoraria: Genzyme, EisaiConsulting or Advisory Role: Eisai Deborah P. SaundersHonoraria: Amgen, PfizerConsulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, AFYX TherapeuticsResearch Funding: AmgenTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Amgen Douglas E. PetersonStock and Other Ownership Interests: Allergan, Celgene, Gilead Sciences, Procter & Gamble, Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, Johnson & JohnsonHonoraria: PierianDxConsulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, PSI Pharma Support America, Applied Glycan-Oral Health, AEC Partners, BrainCoolNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Objective: The aim of this sub-analysis was to highlight the MASCC/ISOO clinical practice guidelines for the management of oral mucositis (OM) in pediatric patients and to present unique considerations in this patient population., Methods: This sub-analysis of the pediatric patient population is based on the systematic review conducted by the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISSO) published in 2019/2020. Studies were scored and assigned a level of evidence based on previously published criteria. Data regarding adverse effects and compliance was collected from the original publications., Results: A total of 45 papers were included and assessed in this sub-analysis, including 21 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Chewing gum was demonstrated to be not effective in preventing OM in pediatric cancer patients in 2 RCTs. The efficacy of all other interventions could not be determined based on the available literature., Conclusion: There is limited or conflicting evidence about interventions for the management of OM in pediatric cancer patients, except for chewing gum which was ineffective for prevention. Therefore, currently, data from adult studies may need to be extrapolated for the management of pediatric patients. Honey and photobiomodulation therapy in this patient population had encouraging potential. Implementation of a basic oral care protocol is advised amid lack of high level of evidence studies.

Background: Mucositis is a significant toxicity of cancer therapy with numerous systemic sequelae. The goal of this systematic review was to update the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer and International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO) Clinical Practice Guidelines for the management of mucositis., Methods: The literature was reviewed systematically to identify interventions for mucositis. Studies were rated according to the presence of major and minor flaws according to previously published criteria. The body of evidence for each intervention and in each treatment setting was assigned a level of evidence based on previously published criteria. Guidelines were developed based on the level of evidence, with 3 possible guideline determinations: recommendation, suggestion, or no guideline possible., Results: The guideline covers evidence from 1197 publications related to oral or gastrointestinal mucositis. Thirteen new guidelines were developed for or against the use of various interventions in specific treatment settings, and 11 previous guidelines were confirmed after aa review of new evidence. Thirteen previously established guidelines were carried over because there was no new evidence for these interventions., Conclusions: The updated MASCC/ISOO Clinical Practice Guidelines for mucositis provide professional health caregivers with a clinical setting-specific, evidence-based tool to help with the management of mucositis in patients who have cancer., (© 2020 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

Purpose: To update the clinical practice guidelines for the use of antimicrobials, mucosal coating agents, anesthetics, and analgesics for the prevention and/or treatment of oral mucositis (OM)., Methods: A systematic review was conducted by the Mucositis Study Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO). The body of evidence for each intervention, in each cancer treatment setting, was assigned an evidence level. The findings were added to the database used to develop the 2014 MASCC/ISOO clinical practice guidelines. Based on the evidence level, the following guidelines were determined: Recommendation, Suggestion, and No Guideline Possible., Results: A total of 9 new papers were identified within the scope of this section, adding to the 62 papers reviewed in this section previously. A new Suggestion was made for topical 0.2% morphine for the treatment of OM-associated pain in head and neck (H&N) cancer patients treated with RT-CT (modification of previous guideline). A previous Recommendation against the use of sucralfate-combined systemic and topical formulation in the prevention of OM in solid cancer treatment with CT was changed from Recommendation Against to No Guideline Possible. Suggestion for doxepin and fentanyl for the treatment of mucositis-associated pain in H&N cancer patients was changed to No Guideline Possible., Conclusions: Of the agents studied for the management of OM in this paper, the evidence supports a Suggestion in favor of topical morphine 0.2% in H&N cancer patients treated with RT-CT for the treatment of OM-associated pain.

Purpose: Oral mucositis (OM) remains a common, debilitating toxicity of radiation therapy (RT) for head and neck cancer. The goal of this phase IIb, multi-institutional, randomized, double-blind trial was to compare the efficacy and safety of GC4419, a superoxide dismutase mimetic, with placebo to reduce the duration, incidence, and severity of severe OM (SOM)., Patients and Methods: A total of 223 patients (from 44 institutions) with locally advanced oral cavity or oropharynx cancer planned to be treated with definitive or postoperative intensity-modulated RT (IMRT; 60 to 72 Gy [≥ 50 Gy to two or more oral sites]) plus cisplatin (weekly or every 3 weeks) were randomly assigned to receive 30 mg (n = 73) or 90 mg (n = 76) of GC4419 or to receive placebo (n = 74) by 60-minute intravenous administration before each IMRT fraction. WHO grade of OM was assessed biweekly during IMRT and then weekly for up to 8 weeks after IMRT. The primary endpoint was duration of SOM tested for each active dose level versus placebo (intent-to-treat population, two-sided α of .05). The National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.03, was used for adverse event grading., Results: Baseline patient and tumor characteristics as well as treatment delivery were balanced. With 90 mg GC4419 versus placebo, SOM duration was significantly reduced ( P = .024; median, 1.5 v 19 days). SOM incidence (43% v 65%; P = .009) and severity (grade 4 incidence, 16% v 30%; P = .045) also were improved. Intermediate improvements were seen with the 30-mg dose. Safety was comparable across arms, with no significant GC4419-specific toxicity nor increase of known toxicities of IMRT plus cisplatin. The 2-year follow-up for tumor outcomes is ongoing., Conclusion: GC4419 at a dose of 90 mg produced a significant, clinically meaningful reduction of SOM duration, incidence, and severity with acceptable safety. A phase III trial (ROMAN; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03689712) has begun.

Purpose: To provide guidance regarding best practices in the prevention and management of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) in patients with cancer., Methods: Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO) and ASCO convened a multidisciplinary Expert Panel to evaluate the evidence and formulate recommendations. Guideline development involved a systematic review of the literature and a formal consensus process. PubMed and EMBASE were searched for studies of the prevention and management of MRONJ related to bone-modifying agents (BMAs) for oncologic indications published between January 2009 and December 2017. Results from an earlier systematic review (2003 to 2008) were also included., Results: The systematic review identified 132 publications, only 10 of which were randomized controlled trials. Recommendations underwent two rounds of consensus voting., Recommendations: Currently, MRONJ is defined by (1) current or previous treatment with a BMA or angiogenic inhibitor, (2) exposed bone or bone that can be probed through an intraoral or extraoral fistula in the maxillofacial region and that has persisted for longer than 8 weeks, and (3) no history of radiation therapy to the jaws or metastatic disease to the jaws. In patients who initiate a BMA, preventive care includes comprehensive dental assessments, discussion of modifiable risk factors, and avoidance of elective dentoalveolar surgery (ie, surgery that involves the teeth or contiguous alveolar bone) during BMA treatment. It remains uncertain whether BMAs should be discontinued before dentoalveolar surgery. Staging of MRONJ should be performed by a clinician with experience in the management of MRONJ. Conservative measures comprise the initial approach to MRONJ treatment. Ongoing collaboration among the dentist, dental specialist, and oncologist is essential to optimal patient care.

Purpose: This observational case registry study was designed to describe the natural history of cancer patients with medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) and evaluate the ONJ resolution rate., Methods: Adults with a diagnosis of cancer and with a new diagnosis of ONJ were enrolled and evaluated by a dental specialist at baseline and every 3 months for 2 years and then every 6 months for 3 years until death, consent withdrawal, or loss to follow-up. The primary endpoint was the rate and time course of ONJ resolution. Secondary endpoints included frequency of incident ONJ risk factors, ONJ treatment patterns, and treatment patterns of antiresorptive agents for subsequent ONJ., Results: Overall, 327 patients were enrolled; 207 (63%) were continuing on study at data cutoff. Up to 69% of evaluable patients with ONJ had resolution or improvement during the study. ONJ resolution (AAOMS ONJ staging criteria) was observed in 114 patients (35%); median (interquartile range) time from ONJ onset to resolution was 7.3 (4.5-11.4) months. Most patients (97%) had received antiresorptive medication before ONJ development, 9 patients (3%) had not; 68% had received zoledronic acid, 38% had received denosumab, and 10% had received pamidronate (56% had received bisphosphonates only, 18% had received denosumab only, and 21% had exposure to both)., Conclusions: These results are consistent with those observed in clinical trials evaluating skeletal-related events in patients with advanced malignancy involving bone. Longer follow-up will provide further information on ONJ recurrence and resolution rates between medically and surgically managed patients.

Introduction: This systematic review aims to update on the prevalence of odontogenic-related infections and the efficacy of dental strategies in preventing dental-related complications in cancer patients since the 2010 systematic review., Review Method: A literature search was conducted in the databases MEDLINE/PubMed and EMBASE for articles published between 1 January 2009 and 30 June 2016. Each study was assessed by 2 reviewers and the body of evidence for each intervention was assigned an evidence level., Results: After examination of the abstracts and full-text articles, 59 articles satisfied the inclusion criteria. The weighted prevalence of dental infections and pericoronitis during cancer therapy was 5.4 and 5.3%, respectively. The frequency of dental-related infections during intensive chemotherapy after complete, partial, and minimal pre-cancer dental evaluation/treatment protocols ranged from 0 to 4%. Protocols involving third molars extractions had the highest complications (40%)., Conclusions: In view of the low prevalence of infections and the potential for complications after third molar extractions, it is suggested that partial dental evaluation/treatment protocols prior to intensive chemotherapy; whereby minor caries (within dentin), asymptomatic third molars or asymptomatic teeth without excessive probing depth (<8 mm), mobility (mobility I or II) or with periapical lesions of <5 mm were observed; is a viable option when there is insufficient time for complete dental evaluation/treatment protocols. The use of chlorhexidine, fluoride mouth rinses as well as composite resin, resin-modified glass ionomer cement (GIC), and amalgam restorations over conventional GIC in post head and neck radiation patients who are compliant fluoride users is recommended.

Patients undergoing radiation therapy for the head and neck are susceptible to a significant and often abrupt deterioration in their oral health. The oral morbidities of radiation therapy include but are not limited to an increased susceptibility to dental caries and periodontal disease. They also include profound and often permanent functional and sensory changes involving the oral soft tissue. These changes range from oral mucositis experienced during and soon after treatment, mucosal opportunistic infections, neurosensory disorders, and tissue fibrosis. Many of the oral soft tissue changes following radiation therapy are difficult challenges to the patients and their caregivers and require life-long strategies to alleviate their deleterious effect on basic life functions and on the quality of life. We discuss the presentation, prognosis, and management strategies of the dental structure and oral soft tissue morbidities resulting from the administration of therapeutic radiation in head and neck patient. A case for a collaborative and integrated multidisciplinary approach to the management of these patients is made, with specific recommendation to include knowledgeable and experienced oral health care professionals in the treatment team., (© 2017 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) has been associated with antiresorptive therapy in both oncology and osteoporosis patients. This debilitating condition is very rare and advances in diagnosis and management may now effectively reduce the risk of its development and offer valuable treatment options for affected patients. This paper provides a case-based review of ONJ and application of the International Task Force on ONJ (referred to as the "Task Force") recommendations for the diagnosis and management of ONJ. The Task Force was supported by 14 international societies and achieved consensus from representatives of these multidisciplinary societies on key issues pertaining to the diagnosis and management of ONJ. The frequency of ONJ in oncology patients receiving oncology doses of bisphosphonate (BP) or denosumab is estimated at 1%-15%, and the frequency in the osteoporosis patient population receiving much lower doses of BP or denosumab is estimated at 0.001%-0.01%. Although the diagnosis of ONJ is primarily clinical, imaging may be helpful in confirming the diagnosis and staging. In those with multiple risk factors for ONJ for whom major invasive oral surgery is being planned, interruption of BP or denosumab therapy (in cancer patients) is advised, if possible, before surgery, until the surgical site heals. Major oral surgery in this context could include multiple extractions if surgical extractions are required, not simple forceps extractions. ONJ development may be reduced by optimizing oral hygiene and postoperatively using topical and systemic antibiotics as appropriate. Periodontal disease should be managed before starting oncology doses of BP or denosumab. Local debridement may be successful in disease unresponsive to conservative therapy. Successful surgical intervention has been reported in those with stage 3 disease; less severe disease is best managed conservatively. Teriparatide may be helpful in healing ONJ lesions and may be considered in osteoporosis patients at a high fracture risk in the absence of contraindications. Resumption of BP or denosumab therapy following healing of ONJ lesions is recommended, and there have not been reports of subsequent local recurrence., (Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: The oral cavity is frequently affected in chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD), with variable clinical presentations. The literature on the effective management of patients suffering from oral cGVHD is limited., Objective: The objective of this study was to assess the clinical approaches used in the diagnosis and treatment of cGVHD in a group of health-care providers specialized in the oral care of oncology patients. The secondary objective was to assess the level of implementation of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) guidelines for cGVHD patients., Methods: One hundred twenty questionnaires were sent to the members of the Oral Care Study Group (OCSG) of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO). The questionnaire included 50 questions about the responder's demographics, level of exposure to cGVHD patients, diagnostic and evaluation methods in their practice, preferred treatment strategies for mucosal and salivary gland involvement, and preventive measures., Results: Twelve responders, representing 12 sites, stated that they treat oral cGVHD patients on a regular basis. This fraction of responders was confirmed by another online survey. Eleven out of the 12 providers were dentists. Seventy-five percent of the providers did not use biopsy in order to diagnose oral cGVHD. The NIH scale for the clinical assessment was used sporadically. The first-line topical treatment for oral mucosal cGVHD was predominantly steroids (91.7 %), and the second preferred treatment was tacrolimus (41.7 %). The preferred treatment for hyposalivation was pilocarpine (41.7 %). The recommended frequency of oral cancer screening varied; half of the providers suggest a follow-up every 6 months., Conclusions: The responses described the common practices for oral cGVHD in several specialized centers across the world. The choice of topical treatments was influenced by the availability of medications in the provider's country.

This work provides a systematic review of the literature from January 2003 to April 2014 pertaining to the incidence, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment of osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ), and offers recommendations for its management based on multidisciplinary international consensus. ONJ is associated with oncology-dose parenteral antiresorptive therapy of bisphosphonates (BP) and denosumab (Dmab). The incidence of ONJ is greatest in the oncology patient population (1% to 15%), where high doses of these medications are used at frequent intervals. In the osteoporosis patient population, the incidence of ONJ is estimated at 0.001% to 0.01%, marginally higher than the incidence in the general population (<0.001%). New insights into the pathophysiology of ONJ include antiresorptive effects of BPs and Dmab, effects of BPs on gamma delta T-cells and on monocyte and macrophage function, as well as the role of local bacterial infection, inflammation, and necrosis. Advances in imaging include the use of cone beam computerized tomography assessing cortical and cancellous architecture with lower radiation exposure, magnetic resonance imaging, bone scanning, and positron emission tomography, although plain films often suffice. Other risk factors for ONJ include glucocorticoid use, maxillary or mandibular bone surgery, poor oral hygiene, chronic inflammation, diabetes mellitus, ill-fitting dentures, as well as other drugs, including antiangiogenic agents. Prevention strategies for ONJ include elimination or stabilization of oral disease prior to initiation of antiresorptive agents, as well as maintenance of good oral hygiene. In those patients at high risk for the development of ONJ, including cancer patients receiving high-dose BP or Dmab therapy, consideration should be given to withholding antiresorptive therapy following extensive oral surgery until the surgical site heals with mature mucosal coverage. Management of ONJ is based on the stage of the disease, size of the lesions, and the presence of contributing drug therapy and comorbidity. Conservative therapy includes topical antibiotic oral rinses and systemic antibiotic therapy. Localized surgical debridement is indicated in advanced nonresponsive disease and has been successful. Early data have suggested enhanced osseous wound healing with teriparatide in those without contraindications for its use. Experimental therapy includes bone marrow stem cell intralesional transplantation, low-level laser therapy, local platelet-derived growth factor application, hyperbaric oxygen, and tissue grafting., (© 2014 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.)

Purpose: Hematology-oncology patients undergoing chemotherapy and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) recipients are at risk for oral complications which may cause significant morbidity and a potential risk of mortality. This emphasizes the importance of basic oral care prior to, during and following chemotherapy/HSCT. While scientific evidence is available to support some of the clinical practices used to manage the oral complications, expert opinion is needed to shape the current optimal protocols., Methods: This position paper was developed by members of the Oral Care Study Group, Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO) and the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) in attempt to provide guidance to the health care providers managing these patient populations., Results: The protocol on basic oral care outlined in this position paper is presented based on the following principles: prevention of infections, pain control, maintaining oral function, the interplay with managing oral complications of cancer treatment and improving quality of life., Conclusion: Using these fundamental elements, we developed a protocol to assist the health care provider and present a practical approach for basic oral care. Research is warranted to provide robust scientific evidence and to enhance this clinical protocol.

Oral mucositis is a significant toxicity of systemic chemotherapy and of radiation therapy to the head and neck region. The morbidity of oral mucositis can include pain, nutritional compromise, impact on quality of life, alteration in cancer therapy, risk for infection, and economic costs. Management includes general symptomatic support and targeted therapeutic interventions for the prevention or treatment of oral mucositis. Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines are available to guide clinicians in the selection of effective management strategies., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The aim of this project was to develop clinical practice guidelines on the use of antimicrobials, mucosal coating agents, anesthetics, and analgesics for the prevention and management of oral mucositis (OM) in cancer patients., Methods: A systematic review of the available literature was conducted. The body of evidence for the use of each agent, in each setting, was assigned a level of evidence. Based on the evidence level, one of the following three guideline determinations was possible: recommendation, suggestion, or no guideline possible., Results: A recommendation was developed in favor of patient-controlled analgesia with morphine in hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) patients. Suggestions were developed in favor of transdermal fentanyl in standard dose chemotherapy and HSCT patients and morphine mouth rinse and doxepin rinse in head and neck radiation therapy (H&N RT) patients. Recommendations were developed against the use of topical antimicrobial agents for the prevention of mucositis. These included recommendations against the use of iseganan for mucositis prevention in HSCT and H&N RT and against the use of antimicrobial lozenges (polymyxin-tobramycin-amphotericin B lozenges/paste and bacitracin-clotrimazole-gentamicin lozenges) for mucositis prevention in H&N RT. Recommendations were developed against the use of the mucosal coating agent sucralfate for the prevention or treatment of chemotherapy-induced or radiation-induced OM. No guidelines were possible for any other agent due to insufficient and/or conflicting evidence., Conclusion: Additional well-designed research is needed on prevention and management approaches for OM.