Search

Purpose: This study examines the risk of severe oral mucositis (SOM) in graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis (GVHD) compared to other agents in hematopoietic cell transplantation patients. Methods: A comprehensive search of four databases, including PubMed, Embassy, Web of Science, and Scopus, was conducted to identify studies reporting frequency and severity of oral mucositis in association with GVHD prophylactic regimens. RevMan 5.4 was used to perform the meta-analysis. Risk of bias assessment was carried out using the Rob-2 tool for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and ROBINS-I tool for observational studies. Results: Twenty-five papers, including 11 RCTs and 14 observational studies, met the inclusion criteria. The pooled results from eight RCTs showed a higher risk of SOM in patients receiving MTX or MTX-inclusive GVHD prophylaxis versus non-MTX alternatives (RR = 1.50, 95% CI [1.20, 1.87], I2 = 36%, P = 0.0003). Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and post-transplant cyclophosphamide (Pt-Cy) consistently showed lower risk of mucositis than MTX. Folinic acid (FA) rescue and mini-dosing of MTX were associated with reduced oral mucositis severity. Conclusion: Patients receiving MTX have a higher SOM risk compared to other approaches to prevent GVHD, which should be considered in patient care. When appropriate, MMF, FA, and a mini-dose of MTX may be an alternative that is associated with less SOM. This work also underlines the scarcity of RCTs on MTX interventions to provide the best evidence-based recommendations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Neutropenic ulcerations are characterized by mucosal ulcerations which occur in the presence of neutropenia, suggesting a direct link between neutropenia and mucosal ulceration. An oral ulcer can be labeled as “neutropenic” only if the patients have primary (typically congenital) or secondary neutropenia, and neutropenia is the sole causative factor. Oral mucosal ulcers observed in patients undergoing oncologic therapy may also be termed as “neutropenic ulcers”, but the pathogenesis of these oral ulcers more likely involves mucosal events related to trauma, microbial factors, and direct cytotoxicity. In cancer patients, the early appearance of oral ulcers is often attributed to oral mucositis which is a condition primarily caused by the direct mucosal cytotoxicity of chemotherapeutic agents and radiation therapy. Oral ulcers that develop later during or after active cancer therapy may result from intraoral trauma and typically manifest on non-keratinized areas of the oral mucosa which are more susceptible to mucosal damage. In patients undergoing chemotherapy, factors such as disturbances in mucosal barrier function as well as bone marrow suppression lead to reduced neutrophil count and function, and can contribute to the development of oral ulcers. While the etiology of oral ulcers in cancer therapy receiving patients can vary, it is important to emphasize that the host’s response plays a crucial role in the progression and repair process of these lesions. This narrative review presents the etiopathogenesis, clinical presentation, and potential management approaches for oral ulcerations in neutropenic patients, with a particular focus on clarifying the usage of the term “neutropenic ulcer” since this term lacks diagnostic specificity and can be misleading in clinical practice regarding the underlying causes and treatment strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study presents follow-up of a prior study of patients with chronic symptomatic oral chronic graft-versus-host-disease (cGVHD) managed with photobiomodulation therapy (PBM therapy for 1 month. Here, we report long-term follow-up of a series of patients where PBM therapy in patients with oral cGVHD for maintenance follows the initial period of PBM therapy for continuing management. Patients and methods: We report continuing follow-up of 7 cases of oral cGVHD that were treated with PBM therapy. PBM therapy was continued in these patients with the goal of determining the best management schedule of PBM to maintain or improve control of each patient's symptoms and signs of oral cGVHD. Results: Oral sensitivity and mucosal changes of cGVHD were controlled with a continuing schedule of PBM therapy of up to 6–8-week treatment intervals in patients with continuing GVHD. These findings suggest that PBM therapy represents an additional approach for continuing management of oral cGVHD and that the frequency of treatment should be individualized for each patient to provide best control of oral findings. In one case weekly PBM treatment was continued, while in others, management on a monthly or bimonthly basis was associated with control of the oral condition. PBM may be individualized and provided based upon best control of the symptoms and signs of oral GVHD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of palifermin on oral mucositis (OM) and its sequelae in patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) who were conditioned with fractionated total body irradiation (FTBI) and etoposide.Methods: This retrospective chart review study compared the effect of palifermin on the development of OM in patients who received this agent during an allo-HSCT (n = 99) to those who did not (n = 30). The primary end points were severity and duration of OM. Secondary end points included requirements for opioids, total parenteral nutrition (TPN), and intensive oral care; incidence of infection; length of hospital stay; and overall survival.Results: There was no significant difference in the incidence of all grades of OM, but incidence of severe OM was decreased in palifermin-exposed patients (34 vs 80 %, p < 0.0001). In patients who developed OM (all grades), the median duration of OM was shorter in palifermin-exposed patients (13 vs 18 days, p = 0.0001); there was no difference in the median duration of severe OM. Patients who received palifermin used less opioids and required a shorter duration of intensive oral care. There was no difference in duration of TPN, incidence of infection, length of hospital stay, and overall survival.Conclusions: Our findings demonstrated a significant benefit with the use of palifermin for allo-HSCT recipients who were conditioned with FTBI and etoposide. Palifermin can potentially improve quality of life for this patient population and reduce complications and resources used during the transplant process. A randomized clinical trial is required to confirm these results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]