Search

In recent years oral mucosal injury has been increasingly recognized as an important toxicity associated with mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors, including in patients with breast cancer who are receiving everolimus. This review addresses the state-of-the-science regarding mTOR inhibitor-associated stomatitis (mIAS), and delineates its clinical characteristics and management. Given the clinically impactful pain associated with mIAS, this review also specifically highlights new research focusing on the study of the molecular basis of pain. The incidence of mIAS varies widely (2-78%). As reported across multiple mTOR inhibitor clinical trials, grade 3/4 toxicity occurs in up to 9% of patients. Managing mTOR-associated oral lesions with topical oral, intralesional, and/or systemic steroids can be beneficial, in contrast to the lack of evidence supporting steroid treatment of oral mucositis caused by high-dose chemotherapy or radiation. However, steroid management is not uniformly efficacious in all patients receiving mTOR inhibitors. Furthermore, technology does not presently exist to permit clinicians to predict a priori which of their patients will develop these lesions. There thus remains a strategic need to define the pathobiology of mIAS, the molecular basis of pain, and risk prediction relative to development of the clinical lesion. This knowledge could lead to novel future interventions designed to more effectively prevent mIAS and improve pain management if clinically significant mIAS lesions develop., (© 2016 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Purpose: Misoprostol, a synthetic analog of prostaglandin E1, has anti-inflammatory and mucosa-protecting properties. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of misoprostol oral rinse in reducing the severity of oral mucosal injury caused by high-dose chemotherapy., Methods: The study used a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group design. Oncology patients receiving myeloablative high-dose chemotherapy, in preparation for a hematopoietic stem cell transplant, were randomized to misoprostol or placebo rinse. The primary outcome measure was the severity of oral mucositis, measured using the modified Oral Mucositis Index. Additional outcome measures included the severity of mouth pain (measured using a Visual Analog Scale and the Pain Affect Faces Scale), duration of hospital stay, and days on total parenteral nutrition., Results: This study was originally planned to accrue 160 subjects but was terminated early due to revised sponsor research priorities. The intent-to-treat population consisted of 22 subjects randomized to misoprostol rinse and 26 subjects randomized to placebo rinse. There was no significant difference between the two groups in mucositis or pain severity. In both groups, duration of hospital stay was approximately 19 days, and number of days on total parenteral nutrition was 17-18 days. There were no serious adverse events attributable to misoprostol rinse., Conclusions: Although this study did not find a beneficial effect of a misoprostol rinse in mucositis secondary to high-dose chemotherapy, the small sample size limits the strength of this conclusion. Given the proposed importance of the prostaglandin pathway in the pathogenesis of oral mucositis, additional studies are warranted.

Effective pain control for mucositis requires constant attention and willingness on the part of managing clinicians to evaluate and adapt pain-relieving strategies throughout the period of risk for oral mucositis. By utilizing the principles of an individualized, tiered approach to pain management that addresses the multidimensional components of a patient's pain, maximum comfort can be consistently provided while reducing the risk for side effects.

Oral mucositis (OM) has emerged as a common cause of dose delays and interruptions of cancer therapies such as multicycle chemotherapy, myeloablative chemotherapy, and radiotherapy with or without concurrent chemotherapy of head and neck cancer. Research into both preventive and management strategies has lagged behind research into the common cancer treatment-related morbidities of nausea, vomiting, and cytopenias. This disparity is related to the complex risk assessment of multifactorial patient and treatment factors and different techniques of rating mucositis. In addition, relatively few clinical trials have focused on mucositis as a specific outcome. Currently, the only effective preventive strategies include the use of palifermin to prevent OM in the setting of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and oral cryotherapy used in conjunction with bolus 5-FU, melphalan, or edatrexate. For the most part, managing OM relies on supportive care and symptom palliation. However, OM is a common problem associated with significant patient morbidity and increased resource use. The magnitude of the problem demands innovative approaches based on expert judgment as evidence accumulates to support specific recommendations. To improve this situation, the NCCN convened a multidisciplinary task force to address key issues. This report integrates expert judgment with a review of key literature on risk assessment, prevention, and treatment strategies, and provides recommendations for the overall management of OM.

Considerable progress in research and clinical application has been made since the original guidelines for managing mucositis in cancer patients were published in 2004, and the first active drug for the prevention and treatment of this condition has been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration and other regulatory agencies in Europe and Australia. These changes necessitate an updated review of the literature and guidelines. Panel members reviewed the biomedical literature on mucositis published in English between January 2002 and May 2005 and reached a consensus based on the criteria of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. Changes in the guidelines included recommendations for the use of palifermin for oral mucositis associated with stem cell transplantation, amifostine for radiation proctitis, and cryotherapy for mucositis associated with high-dose melphalan. Recommendations against specific practices were introduced: Systemic glutamine was not recommended for the prevention of gastrointestinal mucositis, and sucralfate and antimicrobial lozenges were not recommended for radiation-induced oral mucositis. Furthermore, new guidelines suggested that granulocyte-macrophage-colony stimulating factor mouthwashes not be used for oral mucositis prevention in the transplantation population. Advances in mucositis treatment and research have been complemented by an increased rate of publication on mucosal injury in cancer. However, additional and sustained efforts will be required to gain a fuller understanding of the pathobiology, impact on overall patient status, optimal therapeutic strategies, and improved educational programs for health professionals, patients, and caregivers. These efforts are likely to have significant clinical and economic impact on the treatment of cancer patients. Cancer 2007;109:820-31. (c) 2007 American Cancer Society.

The invasion and colonization of oral cavity mucosal tissues by microflora may contribute to the pathophysiology of ulcerative oral mucositis (UOM). Iseganan is an analog of protegrin-1, a naturally occurring peptide with broad-spectrum microbicidal activity. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of iseganan in preventing UOM after stomatotoxic therapy. Patients received an oral rinse, consisting of iseganan 9mg or placebo, to be swished/swallowed six times daily, starting with stomatotoxic therapy and continuing up to 21 days. Patients were assessed for stomatitis and UOM, and administered a questionnaire evaluating mouth pain and difficulty swallowing thrice weekly. The primary study efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients who did not have peak stomatitis NCI-CTC grade >or=2. Between November 2001 and June 2002, 502 patients were randomized to receive iseganan (251) or placebo (251). Equivalent numbers of patients in both cohorts received bone marrow or peripheral blood allogeneic or autologous stem cell transplantation (SCT). Forty-three percent and 37% of iseganan and placebo patients, respectively, did not have peak stomatitis grade =2 (P = 0.182). There was no significant difference between the cohorts in stomatitis severity, incidence of UOM, peak mouth pain, peak difficulty swallowing, amount of opiate analgesics used, or adverse event type or incidence. A major impact of Iseganan on reducing stomatitis, UOM, or its clinical sequelae in patients receiving stomatotoxic therapy was not detected on this study.

Background: A frequent complication of anticancer treatment, oral and gastrointestinal (GI) mucositis, threatens the effectiveness of therapy because it leads to dose reductions, increases healthcare costs, and impairs patients' quality of life. The Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer and the International Society for Oral Oncology assembled an international multidisciplinary panel of experts to create clinical practice guidelines for the prevention, evaluation, and treatment of mucositis., Methods: The panelists examined medical literature published from January 1966 through May 2002, presented their findings at two separate conferences, and then created a writing committee that produced two articles: the current study and another that codifies the clinical implications of the panel's findings in practice guidelines., Results: New evidence supports the view that oral mucositis is a complex process involving all the tissues and cellular elements of the mucosa. Other findings suggest that some aspects of mucositis risk may be determined genetically. GI proapoptotic and antiapoptotic gene levels change along the GI tract, perhaps explaining differences in the frequency with which mucositis occurs at different sites. Studies of mucositis incidence in clinical trials by quality and using meta-analysis techniques produced estimates of incidence that are presented herein for what to our knowledge may be a broader range of cancers than ever presented before., Conclusions: Understanding the pathobiology of mucositis, its incidence, and scoring are essential for progress in research and care directed at this common side-effect of anticancer therapies., (Copyright 2004 American Cancer Society.)

Background: Oral and gastrointestinal (GI) mucositis can affect up to 100% of patients undergoing high-dose chemotherapy and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, 80% of patients with malignancies of the head and neck receiving radiotherapy, and a wide range of patients receiving chemotherapy. Alimentary track mucositis increases mortality and morbidity and contributes to rising health care costs. Consequently, the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer and the International Society for Oral Oncology assembled an expert panel to evaluate the literature and to create evidence-based guidelines for preventing, evaluating, and treating mucositis., Methods: Thirty-six panelists reviewed literature published between January 1966 and May 2002. An initial meeting in January 2002 produced a preliminary draft of guidelines that was reviewed at a second meeting the same year. Thereafter, a writing committee produced a report on mucositis pathogenesis, epidemiology, and scoring (also included in this issue), as well as clinical practice guidelines., Results: Panelists created recommendations from higher levels of evidence and suggestions when evidence was of a lower level and there was a consensus regarding the interpretation of the evidence by the panel. Panelists identified gaps in evidence that made it impossible to recommend or not recommend use of specific agents., Conclusions: Oral/GI mucositis is a common side effect of many anticancer therapies. Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines are presented as a benchmark for clinicians to use for routine care of appropriate patients and as a springboard to challenge clinical investigators to conduct high-quality trials geared toward areas in which data are either lacking or conflicting., (Copyright 2004 American Cancer Society.)