A new in vitro assay for quantitation of chemotherapy-induced mucositis

Wymenga, A.N.M.; Vandergraaf, Wta; Spijkervet, F. K. L.; Timens, Wim; Timmer‐Bosscha, Hetty; Sluiter, Wj; Devries, Ege; Mulder, Nh

doi:10.1038/bjc.1997.508

Cited by 16 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This indicated a significant increase in the viability of cells collected after the second brushing relative to the first brushing. The viability of buccal cells from mouthwashes has previously been estimated to be 44% to 75% (17,18) using Trypan blue staining, which is higher than our results. As most of the cells from the mouthwash are fully differentiated and have a very thick cell membrane (17), this may prevent Trypan blue penetration even if the cells are dead and could account for the high percentage of live cells seen in other studies.…”

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 80%

Fresh and cultured buccal cells as a source of mRNA and protein for molecular analysis

Michalczyk

Varigos

Smith³

et al. 2004

BioTechniques

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We developed a method for obtaining viable buccal cells from mouthwash samples for use as a source of mRNA and protein. Immunofluorescent analysis showed that most cells were derived from nonkeratinized parabasal epithelia, with a minor proportion of proliferative cells. Gene expression was detected in buccal cells using reverse transcription PCR, Western blot analysis, and immunofluorescence. Using a keratinocyte-specific medium, buccal cells could be cultured on Matrigel-coated permeable filters for up to 2 weeks while maintaining the expression of some epithelial-specific markers, including cytokeratin 13, cytokeratin 10, transferrin receptor, and beta-integrin. The basal marker cytokeratin 14 and Ki67, an indicator of cellular proliferation, were detected in a few cells. We show that buccal cells can be obtained from a noninvasive procedure for use as a source of material for biochemical analyses. A population of the buccal cells can be maintained in culture for up to 2 weeks using keratinocyte-specific medium in combination with extracellular matrix.

show abstract

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 80%

Fresh and cultured buccal cells as a source of mRNA and protein for molecular analysis

Michalczyk

Varigos

Smith³

et al. 2004

BioTechniques

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recently, interesting pathologic evaluations also have been described. These evaluations result in, for example, estimates of the cell viability after mouthwashes using trypan blue coloration (Wynenga et al 1999), measurement of neutrophil levels in mouthwashes (Graham et al 1992), or assessment of epithelial cell morphology, and differentiation/maturation (Wynenga et al 1997). The use of these in vitro pathological tests must be encouraged because they can reduce the bias of subjective methodology.…”

Section: Epidemiologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Oral mucositis induced by anticancer treatments: physiopathology and treatments

Lionel¹,

Lonchay²,

André³

et al. 2006

Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Oral mucositis is a frequent and devastating side effect of anticancer treatments. It impairs the patient's quality of life and also can be life threatening because severe infections and delayed or incomplete anticancer treatments may result. This problem has been largely overlooked and underestimated in the past. However, recently studies have been performed to precisely identify the epidemiology, cost, consequences, physiopathology, and treatments of oral mucositis. Clinical guidelines have recently been published to help the daily management of this frequent complication. In addition, some innovative new drugs, including palifermin, have been developed to prevent and treat this major side effect of cancer treatments. In this paper we summarize the recent developments of oral mucositis management.

show abstract

“…There is also a pressing need for much simpler tests of each phase of MBI. Data from chemotherapyinduced cytokine expression of epithelial cells in singlecell testing or cell lines, quantitation of cytokine profiles in saliva or stools 83 and the results of basal cell kinetic studies like grading of epithelial cell viability by trypan blue dye exclusion obtained by oral washings 84 should be incorporated in clinical research and care. It should be possible to demonstrate overt mucositis using radionuclide imaging techniques, such as indium-labelled leukocytes 85 and technetium-labelled diphytanoylphosphatidylcholine liposomes but there are only a few anecdotal reports and their clinical feasibility is expected to be minimal.…”

Section: Sugar Absorption Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mucosal barrier injury: biology, pathology, clinical counterparts and consequences of intensive treatment for haematological malignancy: an overview

Blijlevens¹,

Donnelly²,

Pauw³

2000

Bone Marrow Transplant

233

153

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary:Mucositis is an inevitable side-effect of the conditioning regimens used for haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. The condition is better referred to as mucosal barrier injury (MBI) since it is primarily the result of toxicity and is a complex and dynamic pathobiological process manifested not only in the mouth but also throughout the entire digestive tract. A model has been proposed for oral MBI and consists of four phases, namely inflammatory, epithelial, ulcerative and healing phases. A variety of factors are involved in causing and modulating MBI including the nature of the conditioning regimen, the elaboration of pro-inflammatory and other cytokines, translocation of the resident microflora and their products, for example, endotoxins across the mucosal barrier, exposure to antimicrobial agents and whether or not the haematopoietic stem cell graft is from a donor. Neutropenic typhlitis is the most severe gastrointestinal manifestation of MBI, but it also influences the occurrence of other major transplant-related complications including acute GVHD, veno-occlusive disease and systemic infections. The pathobiology, clinical counterparts and the means of measuring MBI are discussed together with potential approaches for prevention, amelioration and, perhaps, even cure. Bone Marrow Transplantation (2000) 25, 1269-1278. Keywords: mucositis; mucosal barrier injury; diagnosis; risk factors; treatment Mucositis is an inevitable side-effect of the intensive conditioning therapy used for haematopoietic stem cell transplantation 1 and usually refers to the mucosal ulceration of mouth and throat. However, it is generally accepted that oral mucositis is in reality the most obvious manifestation of damage or injury elsewhere particularly that of the gut. Hence, mucosal barrier injury (MBI) may be a more appropriate term for this biological process. There exists no clear definition of MBI which is defined by a constellation of signs and symptoms that vary in their clinical expression. Oral MBI is reported to affect 60% to 100% of transplant recipients 2,3 and is characterised by pain, oedema, erythema, lesions, pseudomembrane formation, excessive mucous production, reduced saliva and bleeding, all of which reduce the patient's ability to eat and drink. In contrast, there are no reliable data on the incidence of gut MBI although intestinal symptoms affect almost every transplant recipient to some extent and include nausea, vomiting, abdominal cramping and watery diarrhoea occasionally accompanied by macroscopic blood loss. The exact course and severity of bowel symptoms of MBI are also difficult to ascertain because many patients are in such pain due to oral MBI that they only gain relief from narcotic analgesia which induces constipation as a result of reduced gut motility. There are also a number of scoring systems for oral MBI 4 although none is universally accepted and all lack standardisation. As yet, there is no system for registering gut MBI although there are published definitions for grading toxicity o...

show abstract

A new in vitro assay for quantitation of chemotherapy-induced mucositis

Cited by 16 publications

References 17 publications

Fresh and cultured buccal cells as a source of mRNA and protein for molecular analysis

Fresh and cultured buccal cells as a source of mRNA and protein for molecular analysis

Oral mucositis induced by anticancer treatments: physiopathology and treatments

Mucosal barrier injury: biology, pathology, clinical counterparts and consequences of intensive treatment for haematological malignancy: an overview

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About