Oral mucositis in patients undergoing bone marrow transplantation

Seto, Bradley G.; Kim, Matthew; Wolinsky, Lawrence E.; Mito, Ronald S.; Champlin, Richard E.

doi:10.1016/0030-4220(85)90237-3

Cited by 75 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The vast majority of studies tested effects of oral care protocols on the prevention of OM, whereas only three studies [21,22,61] explored effects on treatment of OM. That said, a significant number of the prevention studies continued the use of oral care protocols after OM developed, but remain classified as prevention studies because that was the original indication (or aim of the study).…”

Section: Oral Care Protocolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic review of basic oral care for the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients

McGuire

Fulton²,

Park

et al. 2013

Support Care Cancer

217

151

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this project was to evaluate research in basic oral care interventions to update evidence-based practice guidelines for preventing and treating oral mucositis (OM) in cancer patients undergoing radio-or chemotherapy. Methods A systematic review of available literature was conducted by the Basic Oral Care Section of the Mucositis Study Group of MASCC/ISOO. Seven interventions-oral care protocols, dental care, normal saline, sodium bicarbonate, mixed medication mouthwash, chlorhexidine, and calcium phosphate-were evaluated using the Hadorn (J Clin Epidemiol 49: [749][750][751][752][753][754] 1996) criteria to determine level of evidence, followed by a guideline determination of one of the following: recommendation, suggestion, or no guideline possible, using Somerfield's (Classic Pap Cur Comments 4:881-886, 2000) schema.Results Fifty-two published papers were examined by treatment population (radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and hematopoietic stem cell transplant) and by whether the intervention aimed to prevent or treat OM. The resulting practice suggestions included using oral care protocols for preventing OM across all treatment modalities and age groups and not using chlorhexidine mouthwash for preventing OM in adults with head and neck cancer undergoing radiotherapy. Considering inadequate and/or conflicting evidence, no guidelines for prevention or treatment of OM were possible for the interventions of dental care, normal saline, sodium bicarbonate, mixed medication mouthwash, chlorhexidine in patients receiving chemotherapy or hematopoietic stem cell transplant, or calcium phosphate. Conclusions The evidence for basic oral care interventions supports the use of oral care protocols in patient populations receiving radiation and/or chemotherapy and does not support chlorhexidine for prevention of mucositis in head and neck cancer patients receiving radiotherapy. Additional welldesigned research is needed for other interventions to improve the amount and quality of evidence guiding future clinical care.

show abstract

Section: Oral Care Protocolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic review of basic oral care for the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients

McGuire

Fulton²,

Park

et al. 2013

Support Care Cancer

217

151

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Prevention and management of oral complications of cancer and cancer therapy are important in improving quality of life and oral function, reducing morbidity, and reducing the cost of care [32,30,45,20,5,38,2,55]. For example, studies indicate that comprehensive oral care, including the maintenance of good oral hygiene during therapy, may reduce the severity of oral mucositis [3,42,8,6,27,10] and oral infection [34]. In addition, osteoradionecrosis is reduced in patients who have had comprehensive oral/dental care prior to radiation [17].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Current practice and knowledge of oral care for cancer patients: a survey of supportive health care providers

Barker

Epstein

Williams

et al. 2004

Support Care Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The survey represents a first review of current, international oral care practices. It suggests a need to develop evidence-based clinical guidelines to support effective oral/dental interventions and management strategies for this population. Furthermore, strategies for implementation of oral care protocols and better integration of dental and medical services should be developed. Caution in interpreting these findings is urged due to the limited response rate.

show abstract

“…[1][2][3][4] Although the classical target organs of aGVHD are the skin, the liver and the digestive tract, one of the common clinical consequences of aGVHD is the induction of oral mucosa lesions that occur in around 70% of patients. [5][6][7][8][9][10] Histological lesions in the oral mucosa are characterized by basal keratinocyte apoptosis, 11,12 and often evolve into chronic lichenoid lesions 10,13 that may, as idiopathic lichen, favor the development of spinocellular cancer. 14,15 Previous studies using several different murine models have suggested that the pathogenesis of GVHD lesions in the liver, skin and digestive tract might involve either death ligands from the tumor necrosis factor (TNF) family, such as the CD95 ligand (CD95L) or TNFa, expressed or released by allogeneic lymphocytes, 4,[16][17][18][19][20][21][22] or perforine/granzyme, released by allogeneic lymphocyte granules.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

CD95 ligand-dependant endothelial cell death initiates oral mucosa damage in a murine model of acute graft versus host disease

Deschaumes

Verneuil

Ertault-Daneshpouy

et al. 2007

Laboratory Investigation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Oral mucosa lesions are one of the common pathological consequences of acute graft versus host disease (aGVHD), the major complication of allogeneic bone marrow transplantation caused by mature T lymphocytes of donor origin. Oral mucosa damage in aGVHD is characterized by apoptosis induction in the basal keratinocytes, associated with immune effector T-cell infiltration, but its pathogenesis remains unclear because these lesions might result from the patient conditioning therapy that includes radiation and/or chemotherapy. Here, using a murine model of aGVHD that does not involve any conditioning treatment, we show that the earliest detectable oral mucosa lesion is apoptosis of the endothelial cells from chorion capillaries, which precedes basal keratinocyte apoptosis induction. Neither vascular damage nor epithelial-cell death occurred in recipients of allogeneic lymphocytes from CD95 ligand (CD95L)-defective mice. Our findings indicate that oral mucosa lesions in aGVHD are initiated by endothelial-cell death and require CD95L expression by the allogeneic lymphocytes. This early vascular damage may contribute to the induction of further tissue damage in the oral mucosa, through the induction of hypoxia and vascular leakage of immune cells or soluble proapoptotic mediators.

show abstract

Oral mucositis in patients undergoing bone marrow transplantation

Cited by 75 publications

References 13 publications

Systematic review of basic oral care for the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients

Systematic review of basic oral care for the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients

Current practice and knowledge of oral care for cancer patients: a survey of supportive health care providers

CD95 ligand-dependant endothelial cell death initiates oral mucosa damage in a murine model of acute graft versus host disease

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About