Search

Oral mucositis is a common side-effect associated with conventional cancer therapy and has also recently been reported in association with newly emerging cancer therapies. It is characterized as an inflammation of the oral mucous membranes accompanied by many complex mucosal and submucosal changes. Ulcerative oral mucositis can cause significant oral pain, impair nutritional intake, lead to local or systemic infection, and cause significant economic cost. In addition, it may necessitate interruptions in cancer therapy, thus adversely affecting patient prognosis. This review presents the current understanding of the pathogenesis of mucositis and discusses evidence-based clinical management strategies for oral mucositis. In addition, key research questions for future investigation are identified, followed by a discussion of strategies to promote development and funding of the needed research., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Purpose of Review: Oral mucositis remains a frequent debilitating toxicity associated with drug and radiation regimens used to treat cancer. This review highlights the recent understanding of the biological basis, risk factors for, and management for oral mucositis., Recent Findings: Prevalence and incidence data for mucositis are inconsistent and often underreported. The pathogenesis of mucositis encompasses a sequence of biological events possibly influenced by the oral microbiome and environment. Despite its frequency and severity, there is currently no effective treatment available for the majority of patients at risk. However, with the better understanding of the pathogenesis of mucositis a number of new drugs and biological agents are under investigation. Genome-wide risk prediction tools will allow the identification of patients at risk of developing mucositis., Summary: Oral mucositis is a common complication of cancer treatment that may negatively impact the patient's cancer treatment outcome. Despite its frequency and consequences, the lack of effective interventions has frustrated patients and caregivers. Fortunately, a broad range of mechanistically targeted compounds are being developed.

Objectives: Oral mucositis (OM) is a painful complication of radiation therapy (RT) for head and neck cancer (H&NC). OM can compromise nutrition, require opioid analgesics and hospitalization for pain control, and lead to treatment interruptions. Based on the role of inflammatory pathways in OM pathogenesis, we investigated effect of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibition on severity and morbidity of OM., Methods: In this double-blind placebo-controlled trial, 40 H&NC patients were randomized to daily use of 200 mg celecoxib or placebo, for the duration of RT. Clinical OM, normalcy of diet, pain scores, and analgesic use were assessed 2-3 times/week by blinded investigators during the 6-7 week RT period, using validated scales., Results: Twenty subjects were randomized to each arm, which were similar with respect to tumor location, radiation dose, and concomitant chemotherapy. In both arms, mucositis and pain scores increased over course of RT. Intention-to-treat analyses demonstrated no significant difference in mean Oral Mucositis Assessment Scale (OMAS) scores at 5000 cGy (primary endpoint). There was also no difference between the two arms in mean OMAS scores over the period of RT, mean worst pain scores, mean normalcy of diet scores, or mean daily opioid medication use in IV morphine equivalents. There were no adverse events attributed to celecoxib use., Conclusions: Daily use of a selective COX-2 inhibitor, during period of RT for H&NC, did not reduce the severity of clinical OM, pain, dietary compromise or use of opioid analgesics. These findings also have implications for celecoxib use in H&NC treatment regimens (NCT00698204)., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Mucositis is a highly significant, and sometimes dose-limiting, toxicity of cancer therapy. 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 mucositis., Methods: A literature search was conducted to identify eligible published articles, based on predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Each article was independently reviewed by 2 reviewers. Studies were rated according to the presence of major and minor flaws as per previously published criteria. The body of evidence for each intervention, 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 literature search identified 8279 papers, 1032 of which were retrieved for detailed evaluation based on titles and abstracts. Of these, 570 qualified for final inclusion in the systematic reviews. Sixteen new guidelines were developed for or against the use of various interventions in specific treatment settings. In total, the MASCC/ISOO Mucositis Guidelines now include 32 guidelines: 22 for oral mucositis and 10 for gastrointestinal mucositis. This article describes these updated guidelines., Conclusions: The updated MASCC/ISOO Clinical Practice Guidelines for mucositis will help clinicians provide evidence-based management of mucositis secondary to cancer therapy., (© 2014 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

Side effects or toxicities are frequent, undesirable companions of almost all forms of non-surgical cancer therapy. It is unusual for patients to complete treatment with radiation or chemotherapy without experiencing at least one form of therapy-associated tissue injury or systemic side effect. Often, toxicities do not occur as solitary events; rather, they result in clusters of symptoms that share a common biological aetiology. Like any disease, cancer treatment-related toxicities (CTRTs) vary in their severity. But, in contrast to most diseases in which incidence is described as being present or absent, the current approach to CTRT typically limits reporting to severe cases only. Not only does this dilute the frequency with which CTRTs occur, but it also undermines our ability to determine the full burden of their impact and to accurately assess the cost effectiveness of potential toxicity interventions. In this article, we report the results of a directed literature review for the years 2000-2012, in which we studied and compared three tissue-based toxicities (nausea and vomiting, diarrhoea, and oral mucositis) and one systemic toxicity (fatigue). Our results confirm the heavy burden of resource use and cost associated with CTRTs. The inclusion of fatigue in our analysis provided an opportunity to compare and contrast a toxicity in which there are both acute and chronic consequences. Our findings also demonstrate a number of challenges to, and opportunities for, future study. Among the most obvious are the lack of provider consistency in diagnosis and grading, especially when there is no global agreement on severity scales. Compounding this inconsistency is the disconnect between healthcare providers and patients that exists when describing toxicity severity and impact. In many cases, cancer can be thought of as a chronic disease that requires prolonged but episodic treatment once the acute disease is eradicated. This change reflects increasing treatment successes, but it also implies that the burden of CTRTs will be expanded and prolonged. Creation of hierarchical attribution of costs in the presence of simultaneous CTRTs, accurate coding, and consistent tracking tools for toxicities will be imperative for effective appraisal of the costs associated with cancer treatment regimen toxicities.

Purpose of Review: Gastrointestinal toxicities are a common side effect of many forms of cytotoxic cancer therapy. Of the gastrointestinal toxicities, mucositis is among the most common and results in a range of symptoms that negatively impact patients' quality of life, ability to tolerate their cancer therapy, and health resource use. The purpose of this review is to describe the scope, risk factors, pathobiology, and treatment opportunities for mucositis., Recent Findings: The historical paradigm by which mucositis occurs has been markedly revised in the past decade. The pathogenesis of mucositis is now recognized to consist of a series of complex biological events that ultimately result in the disruption of the integrity of the gastrointestinal tract. Risk factors for mucositis have been identified that are associated with its biology. Treatment strategies that target mucositis' mechanistic pathways hold significant promise., Summary: Mucosal injury induced by radiation or chemotherapy is a common, painful, function disrupting toxicity that, currently, has limited treatment options. The evolving understanding of the pathobiology of the condition provides multiple treatment targets that should ultimately result in amelioration of the condition.

Background: The risk, severity, and patient-reported outcomes of radiation-induced mucositis among head and neck cancer patients were prospectively estimated., Methods: A validated, patient-reported questionnaire (OMDQ), the FACT quality of life (QOL), and the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) fatigue scales were used to measure mucositis (reported as mouth and throat soreness), daily functioning, and use of analgesics. Patients were studied before radiotherapy (RT), daily during RT, and for 4 weeks after RT., Results: Contrary to previous reports, the risk of mucositis was virtually identical in the 126 patients with oral cavity or oropharynx tumors (99% overall; 85% grade 3-4) compared with 65 patients with tumors of the larynx or hypopharynx (98% overall; 77% grade 3-4). The mean QOL score decreased significantly during RT, from 85.1 at baseline to 69.0 at Week 6, corresponding with the peak of mucositis severity. The mean functional status score decreased by 33% from 18.3 at baseline to 12.3 at Week 6. The impact of mucositis on QOL was proportional to its severity, although even a score of 1 or 2 (mild or moderate) was associated with a significant reduction in QOL (from 93.6 at baseline to 74.7 at Week 6). Despite increases in analgesic use from 34% at baseline to 80% at Week 6, mean mucositis scores exceeded 2.5 at Week 6., Conclusions: Mucositis occurs among virtually all patients who are undergoing radiation treatment of head and neck cancers. The detrimental effects on QOL and functional status are significant, and opioid analgesia provides inadequate relief. Preventive rather than symptom palliation measures are needed.

Purpose: M40403 is a small-molecule superoxide dismutase mimetic that has shown efficacy in animal model disease states in which superoxide anions are thought to play a key role. Radiation treatment and chemotherapy for cancer generate free oxygen radicals that are hypothesized to trigger unwanted side effects in healthy tissue. For some patients undergoing these antineoplastic treatments, one of the most prevalent side effects is oral mucositis, which is a painful, often dose-limiting condition. Preclinical and clinical studies of this condition have shown the positive effect of treatment with compounds that decrease free oxygen radicals. This study investigated the efficacy M40403 in a clinically relevant hamster model of acute, radiation-induced oral mucositis., Methods: Oral mucositis was induced in hamsters by irradiation of the cheek pouch. The ability of i.p. administered M40403 to decrease the duration and severity of oral mucositis was assessed after treatment at different doses and dosing schedules. Oral mucositis was scored using the WHO grading scale., Results: Compared with placebo-treated animals, those irradiated on day 0 and treated twice daily with 30 mg/kg M40403 had significantly less severe and shorter duration mucositis over a range of treatment schedules, including from days -1 to 3, day 0 to 3, and day 0 alone. Similar efficacy was achieved at doses of 10 and 3 mg/kg twice daily on days -1 to 3., Conclusions: These results implicate free oxygen radicals in the onset of oral mucositis and also provide the basis for further development of M40403 in the prevention of this condition in at-risk cancer patients.

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.

Oral mucositis induced by radiation therapy and chemotherapy is a frequently occurring toxicity in patients with cancer. Severe mucositis has a major impact on patient daily functioning,well-being, and quality of life. It can also compromise a patient's ability to tolerate planned therapy, resulting in missed doses or dose reductions. Mucositis negatively affects other health outcomes as well, increasing the risk of opportunistic infections and mortality due to sepsis. It also imposes a significant economic burden, since extended hospitalization and greater analgesic use can substantially increase treatment costs. A five-phase model of the pathobiology of mucositis has been proposed that facilitates our understanding of mucositis pathogenesis and the complex interactions that occur in response to tissue insult. Application of this evolving model has aided in the development of mechanistically based therapies for the prevention and treatment of mucositis. Continued research is needed to optimize when these treatments should be administered during the course of cancer therapy to maximize therapeutic benefit.

The mouth is a frequent site of complications arising from drug or radiation cancer therapy, with mucositis, xerostomia, osteoradionecrosis, and local infections being the most common. From the stand-point of dose limitation, treatment breaks, quality of life, and health economic outcomes, mucositis is the most significant acute oral toxicity. Xerostomia, a chronic side effect of radiation, involves the salivary gland tissue, and results in changes in taste, tissue resilience, and an increased risk of caries and periodontal disease. While the incidence of osteoradionecrosis seems to be decreasing, the chronicity and symptoms of this festering bony condition are especially difficult for patients. Local oral infections resulting from the overgrowth of opportunistic organisms or the activation of latent viruses are so common as to warrant a prophylactic approach in many cases. A surge of investigational interest has been directed at understanding the mechanisms of these stomatotoxicities and at developing treatment strategies to combat them.

Oral mucositis (OM) remains a significant toxicity among patients being treated with radiotherapy (RT) alone or with concomitant chemotherapy (CRT) for cancers of the head and neck (HNC). Given its clinical significance as an unmet need and its potential commercial viability, the pharmaceutical industry has been actively pursuing an effective intervention. Despite this interest and activity, only a few agents have been studied in Phase III trials (n = 6). The objective of this study was to identify common features that differentiate successful and failed Phase III OM trials. We used the United States Patent and Trademark Office Patent Public Search database to search patents with "oral mucositis" in the claims. We then searched ClinicalTrials.gov and PubMed to determine if Phase III or Phase II trial data for identified biologics/drugs had been published. We assessed each Phase III and Phase II trial for characteristics that may be associated with trial success or failure. We considered a study as a "success" if the primary endpoint reached statistical significance, and we considered a study as "failure" if the primary endpoint did not reach statistical significance. Of the three successful Phase III trials, one investigated avasopasem manganese (Galera Therapeutics) and two examined palifermin (Amgen). The three failed trials included those evaluating dusquetide (Soligenix), iseganan hydrochloride (IntraBiotics Pharmaceuticals), and clonidine (Monopar Therapeutics). We found that differences in the level of sponsor funding, patient inclusion criteria including radiation source and concomitant chemotherapy regimen, and concordance of primary efficacy outcomes between Phase II and Phase III trials influenced outcomes. To properly design clinical trials for OM in HNC patients, it is important that researchers and sponsors take note of specific study characteristics associated with success or failure, particularly with Phase III trials where the risks and costs are the highest. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We have characterized a novel 21 amino acid-peptide derived from Antrum Mucosal Protein (AMP)-18 that mediates growth promotion of cultured normal epithelial cells and mitigates radiation-induced oral mucositis in animal models, while suppressing in vitro function of cancer cells. The objective of this study was to evaluate these dual potential therapeutic effects of AMP peptide in a clinically relevant animal model of head and neck cancer (HNC) by simultaneously assessing its effect on tumor growth and radiation-induced oral mucositis in an orthotopic model of HNC. Bioluminescent SCC-25 HNC cells were injected into the anterior tongue and tumors that formed were then subjected to focal radiation treatment. Tumor size was assessed using an in vivo imaging system, and the extent of oral mucositis was compared between animals treated with AMP peptide or vehicle (controls). Synergism between AMP peptide and radiation therapy was suggested by the finding that tumors in the AMP peptide/radiation therapy cohort demonstrated inhibited growth vs. radiation therapy-only treated tumors, while AMP peptide-treatment delayed the onset and reduced the severity of radiation therapy-induced oral mucositis. A differential effect on apoptosis appears to be one mechanism by which AMP-18 can stimulate growth and repair of injured mucosal epithelial cells while inhibiting proliferation of HNC cells. RNA microarray analysis identified pathways that are differentially targeted by AMP-18 in HNC vs. nontransformed cells. These observations confirm the notion that normal cells and tumor cells may respond differently to common biological stimuli, and that leveraging this finding in the case of AMP-18 may provide a clinically relevant opportunity.

Purpose: To assess the safety of the superoxide dismutase mimetic GC4419 in combination with radiation and concurrent cisplatin for patients with oral cavity or oropharyngeal cancer (OCC) and to assess the potential of GC4419 to reduce severe oral mucositis (OM).Patients and Methods: Patients with locally advanced OCC treated with definitive or postoperative intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plus cisplatin received GC4419 by 60-minute intravenous infusion, ending <60 minutes before IMRT, Monday through Friday for 3 to 7 weeks, in a dose and duration escalation study. Oral mucositis was assessed twice weekly during and weekly after IMRT.Results: A total of 46 patients received GC4419 in 11 separate dosing and duration cohorts: dose escalation occurred in 5 cohorts receiving 15 to 112 mg/d over 3 weeks (n=20), duration escalation in 3 cohorts receiving 112 mg/d over 4 to 6 weeks (n=12), and then 3 additional cohorts receiving 30 or 90 mg/d over 6 to 7 weeks (n=14). A maximum tolerated dose was not reached. One dose-limiting toxicity (grade 3 gastroenteritis and vomiting with hyponatremia) occurred in each of 2 separate cohorts at 112 mg. Nausea/vomiting and facial paresthesia during infusion seemed to be GC4419 dose-related. Severe OM occurred through 60 Gy in 4 of 14 patients (29%) dosed for 6 to 7 weeks, with median duration of only 2.5 days.Conclusions: The safety of GC4419 concurrently with chemoradiation for OCC was acceptable. Toxicities included nausea/vomiting and paresthesia. Doses of 30 and 90 mg/d administered for 7 weeks were selected for further study. In an exploratory analysis, severe OM seemed less frequent and briefer than expected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Osteoradionecrosis of the jaw (ORN) is an infrequent yet potentially devastating complication of radiation therapy to the head and neck region.Treatment options include antimicrobial therapy, local sequestrectomy, resection, and the use of hyperbaric oxygen (HBO). Published data on ORN are difficult to compare because of the lack of a universally accepted classification and staging system, and the literature on the use of HBO to either prevent or successfully manage ORN is controversial and inconclusive. Therefore, we aimed to establish a standard approach for using HBO at our institution. Materials and Methods. A literature search was conducted of articles published in the English language between January 1980 and January 2016. Retrieved articles were evaluated by two independent reviewers. Isolated case reports, abstracts, case series, review articles, and cohort studies without a control group were excluded; summary data were extracted from the remaining studies. A panel of experts from Head and Neck Oncology and Oral Medicine from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital reviewed the summary data and established multidisciplinary guidelines on the use of HBO for the prevention and management of ORN. Results. Seven studies were evaluated and reviewed by the multidisciplinary panel. There was no consistent evidence in support of HBO for either the prevention or management of ORN. Conclusion. Based on the available evidence and expert opinion, routine use of HBO for the prevention or management of ORN is not recommended and is rarely used at our institution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Velafermin (recombinant human fibroblast growth factor-20, rhFGF-20) has been shown to reduce the severity and duration of mucositis in preclinical acute (single dose) radiation and chemotherapy/radiation models of oral mucositis. Our present study assessed the impact of velafermin on the severity and duration of oral mucositis that occurred as a consequence of fractionated radiation. Experimental design: Male Golden Syrian hamsters were exposed to eight doses of radiation (7.5 Gy/dose) to the cheek pouch on days 0, 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8 and 9 that resulted in severe mucositis. Velafermin (4 mg/kg intraperitoneally) was administered on days 3 and 9; days 2, 3, 8 and 9; days 3, 4, 9 and 10; or days 4, 5, 10 and 11. Results: Although all velafermin-treated groups showed some reduction in the degree of mucositis relative to the vehicle control, the most significant reduction (p < 0.001) was observed in the groups treated on days 3 and 9 or on days 4, 5, 10 and 11. Further histological analysis of resected buccal mucosa revealed improvements in epithelial tissue degradation, connective tissue degradation and inflammation severity after velafermin treatment. Most notably, velafermin treatment reduced inflammatory cytokines interleukin-6 (IL-6) and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) production possibly through nuclear factor-κB (NF-κB) mediation. The detection of increased NF-E2-related factor-2 (NRF-2) expression in the early onset stage of mucositis in the buccal mucosa suggested additional protective benefits from reactive oxygen species (ROS) generated as a consequence of fractionated radiation treatment. Conclusion: Thus, velafermin provided therapeutic benefit in a hamster model of oral mucositis induced by fractionated radiation therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Avasopasem manganese (GC4419), an investigational selective dismutase mimetic radioprotector, reduced duration, incidence, and severity of severe oral mucositis (World Health Organization grade 3-4) in a phase 2b, randomized, double-blind trial of patients receiving concurrent cisplatin (cis) and radiation therapy (RT) for head and neck cancer. We report the secondary endpoints of final 1- and 2-year tumor outcomes and exploratory data on trismus and xerostomia.Methods and Materials: Patients with locally advanced oral cavity or oropharynx cancer to be treated with definitive or postop cis and RT were randomized to 1 of 3 arms: 30 mg avasopasem, 90 mg avasopasem, or placebo. Pairwise comparisons of Kaplan-Meier estimates (each active arm separately vs placebo) were made for overall survival, progression-free survival, locoregional control, and distant metastasis-free survival. Xerostomia and trismus data were collected at each follow-up visit and analyzed for trends by post-RT timepoint and treatment group.Results: At a median follow-up for the entire cohort of 25.5 months (25th-75th percentile, 24.6-26.2 months; range, 0.2-31.9 months), Kaplan-Meier estimates of 1- and 2-year overall survival, progression-free survival, locoregional control, and distant metastasis-free survival were not statistically different. No trends were apparent in xerostomia or trismus data.Conclusions: Avasopasem does not lead to statistically different tumor control outcomes when used concurrently with cis and RT for head and neck cancer. There was no detectable effect on trismus or xerostomia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Oral mucositis represents a significant source of morbidity after chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Since infection may have an important role in the pathophysiology of oral mucositis, several antimicrobial agents have been investigated for their efficacy in preventing and treating this disease. We sought to establish the weight of evidence for antimicrobial treatment and identified 31 prospectively designed clinical trials of which 13 reported some benefit and 15 did not. No clear pattern was identified regarding patient type, cancer treatment, or type of antimicrobial agent used, and inconsistent assessment of oral mucositis made comparison of outcomes difficult. Newer drugs, such as the topical antimicrobial peptide iseganan HCl initially showed promise in reducing mucositis and the related oral pain but the results of a phase 3 trial were disappointing and the line of enquiry was abandoned altogether. Hence, there is a need to better understand the role of the microflora in the cause of oral mucositis if an antimicrobial agent for prevention and treatment of this disease is to be developed. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]