Riley Philip, Glenny Anne-Marie, Worthington Helen V, Littlewood Anne, Clarkson Jan E, McCabe Martin G
Cochrane Oral Health Group, School of Dentistry, The University of Manchester, JR Moore Building, Oxford Road, Manchester, UK, M13 9PL.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Dec 23;2015(12):CD011552. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011552.pub2.
Oral mucositis is a side effect of chemotherapy, head and neck radiotherapy, and targeted therapy, affecting over 75% of high risk patients. Ulceration can lead to severe pain and difficulty eating and drinking, which may necessitate opioid analgesics, hospitalisation and nasogastric or intravenous nutrition. These complications may lead to interruptions or alterations to cancer therapy, which may reduce survival. There is also a risk of death from sepsis if pathogens enter the ulcers of immunocompromised patients. Ulcerative oral mucositis can be costly to healthcare systems, yet there are few preventive interventions proven to be beneficial. Oral cryotherapy is a low-cost, simple intervention which is unlikely to cause side-effects. It has shown promise in clinical trials and warrants an up-to-date Cochrane review to assess and summarise the international evidence.
To assess the effects of oral cryotherapy for preventing oral mucositis in patients with cancer who are receiving treatment.
We searched the following databases: the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 17 June 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 5), MEDLINE via Ovid (1946 to 17 June 2015), EMBASE via Ovid (1980 to 17 June 2015), CANCERLIT via PubMed (1950 to 17 June 2015) and CINAHL via EBSCO (1937 to 17 June 2015). We searched the US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry, and the WHO Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching databases.
We included parallel-design randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of oral cryotherapy in patients with cancer receiving treatment. We used outcomes from a published core outcome set registered on the COMET website.
Two review authors independently screened the results of electronic searches, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We contacted study authors for information where feasible. For dichotomous outcomes, we reported risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). For continuous outcomes, we reported mean differences (MD) and 95% CIs. We pooled similar studies in random-effects meta-analyses. We reported adverse effects in a narrative format.
We included 14 RCTs analysing 1280 participants. The vast majority of participants did not receive radiotherapy to the head and neck, so this review primarily assesses prevention of chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis. All studies were at high risk of bias. The following results are for the main comparison: oral cryotherapy versus control (standard care or no treatment). Adults receiving fluorouracil-based (5FU) chemotherapy for solid cancersOral cryotherapy probably reduces oral mucositis of any severity (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.72, 5 studies, 444 analysed, moderate quality evidence). In a population where 728 per 1000 would develop oral mucositis, oral cryotherapy would reduce this to 444 (95% CI 379 to 524). The number needed to treat to benefit one additional person (NNTB), i.e. to prevent them from developing oral mucositis, is 4 people (95% CI 3 to 5).The results were similar for moderate to severe oral mucositis (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.65, 5 studies, 444 analysed, moderate quality evidence). NNTB 4 (95% CI 4 to 6).Severe oral mucositis is probably reduced (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.61, 5 studies, 444 analysed, moderate quality evidence). Where 300 per 1000 would develop severe oral mucositis, oral cryotherapy would reduce this to 120 (95% CI 81 to 183), NNTB 6 (95% CI 5 to 9). Adults receiving high-dose melphalan-based chemotherapy before haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT)Oral cryotherapy may reduce oral mucositis of any severity (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.01, 5 studies, 270 analysed, low quality evidence). Where 824 per 1000 would develop oral mucositis, oral cryotherapy would reduce this to 486 (95% CI reduced to 289 to increased to 833). The NNTB is 3, although the uncertainty surrounding the effect estimate means that the 95% CI ranges from 2 NNTB, to 111 NNTH (number needed to treat in order to harm one additional person, i.e. for one additional person to develop oral mucositis).The results were similar for moderate to severe oral mucositis (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.09, 5 studies, 270 analysed, low quality evidence). NNTB 3 (95% CI 2 NNTB to 17 NNTH).Severe oral mucositis is probably reduced (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.72, 5 studies, 270 analysed, moderate quality evidence). Where 427 per 1000 would develop severe oral mucositis, oral cryotherapy would reduce this to 162 (95% CI 85 to 308), NNTB 4 (95% CI 3 to 9).Oral cryotherapy was shown to be safe, with very low rates of minor adverse effects, such as headaches, chills, numbness/taste disturbance, and tooth pain. This appears to contribute to the high rates of compliance seen in the included studies.There was limited or no evidence on the secondary outcomes of this review, or on patients undergoing other chemotherapies, radiotherapy, targeted therapy, or on comparisons of oral cryotherapy with other interventions or different oral cryotherapy regimens. Therefore no further robust conclusions can be made. There was also no evidence on the effects of oral cryotherapy in children undergoing cancer treatment.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We are confident that oral cryotherapy leads to large reductions in oral mucositis of all severities in adults receiving 5FU for solid cancers. We are less confident in the ability of oral cryotherapy to reduce oral mucositis in adults receiving high-dose melphalan before HSCT. Evidence suggests that it does reduce oral mucositis in these adults, but we are less certain about the size of the reduction, which could be large or small. However, we are confident that there is an appreciable reduction in severe oral mucositis in these adults.This Cochrane review includes some very recent and currently unpublished data, and strengthens international guideline statements for adults receiving the above cancer treatments.
口腔黏膜炎是化疗、头颈部放疗及靶向治疗的一种副作用,影响超过75%的高危患者。溃疡会导致剧痛及进食和饮水困难,这可能需要使用阿片类镇痛药、住院治疗以及鼻饲或静脉营养。这些并发症可能导致癌症治疗中断或改变,进而可能降低生存率。如果病原体进入免疫功能低下患者的溃疡处,还存在因败血症死亡的风险。溃疡性口腔黏膜炎会给医疗系统带来高昂成本,但几乎没有经证实有益的预防干预措施。口腔冷冻疗法是一种低成本、简单的干预措施,不太可能引起副作用。它在临床试验中显示出前景,因此有必要进行一项最新的Cochrane综述来评估和总结国际证据。
评估口腔冷冻疗法对接受治疗的癌症患者预防口腔黏膜炎的效果。
我们检索了以下数据库:Cochrane口腔健康组试验注册库(截至2015年6月17日)、Cochrane对照试验中央注册库(CENTRAL)(Cochrane图书馆2015年第5期)、通过Ovid检索的MEDLINE(1946年至2015年6月17日)、通过Ovid检索的EMBASE(1980年至2015年6月17日)、通过PubMed检索的CANCERLIT(1950年至2015年6月17日)以及通过EBSCO检索的CINAHL(1937年至2015年6月17日)。我们检索了美国国立卫生研究院试验注册库以及世界卫生组织临床试验注册平台以查找正在进行的试验。检索数据库时对语言或出版日期未设限制。
我们纳入了评估口腔冷冻疗法对接受治疗的癌症患者效果的平行设计随机对照试验(RCT)。我们使用了在COMET网站注册的已发表核心结局集中的结局指标。
两位综述作者独立筛选电子检索结果、提取数据并评估偏倚风险。在可行的情况下,我们联系研究作者获取信息。对于二分法结局,我们报告风险比(RR)和95%置信区间(CI)。对于连续性结局,我们报告均值差(MD)和95%CI。我们将相似研究纳入随机效应荟萃分析。我们以叙述形式报告不良反应。
我们纳入了14项RCT,分析了1280名参与者。绝大多数参与者未接受头颈部放疗,因此本综述主要评估化疗引起的口腔黏膜炎的预防。所有研究均存在高偏倚风险。以下是主要比较的结果:口腔冷冻疗法与对照(标准护理或不治疗)。接受基于氟尿嘧啶(5FU)化疗的实体癌成人患者口腔冷冻疗法可能降低任何严重程度的口腔黏膜炎(RR 0.61,95%CI 0.52至0.72,5项研究,444名分析对象,中等质量证据)。在每1000人中有728人会发生口腔黏膜炎的人群中,口腔冷冻疗法会将此人数降至444人(95%CI 379至524)。为使另外一人受益(即预防其发生口腔黏膜炎)所需治疗的人数(NNTB)为4人(95%CI 3至5)。对于中度至重度口腔黏膜炎,结果相似(RR 0.52,95%CI 0.41至0.65,5项研究,444名分析对象,中等质量证据)。NNTB为4(95%CI 4至6)。严重口腔黏膜炎可能会减少(RR 0.40,95%CI 0.27至0.61,5项研究,444名分析对象,中等质量证据)。在每1000人中有300人会发生严重口腔黏膜炎的情况下,口腔冷冻疗法会将此人数降至120人(95%CI 81至183),NNTB为6(95%CI 5至9)。接受造血干细胞移植(HSCT)前接受大剂量美法仑化疗的成人患者口腔冷冻疗法可能降低任何严重程度的口腔黏膜炎(RR 0.59,95%CI 0.35至1.01,5项研究,270名分析对象,低质量证据)。在每1000人中有824人会发生口腔黏膜炎的情况下,口腔冷冻疗法会将此人数降至486人(95%CI降至289人至增至833人)。NNTB为3,尽管效应估计值的不确定性意味着其95%CI范围从2个NNTB到111个NNTH(为使另外一人受到伤害,即另外一人发生口腔黏膜炎所需治疗的人数)。对于中度至重度口腔黏膜炎,结果相似(RR 0.43,95%CI 0.17至1.09,5项研究,270名分析对象,低质量证据)。NNTB为3(95%CI 2个NNTB至17个NNTH)。严重口腔黏膜炎可能会减少(RR 0.38,95%CI 0.2至0.72,5项研究,270名分析对象,中等质量证据)。在每1000人中有427人会发生严重口腔黏膜炎的情况下,口腔冷冻疗法会将此人数降至162人(95%CI 85至308),NNTB为4(95%CI 3至9)。口腔冷冻疗法被证明是安全的,轻微不良反应发生率极低,如头痛、寒战、麻木/味觉障碍和牙痛。这似乎有助于解释纳入研究中观察到的高依从率。关于本综述的次要结局,或接受其他化疗、放疗、靶向治疗的患者,或口腔冷冻疗法与其他干预措施或不同口腔冷冻疗法方案比较的证据有限或不存在。因此无法得出进一步有力的结论。也没有关于口腔冷冻疗法对接受癌症治疗儿童影响的证据。
我们确信,口腔冷冻疗法能大幅降低接受5FU治疗实体癌的成人患者各种严重程度口腔黏膜炎的发生率。对于接受HSCT前大剂量美法仑化疗的成人患者,我们对口腔冷冻疗法降低口腔黏膜炎的能力信心不足。有证据表明它确实能降低这些成人患者的口腔黏膜炎发生率,但我们对降低幅度的大小不太确定,可能大也可能小。然而,我们确信这些成人患者的严重口腔黏膜炎发生率有明显降低。本Cochrane综述纳入了一些非常新且目前未发表的数据,并强化了针对接受上述癌症治疗的成人患者的国际指南声明。