用于治疗口腔白斑以预防口腔癌的干预措施。
Interventions for treating oral leukoplakia to prevent oral cancer.
作者信息
Lodi Giovanni, Franchini Roberto, Warnakulasuriya Saman, Varoni Elena Maria, Sardella Andrea, Kerr Alexander R, Carrassi Antonio, MacDonald L C I, Worthington Helen V
机构信息
Dipartimento di Scienze Biomediche, Chirurgiche e Odontoiatriche, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Beldiletto 1/3, Milan, Italy, 20142.
出版信息
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Jul 29;7(7):CD001829. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001829.pub4.
BACKGROUND
Oral leukoplakia is a relatively common oral lesion that, in a small proportion of people, precedes the development of oral cancer. Most leukoplakias are asymptomatic; therefore, the primary objective of treatment should be to prevent onset of cancer. This review updates our previous review, published in 2006.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness, safety and acceptability of treatments for leukoplakia in preventing oral cancer.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following electronic databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 16 May 2016), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2016, Issue 4), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 16 May 2016), Embase Ovid (1980 to 16 May 2016) and CancerLit via PubMed (1950 to 16 May 2016). We searched the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (to 10 February 2015), ClinicalTrials.gov (to 16 May 2016) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials (to 16 May 2016). We placed no restrictions on the language or date of publication when searching electronic databases.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that enrolled people with a diagnosis of oral leukoplakia and compared any treatment versus placebo or no treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We collected data using a data extraction form. Oral cancer development, demonstrated by histopathological examination, was our primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were clinical resolution of the lesion, improvement of histological features and adverse events. We contacted trial authors for further details when information was unclear. When valid and relevant data were available, we conducted a meta-analysis of the data using a fixed-effect model when we identified fewer than four studies with no heterogeneity. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed risk of bias in studies by using the Cochrane tool. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence by using standardised criteria (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group (GRADE)).
MAIN RESULTS
We included 14 studies (909 participants) in this review. Surgical interventions, including laser therapy and cryotherapy, have never been studied by means of an RCT that included a no treatment or placebo arm. The included trials tested a range of medical and complementary treatments, in particular, vitamin A and retinoids (four studies); beta carotene or carotenoids (three studies); non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), specifically ketorolac and celecoxib (two studies); herbal extracts (four studies), including tea components, a Chinese herbal mixture and freeze-dried black raspberry gel; bleomycin (one study); and Bowman-Birk inhibitor (one study).We judged one study to be at low risk of bias, seven at unclear risk and six at high risk. In general, we judged the overall quality of the evidence to be low or very low, so findings are uncertain and further research is needed.Five studies recorded cancer incidence, only three of which provided useable data. None of the studies provided evidence that active treatment reduced the risk of oral cancer more than placebo: systemic vitamin A (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.05; 85 participants, one study); systemic beta carotene (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.24 to 2.09; 132 participants, two studies); and topical bleomycin (RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.32 to 27.83; 20 participants, one study). Follow-up ranged between two and seven years.Some individual studies suggested effectiveness of some proposed treatments, namely, systemic vitamin A, beta carotene and lycopene, for achieving clinical resolution of lesions more often than placebo. Similarly, single studies found that systemic retinoic acid and lycopene may provide some benefit in terms of improvement in histological features. Some studies also reported a high rate of relapse.Side effects of varying severity were often described; however, it seems likely that interventions were well accepted by participants because drop-out rates were similar between treatment and control groups.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Surgical treatment for oral leukoplakia has not been assessed in an RCT that included a no treatment or placebo comparison. Nor has cessation of risk factors such as smoking been assessed. The available evidence on medical and complementary interventions for treating people with leukoplakia is very limited. We do not currently have evidence of a treatment that is effective for preventing the development of oral cancer. Treatments such as vitamin A and beta carotene may be effective in healing oral lesions, but relapses and adverse effects are common. Larger trials of longer duration are required to properly evaluate the effects of leukoplakia treatments on the risk of developing oral cancer. High-quality research is particularly needed to assess surgical treatment and to assess the effects of risk factor cessation in people with leukoplakia.
背景
口腔白斑是一种相对常见的口腔病变,在一小部分人群中,它先于口腔癌出现。大多数白斑无症状;因此,治疗的主要目标应是预防癌症的发生。本综述更新了我们2006年发表的上一篇综述。
目的
评估白斑治疗在预防口腔癌方面的有效性、安全性和可接受性。
检索方法
我们检索了以下电子数据库:Cochrane口腔健康试验注册库(截至2016年5月16日)、Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)(Cochrane图书馆,2016年第4期)、MEDLINE Ovid(1946年至2016年5月16日)、Embase Ovid(1980年至2016年5月16日)以及通过PubMed检索的CancerLit(1950年至2016年5月16日)。我们检索了对照试验元注册库(截至2015年2月10日)、ClinicalTrials.gov(截至2016年5月16日)以及世界卫生组织(WHO)国际临床试验注册平台以查找正在进行的试验(截至2016年5月16日)。在检索电子数据库时,我们对语言或出版日期没有限制。
选择标准
我们纳入了诊断为口腔白斑的人群的随机对照试验(RCT),并比较了任何治疗与安慰剂或不治疗的效果。
数据收集与分析
我们使用数据提取表收集数据。通过组织病理学检查证实的口腔癌发生是我们的主要结局。次要结局包括病变的临床消退、组织学特征的改善以及不良事件。当信息不明确时,我们与试验作者联系以获取更多详细信息。当有有效且相关的数据时,当我们确定少于四项研究且无异质性时,我们使用固定效应模型对数据进行荟萃分析。对于二分结局,我们计算风险比(RRs)和95%置信区间(CIs)。我们使用Cochrane工具评估研究中的偏倚风险。我们使用标准化标准(推荐分级、评估、制定和评价工作组(GRADE))评估证据的总体质量。
主要结果
我们在本综述中纳入了14项研究(909名参与者)。手术干预,包括激光治疗和冷冻治疗,从未通过包含不治疗或安慰剂组的RCT进行研究。纳入的试验测试了一系列医学和补充治疗方法,特别是维生素A和类视黄醇(四项研究);β-胡萝卜素或类胡萝卜素(三项研究);非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs),特别是酮咯酸和塞来昔布(两项研究);草药提取物(四项研究),包括茶成分、一种中药混合物和冻干黑树莓凝胶;博来霉素(一项研究);以及鲍曼-伯克抑制剂(一项研究)。我们判断一项研究的偏倚风险较低,七项研究的偏倚风险不明确,六项研究的偏倚风险较高。总体而言,我们判断证据的总体质量为低或非常低,因此研究结果不确定,需要进一步研究。五项研究记录了癌症发病率,其中只有三项提供了可用数据。没有一项研究提供证据表明积极治疗比安慰剂更能降低口腔癌风险:全身性维生素A(RR 0.11,95% CI 0.01至2.05;85名参与者,一项研究);全身性β-胡萝卜素(RR 0.71,95% CI 0.24至2.09;132名参与者,两项研究);以及局部博来霉素(RR 3.00,95% CI 0.32至27.83;20名参与者,一项研究)。随访时间为两年至七年。一些个别研究表明某些提议的治疗方法,即全身性维生素A、β-胡萝卜素和番茄红素,在使病变临床消退方面比安慰剂更有效。同样,单项研究发现全身性视黄酸和番茄红素在改善组织学特征方面可能有一些益处。一些研究还报告了高复发率。经常描述了不同严重程度的副作用;然而,由于治疗组和对照组的退出率相似,似乎参与者对干预措施的接受度良好。
作者结论
在包含不治疗或安慰剂对照比较的RCT中,尚未对口腔白斑的手术治疗进行评估。也未评估戒烟等危险因素的消除情况。关于治疗白斑患者的医学和补充干预措施的现有证据非常有限。我们目前没有证据表明有一种治疗方法对预防口腔癌的发生有效。维生素A和β-胡萝卜素等治疗方法可能对愈合口腔病变有效,但复发和不良反应很常见。需要进行更大规模、更长时间的试验来正确评估白斑治疗对发生口腔癌风险的影响。尤其需要高质量的研究来评估手术治疗以及评估消除白斑患者危险因素的效果。