Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23900593›Full record

SynthesisSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2013

Systematic review of miscellaneous agents for the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients.

Siri Beier Jensen, Virginia Jarvis, Yehuda Zadik, Andrei Barasch, Anura Ariyawardana, Allan Hovan, Noam Yarom, Rajesh V Lalla, Joanne Bowen, Sharon Elad and 1 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 60 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Photobiomodulation in oral mucositis in patients with head and neck cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis followed by a cost-effectiveness analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Systematic review of anti-inflammatory agents for the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients and clinical practice guidelines.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2019
    Pooled it
  5. Guideline
  6. Systematic review of natural agents for the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2013
    Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Introduction and Overview of Cancer Therapeutics.Cancer treatment and research · 2023
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. The pathogenesis of mucositis: updated perspectives and emerging targets.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2019
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Current Trends in Management of Oral Mucositis in Cancer TreatmentAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2017
    Article
  20. Intra-oral administration of rebamipide liquid prevents tongue injuries induced by X-ray irradiation in rats.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 10 institutions in 5 countries.

Siri Beier JensenSection of Oral Medicine, Clinical Oral Physiology, Oral Pathology and Anatomy, Department of Odontology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Nørre Allé 20, 2200 N, Copenhagen, Denmark, sirib@sund.ku.dk.
Virginia Jarvis
Yehuda Zadik
Andrei Barasch
Anura Ariyawardana
Allan Hovan
Noam Yarom
Rajesh V Lalla
Joanne Bowen
Sharon Elad
Mucositis Study Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO)
BC Cancer Agency · CAHadassah · USJames Cook University · AUOttawa Hospital · CATel Aviv University · ILUConn Health · USUniversity of Adelaide · AUUniversity of Copenhagen · DKUniversity of Rochester Medical Center · USWinthrop-University Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of this systematic review was to analyze the available literature and define clinical practice guidelines for the use of the following agents for the prevention and treatment of oral mucositis (OM): allopurinol, midline mucosa-sparing radiation blocks, payayor, pentoxifylline, timing of radiation therapy (RT) (morning versus late afternoon), pilocarpine, bethanechol, chewing gum, propantheline, and tetrachlorodecaoxide.

methodsA systematic review was conducted by the Mucositis Study Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society for Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO). The body of evidence for each intervention, in each cancer treatment setting, was assigned an evidence level. Based on the evidence level, one of the following three guideline determinations was possible: recommendation, suggestion, no guideline possible.

resultsA total of 32 papers across 10 interventions were examined. New suggestions were developed against the use of systemic pilocarpine administered orally for prevention of OM during RT in head and neck cancer patients and in patients receiving high-dose chemotherapy, with or without total body irradiation, prior to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. A suggestion was also made against the use of systemic pentoxifylline administered orally for the prevention of OM in patients undergoing bone marrow transplantation. No guideline was possible for any other agent reviewed due to inadequate and/or conflicting evidence.

conclusionsNone of the agents reviewed was determined to be effective for the prevention or treatment of OM. Two agents, pilocarpine and pentoxifylline, were determined to be ineffective, in the populations listed above. Additional well-designed research is needed on other interventions.

Indexed as

AllopurinolAntimetabolitesChemoradiotherapyChewing GumHead and Neck NeoplasmsHumansMuscarinic AgonistsPractice Guidelines as TopicRadiation-Protective AgentsStomatitisAllopurinolAntimetabolitesChewing GumMuscarinic AgonistsRadiation-Protective Agents

Identifiers

PMID23900593
OpenAlexW2057349650

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.