ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2024
Preventive versus curative photobiomodulation for oral mucositis in patients with multiple myeloma undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: which approach is more effective?
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThere is increasing evidence that photobiomodulation (PBM) therapy is both an effective and safe approach in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for both prevention and management of oral mucositis (OM), but its use in clinical practice is still limited and the timing of application is under discussion. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate possible differences between patients treated either with preventive or curative PBM therapy.
methodsThe retrospective case series included 24 patients suffering from multiple myeloma who underwent the same conditioning and transplantation protocol. Patients were treated either with preventive PBM starting from the first day of conditioning up to two days post-HSCT or with curative PBM (starting at OM onset for four consecutive days). OM score, pain, and functional parameters were recorded.
resultsAll patients developed OM. Preventive PBM was significantly more effective in reducing OM severity (p < 0.0001) and pain (p < 0.0001) post-HSCT than curative PBM. Furthermore, we found a lower number of patients reporting discomfort in all subjective parameters (pain during swallowing, chewing, and speaking) in the preventive PBM group. No adverse events related to PBM therapy were recorded in both groups.
conclusionThe timing for PBM therapy in patients undergoing HSCT is crucial: when started on the first day of conditioning, it significantly reduces both pain and OM severity, providing an important benefit also in subjective oral functions such as speaking, swallowing, and chewing, thus increasing the overall adherence to the oncological therapies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.