Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38933098›Full record

ArticleEClinicalMedicine2024

Guidance on mucositis assessment from the MASCC Mucositis Study Group and ISOO: an international Delphi study.

Ragda Abdalla-Aslan, Pierluigi Bonomo, Dorothy Keefe, Nicole Blijlevens, Katrina Cao, Yin Ting Cheung, Eduardo Rodrigues Fregnani, Robert Miller, Judith Raber-Durlacher, Joel Epstein and 13 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Acceptance and perceived efficacy of intraoral versus extraoral photobiomodulation for oral mucositis prevention in pediatric patients.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Trial
  2. Effectiveness of oral mucositis management based on MASCC/ISOO guidelines in pediatric oncology patients: a randomized controlled trial.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Trial
  3. Enteral versus parenteral nutrition in auto-HCT: a randomized controlled trial on clinical outcomes and gut microbiome dynamics.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Effects of L-glutamine and hyaluronic acid associated with photobiomodulation on oral mucositis: a randomized clinical trial.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Trial
  6. Machine learning for predicting muscle loss after radiotherapy using clinical and toxicity data in oral cavity cancer.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Oral mucositis management in hematopoietic cell transplantation in Australia and New Zealand (CAN EAT Survey).Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  11. Dentists' knowledge and practices in supportive care: a French national survey.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

23 authors.

Ragda Abdalla-AslanDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel.
Pierluigi BonomoRadiation Oncology, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy.
Dorothy KeefeCancer Australia, Australia.
Nicole BlijlevensDepartment of Hematology, Radboud University Medical Centre, the Netherlands.
Katrina CaoSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Australia.
Yin Ting CheungSchool of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Eduardo Rodrigues FregnaniInstituto de Ensino e Pesquisa, Hospital Sírio-Libanês, São Paulo, 01308-060, Brazil.
Robert MillerDepartment of Radiation Medicine, University of Kentucky College of Medicine, Lexington, KY, USA.
Judith Raber-DurlacherDepartment of Oral Medicine, Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), the Netherlands.
Joel EpsteinDepartment of Surgery, City of Hope National Cancer Centre, Duarte, CA, USA.
Ysabella Van SebilleUniversity of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.
Elisa Kauark-FontesDepartment of Propaedeutic and Integrated Clinic, Universidade Federal da Bahia (UFBA), Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Abhishek KandwalDepartment of Dental Surgery, Cancer Research Institute, Himalayan Institute of Medical Sciences, Swami Rama Himalayan University, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India.
Emma McCurdy-FranksSunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Joel FinkelsteinSunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Victoria McCarvellSunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Yehuda ZadikDepartment of Oral Medicine, and Saligman Clinics, Faculty of Dental Medicine, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Hadassah Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel.
Giulia OttavianiDepartment of Medical, Surgical and Health Sciences, University of Trieste, Italy.
Rui Amaral MendesDepartment of Community Medicine, Information and Health Decision Sciences (MEDCIDS), Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Caroline Margina SpeksnijderDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Special Dental Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Hannah Rose WardillSchool of Biomedicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, 5005, Australia.
Paolo BossiDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini 4, 20072, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy.
MASCC Mucositis Study Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Mucositis is a common and highly impactful side effect of conventional and emerging cancer therapy and thus the subject of intense investigation. Although common practice, mucositis assessment is heterogeneously adopted and poorly guided, impacting evidence synthesis and translation. The Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) Mucositis Study Group (MSG) therefore aimed to establish expert recommendations for how existing mucositis assessment tools should be used, in clinical care and trials contexts, to improve the consistency of mucositis assessment. Methods: This study was conducted over two stages (January 2022-July 2023). The first phase involved a survey to MASCC-MSG members (January 2022-May 2022), capturing current practices, challenges and preferences. These then informed the second phase, in which a set of initial recommendations were prepared and refined using the Delphi method (February 2023-May 2023). Consensus was defined as agreement on a parameter by >80% of respondents. Findings: Seventy-two MASCC-MSG members completed the first phase of the study (37 females, 34 males, mainly oral care specialists). High variability was noted in the use of mucositis assessment tools, with a high reliance on clinician assessment compared to patient reported outcome measures (PROMs, 47% vs 3%, 37% used a combination). The World Health Organization (WHO) and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) scales were most commonly used to assess mucositis across multiple settings. Initial recommendations were reviewed by experienced MSG members and following two rounds of Delphi survey consensus was achieved in 91 of 100 recommendations. For example, in patients receiving chemotherapy, the recommended tool for clinician assessment in clinical practice is WHO for oral mucositis (89.5% consensus), and WHO or CTCAE for gastrointestinal mucositis (85.7% consensus). The recommended PROM in clinical trials is OMD/WQ for oral mucositis (93.3% consensus), and PRO-CTCAE for gastrointestinal mucositis (83.3% consensus). Interpretation: These new recommendations provide much needed guidance on mucositis assessment and may be applied in both clinical practice and research to streamline comparison and synthesis of global data sets, thus accelerating translation of new knowledge into clinical practice. Funding: No funding was received.

Indexed as

Gastrointestinal mucositisMucositis assessment toolsOral mucositisPatient-reported outcome measures

Identifiers

PMID38933098
PMCPMC11200283

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.