ReviewCureus2025
Comparative Efficacy of Treatments for Radiation-Induced Oral Mucositis in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer.
Review in Cureus, 2025. 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Radiation-induced oral mucositis is a common and painful side effect in patients with head and neck cancer undergoing radiation therapy, causing inflammation and ulceration of the oral mucosa. This condition severely impacts a patient's ability to eat, speak, or swallow, making effective prevention crucial for improving quality of life. This review aimed to evaluate and compare treatments for radiation-induced oral mucositis, focusing on symptom relief and side effects. We included studies with clear outcome measures, pre- and post-treatment scores, and demographic data, excluding case reports, reviews, and abstracts. Our literature search through PubMed and the Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE) identified 190 articles, which were narrowed down to nine after abstract analysis. From the systematic review findings, omega-3 nanoemulgel demonstrated the lowest complication rate (2.9%), with minimal impact on symptoms, making it the most effective treatment. In contrast, rebamipide and benzydamine had higher complication rates (25% and 28%, respectively) and less significant symptom relief. Given its safety, efficacy, and minimal side effects, omega-3 nanoemulgel should be considered a first-line preventive treatment for oral mucositis in patients with head and neck cancer.
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.