Trial reportSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2026
Comparable efficacy of extraoral and intraoral photobiomodulation in preventing oral mucositis during high-dose methotrexate therapy in pediatric oncology: A single-blind randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis prospective randomized controlled clinical study compared intraoral (IO) and extraoral (EO) photobiomodulation (PBM) for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis (OM) in pediatric oncology patients.
methodsA total of 155 patients (1-18 years), receiving high-dose methotrexate (HDMTX) for leukemia, lymphoma, or osteosarcoma, were randomized to PBM-IO (n = 73) or PBM-EO (n = 82). Preventive PBM was administered daily from hospital admission through discharge. Both protocols used red light with equivalent dosimetry (660 nm, 100 mW, 1 J per point). PBM-EO required 30 s/session, whereas PBM-IO required approximately 6 min, excluding patient handling time. OM occurrence, severity (WHO scale), plaque index, and pain (numeric rating scale) were assessed on days 0, 3, 5, and 10 after HDMTX infusion.
resultsThe overall OM occurrence was 35.5%, with no significant difference between PBM-IO (41.1%) and PBM-EO (30.5%) groups (p = 0.168). No statistically significant differences were observed between groups for OM severity, pain, salivary pH, or plaque index at any time point (p > 0.05). Multivariable ordinal logistic regression demonstrated that PBM modality was not independently associated with OM severity. As expected, increasing age (OR = 1.14; 95% CI: 1.04-1.25; p = 0.004) and higher HDMTX dose (OR = 1.24; 95% CI: 1.03-1.49; p = 0.021) were significantly associated with greater OM severity. Median pain scores remained 0 at all assessment points in both groups.
conclusionExtraoral PBM demonstrated comparable effectiveness to intraoral for OM prevention in pediatric patients undergoing HDMTX chemotherapy, while reducing application time.
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.