A novel, multi-active emollient for the prevention of acute radiation dermatitis in breast cancer patients: a randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: To investigate the efficacy of a novel, multi-active emollient in preventing and managing acute radiation dermatitis (ARD) in breast cancer patients undergoing moderate hypofractionated (HF) radiotherapy (RT) compared to standard of care. METHODSA: A monocentric, open-label, randomized clinical trial (RCT) with breast cancer patients receiving moderate HF (dose: 40.05-55.86 Gy, fractions: 15-21) was conducted between January 2022 and May 2023. The experimental group received the novel emollient, while the control group received the standard skin care. Patients applied the skin care products twice daily during the complete RT course. The primary outcome was the severity of ARD at the final RT session measured by the modified Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) criteria. Secondary outcomes included patient symptoms, quality of life (QoL), and treatment satisfaction. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients with 50 patients per group were enrolled. In the control group, 50% of the patients developed RTOG grade 1 ARD and 48% grade 2 or higher, while in the experimental group, the severity of ARD was significantly lower with 82% grade 1 and 16% grade 2 ARD (P = .013, χ2-test). The frequency and severity of xerosis were significantly lower in the experimental compared to the control group (Ps ≤ .036, Mann Whiney U test). The impact of ARD on the QoL was low, and treatment satisfaction was high in both groups, with no significant difference. CONCLUSION: This RCT shows that the novel, multi-active emollient significantly reduced the ARD RTOG grade. Research in a more diverse patient population is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04929808 (11/06/2021).

A long-term follow-up of early breast cancer patients treated with photobiomodulation during conventional fractionation radiotherapy in the prevention of acute radiation dermatitis.

OBJECTIVES: The evidence demonstrating the efficacy of photobiomodulation (PBM) therapy for preventing and managing acute radiation dermatitis (ARD) is growing steadily. The question that arises from many clinicians is, if PBM is safe for oncologic patients. This study aimed to evaluate the disease-free survival (DFS), cancer-free survival (CFS), and overall survival (OS) of breast cancer patients treated with PBM for ARD. METHODS: Clinical data of 120 breast cancer patients treated with prophylactic PBM (n = 60, 2x/week, 808-905 nm, 4 J/cm2 ) or placebo (n = 60) during conventional fractionation (CF) radiotherapy (RT) between April 2015 and June 2017 were retrospectively analyzed (TRANSDERMIS trial). During follow-up (April 2015 to May 2022), patients underwent a complete clinical evaluation every 6 months and blood analysis and mammography yearly in the first 5 years after the end of RT. The DFS, CFS, and OS were estimated. RESULTS: At a median follow-up time of 66 months (range 4-81), there was no significant difference in DFS (73.7% vs. 98.3%, resp., p = 0.54), CFS (68.4% vs. 77.8%, resp., p = 0.79), and OS (87.9% vs. 98.3%, resp., p = 0.30) between the placebo and PBM group. CONCLUSIONS: This paper is the first to describe the results of a long-term follow-up in early-stage breast cancer patients who underwent PBM for ARD. Results suggest that using PBM in breast cancer patients undergoing CF RT does not influence the locoregional recurrence, the development of new primary tumors, or OS.

The Effectiveness of a Novel Skin Barrier Protectant in the Management of Acute Radiation Dermatitis: A Case Series.

OBJECTIVE: Acute radiation dermatitis (ARD) is a frequent adverse effect in patients with cancer undergoing radiotherapy (RT). The aim of this case series is to evaluate the effect of a novel skin barrier protectant in patients with ARD. METHODS: The skin barrier protectant was used in four patients with different cancer types undergoing RT at two clinical sites. All patients received the standard institutional skincare alongside the novel skin barrier protectant. The skin reactions were evaluated by an RT nurse using the modified version of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group criteria. RESULTS: At the final RT session, three of four patients developed erythema with or without dry desquamation. One patient presented only a minor patchy moist wound. Overall, the pain and pruritus due to ARD was low or nonexistent. No adverse events related to the skin barrier protectant were reported. CONCLUSIONS: This case series demonstrates the beneficial effects and safety of the novel skin barrier protectant in the management of ARD in patients with cancer of different etiologies. These results lay the foundation for future studies with larger, more homogeneous patient populations; a well-defined application scheme; and a stricter study design.

Vaginal mucositis in patients with gynaecological cancer undergoing (chemo-)radiotherapy: a retrospective analysis.

The objective of this retrospective analysis was to determine the incidence and extent of vaginal mucositis (VM) in women with gynaecological cancer undergoing external (chemo)radiation therapy (CRT). A retrospective analysis was set up to collect data on the incidence and severity of VM in women treated with external pelvic RT for gynaecological cancer at the Jessa Hospital, Hasselt and ZOL, Genk, BE between January 2017 and June 2018. At the start and end of their external (C)RT, they rated the frequency and intensity of five common symptoms of VM. Thirty-three patients treated with RT for gynaecological cancer met the inclusion criteria. A non-negligible proportion of patients already experienced at least one VM symptom to any degree before the start of RT, a proportion that further increased towards the end of the RT (73%). At the end of RT, on average, about 25% of these patients reported moderate-to-severe symptoms (against about 7% before the (C)RT). These results suggest that VM is a rather frequent side effect in gynaecological cancer patients that aggravates during treatment up to a moderate severity level. Although the small sample size, these data highlight the need for attention to VM.Impact StatementWhat is already known about this topic? Radiotherapy plays an important role in the treatment of gynaecological malignancies. A debilitating complication in patients undergoing pelvic radiotherapy is vaginal mucositis, an inflammation of the vaginal mucosal lining. To date, the incidence of vaginal mucositis is still not well documented.What this paper adds? A non-negligible proportion of patients already experienced at least one symptom related to vaginal mucositis before the start of radiotherapy. Most patients presented mild to moderate vaginal mucositis symptoms at the end of external pelvic radiotherapy. Burning sensation, pruritus, and pain were the most frequently documented radiotherapy-induced complications.The implications of this paper: Vaginal mucositis is an underrated side effect of pelvic radiotherapy that needs to be tackled multidisciplinary by a team of nurses, radiotherapists, oncologists, and gynaecologists. The team should tackle the complication from the start of radiotherapy by using the most appropriate measures. Due to a possible link between acute vaginal mucositis and late vaginal toxicity, the team needs to follow-up patient's post-radiotherapy to support patients in late complications and advise/encourage patients in performing vaginal dilatation to prevent vaginal stenosis.

Photobiomodulation therapy for the prevention of acute radiation dermatitis in breast cancer patients undergoing hypofractioned whole-breast irradiation (LABRA trial).

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of photobiomodulation therapy in breast cancer patients post-lumpectomy undergoing hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation (HF-WBI) for the prevention and management of acute radiodermatitis (ARD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A randomized, multicentric clinical trial (LABRA trial, NCT03924011) was set up at the Limburg Oncology Center, including the Jessa Hospital (Hasselt, BE) and Ziekenhuis Oost-Limburg (Genk, BE). A total of 71 breast cancer patients planned to undergo HF-WBI were randomized to one of the two study arms: the control group (n = 32) or the PBM group (n = 39). The PBM group received the standard institutional skincare combined with PBM (2×/week) during the complete radiotherapy (RT) course. Patients in the control group received the standard skincare combined with placebo treatment (2x/week). Patients' skin reactions were evaluated weekly during the RT treatment by using the modified version of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) criteria. RESULTS: At week 3 of RT, one patient presented a grade 2 and one patient a grade 3 skin reaction in the control group, while in the PBM group, all patients still presented grade 1 ARD. At the final RT session 28% of the patients presenting grade 2-3 ARD, while in the PBM group 10% presented grade 2 and no grade 3 ARD. PBM reduced the incidence of severe ARD by 18%. However, the difference was not significant (p = 0.053). CONCLUSION: Based on the LABRA trial results, PBM seems not able to reduce the incidence of severe ARD in breast cancer patients undergoing HF-WBI. Research in a larger patient population is recommended.

Photobiomodulation therapy for the prevention of acute radiation dermatitis in head and neck cancer patients (DERMISHEAD trial).

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) for the prevention of acute radiation dermatitis (ARD) in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A randomised, placebo-controlled trial (RCT) with 46 HNC patients who underwent radiotherapy (RT) with or without concomitant chemotherapy was set up (DERMISHEAD trial). Patients were randomised to receive PBM or placebo treatments from the first day of RT (2×/week) alongside the institutional skincare. The severity of skin reactions was assessed by the National Cancer Institute-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.03 (NCI-CTCAE v4.03) and the Radiotherapy-Induced Skin Reaction Assessment Scale (RISRAS). Quality of life (QoL) was evaluated using the Skindex-16 questionnaire. RESULTS: PBMT significantly reduced NCI-CTCAE grade 2-3 ARD with 49% at the end of RT. CONCLUSION: The results of the first RCT in HNC patients showed that PBMT is an effective method to prevent the development of severe ARD. These results support the implementation of PBM in the clinical oncology - radiotherapy practice.

Evaluating the Effectiveness of a Novel Skin Barrier Protectant in a Patient with Acute Radiodermatitis of the Vulva: A Case Report.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the use of a novel skin barrier protectant in a patient treated with radiotherapy for vulvar cancer. METHODS: This case report was conducted in a radiotherapy department with two women undergoing radiotherapy for vulvar carcinoma. A novel skin barrier protectant was evaluated in one patient; the other underwent the institutional standard skin care protocol. Skin reactions and pain were evaluated using the Radiotherapy Oncology Group Criteria. MAIN RESULTS: The patient who was treated with the skin protectant showed accelerated healing toward the end of radiotherapy, and this was accompanied with a decrease in pain (maximum pain score 6/10). In comparison, the patient treated with the standard skin care protocol had an extended healing process, experienced a higher pain level (maximum pain score 9/10), and required more nursing care. CONCLUSIONS: This case report is the first to suggest that this novel skin barrier protectant could effectively manage acute radiodermatitis in patients with cancer. This case report hopes to lay the foundation for future randomized controlled trials with a larger and broader patient population.