Secondary endpoints analysis in patients with estrogen receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer treated with everolimus and exemestane enrolled in Oral Care-BC.

BACKGROUND: The Oral Care BC-trial reported that professional oral care (POC) reduces the incidence and severity of oral mucositis in patients receiving everolimus (EVE) and exemestane (EXE). However, the effect of POC on clinical response among patients receiving EVE and EXE was not established. We compared outcomes for estrogen receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer patients who received POC to those who had not, and evaluated clinical prognostic factors. All patients simultaneously received EVE and EXE. METHODS: Between May 2015 and Dec 2017, 174 eligible patients were enrolled in the Oral Care-BC trial. The primary endpoint was the comparative incidence of grade 1 or worse oral mucositis, as evaluated for both the groups over 8 weeks by an oncologist. The secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Data were collected after a follow-up period of 13.9 months. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in PFS between the POC and Control Groups (P = 0.801). A BMI <  25 mg/m2 and non-visceral metastasis were associated with longer PFS (P = 0.018 and P = 0.003, respectively) and the use of bone modifying agents (BMA) was associated with shorter PFS (P = 0.028). The PFS and OS between the POC and control groups were not significantly different in the Oral-Care BC trial. CONCLUSIONS: POC did not influence the prognosis of estrogen receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer patients. Patients with non-visceral metastasis, a BMI <  25 mg/m2, and who did not receive BMA while receiving EVE and EXE may have better prognoses. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study protocol was registered online at the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN), Japan (protocol ID 000016109), on January 5, 2015 and at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02376985 ).

Oral Care Evaluation to Prevent Oral Mucositis in Estrogen Receptor-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients Treated with Everolimus (Oral Care-BC): A Randomized Controlled Phase III Trial.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of oral mucositis (any grade) after everolimus treatment is 58% in the general population and 81% in Asian patients. This study hypothesized that professional oral care (POC) before everolimus treatment could reduce the incidence of everolimus-induced oral mucositis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase III study evaluated the efficacy of POC in preventing everolimus-induced mucositis. Patients were randomized into POC and control groups (1:1 ratio) and received everolimus with exemestane. Patients in the POC group underwent teeth surface cleaning, scaling, and tongue cleaning before everolimus initiation and continued to receive weekly POC throughout the 8-week treatment period. Patients in the control group brushed their own teeth and gargled with 0.9% sodium chloride solution or water. The primary endpoint was the incidence of all grades of oral mucositis. We targeted acquisition of 200 patients with a 2-sided type I error rate of 5% and 80% power to detect 25% risk reduction. RESULTS: Between March 2015 and December 2017, we enrolled 175 women from 31 institutions, of which five did not receive the protocol treatment and were excluded. Over the 8 weeks, the incidence of grade 1 oral mucositis was significantly different between the POC group (76.5%, 62 of 82 patients) and control group (89.7%, 78 of 87 patients; p = .034). The incidence of grade 2 (severe) oral mucositis was also significantly different between the POC group (34.6%, 28 of 82 patients) and control group (54%, 47 of 87 patients; p = .015). As a result of oral mucositis, 18 (22.0%) patients in the POC group and 28 (32.2%) in the control group had to undergo everolimus dose reduction. CONCLUSION: POC reduced the incidence and severity of oral mucositis in patients receiving everolimus and exemestane. This might be considered as a treatment option of oral care for patients undergoing this treatment. Clinical trial identification number: NCT02069093. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The Oral Care-BC trial that prophylactically used professional oral care (POC), available worldwide, did not show a greater than 25% difference in mucositis. The 12% difference in grade 1 or higher mucositis and especially the ∼20% difference in grade 2 mucositis are likely clinically meaningful to patients. POC before treatment should be considered as a treatment option of oral care for postmenopausal patients who are receiving everolimus and exemestane for treatment of hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer and metastatic breast cancer. However, POC was not adequate for prophylactic oral mucositis in these patients, and dexamethasone mouthwash prophylaxis is standard treatment before everolimus.

A cost-minimization analysis of measures against metallic dental restorations for head and neck radiotherapy.

The aim of this study was to compare the estimated public medical care cost of measures to address metallic dental restorations (MDRs) for head and neck radiotherapy using high-energy mega-voltage X-rays. This was considered a first step to clarify which MDR measure was more cost-effective. We estimated the medical care cost of radiotherapy for two representative MDR measures: (i) with MDR removal or (ii) without MDR removal (non-MDR removal) using magnetic resonance imaging and a spacer. A total of 5520 patients received head and neck radiation therapy in 2018. The mean number of MDRs per person was 4.1 dental crowns and 1.3 dental bridges. The mean cost per person was estimated to be 121 720 yen for MDR removal and 54 940 yen for non-MDR removal. Therefore, the difference in total public medical care cost between MDR removal and non-MDR removal was estimated to be 303 268 800 yen. Our results suggested that non-MDR removal would be more cost-effective than MDR removal for head and neck radiotherapy. In the future, a national survey and cost-effectiveness analysis via a multicenter study are necessary; these investigations should include various outcomes such as the rate of local control, status of oral mucositis, frequency of hospital visits and efforts of the medical professionals.

Oral care and oral assessment guide in breast cancer patients receiving everolimus and exemestane: subanalysis of a randomized controlled trial (Oral Care-BC).

BACKGROUND: Oral mucositis is a clinically significant adverse event linked to cancer therapy; it reduces the quality of life of patients and may result in the discontinuation of treatment and a poorer prognosis. Based on level 3 evidence, the Mucositis Study Group of Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer and the International Society of Oral Oncology recommend oral care for all patients receiving cancer chemotherapy and radiotherapy, although no data from large-scaled randomized controlled trials support the efficacy of oral care in preventing oral mucositis. Therefore, this randomized, controlled, multicenter, open-label, phase III study sought to determine whether professional oral care reduces oral mucositis in everolimus and exemestane-treated estrogen receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer patients. METHODS: Altogether, 169 patients were randomized into the professional oral care (n=82) and control (n=87) groups. The professional oral care group received oral health instruction, professional mechanical tooth and tongue cleaning, gargling with a benzethonium chloride mouthwash, and dexamethasone ointment when grade 1 mucositis manifested. The control group received oral health instruction and gargling. Eight weeks after the everolimus and exemestane administration, the oral status (Oral Assessment Guide criteria) and oral mucositis status (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events functional and clinical examinations) were evaluated. RESULTS: The incidence of oral mucositis of any grade and grade 2 severe mucositis was significantly lower in the professional oral care group, based on the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events functional and clinical examinations. The total Oral Assessment Guide score, total Oral Assessment Guide grade, and Oral Assessment Guide score of teeth/dentures and mucous membranes were significantly different between the two groups. The Oral Assessment Guide grade for swallow, lip, teeth/dentures, mucous membrane, tongue, and saliva significantly correlated to oral mucositis severity. CONCLUSIONS: Professional oral care may prevent oral mucositis and improve teeth/denture conditions in patients receiving everolimus and exemestane.

Quantitative bone scan imaging using BSI and BUV: an approach to evaluate ARONJ early.

OBJECTIVE: The usefulness of bone scan index (BSI), a quantitative metric of the area of uptake in computer-aided diagnosis in bone scintigraphy, has been reported for the diagnosis of anti-resorptive-agent-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (ARONJ). The aim of this study is to validate the diagnostic ability of BSI for the early detection of ARONJ. In addition, the Bone uptake value (BUV), another quantitative index obtained from bone scintigraphy that indicates the degree of radioisotope (RI) accumulation, was used to improve the diagnostic ability for early detection of ARONJ. METHODS: A total of 34 patients (11 with ARONJ, 23 without ARONJ) who were administered anti-resorptive-agents for bone metastasis and had incidentally consulted a dental surgeon within 3 months after regular whole-body bone scintigraphy were retrospectively included in the study. The bone scintigraphy data were subjected to semiquantitative analysis of uptake in the jaw using BONENAVI (FUJIFILM Toyama Chemical, Co. Ltd., Tokyo, Japan; EXINI Diagnostics AB, Lund, Sweden) and BUV software (Technical Society for Quantitative Bone Scintigraphy and Fujifilm Toyama Chemical Co., Ltd. Tokyo, Japan). The ROI was set semi-automatically on mandibular hotspots, and the regional BSI was termed BSIJ. Planar anterior and posterior images were then sent to BUV software, with the ROI set manually as for BSI, and the regional BUV was termed BUVJ. RESULTS: Mean BSIJ values for the ARONJ positive and ARONJ negative groups were 0.17 ± 0.83 and 0.03 ± 0.50%, respectively. Mean BUVJ values for the ARONJ positive and ARONJ negative groups were 0.47 ± 0.17 and 0.19 ± 0.11, respectively. BSIJ × BUVJ values for the ARONJ positive versus ARONJ negative groups were 0.088 ± 0.067 vs. 0.007 ± 0.010. The AUC for BSIJ, BUVJ and BSIJ × BUVJ was 0.949, 0.951 and 0.988, respectively. CONCLUSION: The BSI metric of a CAD system for bone scintigraphy was useful for the early detection of ARONJ. Accuracy was improved with the additional use of BUVJ data. We recommend that SPECT imaging be performed when bone scintigraphy reveals focal or diffuse uptake in the mandible with high BSIJ and BUVJ.

Predictive Significance of Tumor Depth and Budding for Late Lymph Node Metastases in Patients with Clinical N0 Early Oral Tongue Carcinoma.

In clinical N0 early oral tongue carcinoma, treatment of occult lymph node metastasis is controversial. The purpose of this study was to assess the histopathological risk factors for predicting late lymph node metastasis in early oral tongue carcinoma. We retrospectively reviewed 48 patients with early oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma. Associations between the histopathological factors (depth of tumor, differentiation, blood vessel invasion, lymphatic invasion, and tumor budding) and late lymph metastasis were analyzed. Although the univariate analysis identified blood vessel invasion, lymphatic invasion, and high-grade tumor budding as predictive factors for neck recurrence (p < 0.001), the Cox proportional hazards model identified high-grade tumor budding as an independent predictive factor (p < 0.01). The combination of a tumor depth ≥ 3 mm and high-grade tumor budding yielded high diagnostic accuracy. Tumor depth and budding grade were identified as histopathological risk factors for late neck recurrence in clinical N0 early oral tongue carcinoma.

Cervicofacial subcutaneous and mediastinal emphysema caused by air cooling spray of dental laser.

Cervicofacial subcutaneous emphysema is a rare complication of dental procedures with an air turbine or syringe, and dentists and oral surgeons sometimes encounter mediastinal emphysema following the presentation of extensive subcutaneous emphysema. Most emphysema occurs incidentally during tooth extraction, restorative treatment, or endodontic treatment, with only a few cases reported of cervicofacial subcutaneous emphysema associated with dental laser treatment. We report a case of cervicofacial subcutaneous and mediastinal emphysema caused by the air cooling spray of dental laser during dental treatment in a 76-year-old woman. After she underwent dental laser treatment, cervicofacial swelling was noted and she was referred to our department. Computed tomography showed both cervicofacial subcutaneous emphysema and mediastinal emphysema. Antibiotics were administered prophylactically and the emphysema disappeared 5 days after the dental laser treatment, without any complications.