Reliability assessment of the 2018 classification case definitions of peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis, and peri-implantitis.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability and accuracy in the assignment of the case definitions of peri-implant health and diseases according to the 2018 Classification of Periodontal and Peri-implant Diseases and Conditions. METHODS: Ten undergraduate students, 10 general dentists, and 10 experts in implant dentistry participated in this study. All examiners were provided with clinical and radiographic documentation of 25 dental implants. Eleven out the 25 cases were also accompanied by baseline readings. Examiners were asked to define all cases using the 2018 classification case definitions. Reliability among examiners was evaluated using the Fleiss kappa statistic. Accuracy was estimated using percentage of complete agreement and quadratic weighted kappa for pairwise comparisons between each rater and a gold standard diagnosis. RESULTS: The Fleiss kappa was 0.50 (95% CI: 0.48 to 0.51) and the mean quadratic weighted kappa value was 0.544. Complete agreement with the gold standard diagnosis was achieved in 59.8% of the cases. Expertise in implantology affected accuracy positively (p < 0.001) while the absence of baseline readings affected it negatively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Both reliability and accuracy in assigning case definitions to dental implants according to the 2018 classification were mostly moderate. Some difficulties arose in the presence of specific challenging scenarios.

Peri-Implantitis and Peri-Implant Mucositis Case Definitions in Dental Research: A Systematic Assessment.

The aim of this review was to determine the most common peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis case definitions used worldwide in the implant dentistry literature. A systematic assessment of peri-implant disease classification was conducted using all publications in MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Google Scholar between 1994 and November 2017. Screening of eligible studies and data extraction were conducted in duplicate and independently by 2 reviewers. The search protocol identified 3049 unique articles, of which 2784 were excluded based on title and abstract. In total, 265 full texts were screened, 106 of which met the eligibility criteria. Of these, 41 defined peri-implant mucositis. Eight (19.6%) used bleeding on probing (BOP) only; 8 (19.6.7%) used a combination of probing depth (PD), BOP, and radiograph; and 5 (12.3%) used PD and BOP. Cases with crestal bone loss of ≤2 mm in the first year and ≤0.2 mm in each subsequent year were considered as peri-implant mucositis. Ninety-three articles defined peri-implantitis; 28 (30.1%) used a combination of PD with suppuration, BOP, and radiograph, followed by 25 (26.9%) using a combination of PD, BOP, and radiograph. The main criteria in most of the studies were considered to be BOP, PD, and radiograph. Cases of crestal bone loss of ≥2 mm and PD ≥3 mm are considered peri-implantitis. Different peri-implant disease case definitions may affect disease prevalence and treatment strategies. We need to standardize case definitions to avoid discrepancies in case diagnosis and prognosis.

US oncology-wide incidence, duration, costs and deaths from chemoradiation mucositis and antimucositis therapy benefits.

Approximate oncology-wide incidence, duration, costs and deaths associated with mucositis and identify health economic benefits of antimucositis therapies. Review the literature relevant to the clinical experience of mucositis by pathophysiology, incidence, duration, costs and deaths. Use US insurance actuarial and epidemiology on cancer to generalize an oncology-wide impact of toxic mucositis. Toxic mucositis causes oropharyngoesophageal ulcerations, chemo-induced nausea, vomiting and diarrhea. Acutely, it lasts 102 days/six cycles of chemotherapy, 60 days in human stem-cell transplantation patients and 70-84 days in head and neck cancer patients at annual costs of US$13.23 billion/522,166 treated patients (US$20,892/erosive-type mucositis patient, US$25,337/physiologic mucositis patient) and 46,699 deaths. Using antimucositis therapies prior to 2013 provided fractional benefits at high costs. By completely preventing and rapidly reversing mucositis, high-potency polymerized cross-linked sucralfate promises superior health economic benefits.

New measure of health-related quality of life for patients with oropharyngeal mucositis: development and preliminary psychometric evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Oropharyngeal mucositis (OM) causes profound impairment of patients' health-related quality of life (HQoL). The aim of the article is to describe the development and preliminary validation of an HQoL instrument, OMQoL, specifically for patients with OM. METHODS: First, a qualitative phase was conducted to generate items (n = 23). Face validity was assessed by focus group interviews (n = 13). Expert content review (n = 7) was used to ensure content validity. The second step was a quantitative validation phase comprised a multicenter study (n = 210) to help identify subscales of the instrument addressing different dimensions of OM and to measure reliability. RESULTS: The qualitative interview generated 171 items. Using focus group discussion and expert content review, items were reduced to 41 items. Factor and scaling analyses of these 41 items resulted in 4 subscales, contributed by 31 items, depicting problems with symptoms, diet, social function, and swallowing. The floor effect was modest. The factorial structure was satisfactory with loading >0.40 on each subscale for all items. All corrected item-total corrections were higher than 0.40 (r = 0.457-0.874). The internal consistency reliability of each subscale was high, with Cronbach alpha coefficients ranging from 0.906 to 0.934. The test-retest reliability of the individual items using weighted kappa was good (kappa values 0.610-0.895). The intraclass correlation results for the subscale totals were all in excess of 0.70 (0.864-0.934). CONCLUSIONS: An initial psychometric analysis of the OMQoL was encouraging. The OMQoL could provide a valuable tool for the assessment of HQoL of patients with OM.

Alimentary tract mucositis in cancer patients: impact of terminology and assessment on research and clinical practice.

BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE: The field of terminology and assessment of oral and gastrointestinal mucosal injury caused by high-dose cancer therapies in cancer patients has undergone important evolution in recent years. The advances are important for several clinical and research reasons. These reasons include improved patient management and design and conduct of clinical trials based on molecularly targeted therapies. For several decades leading up to the 1980s, terminology was characterized by varying use of "mucositis" and "stomatitis" to describe oral mucosal inflammatory changes and ulceration caused by cancer treatments. In addition, oral mucositis was viewed principally as an epithelial event and one that likely did not intersect with causative mechanisms associated with gastrointestinal mucositis. The term "stomatitis" was directed to oral toxicities and seemed to isolate these conditions from parallel events occurring throughout the alimentary tract and potentially other tissues as well. These perspectives and varying use of these terms resulted in several dilemmas, including (1) difficulty in accurately reporting incidence and severity of oral mucositis and, (2) an under-appreciation of potential significance of alimentary tract mucosal toxicity relative to overall course of therapy, patient quality of life, and in some cases, survivorship. These and related components of the model relative to mucositis have undergone strategic shifts over the past 15 years. A 1989 National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference targeted oral mucositis research as one of the key areas for investigation relative to causation, clinical impact, and potential links with other complications in cancer patients. Research in this area over the past 15 years has evolved such that oral and gastrointestinal mucositis are now appropriately framed as a continuum of pathobiologic changes over time, with clinical impact that may well contribute to overall symptom clustering in selected patient cohorts. OBJECTIVES: This paper will review history, current status, and new research directions associated with terminology and assessment of mucosal injury in cancer patients in the context described above.

Developing evidence-based guidelines for management of alimentary mucositis: process and pitfalls.

INTRODUCTION: It is important yet difficult to maintain currency in clinical oncology practice. The emergence of new diagnostic technologies and new paradigms for cancer treatment combine to produce a rapidly changing clinical approach to patients aided by the increasing use of multidisciplinary care teams and development of evidence-based protocols. METHODS: Teams of experts review the literature in a given area and produce management guidelines and protocols for use by practicing clinicians. Traditionally within Hematology/Oncology, these guidelines have been directed to management of a given tumor type. However, in recent years, attention has increasingly turned to supportive oncology; for example, there are now management guidelines for conditions such as neutropenic fever [Hughes et al. Clinical Infectious Diseases 34(6):730-751, 2002], antiemetic (The Antiemetic Subcommittee of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer Annals of Oncology 17:20-28, 2006) and most recently, mucositis [Rubenstein et al. Cancer 100(9 Suppl):2026-2046, 2004]. It is critical that any guideline process should include education, evaluation, and timely update in its remit, because guidelines become highly compromised if their existence is not widely known, if they do not facilitate clinical practice, or if they are not reflective of contemporary medical literature. RESULTS: The Mucositis Study Group (MSG) of the Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society for Oral Oncology was created in 1998 to specifically address the multiprofessional approach to clinical care, research, and education associated with mucosal injury in cancer patients. A specific outcome has been the development of evidence-based guidelines for the management of mucositis [Rubenstein et al. Cancer 100(9 Suppl):2026-2046, 2004; The Mucositis Study Group of MASCC/ISSO 2005]. The original guidelines [Rubenstein et al. Cancer 100(9 Suppl):2026-2046, 2004] and a companion paper discussing the science behind mucositis [Sonis et al. Cancer 100(9):1995-2025, 2004], were published in 2004. The MSG has recently updated the guidelines [The Mucositis Study Group of MASCC/ISSO 2005]. DISCUSSION: This paper discusses the process involved and the lessons learned that might help other groups planning to undertake a similar project.

Intestinal permeability in the assessment of intestinal toxicity of cytotoxic agents.

The diagnosis and assessment of the severity of intestinal mucosal damage in cancer patients treated with cytotoxic drugs still rely on anamnestic data. There is cumulative evidence that measurement of intestinal permeability may represent a sensitive indicator of intestinal damage by cytotoxic agents. The intestinal permeability testing is based on differential permeability of tight junctions along the crypt-villus axis to nonmetabolized sugars. Cytotoxic drugs induce flattening of villi, leading to increased exposure of luminal contents to crypts and increased disaccharide absorption. An increased disaccharide/monosaccharide ratio and decreased xylose absorption have been described in patients treated with different cytotoxic drugs across a spectrum of malignant tumors that correlated with clinical manifestations, and were used to monitor the effect of therapeutic interventions.