Assessment of salivary alpha amylase and mucin-4 before and after non-surgical treatment of peri-implant mucositis.

BACKGROUND: The present study was based on the null hypothesis that there is no difference in clinicoradiographic parameters and whole salivary alpha amylase (AA) and mucin-4 levels before and after non-surgical mechanical debridement (NSMD) of patients with peri-implant mucositis (PM). The aim was to assess whole salivary AA and mucin-4 levels before and after treatment of PM. METHODS: Patients with PM (Group-1) and individuals without peri-implant diseases (Group-2) were included. Demographic data was collected and peri-implant modified plaque and bleeding indices (mPI and mBI, respectively), probing depth (PD) and crestal bone loss were measured at baseline. Levels of AA and mucin-4 were assessed in unstimulated whole saliva samples. All patients underwent full-mouth non-surgical periodontal therapy (NSPT) and NSMD; and clinical parameters and salivary biomarkers were re-assessed after 3 months. Level of significance was set at P < 0.01. RESULTS: Twenty-six and 32 individuals were included in groups 1 and 2, respectively. None of the participants had periodontitis. At baseline clinical periodontal parameters (PI [P < 0.001], GI [P < 0.001], clinical AL [P < 0.001] and PD [P < 0.001]) were significantly high in Group-1 than Group-2. At 3-month follow-up, there was a statistically significant reduction in clinical periodontal and peri-implant parameters (PI [P < 0.01], GI [P < 0.01], and PD [P < 0.01]) in Group-1 compared with their baseline values. At baseline, salivary AA levels were significantly high in Group-1 than Group-2 (P < 0.01). At 3-month follow-up, there was no significant difference in whole salivary AA levels among patients in groups 1 and 2. CONCLUSIONS: The AA and mucin-4 levels are potential biomarkers for evaluation of peri-implant diseases including PM. Mechanical instrumentation continues to be the most predictable treatment option for the management of peri-implant diseases.

Direct costs associated with the management of mucositis: A systematic review.

Mucositis is one of the more frequent and costly adverse events following cancer treatment. To evaluate and report the direct economic outcomes associated with the management of mucositis across several cancer treatments we conducted a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Scopus, MEDLINE/PubMed, and Embase were searched electronically and a total of 37 relevant studies were included. The costs attributable to mucositis in the hematopoietic stem cell transplantation setting ranged from 1124,47 US dollars (USD) to 299 214,14 USD per patient. The radiotherapy/chemoradiotherapy/radiotherapy plus molecular targeted therapy accounted for mucositis costs that ranged from 51,23 USD to 33 560,58 USD per patient. Costs for mucositis in the chemotherapy setting ranged from 4,18 USD to 31 963,64 USD per patient. When the cancer treatment was not specified, costs of mucositis ranged from 565,85 USD to as high as 20 279, 12 USD per patient. Mucositis costs from multimodal therapy ranged from 12,42 USD to 5670,46 USD per patient. The molecular targeted therapy setting included only one study and depending on the healthcare providers' perspective of each country evaluated, mucositis' costs ranged from 45,78 USD to 3484,91 USD per patient. Mucositis is associated with increased resource use, consultations, hospitalizations and extended hospitalizations, leading to a substantial incremental cost that exacerbates the economic burden on the patient, health plan and health system across several cancer treatments and diagnosis. More studies with a prospective evaluation of the economic costs associated with mucositis management are needed.

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.

[Radio-induced oral and pharyngeal mucositis: management updates]. / Mucites radio-induites buccopharyngées : actualités sur la prise en charge.

Mucositis is a major side effect induced by radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy of head and neck cancer. This toxicity impacts patient's quality of life and may compromise optimal treatments. Pathophysiology, risk factors, incidence and consequences of mucositis will be discussed in this review. Its management remains principally supportive (pain medication and nutritional support); however, in recent years several studies have revealed that the use of low level energy laser is particularly useful in the prevention and treatment of chemo- and radio-induced mucositis.

Decision tree for the management of periimplant diseases.

The development of implants reflects one of the foremost breakthroughs of dentistry. As the market keeps growing exponentially, the implantologist faces an unavoidable challenge, that is, how to deal with the complications associated with implants. Literature published so far has focused in dealing with the technical and surgical aspects of implant therapy. Information regarding the management of periimplant diseases is rather lacking. Hence, the purpose of this article is to provide an overview and description of periimplant diseases, along with treatment recommendations.

Chemotherapy- and radiotherapy-induced oral mucositis: pathobiology, epidemiology and management.

Oral mucositis is a debilitating complication of anticancer treatment, characterised by erythematous, atrophic, erosive or ulcerative lesions. Oral mucositis is almost always painful, affects eating, sleeping, and speech and affects the physiological and social well-being of the patient. The pathophysiology of the condition is not well understood. Guidelines to the treatment of oral mucositis are often contradictory so that there is no evidence based standard treatment protocol. Therefore the treatment is empiric. This paper offers a brief review of current knowledge of the pathophysiology and treatment of oral mucositis.

Evaluating the supportive care costs of severe radiochemotherapy-induced mucositis and pharyngitis : results from a Northwestern University Costs of Cancer Program pilot study with head and neck and nonsmall cell lung cancer patients who received care at a county hospital, a Veterans Administration hospital, or a comprehensive cancer care center.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined the costs of supportive care for radiochemotherapy-induced mucosits/pharyngitis among patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) or lung cancers despite the documented negative clinical impact of these complications. METHODS: The authors identified a retrospective cohort of patients with HNC or nonsmall lung cancer (NSCLC) who had received radiochemotherapy at 1 of 3 Chicago hospitals (a Veterans Administration hospital, a county hospital, or a tertiary care hospital). Charts were reviewed for the presence/absence of severe mucositis/pharyngitis and the medical resources that were used. Resource estimates were converted into cost units obtained from standard sources (hospital bills, Medicare physician fee schedule, Red Book). Estimates of resources used and direct medical costs were compared for patients who did and patients who did not develop severe mucositis/pharyngitis. RESULTS: Severe mucositis/pharyngitis occurred in 70.1% of 99 patients with HNC and in 37.5% of 40 patients with NSCLC during radiochemotherapy. The total median medical costs per patient were USD 39,313 for patients with mucositis/pharyngitis and USD 20,798 for patients without mucositis/pharyngitis (P = .007). Extended inpatient hospitalization accounted for USD 12,600 of the increased medical costs (median 14 days [USD 19,600] with severe mucositis/pharyngitis vs 5 days [USD 7,000] without; P = .017). For patients who had HNC with mucositis/pharyngitis, incremental inpatient hospitalization costs were USD 14,000, and total medical costs were USD 17,244. For patients who had NSCLC with mucositis/pharyngitis, these costs were USD 11,200 and USD 25,000, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In the current study, the medical costs among the patients with HNC and NSCLC who received radiochemotherapy were greater for those who developed severe mucositis/pharyngitis than for those who did not.

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.

Alimentary mucositis: putting the guidelines into practice.

BACKGROUND: The Mucositis Study Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer and International Society of Oral Oncology completed an evidence-based review of the literature for the management of alimentary mucositis. DISCUSSION: The present manuscript puts these guidelines into clinical practice by presenting two cases of alimentary mucositis from cancer therapy. These cases illustrate the impact of oral and gastrointestinal mucositis on patient care.

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.