EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF A DEXAMETHASONE-BASED MOUTHWASH TO PREVENT CHEMOTHERAPY-INDUCED STOMATITIS IN WOMEN WITH BREAST CANCER: A MULTICENTRE, OPEN-LABEL, RANDOMISED PHASE 2 STUDY.

PURPOSE: No standard approach other than oral care is available for preventing chemotherapy-induced stomatitis in patients with breast cancer. In this randomized, controlled phase 2 trial, we aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of a dexamethasone-based mouthwash in preventing chemotherapy-induced stomatitis in patients with early breast cancer. BASIC PROCEDURES: Patients with breast cancer scheduled for epirubicin and cyclophosphamide (EC) or docetaxel and cyclophosphamide (TC) therapy were selected and allocated in a 1:1 ratio to the intervention and control groups. The intervention group received chemotherapy, oral care, and a dexamethasone-based mouthwash, whereas the control group received chemotherapy and oral care. The primary endpoint was the incidence of stomatitis. This was a phase 2 study, and the significance level for the analysis of the primary endpoint was set a priori at 0.2. MAIN FINDINGS: Data pertaining to 58 patients in the control group and 59 patients in the intervention group were analyzed. Stomatitis incidence was 55% and 38% in the control and intervention groups, respectively (risk ratio, 0.68; 80% confidence interval, 0.52-0.88; P = .052). Stomatitis severity was lower in the intervention group than in the control group (P = .03). The proportion of patients who adhered to the mouthwash regimen was 87% (interquartile range, 67.8%-95.3%). No severe oral infections were observed. PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS: The dexamethasone-based mouthwash safely reduced stomatitis incidence and severity in patients receiving chemotherapy for early breast cancer. Phase 3 clinical trials are warranted for validating our results.

Efficacy of 3% hydrogen peroxide solution in cleaning tongue coating before and after surgery: a randomized phase II study.

BACKGROUND: Increased bacterial presence in the tongue coating and thereby, the saliva, may be a risk factor for postoperative complications such as surgical site infection or postoperative pneumonia after cancer surgery. However, no method for cleaning tongue coating has been established experimentally. The purpose of this study was to verify the effect of brushing with 3% hydrogen peroxide on suppression of the number of bacteria in tongue coating. METHODS: Sixteen patients with gastric cancer or colorectal cancer undergoing surgery were randomly allocated to control and intervention groups. In the control group, the tongue was brushed for 30 s with a water-moistened toothbrush, while in the intervention group, the tongue was brushed for 30 s with a toothbrush moistened with 3% hydrogen peroxide. Bacterial counts on tongue coating were measured before and 30 s after cleaning the tongue coating using the Rapid Oral Bacteria Quantification System. RESULTS: In the control group, the number of bacteria on the tongue did not decrease significantly after tongue cleaning on the day before surgery, but did on the day after surgery. In contrast, in the intervention group, the number of bacteria on the tongue decreased significantly after tongue cleaning both on the day before and the day after surgery. Furthermore, when comparing the control and intervention groups, the intervention group had a greater reduction effect. CONCLUSIONS: Tongue brushing with 3% hydrogen peroxide is a useful method to reduce the number of bacteria on the tongue in patients with gastrointestinal cancer undergoing surgery. Trial registration jRCTs071200020 (July 3, 2020).

Study protocol for efficacy and safety of steroid-containing mouthwash to prevent chemotherapy-induced stomatitis in women with breast cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2 study.

INTRODUCTION: Stomatitis is a frequent adverse event in patients undergoing chemotherapy for breast cancer. Stomatitis can hamper oral nutrition resulting in malnutrition, reduce quality of life and introduce the need for dose reductions and interruption of chemotherapy; however, there is currently no standard approach for preventing chemotherapy-induced stomatitis. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of a dexamethasone-based elixir mouthwash for preventing chemotherapy-induced stomatitis in patients with early breast cancer. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this multicenter, randomised, controlled phase 2 trial, we will randomly assign 120 women with early breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy to use of a dexamethasone-based elixir or standard oral care, to compare their preventive effects on chemotherapy-induced stomatitis. Patients will be assigned in a 1:1 ratio. Patients in the intervention group will receive chemotherapy, oral care and a dexamethasone-based elixir (10 mL 0.1 mg/mL; swish for 2 min and spit, four times daily for 9 weeks), and patients in the control group will receive chemotherapy and oral care. The primary endpoint is the difference in incidence of stomatitis between the two groups. The sample size allows for the detection of a minimum difference of 20% in the incidence of stomatitis between the two groups. Secondary endpoints are severity of stomatitis, duration of stomatitis, completion rate of chemotherapy and adverse events. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: All participants signed a written consent form, and the study protocol has been reviewed and approved by the Clinical Research Review Board of Nagasaki University (CRB7180001). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000030489).

Preoperative fluid and electrolyte management with oral rehydration therapy.

PURPOSE: We hypothesized that oral rehydration therapy using an oral rehydration solution may be effective for preoperative fluid and electrolyte management in surgical patients before the induction of general anesthesia, and we investigated the safety and effectiveness of oral rehydration therapy as compared with intravenous therapy. METHODS: Fifty female patients who underwent breast surgery were randomly allocated to two groups. Before entry to the operation room and the induction of general anesthesia, 25 patients drank 1000 ml of an oral rehydration solution ("oral group") and 25 patients were infused with 1000 ml of an intravenous electrolyte solution ("intravenous group"). Parameters such as electrolyte concentrations in serum and urine, urine volume, vital signs, vomiting and aspiration, volumes of esophageal-pharyngeal fluid and gastric fluid (EPGF), and patient satisfaction with the therapy (as surveyed by a questionnaire) were assessed. RESULTS: After treatment, the serum sodium concentration and the hematocrit value, which both declined within the normal limits, were significantly higher in the oral group than in the intravenous group (sodium, 140.8 +/- 2.9 mEq x l(-1) in the oral group and 138.7 +/- 1.9 mEq x l(-1) in the intravenous group; P = 0.005; hematocrit, 39.03 +/- 4.16% in the oral group and 36.15 +/- 3.41% in the intravenous group; P = 0.01). No significant difference was observed in serum glucose values. Urine volume was significantly larger in the oral group (864.9 +/- 211.5 ml) than in the intravenous group (561.5 +/- 216.0 ml; P < 0.001). The fractional excretion of sodium (FENa), as an index of renal blood flow, was increased in both groups following treatment (0.8 +/- 0.5 in the oral group and 0.8 +/- 0.3 in the intravenous group). Patient satisfaction with the therapy favored the oral rehydration therapy, as judged by factors such as "feeling of hunger", "occurrence of dry mouth", and "less restriction in physical activity". The volume of EPGF collected following the induction of anesthesia was significantly smaller in the oral group than in the intravenous group (6.03 +/- 9.14 ml in the oral group and 21.76 +/- 30.56 ml in the intravenous group; P < 0.001). No adverse events or adverse reactions were observed in either group. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that the oral rehydration therapy with an oral rehydration solution before surgery is superior to the current preoperative intravenous therapy for the provision of water, electrolytes, and carbohydrates, and this therapy should be considered as an alternative to the intravenous therapy for preoperative fluid and electrolyte management in selected surgical patients in whom there is no reason to suspect delayed gastric emptying.