Barrier films or dressings for the prevention of acute radiation dermatitis in breast cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Barrier films or dressings were reported to be effective in preventing radiation dermatitis (RD) in breast cancer patients, but their comparative efficacy is unknown. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed on Embase, MEDLINE and Cochrane CENTRAL Registry of Clinical Trials from inception to October 20, 2023. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing barrier films or dressings to the standard of care (SOC) or other interventions were included. We estimated summary odds ratios and mean differences using network meta-analysis with random effects. This study was registered with PROSPERO (ID: CRD42023475021). RESULTS: Fourteen RCTs met inclusion criteria. Six interventions were analysed: 3M™ Moisturizing Double Barrier Cream (MDBC), 3M™ No Sting Barrier Film (BF), Hydrofilm® (HF), Mepitel® Film (MF), Silver Leaf Nylon Dressing and StrataXRT®. HF, MF and StrataXRT® reduced the incidence of moist desquamation compared to SOC (HF: OR = 0.08; p = 0.02; MF: OR = 0.31 p < 0.01; StrataXRT®: OR = 0.22, p = 0.04). The ranking of agents from most to least effective in preventing moist desquamation according to P-scores was HF (92.5%), MF (78.5%), StrataXRT® (70.1%), BF (46.4%), Silver Leaf Nylon Dressing (24.9%), MDBC (22.9%) and SOC (14.7%). Only four RCTs on HF and MF included patient-reported outcome (PRO) assessments that allowed pooling for analysis. HF and MF were more effective in reducing pain, itchiness and burning sensation compared to SOC (p < 0.01 for all symptoms). CONCLUSION: HF and MF were effective in preventing RD in breast cancer. Future RCTs should compare these interventions to effective cream preparations, such as topical corticosteroids.

Decrease of radiation-induced skin reactions in breast cancer patients by preventive application of film dressings-a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Radiation-induced skin reactions remain one of the most frequent side effects of adjuvant radiotherapy for breast cancer, which is the most common global malignancy. In individual cases, we observed a decrease in radiation dermatitis under film dressings used for skin marking purposes. Therefore, we decided to revise the available evidence regarding the prophylactic use of film dressings to reduce radiation dermatitis in breast cancer patients. METHODS: On 20 March 2023, we conducted a systematic review of literature for randomized controlled trials published in the English, German, French, or Spanish language, available in the PubMed database. RESULTS: Of 82 publications, 9 full texts were assessed and 6 randomized controlled trials were included in the final synthesis. Two trials analyzed the application of polyurethane film (Hydrofilm, Paul Hartmann AG, Heidenheim, Germany), the other four of silicone-based polyurethane film (Mepitel film, Molnlycke Health Care Limited, Milton Keynes, United Kingdom). The evaluation scales Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG), and the Radiation-Induced Skin Reaction Assessment Scale (RISRAS) were used for assessment. All six trials, with a total of 788 patients yielding data for analysis, demonstrate a significant decrease in radiation-induced skin reactions by use of the film (mainly p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our analysis demonstrates a significant decrease in radiation-induced skin reactions by prophylactically applied film dressings in breast cancer patients. Consequent preventive use of film dressings might systematically reduce acute radiation-induced skin reactions in these patients.

Utilizing radiomics and dosiomics with AI for precision prediction of radiation dermatitis in breast cancer patients.

PURPOSE: This study explores integrating clinical features with radiomic and dosiomic characteristics into AI models to enhance the prediction accuracy of radiation dermatitis (RD) in breast cancer patients undergoing volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study involved a retrospective analysis of 120 breast cancer patients treated with VMAT at Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital from 2018 to 2023. Patient data included CT images, radiation doses, Dose-Volume Histogram (DVH) data, and clinical information. Using a Treatment Planning System (TPS), we segmented CT images into Regions of Interest (ROIs) to extract radiomic and dosiomic features, focusing on intensity, shape, texture, and dose distribution characteristics. Features significantly associated with the development of RD were identified using ANOVA and LASSO regression (p-value < 0.05). These features were then employed to train and evaluate Logistic Regression (LR) and Random Forest (RF) models, using tenfold cross-validation to ensure robust assessment of model efficacy. RESULTS: In this study, 102 out of 120 VMAT-treated breast cancer patients were included in the detailed analysis. Thirty-two percent of these patients developed Grade 2+ RD. Age and BMI were identified as significant clinical predictors. Through feature selection, we narrowed down the vast pool of radiomic and dosiomic data to 689 features, distributed across 10 feature subsets for model construction. In the LR model, the J subset, comprising DVH, Radiomics, and Dosiomics features, demonstrated the highest predictive performance with an AUC of 0.82. The RF model showed that subset I, which includes clinical, radiomic, and dosiomic features, achieved the best predictive accuracy with an AUC of 0.83. These results emphasize that integrating radiomic and dosiomic features significantly enhances the prediction of Grade 2+ RD. CONCLUSION: Integrating clinical, radiomic, and dosiomic characteristics into AI models significantly improves the prediction of Grade 2+ RD risk in breast cancer patients post-VMAT. The RF model analysis demonstrates that a comprehensive feature set maximizes predictive efficacy, marking a promising step towards utilizing AI in radiation therapy risk assessment and enhancing patient care outcomes.

Radiation recall reaction induced by gemcitabine/docetaxel in children: A retrospective study on risk factors and outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Radiation recall reaction (RRR) is a rare inflammatory reaction developing in a previously irradiated field after a triggering agent. In pediatric patients, it is poorly understood and deficiently studied. Gemcitabine-docetaxel (G/D) in childhood cancer is mainly used as a salvage regimen for sarcomas. We aim to describe RRR triggered by G/D in children. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective review of 21 patients receiving G/D along with radiotherapy at two hospitals from 2010 until 2022. RRR was considered as any toxicity occurring after G/D administration in a previously irradiated field. RRR features were described. Fisher's and Mann-Whitney tests were utilized to analyze the risk factors involved. RESULTS: Sixteen episodes of RRR developed in 16 (76.2%) patients. RRR mainly involved deep layers of the skin (58%) and occurred predominantly after two G/D cycles. The mean time between radiotherapy and chemotherapy was 28.5 days (0-1359 days), and the mean radiation volume 391 mL (157-1810 mL) for RRR. RRR treatment was mainly systemic steroids, with partial responses in six of 11 (58%) patients. Re-exposure to G/D was associated with a high rate of recurrence in nine of 15 (56.2%), prompting drug discontinuation. The major risk factors for RRR after G/D include, without statistical significance, a larger volume of the irradiated field and a shorter interval between chemotherapy and radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of RRR after G/D in the pediatric population is higher than previously reported. Drug re-exposure is usually followed by recurrence. Higher irradiated volumes and a shorter time to the start of chemotherapy could be related with an increased risk of RRR.

Effectiveness of glutamine for the treatment of radiodermatitis in cancer patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: After receiving radiation therapy, 60%-95% of patients with cancer develop radiodermatitis, which causes pain, wound infection, and poor quality of life. Glutamine is a popular nutritional supplement for patients with cancer. Several studies examined the usefulness of glutamine for reducing radiodermatitis. However, there is still no consolidated evidence for clinical use. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL PLUS, and the China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database for the relevant literature published up to March 2023, without language restrictions. Two reviewers screened, filtered, and appraised these articles independently, and their data were pooled using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 218 participants were analyzed. The incidence of radiodermatitis in the glutamine group (89/110) was significantly lower than in the placebo group (99/108; risk ratio [RR], 0.90; 95% CI, 0.81-1.00; p = 0.05; I2 = 7%). The incidence of moderate to severe radiodermatitis was significantly lower in the glutamine group than in the placebo group (RR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.32-0.76; p = 0.001; I2 = 52%). Moreover, subgroup analysis demonstrated heterogeneity (I2 = 52%) for moderate to severe radiodermatitis, the risk of which might be significantly reduced by a glutamine dose of 20-30 g/day (RR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.41-0.87; I2 = 0%). CONCLUSION: The meta-analysis indicate that glutamine might lead to a lower incidence of radiodermatitis, and that a glutamine dose of 20-30 g/day might decrease the incidence of moderate to severe dermatitis. Thus, the serious impact of radiodermatitis on treatment follow-up makes the clinical use of glutamine even more important. PROSPERO number: CRD42021254394.

StrataXRT for the prevention of acute radiation dermatitis in breast cancer: a pilot study.

PURPOSE: Previous literature has produced heterogeneous results on StrataXRT for prevention of acute radiation dermatitis (RD) in breast cancer. This pilot study aimed to assess the feasibility and efficacy of StrataXRT in a cancer center. METHODS: The study consisted of five cohorts: (1) patients with large breasts treated with local radiation therapy (RT) either in the supine position or (2) the prone position, (3) patients receiving locoregional breast RT with any breast size, and (4) patients receiving chest wall RT, either locally or (5) locoregionally. The primary endpoint of the study was RD grade as assessed using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Secondary endpoints included incidence of moist desquamation (MD), patient- and clinician-reported skin assessments, patient quality of life as assessed by the Skindex-16, and patient satisfaction. These outcomes were compared with those from a published trial from the same institution assessing standard of care and Mepitel Film (MF) as prevention of breast RD. RESULTS: Forty-five patients receiving RT to the breast or chest wall were enrolled. Two withdrew, leaving 43 evaluable patients. Overall, two (4.7%) patients had grade 3 RD, 14 (32.6%) had grade 2 RD, and 27 (62.8%) had grade 1 RD. Ten patients (23.3%) developed MD during/after RT. CONCLUSION: StrataXRT is effective in preventing grade 3 RD in patients, and the most promising results were observed within the prone cohort. Further research includes evaluating the efficacy of StrataXRT against the standard of care for the prophylaxis of RD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study protocol was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT05594498) on October 13, 2022.

Acute skin toxicity and self-management ability among Chinese breast cancer radiotherapy patients: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: Radiation dermatitis is the most common reaction to radiotherapy, almost all breast cancer patients receive radiotherapy on an outpatient basis. Currently, there are no studies on the experience of radiation dermatitis and the ability to self-manage it. Therefore, we aimed to use qualitative approaches to gain a deeper understanding of the actual experiences and self-management ability in order to provide a reference for further improving the effectiveness of self-management and to optimize symptom management strategies. METHODS: A descriptive qualitative study was conducted using purposive sampling to select 17 breast cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy. Semi-structured interviews were conducted from September to November 2023. The Colaizzi seven-step analysis method was used to classify the data into summarized themes. RESULTS: Four themes were identified from the interview responses: (1) multiple self-reported skin symptoms in breast cancer patients with radiation dermatitis; (2) the multidimensional impact on patient's quality of life, especially pruritus, ulceration; (3) the ability to self-manage radiation dermatitis: strong mental toughness, positive response, and self-doubt; (4) challenges faced: concerns about radiotherapy side effects and recurrence, targeted symptom management and continuity of care after the radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare professionals should consider patients' self-reported symptoms when assessing radiation dermatitis. For pruritus and pain, we can enhance precision symptom management to improve patients' quality of life. By utilizing information technology tools, we can increase breast cancer patients' ability and confidence in managing radiation dermatitis effectively while enhancing accurate symptom management during radiotherapy.

Validation of the Skin Symptom Assessment (SSA) questionnaire for the evaluation of radiation dermatitis in breast cancer patients.

PURPOSE: Radiation dermatitis (RD) is a painful side effect of radiation therapy (RT). The objective of this analysis was to investigate the validity and reliability of the Skin Symptom Assessment (SSA) questionnaire in evaluating the severity of patient- and clinician-reported outcomes for RD in breast cancer patients by comparing it to a validated assessment tool, the Radiation-Induced Skin Reaction Assessment Scale (RISRAS) questionnaire. METHODS: This study compared patient and clinician-reported outcomes for RD from previous clinical trials conducted in a Canadian cancer centre. The analysis included 376 and 38 patients in the two trials using Mepitel Film (doi.org/10.1200) and StrataXRT (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT05594498), respectively. Patients in both studies completed the SSA and RISRAS questionnaires at baseline, 2-weeks post-RT, and 3 months after completion of RT. Clinician SSA and RISRAS assessments were collected at baseline and 2-weeks post-RT. These time points were analyzed longitudinally to investigate the SSA's validity in RD symptom assessment. RESULTS: The majority of patient-reported items on the SSA and RISRAS assessments demonstrated positive significant associations between symptoms of itchiness, between pain/soreness and pain/discomfort, and between blistering or erythema with burning sensation items. All items in the clinician-reported SSA and clinician component of RISRAS showed positive statistical significance between items measuring erythema, pigmentation or edema with dry desquamation, and blistering/peeling with moist desquamation. CONCLUSIONS: The SSA has been validated for assessing patient- and clinician-reported symptoms of RD accurately as outcomes correlate well with the previously validated RISRAS assessment.

Acute radiation skin injury in stage III-IV head and neck cancer: scale correlates and predictive model.

PURPOSE: Active radiation skin injury (ARSI) has the highest incidence of acute adverse reactions caused by radiotherapy (RT) in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC). This study aimed to screen risk factors that can facilitate the identification of HNC patients at high risk of ARSI. METHODS: Data from 255 stage III-IV HNC patients who underwent intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) were collected. The data from our medical records, including clinical characteristics and hematological indices before RT, were retrospectively collected and arranged. The Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Criteria (CTCAE), Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Criteria (RTOG), World Health Organization Criteria (WHO), Oncology Nursing Society (ONS), Acute Radiation Dermatitis Graduation Scale, Douglas & Fowler and Radiation Dermatitis Severity Scale (RDSS) were used to assess ARSI. Of these, CTCAE was used for further analysis. Binary logistic regression analyses were used to identity risk factors. To establish the correction between each risk factor and the ARSI score, the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were computed. RESULTS: The assessment results of the CTCAE with RTOG, WHO, ONS, Graduation Scale, Douglas & Fowler and RDSS have good consistency. After radiotherapy, 18.4% of patients had at least 3 (3 +) grade ARSI. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the KPS score, blood glucose level, white blood cell count, and plasma free thyroxine (FT4) concentration were independent risk factors for 3 + grade ARSI. A nomogram was constructed on the basis of these risk factors, which demonstrated good predictive power according to the area under the ROC curve (AUC). The satisfactory consistency and clinical efficacy of the nomogram were confirmed by calibration curves and decision curve analysis (DCA). CONCLUSION: A low KPS score, high blood glucose level, high white blood cell count, and high thyroid hormone prior to radiotherapy for stage III-IV HNC are independent risk factors for grade 3 + RSI.

Radiation-induced nasopharyngeal ulcers after re-irradiation with intensity-modulated radiotherapy in locoregional recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients: a dose-volume-outcome analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the interrelation between radiation dose and radiation-induced nasopharyngeal ulcer (RINU) in locoregional recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). METHODS: Clinical data were collected from 363 patients with locoregional recurrent NPC who received re-irradiated with definitive IMRT from 2009 to 2017. Twenty-nine patients were diagnosed with RINU. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to re-evaluate the first and second radiotherapy plans and to identify predictive dosimetric factors. RESULTS: All dosimetric parameters were notably associated with the progression to RINU (p < 0.01) using paired samples Wilcoxon signed rank tests. Multivariate analysis showed that EQD2_ [Formula: see text]D80 (dose for 80 percent volume of the unilateral nasopharynx lesion) was an independent prognostic factor for RINU (p = 0.001). The area under the ROC curve for EQD2_ [Formula: see text]D80 was 0.846 (p < 0.001), and the cutoff point of 137.035 Gy could potentially be the dose tolerance of the nasopharyngeal mucosa. CONCLUSIONS: The sum of equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions (EQD2) in the overlapping volumes between initial and re-irradiated nasopharyngeal mucosal tissue can be effective in predicting the hazard of developing RINU in NPC patients undergoing radical re­irradiation with IMRT and we propose a EQD2_ [Formula: see text]D80 threshold of 137.035 Gy for the nasopharynx.

Spray skin protectant versus standard moisturiser in the prevention of radiodermatitis in patients with anal canal and rectal cancer: A randomised clinical trial.

The evidence on products for the prevention of radiodermatitis is limited. The primary objective was to analyse the effectiveness of the spray skin protectant 'non-burning barrier film' in the prevention of radiodermatitis with moist desquamation in patients with the anal canal and rectal cancer followed in nursing consultations compared to a standardised moisturiser based on Calendula officinalis and Aloe barbadensis. Single-blind randomised clinical trial. The study was performed in a hospital in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, with 63 patients undergoing anal canal and rectal cancer treatment, randomised into one of the following two groups: an experimental group, which used a spray skin protectant and a control group, which used a moisturiser. Data were collected using an initial and subsequent evaluation form and were assessed using descriptive and inferential analyses. Participants who used the spray skin protectant had a lower chance of presenting radiodermatitis with moist desquamation and a longer time without this outcome when compared to the control group. The overall incidence of radiodermatitis was 100%, with 36.5% being severe. Furthermore, 17.5% of participants discontinued radiotherapy due to radiodermatitis. There were no differences between the groups regarding the severity of radiodermatitis and the number of patients who discontinued radiotherapy. The skin protectant was effective in preventing radiodermatitis with moist desquamation amongst patients with anal canal and rectal cancer.

Computational Model Based on Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) Skin Scanning to Identify and Quantify Acute Radiation Dermatitis (ARD): A Prospective Diagnostic Study.

BACKGROUND: Acute radiation dermatitis (ARD) is the most widely reported radiotherapy-induced adverse event. Currently, there is no objective or reliable method to measure ARD. OBJECTIVE: Our main objective was to identify and quantify the effects of radiotherapy with a computational model using optical coherence tomography (OCT) skin scanning. Secondary objectives included determining the ARD impact of different radiotherapeutic schemes and adjuvant topical therapies. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, single-center case series study in a tertiary referral center of patients with breast cancer who were eligible for whole breast radiotherapy (WBRT). RESULTS: A total of 39 women were included and distributed according to the radiotherapeutic schemes (15, 20, and 25 fractions). A computational model was designed to quantitatively analyze OCT findings. After radiotherapy, OCT scanning was more sensitive revealing vascularization changes in 84.6% of the patients (vs 69.2% of the patients with ARD by clinical examination). OCT quantified an increased vascularization at the end of WBRT (P<.05) and a decrease after 3 months (P=.032). Erythematous skin changes by OCT were more pronounced in the 25-fraction regime. CONCLUSION: An OCT computational model allowed for the identification and quantification of vascularization changes on irradiated skin, even in the absence of clinical ARD. This may allow the design of standardized protocols for ARD beyond the skin color of the patients involved.

Recognizing cisplatin as a potential radiation recall trigger: case report and focused systematic review.

We present a case of mild radiation recall dermatitis triggered by cisplatin chemotherapy given simultaneously to re-irradiation. The dermatitis area correlated to skin exposure of the previous radiation therapy, characterizing the reaction clearly as a recall. Cisplatin has not yet been recognized as a potential trigger for recall reactions. Although it was part of several reported multidrug trigger combinations, all review works referred to cisplatin as not suspicious, suggesting the combination partner as the effector. We performed a focused systematic literature review aiming to re-evaluate the real role of cisplatin as a (co-)triggering factor. In total, 30 reported cases were found, 90% triggered by multidrug combinations. The latter tended to cause more severe symptoms. Besides findings supporting the 20 Gy-threshold theory, no correlation between radiation dose and severity or prevalence was found. Recognition of cisplatin as a trigger of the recall phenomenon and its supportive management may prevent unnecessary cessation of systemic chemotherapy. Systematic reporting of recall events as a secondary endpoint of prospective clinical trials applying radiation therapy could support understanding the recall phenomenon.

Risk assessment, surveillance, and nonpharmaceutical prevention of acute radiation dermatitis: results of a multicentric survey among the German-speaking radiation oncology community.

PURPOSE: Radiation dermatitis (RD) represents one of the most frequent side effects in radiotherapy (RT). Despite technical progress, mild and moderate RD still affects major subsets of patients and identification and management of patients with a high risk of severe RD is essential. We sought to characterize surveillance and nonpharmaceutical preventive management of RD in German-speaking hospitals and private centers. METHODS: We conducted a survey on RD among German-speaking radiation oncologists inquiring for their evaluation of risk factors, assessment methods, and nonpharmaceutical preventive management of RD. RESULTS: A total of 244 health professionals from public and private institutions in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland participated in the survey. RT-dependent factors were deemed most relevant for RD onset followed by lifestyle factors, emphasizing the impact of treatment conceptualization and patient education. While a broad majority of 92.8% assess RD at least once during RT, 59.0% of participants report RD at least partially arbitrarily and 17.4% stated to classify RD severity solely arbitrarily. 83.7% of all participants were unaware of patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Consensus exists on some lifestyle recommendations like avoidance of sun exposure (98.7%), hot baths (95.1%), and mechanical irritation (91.8%) under RT, while deodorant use (63.4% not at all, 22.1% with restrictions) or application of skin lotion (15.1% disapproval) remain controversial and are not recommended by guidelines or evidence-based practices. CONCLUSION: Identification of patients at an increased risk of RD and subsequent implementation of adequate preventive measures remain relevant and challenging aspects of clinical routines. Consensus exists on several risk factors and nonpharmaceutical prevention recommendations, while RT-dependent risk factors, e.g., the fractionation scheme, or hygienic measures like deodorant use remain controversial. Surveillance is widely lacking methodology and objectivity. Intensifying outreach in the radiation oncology community is needed to improve practice patterns.

StrataXRT for the prevention and treatment of radiation dermatitis: a critical review.

PURPOSE: The primary objective is to systematically review primary studies, such as randomized control trials (RCTs), feasibility, exploratory, and case studies; and the secondary objective is to evaluate all secondary articles, such as reviews, guidelines, and editorials, relevant to the use of StrataXRT for the prevention and/or management of radiation dermatitis (RD) in cancer patients. METHODS: A literature search was conducted up to February 26, 2023, for articles investigating the use of StrataXRT for the prevention and treatment of RD, in the following databases: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Google Scholar. The keywords "StrataXRT", "dermatitis", "radiotherapy", and "radiation" were used to identify relevant articles. RESULTS: Twenty-seven articles from 2018 to 2022 were identified to fulfill the inclusion criteria of this review, of which nine are primary studies and 18 are secondary papers. Significant heterogeneity was observed in the current literature studying the effects of StrataXRT, making it difficult to make cross-trial comparisons. There is a suggestion of the efficacy of StrataXRT in the prevention and treatment of RD. CONCLUSION: The findings of this review recommend further adequately powered RCTs with robust methodology including patient and clinician assessments to determine the efficacy of StrataXRT in preventing and treating RD. This is essential to improve the quality of life of patients and identify which groups of patients would benefit most from StrataXRT.

Mepitel film for the prevention and treatment of acute radiation dermatitis in breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of Mepitel film in preventing or treating acute radiation dermatitis (RD) in patients with breast cancer in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: Embase, APA PsychInfo, Journals@Ovid Full Text, Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, and Cochrane Trials were searched until December 12, 2022, to identify RCTs on the use of Mepitel film for preventing or treating acute RD from breast cancer radiotherapy. Per-protocol analysis was used to compare outcomes, calculate pooled effect sizes, odds ratio (OR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI), and to create forest plots using random effects analysis in RevMan 5.4. RESULTS: Three RCTs were included in this review. Mepitel film significantly reduced the incidence of grade 3 RD (OR 0.15 95% CI 0.06, 0.37, p<0.0001) and grade 2 or 3 RD (OR 0.16 95% CI 0.04, 0.65, p=0.01) as scored on either the CTCAE or the RTOG scale. Additionally, Mepitel film significantly reduced RISRAS mean scores assessed by patients and combined researcher and patient (standardized mean difference (SMD) -7.59, 95% CI -14.42, -0.76, p=0.03; SMD -15.36, 95% CI -30.01, -0.71 p=0.04) but not the researcher component of the assessment tool (SMD -17.55, 95% CI -36.94, 1.84, p=0.08). CONCLUSION: Mepitel film reduced the incidence of acute RD and improved patient-reported outcomes with minimal side effects, the main one being itchiness. Future research should assess the feasibility of Mepitel film with respect to specific patient-reported outcomes such as health-related quality of life issues associated with its use.

Head and neck cancer patients under radiotherapy undergoing skin application of hydrogel dressing or hyaluronic acid: results from a prospective, randomized study.

PURPOSE: Acute radiodermatitis (ARD) is a frequent side effect of radiotherapy, a therapeutic option for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). It is responsible for pain, quality of life (QoL) impairment, and increased risk of treatment discontinuation, which may compromise the prognosis for patients. Local therapies to prevent or alleviate ARD have been proposed without providing any high level of evidence to establish recommendations. METHODS: We implemented a prospective multicenter randomized study on patients with HNSCC treated with definitive radiotherapy to assess the impact on ear, nose, and throat (ENT) pain of the application of a hydrogel-based skin dressing (HydroTac®) compared with the application of hyaluronic acid (Ialuset®) during radiotherapy. RESULTS: Out of 130 enrolled patients, 48 patients per group were assessable for the main endpoint. No difference between groups was found: a worsening of ENT pain of 3 points or more on a visual analog scale from the initiation to 1 month after the end of the radiotherapy was observed for 8 patients (16.7%) who received HydroTac® compared to 13 patients (27%) who received Ialuset® (p = 0.342). The proportion of patients who experienced ARD and grades of ARD (CTCAE v4.0 criteria) were similar between groups. Patient compliance with radiodermatitis treatment was poor, with 56.1% of patients in the HydroTac® group having their treatment temporarily stopped. CONCLUSION: The application of a hydrogel dressing to prevent ARD during radiotherapy for HNSCC patients has failed to demonstrate a benefit. These results may be limited by the difficulties of applying the dressing.

Systematic review and meta-analysis on interventions for radiation dermatitis prevention and management: an overview of the methods.

Over several decades, research on the prevention and management of acute radiation dermatitis (RD) has continued to emerge, yet there remains no "gold standard" treatment for RD care. Recent guidelines on RD prevention and management were published in 2022 by the Oncodermatology Study Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC). As part of this guideline process, a collaborative effort was undertaken by international RD experts to quantitatively compare commonly studied RD skin interventions through meta-analyses and discern superiority of interventional treatments over another intervention, standard-of-care, or placebo in RD prevention and management. This paper summarizes the materials and methodology used in a set of meta-analysis studies that supplement the 2022 MASCC Clinical Practice Guidelines on RD Prevention and Management.

Topical non-steroidal agents for the prevention of radiation dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Radiation dermatitis (RD) is a common side effect of radiation therapy, affecting a majority of breast and head and neck cancer patients with a negative impact on quality of life. Currently, no consensus exists regarding the prevention of RD. METHODS: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases (1946 to December 2022) were searched using PRISMA guidelines to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the use of topical non-steroidal agents in the prevention of RD in patients undergoing radiotherapy. RESULTS: A total of six RCTs were included, comprising 627 patients. Among the topical non-steroidal agents analyzed, only the use of Biafine® in breast cancer patients was significant in preventing grade 4 and 3 + RD as classified by the Radiation Therapy Oncology group (RTOG) scale (OR = 0.07, 95% CI 0.01-0.63, p = 0.02, and OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.03-0.41, p < 0.01, respectively). The remaining agents (trolamine alone and hyaluronic acid/hyaluronan) did not significantly prevent the occurrence of RD. CONCLUSION: The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis indicate that Biafine® can prevent grade 3 + RD in breast cancer patients. The use of trolamine and hyaluronic acid does not significantly affect the incidence of RD.

An Experimental Model of Proton-Beam-Induced Radiation Dermatitis In Vivo.

Radiation dermatitis (RD) is one of the most common side effects of radiation therapy. However, to date, there is a lack of both specific treatments for RD and validated experimental animal models with the use of various sources of ionizing radiation (IR) applied in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a model of acute RD induced using proton radiation in mice. Acute RD (Grade 2-4) was obtained with doses of 30, 40, and 50 Gy, either with or without depilation. The developed model of RD was characterized by typical histological changes in the skin after irradiation. Moreover, the depilation contributed to a skin histology alteration of the irradiated mice. The assessment of animal vital signs indicated that there was no effect of proton irradiation on the well-being or general condition of the animals. This model can be used to develop effective therapeutic agents and study the pathogenesis of radiation-induced skin toxicity, including that caused by proton irradiation.