Comparing the risk of severe oral mucositis associated with methotrexate as graft-versus host-disease prophylaxis to other immunosuppressive prophylactic agents in hematopoietic cell transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: This study examines the risk of severe oral mucositis (SOM) in graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis (GVHD) compared to other agents in hematopoietic cell transplantation patients. METHODS: A comprehensive search of four databases, including PubMed, Embassy, Web of Science, and Scopus, was conducted to identify studies reporting frequency and severity of oral mucositis in association with GVHD prophylactic regimens. RevMan 5.4 was used to perform the meta-analysis. Risk of bias assessment was carried out using the Rob-2 tool for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and ROBINS-I tool for observational studies. RESULTS: Twenty-five papers, including 11 RCTs and 14 observational studies, met the inclusion criteria. The pooled results from eight RCTs showed a higher risk of SOM in patients receiving MTX or MTX-inclusive GVHD prophylaxis versus non-MTX alternatives (RR = 1.50, 95% CI [1.20, 1.87], I2 = 36%, P = 0.0003). Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and post-transplant cyclophosphamide (Pt-Cy) consistently showed lower risk of mucositis than MTX. Folinic acid (FA) rescue and mini-dosing of MTX were associated with reduced oral mucositis severity. CONCLUSION: Patients receiving MTX have a higher SOM risk compared to other approaches to prevent GVHD, which should be considered in patient care. When appropriate, MMF, FA, and a mini-dose of MTX may be an alternative that is associated with less SOM. This work also underlines the scarcity of RCTs on MTX interventions to provide the best evidence-based recommendations.

Conspiracy of Silence in Head and Neck Cancer Diagnosis: A Scoping Review.

Cancer disclosure represents a complex healthcare dynamic. Physicians or caregivers may be prompted to withhold diagnosis information from patients. This study aims to comprehensively map and synthesize available evidence about diagnosis nondisclosure regarding head and neck cancer (HNC) patients. Following the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines, a scoping review was conducted across major databases without period restriction, yielding 9238 publications. After screening and selection, a descriptive synthesis was conducted. Sixteen studies were included, primarily conducted in academic settings (75%) from Europe and Asia, with a total population of 662 patients predominantly diagnosed with brain, oral, pharyngeal, or laryngeal tumors. Remarkably, 22.51% of patients were unaware of their diagnosis. Although physicians were the main source of diagnostic information (35%), they reported to often use vague terms to convey malignancy. Additionally, 13.29% of patients were aware of their diagnosis from sources other than doctors or caregivers. Caregivers (55%) supported diagnosis concealment, and physicians tended to respect family wishes. A high diagnosis-to-death interval, education, and age significantly influenced diagnosis disclosure. HNC patients expressed a desire for personalized open communication. Multiple factors influenced the decision on diagnosis disclosure. Current evidence on this topic varies significantly, and there is limited research on the consequences of nondisclosure. These findings reflect the underestimation of the patients' outlook in the diagnosis process and highlight the need for further research, aiming to establish open communication and patient autonomy during the oncological journey.

Necessity and influencing factors for integrating oral health in cancer care for older people: a narrative review.

PURPOSE: The number of older people with poor oral health diagnosed with cancer is increasing rapidly. However, integration of oral health in cancer care for older people to prevent or minimize oral health complications of cancer treatments is uncommon, except in head and neck oncology. The aim of this review is to describe the need, role of, and factors influencing the integration of oral health(care) into the treatment of older people with cancer. METHODS: MEDLINE, CINAHL, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched for papers published in the last 10 years that focus on oral health in older people diagnosed with cancer, the impact of oral health on cancer therapy, and integrated oral health in cancer treatment. RESULTS: From 523 related papers, 68 publications were included and summarized as follows: (1) oral complications associated with cancer therapies, (2) the need for oral healthcare in older people with cancer, (3) the role of integration of oral health in cancer care, and (4) influencing factors such as ageism, interprofessional education and collaborations, oral healthcare workforce, oral health literacy, and financial considerations. CONCLUSION: Integration of oral healthcare is highly recommended for the overall well-being of older people with cancer to prevent, minimize, and manage complications in cancer treatment. However, oral healthcare has not been integrated in cancer care yet, except for head and neck cancers. This review identified a notable gap in the literature, highlighting the need for research on integration of oral healthcare in geriatric oncology.

Head and neck complications of cancer therapies: taste and smell.

Sensory deficits affect awareness of the environment and information processing, leading to dysfunction that may have significant consequences. Deterioration of taste and/or smell sensation has been linked to impaired nutritional intake, and overall decreased quality of life (QoL). Recent data suggest that loss of these senses is also associated with cognitive decline and worse overall cancer treatment prognosis. Cancer therapies have commonly been associated with sensory deterioration. We review these associations with taste and smell in light of new findings and discuss potential prophylactic and therapeutic modalities for taste and smell function.

MASCC/ISOO Clinical Practice Statement: Clinical assessment of salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia in cancer patients.

PURPOSE: A MASCC/ISOO Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) is aimed at generating a concise tool for clinicians that concentrates practical information needed for the management of oral complications of cancer patients. This CPS is focused on the clinical assessment of salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia in cancer patients. METHODS: This CPS was developed based on a critical evaluation of the literature followed by a structured discussion of a group of leading experts, members of the Oral Care Study Group of MASCC/ISOO. The information is presented in the form of succinct bullets and tables to generate a short manual about the best standard of care. RESULTS: The objective assessment of saliva secretion involves an extra- and intra-oral clinical examination while the subjective assessment involves eliciting information on the patient's complaint of xerostomia and its impact on daily functioning. This CPS summarizes the common investigator- and patient-reported instruments used in clinical practice for assessing salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia in cancer patients. CONCLUSION: There is a range of tools to assess salivary gland function in patients undergoing cancer therapy, patients recovering from cancer therapy, or cancer survivors. Clinicians should ideally conduct both objective and subjective measurements to ensure a clear understanding about the status of the patients in order to provide the most appropriate treatment.

MASCC/ISOO Clinical Practice Statement: Management of salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia in cancer patients.

PURPOSE: A MASCC/ISOO Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) is aimed at generating a concise tool for clinicians that concentrates practical information needed for the management of oral complications of cancer patients. This CPS is focused on the management of salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia in cancer patients. METHODS: This CPS was developed based on critical evaluation of the literature followed by a structured discussion of a group of leading experts, members of the Oral Care Study Group of MASCC/ISOO. The information is presented in the form of succinct bullets and tables to generate a short manual about the best standard of care. RESULTS: Salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia in cancer patients are managed by (i) stimulating saliva production of salivary glands with residual secretory capacity or (ii) artificial wetting of the oral and lip surfaces which can be achieved by pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions. Pharmacological interventions encompass the use of sialagogues and sialolytics, while non-pharmacological interventions involve the use of moistening agents, mechanical, gustatory, or electrostimulation of the salivary glands. Additional treatment modalities may be incorporated in practice based on local availability and the clinician's experience. CONCLUSION: The information presented in this CPS offers clinicians convenient access to the dosages and regimens of different interventions for managing salivary gland hypofunction or xerostomia to facilitate clinical efficiency and conserve valuable time for clinicians.

MASCC/ISOO Clinical Practice Statement: The risk of secondary oral cancer following hematopoietic cell transplantation.

PURPOSE: A MASCC/ISOO Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) is aimed at generating a concise tool for clinicians that concentrates practical information needed for the management of oral complications of cancer patients. This CPS is focused on the risk of secondary oral cancer following hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). METHODS: This CPS was developed based on critical evaluation of the literature followed by a structured discussion of a group of leading experts, members of the Oral Care Study Group of MASCC/ISOO. The information is presented in the form of succinct bullets to generate a short manual about the best standard of care. RESULTS: Studies described a 7-16-fold higher risk of secondary oral cancer (mainly squamous cell carcinoma) in allogeneic HCT (alloHCT) recipients, particularly in those who developed chronic graft versus host disease (cGVHD). Risk increases over time and is influenced by several risk factors. In autologous HCT, oral cancer risk seemed only slightly elevated. CONCLUSION: Clinicians should be aware of the higher oral cancer risk in alloHCT survivors, and emphasize the importance of lifelong oral cancer surveillance (at least every 6-12 months) and avoiding cancer promoting lifestyle factors in an empathic way, particularly of those with (a history of) cGVHD. Post-HCT for Fanconi anemia or dyskeratosis congenita, education and rigorous follow-up is even more crucial. In case of suspected oral lesions in the presence of oral mucosal cGVHD, a GVHD intervention may facilitate diagnosis. Suspected lesions should be biopsied. More research is needed on the role of HPV in oral cancer post-HCT.

MASCC/ISOO Clinical Practice Statement: Management of oral complications of targeted therapy.

PURPOSE: A MASCC/ISOO Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) is aimed at generating a concise tool for clinicians that concentrates practical information needed for the management of oral complications of cancer patients. This CPS is focused on the management of oral complications of targeted therapy. METHODS: This CPS was developed based on critical evaluation of the literature followed by a structured discussion of a group of leading experts, members of the Oral Care Study Group of MASCC/ISOO. Targeted agents were identified using the National Cancer Institute's list of Food and Drug Administration approved targeted therapy drugs. The information is presented in the form of succinct bullets and tables to generate a short manual about the best standard of care. RESULTS: Oral toxicities secondary to targeted therapy include various mucosal conditions, gingival conditions, jawbone disease, dysesthesia, taste change, and dry mouth. For the purpose of this CPS, we focused on oral mucosal conditions, gingival conditions, taste change, and dysesthesia. The treatment of oral toxicities depends on the symptom severity. Topical steroids and immunomodulators are often used as first-line therapy for oral mucosal toxicities. Treatment approaches for oral dysesthesia and taste change primarily revolve around symptoms management. Typically, therapy protocols align with the therapeutic algorithms employed for other neuropathic pain conditions, incorporating topical pharmacological interventions to achieve relief. Other oral toxicity requires a more specific approach. CONCLUSION: Management of oral toxicities from targeted molecular therapies is designed to alleviate patient discomfort and optimize treatment outcomes. Collaboration between medical and oral health professionals is necessary for best management practices.

MASCC/ISOO Clinical Practice Statement: Management of oral manifestations of chronic graft-versus-host-disease.

PURPOSE: A MASCC/ISOO Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) is aimed at generating a concise tool for clinicians, which concentrates practical information needed for the management of oral complications of cancer patients. This CPS is focused on the management of oral manifestations of chronic graft-versus-host-disease (cGVHD). METHODS: This CPS was developed based on critical evaluation of the literature followed by a structured discussion of a group of leading experts, members of the Oral Care Study Group of MASCC/ISOO. The information is presented in the form of succinct bullets and table to generate a short manual about the best standard of care. RESULTS: The treatment goals in oral cGVHD are to relieve pain and xerostomia, improve oral function, prevent secondary infection, prevent deterioration of the dentition, and detect malignant transformation as early as possible. The prevention and treatment measures for oral mucosal lesions, hypofunction of the salivary glands, and sclerodermatous changes in the oral and perioral tissues are detailed, as well as the possible complications and side effects of these interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Patients post allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantations, with cGVHD manifest in the oral and perioral tissues, should be regularly monitored and treated as needed by an oral care practitioner. This CPS provides the clinician with practical tools for examining, preventing, and treating the various sequalae that may affect the oral cavity in these patients.

MASCC/ISOO clinical practice statement: Current understanding on controversies in basic oral care in hemato-oncology and hematopoietic cell transplantation.

PURPOSE: A MASCC/ISOO Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) is aimed at generating a concise tool for clinicians, which concentrates on practical information needed for the management of oral complications of cancer patients. This CPS is focused on the current understanding of controversies that may arise while providing basic oral care in hemato-oncology patients and hematopoietic cell transplantation recipients (HCT). The CPS will summarize and elucidate controversies that have appeared in the literature and professional discussions. METHODS: This CPS was developed based on a critical evaluation of the literature followed by a structured discussion of a group of leading experts, members of the Oral Care Study Group of MASCC/ISOO. The information is presented in the form of succinct bullets to generate a short manual about the best standard of care. RESULTS: Controversies about the use of chlorhexidine (CHX) oral rinse, mechanical dental plaque removal procedures, the need for toothbrush replacement during phases of low blood cell counts, and the use of lidocaine mouthwash for oral pain were identified and discussed. Consensus about the best standard of care was outlined. CONCLUSION: The following ratifications are applicable for oral care in hemato-oncology patients and patients undergoing HCT: (1) CHX may reduce the risk of oral infections, although it was not found to reduce the risk of oral mucositis. (2) Toothbrushing and proficient interproximal cleaning should not be discouraged during HCT. (3) Toothbrushes do not need to be replaced daily and are preferred over cleansing swabs. (4) Lidocaine rinse, swish and spit, may be considered to palliate oral mucosal pain if applied in a certain manner.

MASCC/ISOO Clinical Practice Statement: Adjuvant bone-modifying agents in primary breast cancer patients - prevention of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw.

PURPOSE: A MASCC/ISOO Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) is aimed at generating a concise tool for clinicians that concentrates practical information needed for the management of oral complications of cancer patients. This CPS raises awareness to the prevention of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) in patients with breast cancer treated with adjuvant bone-modifying agents (BMA). METHODS: This CPS was developed based on a critical evaluation of the literature followed by a structured discussion of a group of leading experts, members of the Oral Care Study Group of MASCC/ISOO. The information is presented in the form of succinct bullets and tables to generate a short manual about the best standard of care. RESULTS: In patients treated with adjuvant BMA, dento-alveolar surgery poses a moderate risk for MRONJ that ranges between the high risk for MRONJ in patients with metastatic breast cancer and the low risk for MRONJ in patients with osteoporosis. Existing MRONJ guidelines serve as a starting point for adjuvant BMA use. Urgent procedures should be delivered without delay using the accepted precautions to prevent MRONJ. If elective surgery is considered, the individual risk for MRONJ following surgery should be assessed according to common risk factors. CONCLUSION: Prevention of MRONJ in primary breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant BMA requires risk-benefit assessment; collaboration between the medical team, dental professional, and patient; and patient-specific tailored dental treatment planning. The patient should be informed about this risk. Additional research is needed to define optimal MRONJ care for this population.

Guidance on mucositis assessment from the MASCC Mucositis Study Group and ISOO: an international Delphi study.

Background: Mucositis is a common and highly impactful side effect of conventional and emerging cancer therapy and thus the subject of intense investigation. Although common practice, mucositis assessment is heterogeneously adopted and poorly guided, impacting evidence synthesis and translation. The Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) Mucositis Study Group (MSG) therefore aimed to establish expert recommendations for how existing mucositis assessment tools should be used, in clinical care and trials contexts, to improve the consistency of mucositis assessment. Methods: This study was conducted over two stages (January 2022-July 2023). The first phase involved a survey to MASCC-MSG members (January 2022-May 2022), capturing current practices, challenges and preferences. These then informed the second phase, in which a set of initial recommendations were prepared and refined using the Delphi method (February 2023-May 2023). Consensus was defined as agreement on a parameter by >80% of respondents. Findings: Seventy-two MASCC-MSG members completed the first phase of the study (37 females, 34 males, mainly oral care specialists). High variability was noted in the use of mucositis assessment tools, with a high reliance on clinician assessment compared to patient reported outcome measures (PROMs, 47% vs 3%, 37% used a combination). The World Health Organization (WHO) and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) scales were most commonly used to assess mucositis across multiple settings. Initial recommendations were reviewed by experienced MSG members and following two rounds of Delphi survey consensus was achieved in 91 of 100 recommendations. For example, in patients receiving chemotherapy, the recommended tool for clinician assessment in clinical practice is WHO for oral mucositis (89.5% consensus), and WHO or CTCAE for gastrointestinal mucositis (85.7% consensus). The recommended PROM in clinical trials is OMD/WQ for oral mucositis (93.3% consensus), and PRO-CTCAE for gastrointestinal mucositis (83.3% consensus). Interpretation: These new recommendations provide much needed guidance on mucositis assessment and may be applied in both clinical practice and research to streamline comparison and synthesis of global data sets, thus accelerating translation of new knowledge into clinical practice. Funding: No funding was received.

Emerging pharmacotherapy trends in preventing and managing oral mucositis induced by chemoradiotherapy and targeted agents.

INTRODUCTION: The introduction of targeted therapy and immunotherapy has tremendously changed the clinical outcomes and prognosis of cancer patients. Despite innovative pharmacological therapies and improved radiotherapy (RT) techniques, patients continue to suffer from side effects, of which oral mucositis (OM) is still the most impactful, especially for quality of life. AREAS COVERED: We provide an overview of current advances in cancer pharmacotherapy and RT, in relation to their potential to cause OM, and of the less explored and more recent literature reports related to the best management of OM. We have analyzed natural/antioxidant agents, probiotics, mucosal protectants and healing coadjuvants, pharmacotherapies, immunomodulatory and anticancer agents, photobiomodulation and the impact of technology. EXPERT OPINION: The discovery of more precise pathophysiologic mechanisms of CT and RT-induced OM has outlined that OM has a multifactorial origin, including direct effects, oxidative damage, upregulation of immunologic factors, and effects on oral flora. A persistent upregulated immune response, associated with factors related to patients' characteristics, may contribute to more severe and long-lasting OM. The goal is strategies to conjugate individual patient, disease, and therapy-related factors to guide OM prevention or treatment. Despite further high-quality research is warranted, the issue of prevention is paramount in future strategies.

Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw: evolving research for multimodality medical management.

PURPOSE: Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) is a debilitating side effect of antiresorptive and antiangiogenic agents that can lead to progressive bone destruction in the maxillofacial region. Dental surgery, including tooth extractions, commonly trigger the onset of MRONJ. While guidelines suggest avoiding extraction when possible, complete avoidance is not always feasible, as necrosis can develop from dental and periodontal disease without dental procedures. The goal of this article is to provide an update review of current preventive and therapeutic approaches for MRONJ. METHODS: A comprehensive electronic search was conducted on PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus databases. All English articles encompassing randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, observational studies, and case studies were reviewed. The current medical treatments and adjuvant therapies for managing MRONJ patients were critically assessed and summarized. RESULTS: Pentoxifylline and alpha tocopherol (PENT-E), teriparatide, photobiomodulation (PBM), photodynamic therapy (PDT), and the use of growth factors have shown to enhance healing in MRONJ patients. Implementing these methods alone or in conjunction with surgical treatment has been linked to reduced discomfort and improved wound healing and increased new bone formation. DISCUSSION: While several adjuvant treatment modalities exhibit promising results in facilitating the healing process, current clinical practice guidelines predominantly recommend antibiotic therapy as a non-surgical approach, primarily addressing secondary infections in necrotic areas. However, this mainly addresses the potential infectious complication of MRONJ. Medical approaches including PENT-E, teriparatide, PBM, and PDT can result in successful management and should be considered prior to taking a surgical approach. Combined medical management for both preventing and managing MRONJ holds potential for achieving optimal clinical outcomes and avoiding surgical intervention, requiring further validation through larger studies and controlled trials.

Burning mouth in oncology care: a systematic review.

Burning mouth, also referred to as oral dysesthesia, is an underreported condition among cancer patients that may represent an early symptom of cancer or an adverse effect of treatment. This review sought to characterize this symptom in oncology care where burning symptoms may occur. A systematic review of the literature was performed based on the PRISMA statement, and the protocol was registered at PROSPERO database. A structured search was done using eight databases. The process of study selection was conducted in two distinct phases. The JBI Critical Appraisal Tools were utilized to evaluate the risk of bias in the studies included. Of the total number of studies assessed, sixteen met the eligibility criteria. Of these studies included, 7 were case reports, 7 cross-sectional studies, and 2 non-randomized clinical trials. Most studies presented low risk of bias (n = 9), while the remaining studies were evaluated and scored as moderate (n = 5) or high (n = 2) risk of bias. Burning mouth was reported as a first symptom of cancer in three studies, and as an adverse event of radiotherapy (n = 2), chemoradiotherapy (n = 2), and chemotherapy (n = 9). Burning mouth was a first symptom in 0.62% of oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC), and 3.3% of patients with pain as chief complaint. Oral dysesthesia prevalence was 13.6% in patients experiencing chemotherapy-induced oral adverse events. The symptom of burning mouth should be examined in oncology care, as it may be underreported and therefore undertreated. New therapies may be related to a higher risk of oral burning and studies assessing approach to management are needed. Current management borrows from the current management of burning mouth in the non-cancer setting.

Patient-reported symptom monitoring: using (big) data to improve supportive care at the macro-, meso-, and micro-levels.

PURPOSE: This paper aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the need for continued development of symptom monitoring (SM) implementation, utilization, and data usage at the macro-, meso-, and micro-levels. METHODS: Discussions from a patient-reported SM workshop at the MASCC/ISSO 2022 annual meeting were analyzed using a macro-meso-micro analytical framework of cancer care delivery. The workshop categories "initiation and implementation, barriers to adoption and utilization, and data usage" were integrated for each level. RESULTS: At the macro-level, policy development could encourage data sharing and international collaboration, including the exchange of SM methods, supportive care models, and self-management modules. At the meso-level, institutions should adjust clinical workflow and service delivery and promote a thorough technical and clinical integration of SM. At the micro-level, SM should be individualized, with timely feedback for patients, and should foster trust and understanding of AI decision support tools amongst clinicians to improve supportive care. CONCLUSIONS: The workshop reached a consensus among international experts on providing guidance on SM implementation, utilization, and (big) data usage pathways in cancer survivors across the cancer continuum and on macro-meso-micro levels.

Orofacial complications from immune checkpoint inhibitors: A retrospective analysis from two academic medical centers.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are FDA-approved for various cancers, yet their orofacial immune-related adverse events (irAEs) remain poorly understood. Our two-center retrospective study aims to better understand the prevalence and nature of these orofacial irAEs. METHODS: We retrospectively collected demographics, ICI details, and onset of orofacial irAEs in ICI-treated patients at University of California San Francisco and City of Hope (2013-2021). Orofacial irAEs were identified by ICD-10 codes and data categorized as dry mouth/xerostomia, oral mucosal lesions, and orofacial neuropathies. Patients with pre-existing orofacial conditions resembling the reported irAEs were excluded. RESULTS: Among 3768 ICI-treated patients, 408 (10.8%) developed 467 orofacial irAEs: oral mucosal diseases (41.4%), dry mouth/xerostomia (41.0%), and orofacial neuropathies (17.6%). Notably, head and neck cancers had the highest incidence of orofacial irAEs. CONCLUSIONS: Orofacial irAEs are relatively common in patients receiving ICIs, necessitating careful monitoring and management of these complications during and after the treatment.

Oral Chronic Graft-versus-Host Disease in Post-Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant Patients Following SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination: Case Reports.

Patients receiving allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant may experience graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) in which donor immune cells cause an immune reaction in host tissues. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines are highly effective in prevention of severe coronavirus-2019 (COVID-19) disease, but the vaccine can result in immune activation and GVHD. Herein, we report 4 cases of oral manifestations that may have been stimulated by COVID-19 or vaccination with Pfizer or Moderna vaccines. We believe this study is the first to report oral changes driven by an inflammatory/immune mechanism leading to oral symptomatic cGVHD. The clinical impact of this study is early recognition and appropriate management of oral symptomatic cGVHD following COVID-19 disease or SARS-CoV-2 vaccination.

Neutropenic ulcers in oncology: terminology, diagnosis, and management.

Neutropenic ulcerations are characterized by mucosal ulcerations which occur in the presence of neutropenia, suggesting a direct link between neutropenia and mucosal ulceration. An oral ulcer can be labeled as "neutropenic" only if the patients have primary (typically congenital) or secondary neutropenia, and neutropenia is the sole causative factor. Oral mucosal ulcers observed in patients undergoing oncologic therapy may also be termed as "neutropenic ulcers", but the pathogenesis of these oral ulcers more likely involves mucosal events related to trauma, microbial factors, and direct cytotoxicity. In cancer patients, the early appearance of oral ulcers is often attributed to oral mucositis which is a condition primarily caused by the direct mucosal cytotoxicity of chemotherapeutic agents and radiation therapy. Oral ulcers that develop later during or after active cancer therapy may result from intraoral trauma and typically manifest on non-keratinized areas of the oral mucosa which are more susceptible to mucosal damage. In patients undergoing chemotherapy, factors such as disturbances in mucosal barrier function as well as bone marrow suppression lead to reduced neutrophil count and function, and can contribute to the development of oral ulcers. While the etiology of oral ulcers in cancer therapy receiving patients can vary, it is important to emphasize that the host's response plays a crucial role in the progression and repair process of these lesions. This narrative review presents the etiopathogenesis, clinical presentation, and potential management approaches for oral ulcerations in neutropenic patients, with a particular focus on clarifying the usage of the term "neutropenic ulcer" since this term lacks diagnostic specificity and can be misleading in clinical practice regarding the underlying causes and treatment strategies.

Clinical and Psychosocial Impact of Communication about Oral Potentially Malignant Disorders: A Scoping Review.

Delivering bad news has been widely studied in cancer, thus, this scoping review aims to identify the available evidence concerning the communication of oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMDs) and their clinical and psychosocial impacts. A search was performed using electronic databases (Medline/PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science) and one grey literature database (Google Scholar). Studies focused on communicating the diagnosis of OPMDs and the patients' perceptions were included. Study selection and data extraction were performed by two authors in a two-phase process. Five publications were included in the qualitative analysis. Differences regarding the study design, population, OPMDs assessed, and outcomes of professional-patient communication were found in each study. Protocols for OPMD communication have not yet been reported and there is a need to standardize strategies as communication skills may provide better clinical outcomes for patients diagnosed with potentially malignant disorders. Although future studies are needed, a brief list recommending the aspects that must be communicated is proposed.