Oral solitary fibrous tumors: A collaborative clinicopathologic study of 19 cases.

OBJECTIVE: To report the clinicopathologic features of 19 oral solitary fibrous tumors (SFTs). METHODS: Clinical data were collected from the records of seven pathology services. All cases were re-evaluated by HE staining and confirmed by immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: The series comprised 11 females (57.9%) and 8 males (42.1%), with a mean age of 47.3 ± 14.7 years (range: 22-71 years) and a 1.3:1 female-to-male ratio. Most tumors affected the buccal mucosa (n = 7; 36.8%) and presented clinically as an asymptomatic solitary submucosal well-circumscribed nodule with coloration similar to the oral mucosa. Morphologically, most SFTs (n = 10; 52.6%) exhibited a classic hybrid pattern characterized by a well-circumscribed proliferation of densely cellular areas alternating with hypocellular areas in a variably collagenous vascular stroma. Remnants of accessory salivary glands were observed in two cases (n = 2; 10.5%). All tumors were positive for STAT6 and CD34 (n = 19; 100%). Outcome information was available from 6 patients (31.6%), with clinical follow-up ranging from 6 to 24 months (mean ± SD, 9.5 ± 6.8 months), and none developed local recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Oral SFTs are rare and often clinically misdiagnosed. Pathologists should consider SFT in the differential diagnosis of oral spindle cell tumors. Accurate diagnosis requires careful morphological evaluation supported by immunohistochemical analysis.

Effects of a mucoadhesive phytomedicine (Curcuma longa L. and Bidens pilosa L.) on radiotherapy-induced oral mucositis and quality of life of patients undergoing head and neck cancer treatment: randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: To assess the effect of a mucoadhesive herbal medicine containing curcuminoids and a glycerinated extract of Bidens pilosa L. (FITOPROT) in association with photobiomodulation (PBM) therapy and a Preventive Oral Care Program (POCP) compared to PBM and POCP in the treatment of radiotherapy (RT)-induced oral mucositis (ROM) and in the quality of life of these patients. METHODS: A double-blind clinical trial was performed with head and neck cancer patients undergoing RT or chemoradiotherapy. Participants were randomized into two groups: Group 1 (n=27): PBM and POCP; and Group 2 (n=25): PBM, POCP and FITOPROT. The PBM protocol was daily irradiation, 660 nm, 25mW, 0.25 J/point from the first until the last day of RT. The FITOPROT was used as mouthwash twice a day. ROM was evaluated based on the scales of the World Health Organization and National Cancer Institute. The quality of life was evaluated using the University of Washington Questionnaire, OHIP-14 and Patient-Reported Oral Mucositis Symptom Scale. The MMAS-8 questionnaire was used to evaluated the adherence to POCP and FITOPROT. Data were collected at baseline, 7th, 14th, 21st, and 30th RT sessions. RESULTS: No statistical differences were found between the groups for the ROM evaluation. Both groups experienced worsening of the quality of life during the RT. No statistically significant differences between groups were observed for any of the instruments evaluated. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that PBM associated with FITOPROT and POCP control the severity of ROM and stabilize the QoL of patients with head and neck cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (ReBEC-RBR-9vddmr; UTN code: U1111-1193-2066), registered in August 8th, 2017.

Photobiomodulation reduces the impact of radiotherapy on oral health-related quality of life due to mucositis-related symptoms in head and neck cancer patients.

To assess the effectiveness of photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) in the oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) of patients with head and neck cancer undergoing radiotherapy (RT), using the Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14) and the Patient-Reported Oral Mucositis (OM) Symptoms Scale (PROMS), and to correlate OM degree with the PROMS and OHIP-14 scores. Forty-eight patients undergoing RT for head and neck cancer were randomly assigned into two groups: PBMT group (n = 25)-daily PBMT associated with a preventive oral care program (POCP); and control group (n = 23)-receiving POCP exclusively. OHRQoL was assessed using the PROMS and OHIP-14 questionnaires. OM degrees were classified according to the World Health Organization and the National Cancer Institute scales. Assessments were performed at the 1st, 7th, 14th, 21st, and 30th RT sessions. PBMT was effective in preventing and treating severe OM. Both groups showed increased OHRQoL impacts throughout the RT sessions; however, higher impacts were observed in the control group, mainly at the final stage of treatment (21st and 30th RT sessions). Significant correlations were found between the severity of OM and PROMS scores in the total sample and the control group at all RT periods. PROMS and OM scores were positive correlated at 14th, 21st, and 30th RT sessions in the control group, suggesting that this instrument is useful in classifying OM. PBMT was effective in treating and preventing severe OM and OM-related symptoms, and with consequent positive impacts in OHRQoL in head and neck patients undergoing RT. The PROMS scale was helpful instrument for assessment of the severity of OM. Brazilian Clinical Trials database (ReBEC - RBR-5h4y4n), registered in Aug, 24th 2017.

Cost-effectiveness randomized clinical trial on the effect of photobiomodulation therapy for prevention of radiotherapy-induced severe oral mucositis in a Brazilian cancer hospital setting.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) in association with a Preventive Oral Care Program (POCP) compared with POCP alone in the treatment of radiotherapy (RT)-induced oral mucositis (OM). METHODS: The cost-effectiveness was evaluated from the health provider perspective and conducted alongside a randomized, double-blind clinical trial. Participants were randomly assigned to either PBMT (n = 25) or control (n = 23) group. The PBMT group participants received PBMT associated with POCP. In the control group, patients were submitted to POCP alone. Costs were identified, quantified, and valued through observation and consultation of the hospital's financial sector database and estimated in Brazilian real and converted to international dollars using the purchasing power parity exchange rate. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated by considering the prevention of severe OM, interruption of RT, and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) scores, measured by the OHIP-14 and patient-reported OM symptoms scale (PROMS). RESULTS: The incremental cost of PBMT was $857.35, and the cost per session was $25.69. The ICER was $ 2867.39 to avoid one case of severe OM and $ 2756.75 to prevent one interruption in RT due to OM. ICER to reduce 1 point in OHIP-14 and PROMS scores were $170.79 and $31.75, respectively. CONCLUSION: PBMT is more cost-effective than POCP alone in preventing severe OM, worsening of the OHRQoL, and RT interruptions. PBMT is a promising therapy, especially to avoid interruptions in oncological treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ReBEC-RBR-5h4y4n.

A prospective study on oral adverse effects in head and neck cancer patients submitted to a preventive oral care protocol.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the occurrence and severity of oral complications, number of radiotherapy (RT) interruptions and quality of life (QoL) in a population of head and neck cancer patients receiving a preventive oral care program (POCP) and photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT). METHODS: Prospective cohort of 61 head and neck cancer patients undergoing radiochemotherapy were monitored and submitted to a POCP that included oral hygiene and plaque control, removal of infection foci, dental restorations, periodontal therapy, fluorotherapy, oral hydration, and denture removal at night, combined with daily PBMT. Outcomes included occurrence of adverse effects such as severity of oral mucositis (OM) and oral symptoms (pain, solid and fluid dysphagia, odynophagia, dysgeusia), quality of life impacts, and interruptions of radiotherapy (RT) due to symptoms. Disease-free and overall survival rates were evaluated. RESULTS: There was a significant improvement in oral health conditions between initial assessment and the two longitudinal assessments (p < 0.05), which indicates that the POCP was effective for plaque control and reduction of gingival inflammation. All participants were free of OM at the beginning of the RT regimen and only 45.9% after the 7th session, and few patients ranked the highest score of OM. For all symptoms related to OM, there was a progressive increase of severity until the 14th RT session, which remained stable until the completion of the RT regimen. The same effect was observed for the quality of life measures. Discontinued RT due to OM occurred in only three patients (5%), and the maximum duration was 10 days. The overall survival rate was 77% and disease-free survival was 73.8%. Lower survival time was observed for patients with no response to RT (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study suggest a positive effect of an oral preventive care program for head and neck cancer patients submitted to RT. The PBMT associated with a rigorous POCP resulted in satisfactory control of oral adverse effects, reduction of quality of life impacts, and interruption of RT regimen due to severe OM.