Results of the Dutch scalp cooling registry in 7424 patients: analysis of determinants for scalp cooling efficacy.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy-induced alopecia is a common consequence of cancer treatment with a high psychological impact on patients and can be prevented by scalp cooling (SC). With this multi-center patient series, we examined the results for multiple currently used chemotherapy regimens to offer an audit into the real-world determinants of SC efficacy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Dutch Scalp Cooling Registry collected data on 7424 scalp-cooled patients in 68 Dutch hospitals. Nurses and patients completed questionnaires on patient characteristics, chemotherapy, and SC protocol. Patient-reported primary outcomes at the start of the final SC session included head cover (HC) (eg, wig/scarf) use (yes/no) as a surrogate for patient satisfaction with SC and WHO score for alopecia (0 = no hair loss up to 3 = total alopecia) as a measure of scalp cooling success. Exhaustive logistic regression analysis stratified by chemotherapy regimen was implemented to examine characteristics and interactions associated with the SC result. RESULTS: Overall, over half of patients (n = 4191, 56%) did not wear a HC and 53% (n = 3784/7183) reported minimal hair loss (WHO score 0/1) at the start of their final treatment. Outcomes were drug and dose dependent. Besides the chemotherapy regimen, this study did not identify any patient characteristic or lifestyle factor as a generic determinant influencing SC success. For non-gender specific cancers, gender played no statistically significant role in HC use nor WHO score. CONCLUSIONS: Scalp cooling is effective for the majority of patients. The robust model for evaluating the drug and dose-specific determinants of SC efficacy revealed no indications for changes in daily practice, suggesting factors currently being overlooked. As no correlation was identified between the determinants explaining HC use and WHO score outcomes, new methods for evaluation are warranted.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on renal cancer care.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on renal cell carcinoma (RCC) care in the Netherlands. METHODS: Newly diagnosed RCCs between 2018 and 2021 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry; 2020-2021 was defined as COVID period and 2018-2019 as reference period. Numbers of RCCs were evaluated using 3-week-moving averages, overall and by disease stage and age. Changes in treatment were evaluated with logistic regression analyses. To evaluate possible delays in care, time to start of treatment was assessed. The cumulative number of metastatic RCC (mRCC) over time was assessed to evaluate stage shift. RESULTS: During the 1st COVID wave (weeks 9-22, 2020), the number of new RCC diagnoses decreased with 15%. Numbers restored partially in 2020, but remained 10% lower compared to 2018/2019. The decline was mostly due to a drop in T1a/T1b RCCs and in age > 70 years. 2021 showed similar numbers of new RCC diagnoses compared to 2018/2019 without an increase due to previously missed RCCs. Treatment-related changes during the 1st COVID wave were limited and temporarily; less surgery in T1a RCCs in favor of more active surveillance, and in mRCC targeted therapy was preferred over immunotherapy. Time to start of firstline treatment was not prolonged during the 1st COVID wave. No increase in mRCC was found until the end of 2021. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in fewer RCC diagnoses, especially T1a/T1b tumors. Treatment-related changes appeared to be limited, temporarily and in accordance with the adapted guidelines. The diagnostic delay could lead to more advanced RCCs in later years but there are no indications for this yet.

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.

Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and management of acute radiation dermatitis: international Delphi consensus-based recommendations.

Acute radiation dermatitis is a frequent adverse effect of radiotherapy, but standardisation of care for acute radiation dermatitis is lacking. Due to the conflicting evidence and variability in current guidelines, a four-round Delphi consensus process was used to compile opinions of 42 international experts on care for people with acute radiation dermatitis on the basis of the evidence in existing medical literature. Interventions for acute radiation dermatitis prevention or management that reached at least 75% consensus were recommended for clinical use. Six interventions could be recommended for the prevention of acute radiation dermatitis: photobiomodulation therapy and Mepitel film in people with breast cancer, Hydrofilm, mometasone, betamethasone, and olive oil. Mepilex Lite dressings were recommended for the management of acute radiation dermatitis. Most interventions were not recommended due to insufficient evidence, conflicting evidence, or lack of consensus to support use, suggesting a need for further research. Clinicians can consider implementing recommended interventions in their practice to prevent and manage acute radiation dermatitis until additional evidence becomes available.

The PRO-RCC study: a long-term PROspective Renal Cell Carcinoma cohort in the Netherlands, providing an infrastructure for 'Trial within Cohorts' study designs.

BACKGROUND: Ongoing research in the field of both localized, locally advanced and metastatic renal cell carcinoma has resulted in the availability of multiple treatment options. Hence, many questions are still unanswered and await further research. A nationwide collaborative registry allows to collect corresponding data. For this purpose, the Dutch PROspective Renal Cell Carcinoma cohort (PRO-RCC) has been founded, for the prospective collection of long-term clinical data, patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient reported experience measures (PREMs). METHODS: PRO-RCC is designed as a multicenter cohort for all Dutch patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Recruitment will start in the Netherlands in 2023. Importantly, participants may also consent to participation in a 'Trial within cohorts' studies (TwiCs). The TwiCs design provides a method to perform (randomized) interventional studies within the registry. The clinical data collection is embedded in the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). Next to the standardly available data on RCC, additional clinical data will be collected. PROMS entail Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL), symptom monitoring with optional ecological momentary assessment (EMA) of pain and fatigue, and optional return to work- and/or nutrition questionnaires. PREMS entail satisfaction with care. Both PROMS and PREMS are collected through the PROFILES registry and are accessible for the patient and the treating physician. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Ethical board approval has been obtained (2021_218) and the study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05326620). DISCUSSION: PRO-RCC is a nationwide long-term cohort for the collection of real-world clinical data, PROMS and PREMS. By facilitating an infrastructure for the collection of prospective data on RCC, PRO-RCC will contribute to observational research in a real-world study population and prove effectiveness in daily clinical practice. The infrastructure of this cohort also enables that interventional studies can be conducted with the TwiCs design, without the disadvantages of classic RCTs such as slow patient accrual and risk of dropping out after randomization.

Minimal added value of wetting hair before scalp cooling to prevent chemotherapy-induced alopecia in cancer patients - results from the Dutch Scalp Cooling Registry.

PURPOSE: Preventing chemotherapy-induced alopecia (CIA) is related to the degree of temperature reduction during scalp cooling. Wetting hair before scalp cooling reduces the scalp skin temperature. This observational study investigated the effects of wetting hair before scalp cooling on preventing CIA and on tolerance in cancer patients. METHODS: This Dutch multi-center cohort study comprised 1825 patients receiving ≥1 cycle of docetaxel (D), 5-fluorouracil-epirubicin-cyclophosphamide (FEC), 5-fluorouracil-epirubicin-cyclophosphamide-docetaxel (FECD), paclitaxel (P), or paclitaxel-carboplatin (PC). Patients underwent scalp cooling with wet or dry hair. Primary and secondary outcomes were the effects of wetting hair on head cover use and tolerance, respectively. RESULTS: None of the associations between wetting hair and head cover use in patients on D, FEC, P, or PC was significant; however, results all tended to be in favor of wetting hair. For FECD, univariate (p=0.005; OR=1.6; CI=1.1-2.1) and multivariable associations (p=0.007; OR=1.8; CI=1.2-2.6) were significant. Scalp cooling discontinuation due to intolerance differed significantly between groups that wetted hair or not (3% and 1% respectively; p=0.034). CONCLUSION: In a large patient group with mainly a European hair type and a high hair mass, no convincing evidence was found whether wetting hair prior to scalp cooling contributes to better prevention of CIA. Since it is argued that a higher reduction in scalp skin temperature by wetting hair contributes positively to scalp cooling efficacy, only a randomized controlled trial can provide an ultimate conclusion at the highest level of evidence. Until that time, healthcare professionals have to take into account that wetting hair may introduce lower compliance to the scalp cooling procedure.

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.

Natural and miscellaneous agents for the prevention of acute radiation dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the available literature describing the efficacy of natural and miscellaneous agents in preventing acute radiation dermatitis (RD) in cancer patients. METHODS: OVID MedLine, Embase, and Cochrane literature databases were searched from 1946 to January 2023 for randomized controlled trials studying the use of natural and miscellaneous agents to prevent RD. RevMan 5.4 was used for the meta-analysis to calculate the pooled effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the random effects analysis. RESULTS: For the systematic review and meta-analysis, 19 and 16 studies were included, respectively. Of the five studied natural products (aloe vera, oral enzymes, olive oil, calendula, and curcumin), only oral enzymes and olive oil significantly reduced the incidence of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group grade 2+ (RR: 0.42, 95%CI 0.30-0.58, p < 0.00001, RR: 0.66, 95% CI 0.51-0.85, p = 0.001, resp.). The oral enzymes also reduced the grade 3+ RD incidence (RR: 0.18, 95%CI 0.06-0.55, p = 0.003). The other agents demonstrated no significant effect. CONCLUSION: This review and meta-analysis on natural and miscellaneous agents in preventing RD in cancer patients demonstrated that oral enzymes and olive oil prevented RD severity. However, evidence supporting natural agents to prevent RD is inconsistent, mainly because of low studies numbers, low-quality study designs, and small sample sizes. Therefore, concrete conclusions cannot be made. Research on (new) natural or miscellaneous agents should focus on a randomized controlled double-blinded study design with a large patient population, a higher consistency in research methods, and clinician- and patient-reported outcomes.

The effect of antiperspirant and deodorant use on acute radiation dermatitis in breast cancer patients during radiotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: While some authors have investigated the impact of antiperspirant /deodorant on the development of acute radiation dermatitis (RD) among patients undergoing radiotherapy (RT) for breast cancer, recommendations supporting the use of antiperspirant/deodorant during breast RT remain highly variable. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the evidence investigating the effect of antiperspirant/deodorant on the development of acute RD during post-operative breast RT. METHODS: A literature search has been performed using OVID MedLine, Embase, and Cochrane databases (1946 to September 2020) to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that have investigated deodorant/antiperspirant use during RT. The meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4 to calculate pooled effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Five RCTs met the inclusion criteria. The use of antiperspirant/deodorant did not significantly affect the incidence of grade (G) 1 + RD (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.54-1.21, p = 0.31). Prohibition of deodorant use did not significantly prevent the occurrence of G2 + acute RD (OR 0.90, 95%, CI 0.65-1.25, p = 0.53). No significant effect was reported in preventing G3 RD between the antiperspirant/deodorant and control groups (OR 0.54, 95%, CI 0.26-1.12, p = 0.10). There was no significant difference in pruritus and pain between patients undergoing skin care protocols with or without antiperspirant/deodorant (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.29, 1.81, p = 0.50, and OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.43-2.52, p = 0.92, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The use of antiperspirant/deodorant during breast RT does not significantly affect the incidence of acute RD, pruritus, and pain. As such, the current evidence does not support recommendation against antiperspirant/deodorant use during RT.

Topical corticosteroids for the prevention of severe radiation dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Radiation dermatitis (RD) is a frequently occurring adverse reaction during radiotherapy in cancer patients. While the use of topical corticosteroids (TCs) is common for the treatment of RD, its role in preventing severe reactions remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the evidence on the use of TCs as prophylaxis of RD. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted using OVID MedLine, Embase, and Cochrane databases (between 1946 and 2023) to identify studies examining TC use in the prevention of severe RD. Statistical analysis was completed using RevMan 5.4 to calculate pooled effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals. Forest plots were then developed using a random effects model. RESULTS: Ten RCTs with a total of 1041 patients met the inclusion criteria. Six studies reported on mometasone furoate (MF) and four studies reported on betamethasone. Both TCs were associated with a significant improvement in the prevention of moist desquamation [OR = 0.34, 95% CI [0.25, 0.47], p < 0.00001], but betamethasone was found to be more effective than MF [OR = 0.29, 95% CI [0.18, 0.46], p < 0.00001 and OR = 0.39, 95% CI [0.25, 0.61], p < 0.0001, respectively]. A similar finding was seen in reducing the development of grade 2 or higher RD according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group scale. CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence supports the use of TCs in preventing severe reactions of RD. Both MF and betamethasone were found to be effective; however, betamethasone, a higher potency TC, is more effective despite MF being more commonly reported in literature.

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.

Barrier Films and Dressings for the Prevention of Acute Radiation Dermatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of barrier films and dressings in preventing acute radiation dermatitis (RD). METHODS: OVID Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched from 1946 to September 2020 to identify randomized controlled trials on the use of barrier films or dressings to prevent RD. For comparable outcomes between studies, pooled effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using the random effects analysis in RevMan 5.4. RESULTS: Fourteen and 11 studies were included in the qualitative and quantitative analyses, respectively. Five types of barrier films used for RD were identified: Hydrofilm, StrataXRT®, Mepitel® Film, 3 M™ Cavilon™ No-Sting Barrier Film, and silver leaf nylon dressing. Hydrofilm and Mepitel Film significantly reduced the development of RD grade ≥ 2 in breast and head and neck cancer patients (RR 0.32, 95%CI 0.19, 0.56, p < 0.0001; RR 0.21, 95%CI 0.05, 0.89, p = 0.03, resp.). Moreover, Hydrofilm had a beneficial effect on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) (SMD -0.75, 95%CI -1.2, -0.29, p = 0.001). The meta-analyses on the other barrier films did not show any significant effect. CONCLUSION: This review and meta-analysis demonstrated that Hydrofilm and Mepitel Film could effectively reduce RD severity and improve PROs. The evidence is generally weak for all the studies on barrier films and dressings due to a limited study number, high risk of bias, small sample sizes, and minimal comparable outcome measures. It's potential has been proven, but future research in this field is recommended to confirm the efficacy of these products and assess real-world feasibility.

Photobiomodulation therapy for the prevention of acute radiation dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Approximately 95% of patients undergoing radiotherapy (RT) experience radiation dermatitis (RD). Evidence has suggested that photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) can stimulate skin renewal and minimize RD. The aim of the present paper was to investigate the efficacy of PBMT in RD prevention through a comprehensive literature review. METHODS: A literature search of Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases was conducted from 1980 to March 2021 to identify RCT on the use of PBMT for RD prevention. Forest plots were developed using RevMan software to quantitatively compare data between studies. RESULTS: Five papers were identified: four in breast and one in head and neck cancer patients. Patients receiving PBMT experienced less severe RD than the control groups after 40 Gray (Gy) of RT (grade 3 toxicity: Odds Ratio (OR): 0.57, 95% CI 0.14-2.22, p = 0.42) and at the end of RT (grade 0 + 1 vs. 2 + 3 toxicity: OR: 0.28, 95% CI 0.15-0.53, p < 0.0001). RT interruptions due to RD severity were more frequent in the control group (OR: 0.81, 95% CI 0.10-6.58, p = 0.85). CONCLUSION: Preventive PBMT may be protective against the development of severe grades of RD and reduce the frequency of RT interruptions. Larger sample sizes and other cancer sites at-risk of RD should be evaluated in future studies to confirm the true efficacy of PBMT, also in preventing the onset of RD and to finalize a standardized protocol to optimize the technique. At present, starting PBMT when RT starts is recommendable, as well as performing 2 to 3 laser sessions weekly.

Prevention of radiation dermatitis with skin hygiene and washing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effects of washing in patients receiving radiotherapy (RT) on radiation dermatitis (RD) severity. METHODS: A literature search was performed using Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases between January 1, 1946, and January 31, 2023. Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) studying the effects of washing with or without soap on RD were identified. A meta-analysis was conducted for clinician-reported outcomes using RevMan 5.4 and a narrative synthesis for patient-reported outcomes due to a lack of reported data amenable to quantitative comparison in accordance with the Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) guidelines. The Cochrane Risk of bias (RoB2) and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) criteria were used to assess risk of bias and certainty of evidence, respectively. RESULTS: Two RCTs met the inclusion criteria for meta-analysis. Washing with or without soap significantly reduced the incidence of severe RD (OR: 0.32, 95% CI: 0.19-0.55, p < 0.01) and moist desquamation (OR: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.12-0.52, p < 0.01). Two of four trials found an association between washing and reduced itching score (p = 0.38). Pain score was not found to be significantly different with or without washing in any of the four studies (p = 0.07). The two studies that assessed burn scores did not detect any difference between the washing group versus no washing group (p = 0.25). Washing was associated with improved quality of life (QoL) measures in one study. CONCLUSION: Washing with or without soap during RT resulted in less severe RD and less moist desquamation. Given the QoL benefits of washing, it should be advocated as part of routine skin care during RT.

Mepitel Film for the prevention of acute radiation dermatitis in head and neck cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE: This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy of Mepitel Film in preventing acute radiation dermatitis (RD) in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) across randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched on 5 March 2023 to identify relevant RCTs. RD assessment tools and outcomes were compared across studies. Pooled effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated based on random-effects analysis using RevMan 5.4. RESULTS: Three RCTs conducted between 2018 and 2020 were included. Mepitel Film decreased RD severity when compared to Sorbolene or Biafine but not when compared to mometasone. A per-protocol analysis of two of the trials revealed that, overall, Mepitel Film significantly reduced the incidence of grade 2-3 RD (odds ratio (OR), 0.24; 95% CI, 0.09-0.65; p = 0.005) and moist desquamation (OR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.10-0.46; p < 0.0001) and decreased average patient, researcher, and combined components of the Radiation-Induced Skin Reaction Assessment Scale (the standardized mean difference (SMD) for patient ratings, - 2.56; 95% CI, - 3.15 to - 1.96, p < 0.00001; SMD for researcher ratings, - 3.47; 95% CI, - 6.63 to - 0.31, p = 0.03; SMD for combined scores, - 3.68; 95% CI, - 6.43 to - 0.92, p = 0.009). Noted issues with Mepitel Film included itchiness and poor adherence. CONCLUSION: While there were discrepancies across studies, Mepitel Film demonstrated a decrease in the incidence of grade 2-3 RD and moist desquamation. These findings emphasize the need for further examining Mepitel Film's efficacy across diverse patient groups and the importance of standardizing RD severity assessment methodologies and control arms.

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.

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

PURPOSE: To evaluate the overall efficacy of StrataXRT, a topical gel dressing, in preventing acute radiation dermatitis (RD) in breast cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy (RT). METHODS: A systematic search was conducted on April 25, 2023 in Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness of StrataXRT in preventing acute RD in breast cancer patients undergoing adjuvant RT to the breast or chest wall with or without regional nodes were included. Pooled incidence odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a random-effects model, with analysis and forest plots generated in RevMan v5.4. RESULTS: The analysis included three RCTs with a total of 189 patients assessed using per-protocol analysis. Two RCTs compared StrataXRT to standard of care, while the third compared it with Mepitel film and was reported separately. In the former RCTs, the odds ratio (OR) for developing acute grade 3 RD favored StrataXRT at 0.05 (95% CI, 0.01-0.22; P < 0.0001). The OR for developing acute grades 2-3 RD was 0.32 (95% CI, 0.03-3.18; P = 0.33). The RCT comparing StrataXRT with Mepitel film showed insignificant ORs for grade 3 and grades 2-3 RD. One RCT reported significantly lower erythema index (P = 0.008) and melanin index (P = 0.015) in StrataXRT patients. The use of StrataXRT did not raise additional safety concerns. CONCLUSION: StrataXRT may help prevent severe acute RD in breast cancer RT patients. Further high quality, large-scale studies are needed to confirm these findings.

"Dear hair loss"-illness perceptions of female patients with chemotherapy-induced alopecia.

OBJECTIVE: Chemotherapy-induced alopecia (CIA) is one of the most common and distressing side effects of chemotherapy treatment. This study aims to assess the illness perceptions of female patients dealing with CIA, and their associations with demographic and clinical characteristics, coping strategies, and quality of life. The secondary aim was to compare the illness perceptions of patients with CIA with other samples, to help elucidate the specific perceptions of patients with CIA. METHOD: Forty female patients at risk of severe hair loss due to chemotherapy treatment were included at the oncological daycare unit of a teaching hospital in the Netherlands. Patients were asked to complete the Brief-Illness Perception Questionnaire (B-IPQ) and the Hair Quality of Life (Hair-QoL) questionnaire. RESULTS: Illness perceptions indicated that although patients understood their hair loss, they lacked being able to make sense of managing it, negatively impacting patients' lives. Psychological quality of life was significantly correlated with the B-IPQ domains: consequences, degree of concern, and emotional response. Social quality of life was significantly correlated with psychological quality of life. Patients with CIA felt significantly less able to manage their hair loss, compared to patients with breast cancer and psoriatic arthritis. CONCLUSION: As patients' beliefs of being able to manage their hair loss are important for adopting and maintaining adequate coping behaviors, additional effort of health care providers in fostering patients' sense of control is indicated, focusing on patients' strengths during and after chemotherapy treatment. In the context of developing interventions for patients with CIA, consequences, concern, and emotional response are the major dimensions that should be taken in account to help patients deal with hair loss.

Comparison of clinical practice guidelines on radiation dermatitis: a narrative review.

PURPOSE: Radiation dermatitis (RD) is a common side effect of radiation therapy (RT). While many different treatment strategies are currently used to address RD, there is a lack of consensus and RD prophylaxis and management guidelines have remained largely unchanged over the last 10 years. This review aims to formulate unambiguous supportive care interventions by comparing RD clinical practice guidelines published between 2010 and 2021 by several organizations: Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC), British Columbia Cancer Agency (BCCA), Cancer Care Manitoba (CCMB), Oncology Nursing Society (ONS), Society and College of Radiographers (SCoR), and International Society of Nurses in Cancer Care (ISNCC). METHODS: Areas of agreement and discordance were assessed among the MASCC, BCCA, CCMB, ONS, SCoR, and ISNCC guidelines. RESULTS: Treatment recommendations across guidelines for acute RD and chronic RT-induced skin toxicities have been summarized. The strongest agreement among the guidelines exists for the use of topical corticosteroids, silver sulfadiazine, washing, and deodorant. All guidelines recommend the use of topical corticosteroids, and washing with water and soap is consistently supported. There is minimal consensus on an optimal dressing or barrier film for RD prophylaxis or management. MASCC weakly recommends prophylactic use of silver sulfadiazine to reduce RD, while BCCA, CCMB, and SCoR recommend its use upon signs of infection. MASCC and CCMB recommend the use of a long-pulsed dye laser to manage telangiectasia, a late effect of RT. CONCLUSIONS: Given the extent of discordance among guideline recommendations, further research is recommended to establish optimal treatments for RD prophylaxis and management.

Current quality of life assessment tools may not fully address dermatological adverse events from anti-cancer therapies.

Supportive oncodermatology is a burgeoning new field within dermatology tasked with caring for the unique dermatologic needs of patients with cancer. Patients with dermatologic adverse events (dAEs) from localized and systemic anti-cancer therapies commonly experience significant distress and reduced health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Emerging dAEs is often overlooked by clinicians and researchers, despite their considerable impacts on treatment completion and patient self-esteem. Specific HRQoL issues experienced by cancer patients with dAEs include psychosocial distress and treatment interruption or cessation. Existing HRQoL assessment indices unfortunately fall short when assessing HRQoL in patients with dAEs from anti-cancer therapies due to the lack of specificity to patients' symptoms and inability to fully encompass the unique needs of this population. Additionally, the variability in HRQoL assessments across studies is substantial, suggesting the need for a standardized HRQoL measure. Here, we review the burden of dAEs and the existing validated tools used to measure them, while outlining strategies for modification to achieve optimal HRQoL assessment in patients with dAEs from anti-cancer therapies and address the HRQoL gap in supportive oncodermatology. Amongst the current tools, Skindex-16 most closely addresses the required skin-specific HRQoL metrics, but still lacks a few key cancer-specific measures. Other general HRQoL tools are well-tailored to cancer patients, but lack skin-specific questions.