The risk factors for oral mucositis and the effect of cryotherapy in patients after the BEAM and HD-l-PAM 200 mg/m(2) autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation
Language English Country Scotland Media print-electronic
Document type Clinical Trial, Journal Article, Multicenter Study
PubMed
21310656
DOI
10.1016/j.ejon.2011.01.006
PII: S1462-3889(11)00010-X
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- MeSH
- Transplantation, Autologous MeSH
- Cytarabine administration & dosage adverse effects MeSH
- Adult MeSH
- Etoposide administration & dosage adverse effects MeSH
- Carmustine administration & dosage adverse effects MeSH
- Cryotherapy * MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Melphalan administration & dosage adverse effects MeSH
- Adolescent MeSH
- Young Adult MeSH
- Transplantation Conditioning adverse effects methods MeSH
- Prospective Studies MeSH
- Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols administration & dosage adverse effects therapeutic use MeSH
- Risk Factors MeSH
- Drug Administration Schedule MeSH
- Aged MeSH
- Stomatitis etiology prevention & control MeSH
- Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation * adverse effects MeSH
- Treatment Outcome MeSH
- Dose-Response Relationship, Drug MeSH
- Check Tag
- Adult MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Adolescent MeSH
- Young Adult MeSH
- Male MeSH
- Aged MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Clinical Trial MeSH
- Multicenter Study MeSH
- Names of Substances
- Cytarabine MeSH
- Etoposide MeSH
- Carmustine MeSH
- Melphalan MeSH
PURPOSE: Oral mucositis (OM) still represents a significant complication of hematopoietic stem cell transplantations (HSCT). Observational studies focusing on risk factor definitions are still warranted. METHOD: A total of 126 patients participated in this observational study after autologous HSCT with the BEAM and HD-l-PAM 200mg/m(2) conditioning regimens. Basic clinical and laboratory variables and their impact on OM were assessed. RESULTS: Age, gender, body mass index, and baseline absolute neutrophil counts were not shown to have any negative impact on OM development. The multivariate analysis revealed oral cryotherapy non-provision as being the most significant predictor for OM incidence (p < 0.0001), followed by BEAM conditioning regimen (p = 0.007), OM in a patient's history (p = 0.002) and lower number of days since the last chemotherapy (p = 0.025). The cryotherapy was remarkably effective both in the single high-dose melphalan 200mg/m(2) conditioning regimen (18% OM in cryotherapy vs. 68% without it, p<0.0001) and in the multidrug BEAM (melphalan 140mg/m(2)) regimen (38% vs. 86%, p=0.006). CONCLUSION: Oral cryotherapy should be implemented into supportive care management in patients treated with high-dose melphalan short-infusion chemotherapy. Large and well-designed randomized trials are necessary to obtain more significant and reliable results and understanding regarding OM risk factors.
References provided by Crossref.org