Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
Intraoral vs. extraoral photobiomodulation therapy for oral mucositis in head and neck cancer patients: a multicenter, randomized, single-blind clinical trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеМногоцентровое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Klein Isadora Peres, Pinto Mariana Bitu Ramos, Só Bruna Barcelos, de Farias Gabriel Amanda, Mendonça Nathália Felix, da Cruz Santos Letícia Beatriz, Farias Karina Morais, Mores Ana Leticia, Martins Marco Antonio Trevizani, Silva Ana Carolina Prado Ribeiro E, Brandão Thaís Bianca, Santos-Silva Alan Roger, Alves Fábio Abreu, Martins Manoela Domingues
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of intraoral (IOPBM) and extraoral photobiomodulation (EOPBM) protocols for the prevention and treatment of oral mucositis (OM) in patients with oral or oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) to submitted radiotherapy (RT).
METHODS: This randomized, blinded, multicenter clinical trial enrolled 58 patients with oral or oropharyngeal SCC, who were allocated into two groups matched by treatment type, clinical stage, and RT modality. Group I (IOPBM) received intraoral photobiomodulation (PBM) with a continuous InGaAlP diode laser (660 nm, 100 mW, 0.03 cm2 spot size, 3 s per point, fluence 10 J/cm2). Group II (EOPBM) received extraoral PBM using a superpulsed diode laser with dual wavelengths (810/980 nm, 1000 mW, 4.91 cm2 spot size, 30 s per point, fluence 6.11 J/cm2). PBM was performed five times per week during RT or until complete resolution of oral mucositis lesions.
RESULTS: A total of 58 patients were included from February 2021 to August 2023. The mean age of patients was 59.41 years. Forty (69%) were male, and 18 (31%) were female. All patients experienced some degree of OM during RT. No significant differences were observed between the groups for all OM grades (WHO scale, p = 0.69; NCI scale, p = 0.82) or in the meantime to the development of ulcerated OM (WHO scale, p = 0.63; NCI scale, p = 0.61). On day 20 (week 4) and day 30 (week 6), patients in the EOPBM group reported significantly less difficulty swallowing compared to the IOPBM group (Mann-Whitney test, p = 0.02 and p = 0.04, respectively). On day 25 (week 5), the EOPBM group demonstrated a significantly smaller decline in taste perception compared to the IOPBM group, as determined by the Mann-Whitney test (p = 0.01).
CONCLUSION: The EOPBM protocol was found to be as effective as IOPBM in managing OM, with the added benefit of providing greater patient comfort during application.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05242991).
METHODS: This randomized, blinded, multicenter clinical trial enrolled 58 patients with oral or oropharyngeal SCC, who were allocated into two groups matched by treatment type, clinical stage, and RT modality. Group I (IOPBM) received intraoral photobiomodulation (PBM) with a continuous InGaAlP diode laser (660 nm, 100 mW, 0.03 cm2 spot size, 3 s per point, fluence 10 J/cm2). Group II (EOPBM) received extraoral PBM using a superpulsed diode laser with dual wavelengths (810/980 nm, 1000 mW, 4.91 cm2 spot size, 30 s per point, fluence 6.11 J/cm2). PBM was performed five times per week during RT or until complete resolution of oral mucositis lesions.
RESULTS: A total of 58 patients were included from February 2021 to August 2023. The mean age of patients was 59.41 years. Forty (69%) were male, and 18 (31%) were female. All patients experienced some degree of OM during RT. No significant differences were observed between the groups for all OM grades (WHO scale, p = 0.69; NCI scale, p = 0.82) or in the meantime to the development of ulcerated OM (WHO scale, p = 0.63; NCI scale, p = 0.61). On day 20 (week 4) and day 30 (week 6), patients in the EOPBM group reported significantly less difficulty swallowing compared to the IOPBM group (Mann-Whitney test, p = 0.02 and p = 0.04, respectively). On day 25 (week 5), the EOPBM group demonstrated a significantly smaller decline in taste perception compared to the IOPBM group, as determined by the Mann-Whitney test (p = 0.01).
CONCLUSION: The EOPBM protocol was found to be as effective as IOPBM in managing OM, with the added benefit of providing greater patient comfort during application.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05242991).