Turkish
Albanian
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Belarusian
Bengali
Bosnian
Catalan
Czech
Danish
Deutsch
Dutch
English
Estonian
Finnish
Français
Greek
Haitian Creole
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Latvian
Lithuanian
Macedonian
Mongolian
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Serbian
Slovak
Slovenian
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese
Български
中文(简体)
中文(繁體)
Supportive Care in Cancer 2004-Jul

Patient perceptions about chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis: implications for primary/secondary prophylaxis strategies.

Sadece kayıtlı kullanıcılar makaleleri çevirebilir
Giriş yapmak kayıt olmak
Bağlantı panoya kaydedilir
Stuart L Goldberg
Laura Chiang
Natalya Selina
Stephanie Hamarman

Anahtar kelimeler

Öz

OBJECTIVE

Oral mucositis (OM), the painful inflammation of oropharyngeal tissues, is an economically costly chemotherapy toxicity. Several agents to prevent chemotherapy-induced OM are in development, with most studies conducted among transplantation subjects with a brief well-defined risk period. The potential value of these preventative agents among hematology-oncology populations receiving cyclic standard-dose therapy is unknown.

METHODS

Patients receiving standard-dose chemotherapy at an outpatient oncology center over a 2-week time-frame were invited to participate in an anonymous unprompted survey. The survey instrument consisted of six demographic questions and six questions regarding toxicities of chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Of 514 patients providing completed surveys from among approximately 1625 patients (32% response rate), 167 (32%) reported experiencing OM. Factors associated with developing OM included number of chemotherapy cycles ( P=0.001), hematologic malignancy ( P=0.02), female gender ( P=0.03), age ( P=0.05), and treatment with anthracyclines ( P=0.001), vinca alkaloids ( P=0.001), cyclophosphamide ( P=0.001), fludarabine ( P=0.01), cis/carboplatin ( P=0.05) and radiotherapy ( P=0.005). Among patients experiencing OM, 69% considered OM to be an important toxicity with 7% rating their OM very severe, 18% severe, 36% moderate and 29% mild. Recurrent OM was reported by 87 patients (53%) and was judged similar in severity by 67%, milder by 27% and more severe by 6%. OM was considered the sixth most distressing complication behind (in descending order) fatigue, hair loss, nausea, numbness and diarrhea, and more important than anxiety and heartburn.

CONCLUSIONS

OM represents a common toxicity of standard-dose chemotherapy occurring in approximately one-third of patients. High-risk populations can be identified, permitting targeting of primary prophylaxis strategies whereby all patients possessing high-risk factors are treated to prevent OM. However, since OM was self-reported by only one-third of patients receiving standard-dose chemotherapy, but over half of those experiencing OM developed recurrent episodes, secondary prophylaxis strategies targeting recurrent OM episodes may be more appropriate.

Facebook sayfamıza katılın

Bilim tarafından desteklenen en eksiksiz şifalı otlar veritabanı

  • 55 dilde çalışır
  • Bilim destekli bitkisel kürler
  • Görüntüye göre bitki tanıma
  • Etkileşimli GPS haritası - bölgedeki bitkileri etiketleyin (yakında)
  • Aramanızla ilgili bilimsel yayınları okuyun
  • Şifalı bitkileri etkilerine göre arayın
  • İlgi alanlarınızı düzenleyin ve haber araştırmaları, klinik denemeler ve patentlerle güncel kalın

Bir belirti veya hastalık yazın ve yardımcı olabilecek bitkiler hakkında bilgi edinin, bir bitki yazın ve karşı kullanıldığı hastalıkları ve semptomları görün.
* Tüm bilgiler yayınlanmış bilimsel araştırmalara dayanmaktadır

Google Play badgeApp Store badge