4.7 Review

The effects of herbal medicines on cancer therapy-induced oral mucositis: A literature review

期刊

PHYTOTHERAPY RESEARCH
卷 36, 期 1, 页码 243-265

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ptr.7308

关键词

cancer; chemotherapy; herbal medicine; oral mucositis; radiotherapy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cancer therapy-induced oral mucositis is a troublesome complication after radio-chemotherapy, and factors such as age, nutritional status, tumor type, oral hygiene, treatment method, and oxygen-free radicals can affect its incidence. Herbal medicine has been suggested as a potential alternative due to its unique properties of safety, availability, and low cost, with anti-inflammatory, anti-microbial, and antioxidative activities being essential for its palliative effects on oral mucositis.
Cancer therapy-induced oral mucositis (OM) is one of the most troublesome morbidities after radio-chemotherapy. Age, nutritional status, tumor type, oral hygiene, and treatment method are the determinants for OM incidence. In addition, oxygen-free radicals can act as a trigger for an inflammatory milieu that causes OM. Based on the debilitating nature of OM, finding a safe and inexpensive agent with anti-inflammatory, anti-microbial, and antioxidative properties can be valuable for this situation. Considering the harmful effects of some chemical agents, herbal medicine has been suggested as a potential alternative owing to unique properties such as safety, availability and low cost. Many studies have illustrated several pharmacological properties of herbal medicines in recent years, such as anti-inflammatory, anti-microbial, and antioxidative activities, which are essential factors in the palliation of cancer therapy-induced OM. This review aimed to evaluate herbal medicines' effects on cancer therapy-induced OM. According to this comprehensive review, it is concluded that medicinal plants and phytochemicals can be used as practical agents in the palliation of cancer therapy-induced OM without any serious side effects.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据