4.7 Article

Lactobacillus brevis CD2 lozenges reduce radiation- and chemotherapy-induced mucositis in patients with head and neck cancer: A randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 48, 期 6, 页码 875-881

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2011.06.010

关键词

Chemo-radiotherapy; Oral mucositis; Lactobacillus CD2; Lozenges; Squamous cell carcinoma of head and neck

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Oral mucositis is a frequent and serious complication in patients receiving chemo-radiotherapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. This study evaluated the effects of administering Lactobacillus brevis CD2 lozenges on the incidence and severity of mucositis and tolerance to chemo-radiotherapy. Methods: Two hundred patients suitable for chemo-radiotherapy were enrolled in a randomised, double-blind study to receive daily treatment with lozenges containing either L. brevis CD2 or placebo. Anticancer therapy was RT 70 Grays/35 fractions over 7 weeks with weekly Inj. Cisplatin 40 mg/m(2). The study treatment was given during, and for 1 week after completion of anticancer therapy. Primary end-points were the incidence of grade III and IV oral mucositis and the percentage of patients able to complete anticancer treatment. Findings: The efficacy analysis included the 188 patients who received >= 1 week of study treatment. Grade III and IV mucositis developed in 52% of patients in the L. brevis CD2 arm and 77% in the placebo arm (P < 0.001). Anticancer treatment completion rates were 92% in the L. brevis CD2 arm and 70% in the placebo arm (P = 0.001). A larger proportion of patients remained free of mucositis when treated with L. brevis CD2 (28%) compared to the placebo (7%). Interpretation: L. brevis CD2 lozenges reduced the incidence of grade III and IV anticancer therapy-induced oral mucositis and were associated with a lower overall rate of mucositis and a higher rate of anticancer treatment completion. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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