3.9 Article

Frequency of Oral Mucositis and Local Virus Reactivation in Herpes Simplex Virus Seropositive Children with Myelosuppressive Therapy

期刊

KLINISCHE PADIATRIE
卷 227, 期 6-7, 页码 335-338

出版社

GEORG THIEME VERLAG KG
DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1564086

关键词

hsv-seroprevalence; hsv-reactivation; oral mucositis; myelosuppressive therapy; hsv-1; children

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Oral mucositis (OM) is a common chemo-and radiotherapy adverse effect in oncological pediatric patients. Herpes simplex virus (HSV) infection can cause a severe clinical course. We hypothesize, that HSV seropositivity is a risk factor for local HSV-1 reactivation and increased frequency of OM in patients with myelosuppressive therapies. Patients and Method: We evaluated the prevalence of seropositivity of HSV-1 between June 2011 and April 2014 in patients with potential oncological disease and correlated it to the frequency of OM and local viral reactivation in OM under myelosuppressive therapy. Results: The overall rate of HSV-seropositivity in our cohort was 22 %. 48 patients underwent myelosuppressive therapy. Of these, 7 were HSV-1 IgG positive and 41 negative. All patients with OM under myelosuppressive therapy and positive local swab for viral HSV (l-PCR) were HSV-1 IgG positive before the start of therapy (100 %). The absolute risk for OM in HSV-1 IgG positive patients was increased by 58.5 % (95 % CI: 20.0 -72.2 %) corresponding to a relative risk (RR) of 2.4 (95 % CI: 1.7-3.5, P = 0.009). The multivariable adjusted OR to suffer 2 or more OM episodes in HSV-1 IgG positivity was 8.8 (95 % CI: 1.5-95.8, P = 0.014). Discussion and Conclusion: In HSV-1 IgG positive patients half of the OM episode showed HSV reactivation, and the risk for multiple OM episodes was increased. These patients should be investigated for HSV-infection in every OM episode. Prophylactic and preemptive therapeutic measures should be discussed early, but prospective data on HSV prophylaxis and preemptive treatment is required.

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

3.9
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