Watanabe et al. (2010): Polaprezinc prevents oral mucositis associated with radiochemotherapy in patients with head and neck cancer
Reference ↗ | |
---|---|
Title | Polaprezinc prevents oral mucositis associated with radiochemotherapy in patients with head and neck cancer |
Topic | Zinc |
Author | Watanabe, T, Ishihara, M, Matsuura, K, Mizuta, K, Itoh, Y |
Year | 2010 |
Journal | International journal of cancer |
DOI | https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ijc.25200 |
Study Note
Brief summary
The study examined 31 patients with head and neck carcinoma. In addition to radiotherapy, half of the test subjects rinsed their oral cavity with a zinc solution and the other half with an azulene solution. The occurrence of inflammation of the oral mucosa (oral mucositis), pain and dry mouth (xerostomia) as well as the prevention of changes in taste, increased use of painkillers and difficulties with oral food intake were investigated. The number of daily meals was also recorded. There were significant differences in favor of the zinc arm in all points. The only exception was problems with oral food intake, in which the arms did not differ. Inflammation of the oral mucosa, pain and dry mouth occurred less frequently in the zinc arm. Furthermore, patients in the zinc arm reduced their use of painkillers and were able to eat more meals than patients in the azulene arm. The authors' conclusion regarding the intake of zinc is very positive, as it has a positive effect on the side effects of radiotherapy and has been shown to be well tolerated. However, no influence on the development of the tumor was found. From a methodological point of view, this study leaves a lot to be desired in terms of the exact study procedure and the size of the sample analyzed was very small. For these reasons, the results should only be trusted to a limited extent.
In der durchgeführten Studie wurden 31 Patienten mit Kopf-Hals Karzinom untersucht. Die Hälfte der Probanden spülte zusätzlich zur Radiotherapie ihren Mundraum mit einer Zink- und die andere mit einer Azulenlösung. Es wurden das Auftreten Entzündungen der Mundschleimhaut (oraler Mukositis), Schmerz und Mundtrockenheit (Xerostomie) untersucht sowie die Verhinderung von Geschmacksveränderungen, von zunehmendem Schmerzmittelgebrauch und Schwierigkeiten mit oraler Nahrungsaufnahme. Außerdem wurde die Anzahl an täglichen Mahlzeiten erfasst. In allen Punkten zeigten sich bedeutsame Unterschiede zugunsten des Zink-Arms. Die einzige Ausnahme bestand in Problemen der mündlichen Nahrungsaufnahme, worin sich die Arme nicht unterschieden. Mundschleimhautentzündung, Schmerz und Mundtrockenheit traten im Zink-Arm seltener auf. Des Weiteren reduzierten Patienten im Zink-Arm ihren Schmerzmittelgebrauch und konnten mehr Mahlzeiten zu sich nehmen, als Patienten im Azulen-Arm. Das Fazit der Autoren bezüglich der Einnahme von Zink fällt sehr positiv aus, da es eine positive Wirkung auf Nebenwirkungen der Radiotherapie hat und eine gute Verträglichkeit gezeigt werden konnte. Allerdings war kein Einfluss auf die Entwicklung des Tumors zu finden. Methodisch bleibt in dieser Untersuchung einiges offen, was das genaue Studienvorgehen im Verlauf angeht und die Größe der analysierten Stichprobe war sehr klein. Aus diesen Gründen sollte man den Ergebnissen nur bedingt vertrauen.
Study Design
Prospective / Retrospective Prospective: forward-looking, examples include clinical trials, cohort studies, and long-term observational studies;</br>Retrospective: backward-looking, relying on existing data, examples include case-control studies and retrospective cohort studies | Prospective |
---|---|
Monocentric / Multicentric Monocentric: conducted in one center/ hospital; </br>Multicentric: conducted in multiple centers/ hospitals | Monocentric |
Blinding No: Open, all parties are aware of group assignments;</br>Single: one party is unaware of group assignments (generally participants);</br>Double: two parties are unaware of group assignments (generally the participants and the researchers); </br>Triple: concealing group assignment from additional parties | No |
Is randomized | Yes |
Cross-over Participants alternate between different treatment groups or conditions over a specified period, allowing each participant to serve as their own control | No |
Number of arms | 2 |
Study characteristics
Inclusion criteria | Patients with head and neck cancer who underwent radiotherapy or radiochemotherapy |
---|---|
Exclusion criteria | NI |
N randomized | 31 |
Analysis PP: Per Protocol analysis, i.e. only participants included who adhered to the study protocol.</br>ITT: Intention-to-treat analysis, i.e. all randomized participants included regardless of any drop-outs or changes in assignment.</br>mITT: modified Intention-to-treat analysis can refer to analyses in which participants with missing outcome data are excluded or it can refer to analyses in which only participants who received at least one treatment dose are included. In this case, participants dropped out of the study prematurely for reasons unrelated to the treatment. | ITT Analysis |
Specifications on analyses | The specific analysis method is not stated in the study, however, according to the authors, all included patients were evaluated at the end of the study. |
Countries of data collection | Japan |
LoE Level of evidence | 2b Oxford 2009 |
Outcome timeline Data collection times | Weekly observartions |
Characteristics of participants
Setting Refers to cancer therapy setting.</br>- Curative therapy: aims to completely eradicate a disease and achieve a full recovery; </br>- Neo-adjuvant therapy: form of curative therapy, given before the primary treatment for cancer (usually surgery); </br>- Adjuvant therapy: form of curative therapy, given after the primary treatment for cancer (usually surgery); </br>- Palliative therapy: focuses on providing relief from symptoms and improving the quality of life for patients, without necessarily targeting the underlying disease; </br>- Active surveillance: involves close monitoring of disease progression without any intervention (typically used for prostate cancer);</br>- No therapy setting: Patients who completed therapy/are currently not in cancer treatment, cancer survivors. | Curative, Neo-adjuvant, Adjuvant |
---|---|
Types of cancer "Other Cancers" means that only a subpopulation was specified, but further unspecified cancer types were included | Head and Neck Cancers |
Cancer stages Early Stage: generally refers to cancer that is localized to the area where it started, mostly stages I and II;</br>Advanced Stage: cancer that has spread beyond its original site, mostly stages III and IV, with stage IV indicating distant metastasis | Early Stage, Advanced Stage |
Specifications on cancer stages | n=6 stage II, n=2 stage III, n=21 stage IV, n=2 NA |
Comorbidities | NI |
Current cancer therapies | Chemotherapy, Radiation therapy |
Specifications on cancer therapies | Radiotherapy: n=10,
Radiochemotherapy: n=21 |
Previous cancer therapies | Surgery |
Gender | Mixed |
Gender specifications | Intervention arm: 13 male, 3 female
Control arm: 11 male, 4 female |
Age groups | Adults (18+) |
Age groups specification | Intervention arm: mean: 67.4 (53-78)
Control arm: mean: 62.7 (35-86) |
Arms
Duration: from the start to the end of the radiotherapy
Arm type Active control: group receives active treatment; </br>Passive control: for example treatment as usual, waiting control, no treatment | Intervention |
---|---|
Number of participants (arm) N randomized | 16 |
Drop-out Number of participants who left the study for any reason or did not provide information on every data collection date | 0 |
Drop-out reasons | NA |
Intervention | Polaprezinc (zinc L-carnosine) |
Dosage and regime | Orally rinsed with Polaprezinc solution (Polaprezinc granules (0.5g) were dissolved in 20 ml of 5% sodium alginate solution, a natural thickener used as food additive, by agitating intermittently for 1 hr) for 3 min 4 times in a day, the solution was swallowed after oral rinse;
Duration: from the start to the end of the radiotherapy |
One-time application | No |
Duration in days For long-term interventions, the number of days is an estimation.</br>A value of -999 indicates that the exact duration cannot be extracted from the study due to ambiguous or incomplete information. See Outcome timeline or Dosage and regime for further information. | -999 |
Side effects / Interactions | NI |
Arm type Active control: group receives active treatment; </br>Passive control: for example treatment as usual, waiting control, no treatment | Active control |
---|---|
Number of participants (arm) N randomized | 15 |
Drop-out Number of participants who left the study for any reason or did not provide information on every data collection date | 0 |
Drop-out reasons | NA |
Intervention | Azulene |
Dosage and regime | Orally rinsed with azulene solution (prepared by pouring 7 drops of 4% liquid solution into 100 ml water) for 3 min 4 times in a day;
Duration: from the start to the end of the radiotherapy |
One-time application | No |
Duration in days For long-term interventions, the number of days is an estimation.</br>A value of -999 indicates that the exact duration cannot be extracted from the study due to ambiguous or incomplete information. See Outcome timeline or Dosage and regime for further information. | -999 |
Side effects / Interactions | NI |
Outcomes
Mucositis
Outcome type As specificed by the authors | Primary |
---|---|
Outcome specification | Prevention of oral mucositis |
Type of measurement | CTCAE (Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events) |
Results during intervention - Results during intervention means that the time of data collection is during or shortly after the period of the intervention (e.g. on the last day or a few days after). The results therefore still relate to the direct effects of the intervention.</br>- Results after intervention means there is a longer break between the time of data collection and the end of the intervention, e.g. more than a week. The results relate more to long-term effects.</br>- If a categorization in Results during vs. after intervention is not possible (e.g. survival data), the results are summarized under Results after intervention under the headline "Overall". | Oral rinse with polabrezinc significantly reduced the incidence of grade ≥2 events for oral mucositis (40% vs. 86.7%),
reduced risk of oral mucositis by 56.7% (grade ≥2) and 90.6% (grade ≥3) |
Results after intervention - Results during intervention means that the time of data collection is during or shortly after the period of the intervention (e.g. on the last day or a few days after). The results therefore still relate to the direct effects of the intervention.</br>- Results after intervention means there is a longer break between the time of data collection and the end of the intervention, e.g. more than a week. The results relate more to long-term effects.</br>- If a categorization in Results during vs. after intervention is not possible (e.g. survival data), the results are summarized under Results after intervention under the headline "Overall". | NI |
Risk of Bias Assessment: Cochrane RoB tool 2.0 | |
---|---|
Bias arising from the randomization process | ? |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (assignment to intervention) | ? |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (adhering to intervention) | NA |
Bias due to missing outcome data | ? |
Bias in measurement of the outcome | ? |
Bias in selection of the reported result | ? |
Other sources of bias | ? |
Overall RoB judgment | ? |
Pain
Outcome type As specificed by the authors | Secondary |
---|---|
Outcome specification | Prophylaxis of pain;
Reduction in the use of analgesics for the relief of oral pain |
Type of measurement | CTCAE (Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events) |
Results during intervention - Results during intervention means that the time of data collection is during or shortly after the period of the intervention (e.g. on the last day or a few days after). The results therefore still relate to the direct effects of the intervention.</br>- Results after intervention means there is a longer break between the time of data collection and the end of the intervention, e.g. more than a week. The results relate more to long-term effects.</br>- If a categorization in Results during vs. after intervention is not possible (e.g. survival data), the results are summarized under Results after intervention under the headline "Overall". | Oral rinse with polabrezinc significantly reduced the incidence of grade ≥2 events for pain (33.3% vs. 86.7% p<0.003);
reduced risk of pain by 73.9% (grade ≥2) and 81.2% (grade ≥3) The frequency of the use of analgesics was reduced from 100 to 50% (p<0.0025), reduced risk of analgesics use by 50% |
Results after intervention - Results during intervention means that the time of data collection is during or shortly after the period of the intervention (e.g. on the last day or a few days after). The results therefore still relate to the direct effects of the intervention.</br>- Results after intervention means there is a longer break between the time of data collection and the end of the intervention, e.g. more than a week. The results relate more to long-term effects.</br>- If a categorization in Results during vs. after intervention is not possible (e.g. survival data), the results are summarized under Results after intervention under the headline "Overall". | NI |
Risk of Bias Assessment: Cochrane RoB tool 2.0 | |
---|---|
Bias arising from the randomization process | ? |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (assignment to intervention) | ? |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (adhering to intervention) | NA |
Bias due to missing outcome data | ? |
Bias in measurement of the outcome | ? |
Bias in selection of the reported result | ? |
Other sources of bias | ? |
Overall RoB judgment | ? |
Xerostomia
Outcome type As specificed by the authors | Secondary |
---|---|
Outcome specification | Prophylaxis of xerostomia |
Type of measurement | CTCAE (Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events) |
Results during intervention - Results during intervention means that the time of data collection is during or shortly after the period of the intervention (e.g. on the last day or a few days after). The results therefore still relate to the direct effects of the intervention.</br>- Results after intervention means there is a longer break between the time of data collection and the end of the intervention, e.g. more than a week. The results relate more to long-term effects.</br>- If a categorization in Results during vs. after intervention is not possible (e.g. survival data), the results are summarized under Results after intervention under the headline "Overall". | Oral rinse with polabrezinc significantly reduced the incidence of grade ≥2 events for xerostomia (13.3% vs. 73.3%, p<0.001),
reduced risk of xerostomia (grade ≥2) by 83% |
Results after intervention - Results during intervention means that the time of data collection is during or shortly after the period of the intervention (e.g. on the last day or a few days after). The results therefore still relate to the direct effects of the intervention.</br>- Results after intervention means there is a longer break between the time of data collection and the end of the intervention, e.g. more than a week. The results relate more to long-term effects.</br>- If a categorization in Results during vs. after intervention is not possible (e.g. survival data), the results are summarized under Results after intervention under the headline "Overall". | NI |
Risk of Bias Assessment: Cochrane RoB tool 2.0 | |
---|---|
Bias arising from the randomization process | ? |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (assignment to intervention) | ? |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (adhering to intervention) | NA |
Bias due to missing outcome data | ? |
Bias in measurement of the outcome | ? |
Bias in selection of the reported result | ? |
Other sources of bias | ? |
Overall RoB judgment | ? |
Taste alteration
Outcome type As specificed by the authors | Secondary |
---|---|
Outcome specification | Prophylaxis of taste disturbance |
Type of measurement | ? |
Results during intervention - Results during intervention means that the time of data collection is during or shortly after the period of the intervention (e.g. on the last day or a few days after). The results therefore still relate to the direct effects of the intervention.</br>- Results after intervention means there is a longer break between the time of data collection and the end of the intervention, e.g. more than a week. The results relate more to long-term effects.</br>- If a categorization in Results during vs. after intervention is not possible (e.g. survival data), the results are summarized under Results after intervention under the headline "Overall". | Oral rinse with polabrezinc significantly reduced taste disturbance (19% vs. 87%, p<0.0002),
reduced risk of taste disturbance (grade ≥2) by 88.3% |
Results after intervention - Results during intervention means that the time of data collection is during or shortly after the period of the intervention (e.g. on the last day or a few days after). The results therefore still relate to the direct effects of the intervention.</br>- Results after intervention means there is a longer break between the time of data collection and the end of the intervention, e.g. more than a week. The results relate more to long-term effects.</br>- If a categorization in Results during vs. after intervention is not possible (e.g. survival data), the results are summarized under Results after intervention under the headline "Overall". | NI |
Risk of Bias Assessment: Cochrane RoB tool 2.0 | |
---|---|
Bias arising from the randomization process | ? |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (assignment to intervention) | ? |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (adhering to intervention) | NA |
Bias due to missing outcome data | ? |
Bias in measurement of the outcome | ? |
Bias in selection of the reported result | ? |
Other sources of bias | ? |
Overall RoB judgment | ? |
Nutrition status
Outcome type As specificed by the authors | Secondary |
---|---|
Outcome specification | Ability to oral intake;
Amount of daily meals |
Type of measurement | ? |
Results during intervention - Results during intervention means that the time of data collection is during or shortly after the period of the intervention (e.g. on the last day or a few days after). The results therefore still relate to the direct effects of the intervention.</br>- Results after intervention means there is a longer break between the time of data collection and the end of the intervention, e.g. more than a week. The results relate more to long-term effects.</br>- If a categorization in Results during vs. after intervention is not possible (e.g. survival data), the results are summarized under Results after intervention under the headline "Overall". | Reduced risk of disability to oral intake by 68.7%;
Significantly larger amount of meals in intervention arm than in control arm due to the prevention from difficulty in oral intake (mean (SD): 78.8 (31.2%) of total meal vs 30.7 (37.9%), p<0.002) |
Results after intervention - Results during intervention means that the time of data collection is during or shortly after the period of the intervention (e.g. on the last day or a few days after). The results therefore still relate to the direct effects of the intervention.</br>- Results after intervention means there is a longer break between the time of data collection and the end of the intervention, e.g. more than a week. The results relate more to long-term effects.</br>- If a categorization in Results during vs. after intervention is not possible (e.g. survival data), the results are summarized under Results after intervention under the headline "Overall". | NI |
Risk of Bias Assessment: Cochrane RoB tool 2.0 | |
---|---|
Bias arising from the randomization process | ? |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (assignment to intervention) | ? |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (adhering to intervention) | NA |
Bias due to missing outcome data | ? |
Bias in measurement of the outcome | ? |
Bias in selection of the reported result | ? |
Other sources of bias | ? |
Overall RoB judgment | ? |
Tumor response
Outcome type As specificed by the authors | Others |
---|---|
Outcome specification | Objective tumor response to radiochemotherapy |
Type of measurement | RECIST 1.0 Criteria (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) |
Results during intervention - Results during intervention means that the time of data collection is during or shortly after the period of the intervention (e.g. on the last day or a few days after). The results therefore still relate to the direct effects of the intervention.</br>- Results after intervention means there is a longer break between the time of data collection and the end of the intervention, e.g. more than a week. The results relate more to long-term effects.</br>- If a categorization in Results during vs. after intervention is not possible (e.g. survival data), the results are summarized under Results after intervention under the headline "Overall". | The response rate was not significantly different between the arms |
Results after intervention - Results during intervention means that the time of data collection is during or shortly after the period of the intervention (e.g. on the last day or a few days after). The results therefore still relate to the direct effects of the intervention.</br>- Results after intervention means there is a longer break between the time of data collection and the end of the intervention, e.g. more than a week. The results relate more to long-term effects.</br>- If a categorization in Results during vs. after intervention is not possible (e.g. survival data), the results are summarized under Results after intervention under the headline "Overall". | NI |
Risk of Bias Assessment: Cochrane RoB tool 2.0 | |
---|---|
Bias arising from the randomization process | ? |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (assignment to intervention) | ? |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (adhering to intervention) | NA |
Bias due to missing outcome data | ? |
Bias in measurement of the outcome | ? |
Bias in selection of the reported result | ? |
Other sources of bias | ? |
Overall RoB judgment | ? |
Funding and Conflicts of Interest
Funding | NI |
---|---|
Conflicts of Interest | NI |
Further points for assessing the study
Sample
Power analysis performed | ? |
---|---|
- Sample size corresponds to power analysis | |
- Reasons for insufficient sample size based on power analysis | |
If no power analysis performed: at least moderate sample size (n >= 30 per arm) | ? |
Ethnicity mentioned | ? |
Alternative Explanation
Other explanations for an effect besides the investigated intervention | |
---|---|
- Possibility of attention effects | ? |
- Possibility of placebo effects | ? |
- Other reasons | ? |
Statistics
Correct use of parametric and non-parametric tests Testing for normal distribution only necessary if parametric tests are used, NI: use of parametric tests without report of normal distribution testing | |
---|---|
Correction for multiple testing | ? |
Measurement of compliance | ? |
Consistent reporting in numbers (figures, flowchart, abstract, results) | ? |
Comprehensive and coherent reporting | ? |
Cross-over | |
- Sufficient washout period | ? |
- Tested for carry-over effects | ? |
- Tested for sequence effects | ? |
Interpretation of results
Effect sizes reported (clinical vs. statistical significance) | ? |
---|---|
Side effects systematically recorded | ? |
Side effects considered in result interpretation | ? |
Ethics votum | ? |