Jump to content

Example Queries - Curcumin

From CAMIH
Revision as of 14:21, 25 November 2024 by DDeel (talk | contribs)

What helps against mucositis in cancer?

 Outcome topicResults during interventionResults after interventionOverall RoB judgment
Jahangard-Rafsanjani et al. (2013): The efficacy of selenium in prevention of oral mucositis in patients undergoing hematopoietic SCT: a randomized clinical trialSeleniumOnset of mucositis after transplantation comparable in both selenium and placebo arm; p=0.81Overall: Cumulative incidence (grade 1-4) comparable in both selenium arm (83.8%) and placebo arm (81.1%); p=0.76; grade 3-4 mucositis significantly lower in selenium arm (10.8%) compared to placebo arm (35.1%); p=0.013 (grade 4: 2x in placebo arm, 0x in selenium arm)


Mean duration comparable (p=0.048), only duration of objective mucositis from grade 2 to 4 and back was significantly shorter in the selenium arm (3.6±1.84 days) than in the placebo arm (5.3±2.2 days); p=0.014		high risk
Laali et al. (2020): Effect of Selenium on Incidence and Severity of Mucositis during Radiotherapy in Patients with Head and Neck CancerSeleniumSignificant difference for incidence of severe mucositis at week 3: selenium arm 9.8% vs. placebo arm 42.0% (p=0.017)After 7 weeks no significant differences between the selenium arm and the placebo arm for:
  • mean duration of oral mucositis (grade 1–4) (p=0.27)
  • onset of oral mucosits (p =0.31)
  • recovery (day after radiation completion (p=0.80)
  • cumulative incidence of oral mucusitis (grade 1–4) (p=0.79)


Severe oral mucositis (grade 3 or 4) was seen in 25 patients in the selenium arm and in 20 patients in the placebo arm.


Addition: Development of oral mucositis in patients with selenium levels >65 mcg/l significantly delayed from baseline (p=0.04, no further explanation given)		high risk
Mansourian et al. (2015): The effect of "curcuma Longa" topical gel on radiation -induced oral mucositis in patients with head and neck cancerCurcuminSignificant difference between intervention vs. placebo arm in mean (SD): intervention 3.7 (2.1) vs. placebo 7.9 (2.0); p < 0.001NAsome concerns
Mansourian et al. (2015): The effect of "curcuma Longa" topical gel on radiation -induced oral mucositis in patients with head and neck cancerCurcuminMax. degree of mucositis (number (%) of patients):
  • Grade 1: Intervention arm: 15 (78.9%), Placebo arm: 3 (16.7%)
  • Grade 2: Intervention arm: 4 (21.1%), Placebo arm: 8 (44.4%)
  • Grade 3: Intervention arm: 0 (0%), Placebo arm: 7 (38.9%)
  • Grade 4: Intervention arm and Placebo arm: 0
  • Difference between arms in distribution of grades: p < 0.001
  • Time between T0 and onset of max. mucositis: no numbers given; p = 0.315


Incidence of max. mucositis (number (%)):

  • 7 days: Intervention arm: 4 (21.1%), Placebo arm: 8 (44.4%)
  • 14 days: Intervention arm: 6 (31.6%), Placebo arm: 4 (22.2%)
  • 21 days: Intervention arm: 9 (47.4%), Placebo arm: 6 (33.3%)
NAsome concerns
Mix et al. (2015): Randomized phase II trial of selenomethionine as a modulator of efficacy and toxicity of chemoradiation in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neckSeleniumNAOverall: No significant differences between arms (grade 3 intervention arm 2x, placebo arm 3x, no grade 4)some concerns
... further results

Curcumin generell

 Outcome nameResults during interventionResults after intervention
Hejazi et al. (2013): A pilot clinical trial of radioprotective effects of curcumin supplementation in patients with prostate cancerQuality of lifeNAThree month after radiotherapy mean difference intervention vs. placebo arm (controlled for baseline value) (95% CI):
  • Urinary symptoms: -14.1 (-24.7, -3.4); p = 0.011; intervention significantly fewer symptoms than placebo arm
  • Bladder symptoms: 5.4 (-4.5, 15.4); p = 0.275
  • Treatment-related symptoms: 7.9 (-3.1, 18.9); p = 0.155
  • Sexual activity: -3.5 (-19.0, 12.0); p = 0.652
Hejazi et al. (2016): Effect of Curcumin Supplementation During Radiotherapy on Oxidative Status of Patients with Prostate Cancer: A Double Blinded, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled StudyPFS (Progression-Free Survival)NAPSA level (ng/ml) within 3 months:
  • Mean change (SD): Intervention arm 0.12 ( 0.16), placebo arm: 0.13 (0.06); p = 0.78
    • No information on PFS within one year
    Mansourian et al. (2015): The effect of "curcuma Longa" topical gel on radiation -induced oral mucositis in patients with head and neck cancerMucositis
    Mucositis
    Erythema
    Oral ulcus    		Max. degree of mucositis (number (%) of patients):
  • Grade 1: Intervention arm: 15 (78.9%), Placebo arm: 3 (16.7%)
    • Grade 2: Intervention arm: 4 (21.1%), Placebo arm: 8 (44.4%)
    • Grade 3: Intervention arm: 0 (0%), Placebo arm: 7 (38.9%)
    • Grade 4: Intervention arm and Placebo arm: 0
    • Difference between arms in distribution of grades: p < 0.001
    • Time between T0 and onset of max. mucositis: no numbers given; p = 0.315


    Incidence of max. mucositis (number (%)):

    • 7 days: Intervention arm: 4 (21.1%), Placebo arm: 8 (44.4%)
    • 14 days: Intervention arm: 6 (31.6%), Placebo arm: 4 (22.2%)
    • 21 days: Intervention arm: 9 (47.4%), Placebo arm: 6 (33.3%)
      Significant difference between intervention vs. placebo arm in mean (SD):

    intervention 3.7 (2.1) vs. placebo 7.9 (2.0); p < 0.001
    Significant difference between intervention vs. placebo arm for max. size in mm (mean (SD)): intervention 4.9 (2.2) vs. placebo 8.9 (2.7); p < 0.001
    Significant difference between intervention vs. placebo arm for max. size in mm (mean (SD)):

    intervention 1.3 (2.7) vs. placebo 6.4 (4.2); p < 0.001    		NA
    NA
    NA
    NA
    Rao et al. (2014): The Indian Spice Turmeric Delays and Mitigates Radiation-Induced Oral Mucositis in Patients Undergoing Treatment for Head and Neck Cancer: An Investigational StudyToxicity
    Mucositis    		Number (%) of patients requiring therapy interruption:
    • Curcumin arm: 7 (17.95%), Povidone-iodine arm: 9 (24%) ns.


    Number of days lost: mean (SD)

    • Curcumin arm: 7 (0), Povidone-iodine arm: 7.25 (0.56) ns.


    Weight loss: mean (SD)

    • Curcumin arm: 3.92 (2.13), Povidone-iodine arm: 4.45 (2.15); p < 0.001
      Weeks 1-7:

    Curcumin arm < Povidone-iodine arm; p < 0.001 (derived from graph only, no values provided)


    Cases of intolerable mucositis:

    Curcumin arm: 14/39 vs. Povidone-iodine arm: 34/40; p < 0.0001    		NA
    NA
    Ryan et al. (2013): Curcumin for radiation dermatitis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of thirty breast cancer patientsDermatitis
    Dermatitis
    Dermatitis
    Pain
    Toxicity    		Mean difference:
    • Intervention arm – Placebo arm (SD; 95% CI) = -0.8 (0.8, -1.4; -0.2); p = 0.008


    Model over time:

    • Intervention vs. Placebo (without considering time): p = 0.963, but significant arm/week interaction p = 0.007, i.e., the trend over time is different
    • According to the graph, Intervention and Placebo follow a similar trend until week 4, after which the values in the Intervention arm increase less sharply and even decrease slightly in week 7, while the Placebo arm continues to increase
      Number in %:
    • Intervention arm: 28.6%, Placebo arm: 87.5%; p = 0.002
      Intervention vs. placebo (without considering time): p = 0.328


    Arm/week interaction: p = 0.588, i.e., no significant differences in the redness trend
    Mean change from baseline to end of radiotherapy (95% CI):

    • Pain at radiotherapy site: Intervention arm: 1.929 (0.855, 3.002), Placebo arm: 1.313 (0.365, 2.260); p = 0.504
    • Other pain: Intervention arm: –0.286 (-1.309, 0.738), Placebo arm: –0.563 (-1.432, 0.307); p = 0.967


    MPQ-SF:

    • MPQ - total: Intervention arm: 4.643 (2.045, 7.241), Placebo arm: 2.875 (1.543, 4.207); p = 0.144
    • Perceived pain: Intervention arm: 0.857 (0.358, 1.356), Placebo arm: 0.813 (0.523, 1.102); p = 0.644
    • Sensory pain: Intervention arm: 3.286 (1.217, 5.354), Placebo arm: 1.750 (0.827, 2.673); p = 0.081
    • Affective pain: Intervention arm: 0.500 (0.061, 0.939), Placebo arm: 0.375 (-0.008, 0.758); p = 0.550
    • No significant differences between intervention and placebo arms
    • Considering types of pain: gnawing, aching, splitting (Intervention arm > Placebo arm, p < 0.021), otherwise no significant differences
      No significant differences (nausea, vomiting, depression, shortness of breath, memory, appetite, diarrhea, urination, skin, sleep, fatigue, activity, mood, work, relationships, walking, quality of life)
    		NA
    NA
    NA
    NA
    NA
     Results during interventionResults after interventionOverall RoB judgment
    Ryan et al. (2013): Curcumin for radiation dermatitis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of thirty breast cancer patientsMean difference:
    • Intervention arm – Placebo arm (SD; 95% CI) = -0.8 (0.8, -1.4; -0.2); p = 0.008


    Model over time:

    • Intervention vs. Placebo (without considering time): p = 0.963, but significant arm/week interaction p = 0.007, i.e., the trend over time is different
    • According to the graph, Intervention and Placebo follow a similar trend until week 4, after which the values in the Intervention arm increase less sharply and even decrease slightly in week 7, while the Placebo arm continues to increase
    		NAhigh risk
    Ryan et al. (2013): Curcumin for radiation dermatitis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of thirty breast cancer patientsNumber in %:
  • Intervention arm: 28.6%, Placebo arm: 87.5%; p = 0.002
    		• NAhigh risk
    Ryan et al. (2013): Curcumin for radiation dermatitis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of thirty breast cancer patientsIntervention vs. placebo (without considering time): p = 0.328


    Arm/week interaction: p = 0.588, i.e., no significant differences in the redness trend    		NAhigh risk
    Retrieved from "https://camih.med.uni-jena.de/camih/index.php?title=Example_Queries_-_Curcumin&oldid=7196"