Yung-Shuo Kao1, Kevin Sheng-Kai Ma2,3,4, Min-You Wu5, Yao-Cheng Wu5, Yu-Kang Tu6,7,8, Cheng-Hsien Hung9. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, China Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan, R.O.C. 2. Center for Global Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, U.S.A. 3. Graduate Institute of Biomedical Electronics and Bioinformatics, College of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. 4. Department of Dentistry, Chung Shan Medical University and Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan, R.O.C. 5. School of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan, R.O.C. 6. Institute of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. 7. Department of Dentistry, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. 8. School of Dentistry, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. 9. Department of Pharmacy, Chang Bing Show Chwan Memorial Hospital, Changhua, Taiwan, R.O.C. chenghsien823@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM: Head and neck cancer is a major malignancy worldwide. The treatment strategy for head and neck cancer usually involves radiotherapy. The main side effect of radiotherapy is radiation dermatitis. Thus, determining the most effective topical regimen for the prevention of radiation dermatitis in head and neck cancer patients is a critical issue. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PRISMA-NMA guidelines were used in this network meta-analysis. We included only randomized control trials. A random effects model was used. Heterogeneity was evaluated by I2 and Cochran's Q tests. RESULTS: We included a total of 1,304 patients in the network meta-analysis. Among them, olive oil was the only effective regimen when compared with usual care (OR=0.18, 95%CI=0.03-0.95). The I2 value was 56%. The test of heterogeneity yielded a p-value of 0.10. CONCLUSION: Olive oil was the most effective regimen for the prevention of radiation dermatitis.
BACKGROUND/AIM: Head and neck cancer is a major malignancy worldwide. The treatment strategy for head and neck cancer usually involves radiotherapy. The main side effect of radiotherapy is radiation dermatitis. Thus, determining the most effective topical regimen for the prevention of radiation dermatitis in head and neck cancer patients is a critical issue. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PRISMA-NMA guidelines were used in this network meta-analysis. We included only randomized control trials. A random effects model was used. Heterogeneity was evaluated by I2 and Cochran's Q tests. RESULTS: We included a total of 1,304 patients in the network meta-analysis. Among them, olive oil was the only effective regimen when compared with usual care (OR=0.18, 95%CI=0.03-0.95). The I2 value was 56%. The test of heterogeneity yielded a p-value of 0.10. CONCLUSION: Olive oil was the most effective regimen for the prevention of radiation dermatitis.
Authors: Raymond J Chan; Rae Blades; Lee Jones; Tai-Rae Downer; Samuel C Peet; Elise Button; David Wyld; Steven McPhail; Melissa Doolan; Patsy Yates Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2019-08-21 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Patries M Herst; Noelle C Bennett; Annie E Sutherland; Ruth I Peszynski; Dean B Paterson; Marieke L Jasperse Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2014-01-30 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Brian Hutton; Georgia Salanti; Deborah M Caldwell; Anna Chaimani; Christopher H Schmid; Chris Cameron; John P A Ioannidis; Sharon Straus; Kristian Thorlund; Jeroen P Jansen; Cynthia Mulrow; Ferrán Catalá-López; Peter C Gøtzsche; Kay Dickersin; Isabelle Boutron; Douglas G Altman; David Moher Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2015-06-02 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Raymond Javan Chan; Joan Webster; Bryan Chung; Louise Marquart; Muhtashimuddin Ahmed; Stuart Garantziotis Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2014-01-31 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Elaine B Ferreira; Marcia A Ciol; Amanda G de Meneses; Priscila de S M Bontempo; Jeanne M Hoffman; Paula E D Dos Reis Journal: Integr Cancer Ther Date: 2020 Jan-Dec Impact factor: 3.279