D Riesenbeck1, W Dörr. 1. Klinik und Poliklinik für Strahlentherapie-Radioonkologie, Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster. HYPERLINK mailto:DOERR@RCS.URZ.TU-DRESDEN.DE
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Radiation therapy of tumors in the head and neck region is frequently associated with severe side effects in the oral mucosa which often necessitate interruption of the prescribed treatment protocol. In order to compare therapeutic strategies and, more important, in order to perform multi center studies, generally accepted scoring systems have to be applied for uniform documentation of the oral mucosal response. METHODS: Different scoring protocols are found in the literature. The scoring protocols most widely accepted are the CTC classification and the RTOG/EORTC classification. These are compared with more detailed systems. RESULTS: In the CTC classification, grading of stomatitis is included in the responses of the gastrointestinal tract and emphasizes dietary effects. For effects of radiation alone or of radiochemotherapy, the RTOG/EORTC system, focusing on therapeutic interventions, has been established. However, there are only minor differences in the grading of mucositis between these 2 protocols. Based on the RTOG/EORTC classification, Maciejewski et al. introduced a classification system with inclusion of the area affected, but also changed the sensitivity of the scores. The latter may be confusing if the source of the system used is not cited in a report. An alternative system was proposed by Dische, which in addition to objective morphologic criteria also includes the symptoms induced by the mucosal response, and hence includes some subjective aspects reported by the patient. CONCLUSIONS: For routine documentation of acute radiation side effects in the oral cavity, the German version of the RTOG/EORTC classification can be recommended. In studies with particular interest in oral mucositis, a more sensitive scoring system may be applied. In any publication concerning mucositis, a table or a detailed description of the system used should be included.
BACKGROUND: Radiation therapy of tumors in the head and neck region is frequently associated with severe side effects in the oral mucosa which often necessitate interruption of the prescribed treatment protocol. In order to compare therapeutic strategies and, more important, in order to perform multi center studies, generally accepted scoring systems have to be applied for uniform documentation of the oral mucosal response. METHODS: Different scoring protocols are found in the literature. The scoring protocols most widely accepted are the CTC classification and the RTOG/EORTC classification. These are compared with more detailed systems. RESULTS: In the CTC classification, grading of stomatitis is included in the responses of the gastrointestinal tract and emphasizes dietary effects. For effects of radiation alone or of radiochemotherapy, the RTOG/EORTC system, focusing on therapeutic interventions, has been established. However, there are only minor differences in the grading of mucositis between these 2 protocols. Based on the RTOG/EORTC classification, Maciejewski et al. introduced a classification system with inclusion of the area affected, but also changed the sensitivity of the scores. The latter may be confusing if the source of the system used is not cited in a report. An alternative system was proposed by Dische, which in addition to objective morphologic criteria also includes the symptoms induced by the mucosal response, and hence includes some subjective aspects reported by the patient. CONCLUSIONS: For routine documentation of acute radiation side effects in the oral cavity, the German version of the RTOG/EORTC classification can be recommended. In studies with particular interest in oral mucositis, a more sensitive scoring system may be applied. In any publication concerning mucositis, a table or a detailed description of the system used should be included.
Authors: Deborah Tomlinson; Peter Judd; Eleanor Hendershot; Anne-Marie Maloney; Lillian Sung Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2007-08-28 Impact factor: 3.603