Dental Biofilm Microbiota Dysbiosis Is Associated With the Risk of Acute Graft-Versus-Host Disease After Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Acute graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD) is one of the major causes of death after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). Recently, aGVHD onset was linked to intestinal microbiota (IM) dysbiosis. However, other bacterial-rich gastrointestinal sites, such as the mouth, which hosts several distinctive microbiotas, may also impact the risk of GVHD. The dental biofilm microbiota (DBM) is highly diverse and, like the IM, interacts with host cells and modulates immune homeostasis. We characterized changes in the DBM of patients during allo-HSCT and evaluated whether the DBM could be associated with the risk of aGVHD. DBM dysbiosis during allo-HSCT was marked by a gradual loss of bacterial diversity and changes in DBM genera composition, with commensal genera reductions and potentially pathogenic bacteria overgrowths. High Streptococcus and high Corynebacterium relative abundance at preconditioning were associated with a higher risk of aGVHD (67% vs. 33%; HR = 2.89, P = 0.04 and 73% vs. 37%; HR = 2.74, P = 0.04, respectively), while high Veillonella relative abundance was associated with a lower risk of aGVHD (27% vs. 73%; HR = 0.24, P < 0.01). Enterococcus faecalis bloom during allo-HSCT was observed in 17% of allo-HSCT recipients and was associated with a higher risk of aGVHD (100% vs. 40%; HR = 4.07, P < 0.001) and severe aGVHD (60% vs. 12%; HR = 6.82, P = 0.01). To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study demonstrating that DBM dysbiosis is associated with the aGVHD risk after allo-HSCT

A low-cost HPV immunochromatographic assay to detect high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia

Objective To evaluate the reproducibility and accuracy of the HPV16/18-E6 test. Methods The study population was comprised of 448 women with a previously abnormal Pap who were referred to the Barretos Cancer Hospital (Brazil) for diagnosis and treatment. Two cervical samples were collected immediately before colposcopy, one for the hr-HPV-DNA test and cytology and the other for the HPV16/18-E6 test using high-affinity monoclonal antibodies (mAb). Women with a histologic diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or 3 were considered to be positive cases. Different strategies using a combination of screening methods (HPV-DNA) and triage tests (cytology and HPV16/18-E6) were also examined and compared. Results The HPV16/18-E6 test exhibited a lower positivity rate compared with the HPV-DNA test (19.0% vs. 29.3%, p<0.001) and a moderate/high agreement (kappa = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.60-0.75). It also exhibited a significantly lower sensitivity for CIN2+ and CIN3+ detection compared to the HPV-DNA test and a significantly higher specificity. The HPV16/18-E6 test was no different from cytology in terms of sensitivity, but it exhibited a significantly higher specificity in comparison to ASCH+. A triage test after HPV-DNA detection using the HPV16/18-E6 test exhibited a significantly higher specificity compared with a triage test of ASCH+ to CIN2+ (91.8% vs. 87.4%, p = 0.04) and CIN3+ (88.6% vs. 84.0%, p = 0.05). Conclusion The HPV16/18-E6 test exhibited moderate/high agreement with the HPV-DNA test but lower sensitivity and higher specificity for the detection of CIN2+ and CIN3+. In addition, its performance was quite similar to cytology, but because of the structural design addressed for the detection of HPV16/18-E6 protein, the test can miss some CIN2/3+ lesions caused by other high-risk HPV types.Cancer Prevention Department, Center for the Researcher Support and Pathology Department of the Barretos Cancer Hospital. This study was supported by CNPq 573799/2008-3 and FAPESP 2008/57889-1info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

From Pathogenesis to Intervention: The Importance of the Microbiome in Oral Mucositis

Oral mucositis (OM) is a common and impactful toxicity of standard cancer therapy, affecting up to 80% of patients. Its aetiology centres on the initial destruction of epithelial cells and the increase in inflammatory signals. These changes in the oral mucosa create a hostile environment for resident microbes, with oral infections co-occurring with OM, especially at sites of ulceration. Increasing evidence suggests that oral microbiome changes occur beyond opportunistic infection, with a growing appreciation for the potential role of the microbiome in OM development and severity. This review collects the latest articles indexed in the PubMed electronic database which analyse the bacterial shift through 16S rRNA gene sequencing methodology in cancer patients under treatment with oral mucositis. The aims are to assess whether changes in the oral and gut microbiome causally contribute to oral mucositis or if they are simply a consequence of the mucosal injury. Further, we explore the emerging role of a patient’s microbial fingerprint in OM development and prediction. The maintenance of resident bacteria via microbial target therapy is under constant improvement and should be considered in the OM treatment

IMRT delivers lower radiation doses to dental structures than 3DRT in head and neck cancer patients

Abstract Background Radiotherapy (RT) is frequently used in the treatment of head and neck cancer, but different side-effects are frequently reported, including a higher frequency of radiation-related caries, what may be consequence of direct radiation to dental tissue. The intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) was developed to improve tumor control and decrease patient’s morbidity by delivering radiation beams only to tumor shapes and sparing normal tissue. However, teeth are usually not included in IMRT plannings and the real efficacy of IMRT in the dental context has not been addressed. Therefore, the aim of this study is to assess whether IMRT delivers lower radiation doses to dental structures than conformal 3D radiotherapy (3DRT). Material and methods Radiation dose delivery to dental structures of 80 patients treated for head and neck cancers (oral cavity, tongue, nasopharynx and oropharynx) with IMRT (40 patients) and 3DRT (40 patients) were assessed by individually contouring tooth crowns on patients’ treatment plans. Clinicopathological data were retrieved from patients’ medical files. Results The average dose of radiation to teeth delivered by IMRT was significantly lower than with 3DRT (p = 0.007); however, only patients affected by nasopharynx and oral cavity cancers demonstrated significantly lower doses with IMRT (p = 0.012 and p = 0.011, respectively). Molars received more radiation with both 3DRT and IMRT, but the latter delivered significantly lower radiation in this group of teeth (p < 0.001), whereas no significant difference was found for the other dental groups. Maxillary teeth received lower doses than mandibular teeth, but only IMRT delivered significantly lower doses (p = 0.011 and p = 0.003). Ipsilateral teeth received higher doses than contralateral teeth with both techniques and IMRT delivered significantly lower radiation than 3DRT for contralateral dental structures (p < 0.001). Conclusion IMRT delivered lower radiation doses to teeth than 3DRT, but only for some groups of patients and teeth, suggesting that this decrease was more likely due to the protection of other high risk organs, and was not enough to remove teeth from the zone of high risk for radiogenic disturbance (>30Gy)

Systematic review of photobiomodulation for the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients and clinical practice guidelines

Purpose To systematically review the literature and update the evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the use of photobiomodulation (PBM), such as laser and other light therapies, for the prevention and/or treatment of oral mucositis (OM). Methods A systematic review was conducted by the Mucositis Study Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society for Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO) using PubMed and Web of Science. We followed the MASCC methods for systematic review and guidelines development. The rigorously evaluated evidence for each intervention, in each cancer treatment setting, was assigned a level-of-evidence (LoE). Based on the LoE, one of the following guidelines was determined: Recommendation, Suggestion, or No Guideline Possible. Results Recommendations are made for the prevention of OM and related pain with PBM therapy in cancer patients treated with one of the following modalities: hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, head and neck (H&N) radiotherapy (without chemotherapy), and H&N radiotherapy with chemotherapy. For each of these modalities, we recommend 1-2 clinically effective protocols; the clinician should adhere to all parameters of the protocol selected. Due to inadequate evidence, currently, No Guideline Possible for treatment of established OM or for management of chemotherapy-related OM. The reported clinical settings were extremely variable, limiting data integration. Conclusions The evidence supports the use of specific settings of PBM therapy for the prevention of OM in specific patient populations. Under these circumstances, PBM is recommended for the prevention of OM. The guidelines are subject to continuous update based on new published data

MASCC/ISOO expert opinion on the management of oral problems in patients with advanced cancer

Purpose The Palliative Care Study Group in conjunction with the Oral Care Study Group of the Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) formed a sub-group to develop evidence-based guidance on the management of common oral problems in patients with advanced cancer. Methods This guidance was developed in accordance with the MASCC Guidelines Policy. A search strategy for Medline was developed, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were explored for relevant reviews and trials, respectively. Guidance was categorised by the level of evidence, and "category of guideline" (i.e., "recommendation", "suggestion" or "no guideline possible"). Results Twelve generic suggestions (level of evidence - 5), three problem-specific recommendations and 14 problem-specific suggestions were generated. The generic suggestions relate to oral hygiene measures, assessment of problems, principles of management, re-assessment of problems and the role of dental/oral medicine professionals. Conclusions This guidance provides a framework for the management of common oral problems in patients with advanced cancer, although every patient requires individualised management