ArticlePDF Available

Editorial: Oral complications in cancer patients

Authors:
EDITED AND REVIEWED BY
Ali-Farid Sa,
Craniologicum - Center for Craniomaxillofacial
Surgery, Switzerland
*CORRESPONDENCE
Nathaniel S. Treister
ntreister@bwh.harvard.edu
SPECIALTY SECTION
This article was submitted to Oral Cancers, a
section of the journal Frontiers in Oral Health
RECEIVED 05 December 2022
ACCEPTED 19 December 2022
PUBLISHED 26 January 2023
CITATION
González-Arriagada WA, Ottaviani G, Dean D,
Ottaviani G, Santos-Silva AR and Treister NS
(2023) Editorial: Oral complications in cancer
patients.
Front. Oral. Health 3:1116885.
doi: 10.3389/froh.2022.1116885
COPYRIGHT
© 2023 González-Arriagada, Ottaviani, Dean,
Ottaviani, Santos-Silva and Treister. This is an
open-access article distributed under the terms
of the Creative Commons Attribution License
(CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in
other forums is permitted, provided the original
author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are
credited and that the original publication in this
journal is cited, in accordance with accepted
academic practice. No use, distribution or
reproduction is permitted which does not
comply with these terms.
Editorial: Oral complications
in cancer patients
Wilfredo Alejandro González-Arriagada1,2 , Giulia Ottaviani3,
David Dean4, Giulia Ottaviani5, Alan Roger Santos-Silva6
and Nathaniel S. Treister7*
1
Facultad de Odontología, Universidad de los Andes, Las Condes, Chile,
2
Centro de Investigación e
Innovación em Biomedicina, Universidad de los Andes, Las Condes, Chile,
3
Anatomic Pathology, Lino
Rossi Research Center, Department of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, Università degli
Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy,
4
Department of Oral Medicine, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center,
University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States,
5
Department of Medicine, Surgery and Health
Sciences, University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy,
6
Oral Diagnosis Department, Oral Medicine
(Stomatology), Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Piracicaba, Brazil,
7
Division of Oral Medicine and Dentistry, Brigham and Womens Hospital and Harvard School of
Dental Medicine, Boston, MA, United States
KEYWORDS
cancer therapy, chemotherapy, oral complications, oral mucositis, oral health,
radiotherapy, xerostomia, immune checkpoint inhibitors
Editorial on the Research Topic
Oral complications in cancer patients
Cancer is the second leading cause of death worldwide and future projections place it as
the leading cause by 2040 (1,2,Salazar-Gamarra et al.). Current strategies of treatment
include surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, cellular therapiese.g., stem cell
transplantation, chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T therapy, bone-modifying agents,
immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), and others. These therapies, especially in
advanced cancers, produce direct and indirect toxicities involving the oral cavity and
neighboring regions. For this reason, it is essential to recognize the role that trained
dentists provide in the multidisciplinary teams that treat cancer patients (Harris et al.).
Roles include comprehensive dental evaluation and treatment to decrease infection risk
prior to initiation of cancer therapy (Yong et al.), intra-therapy assessment to mitigate
acute oral toxicities, and long-term follow-up posttreatment therapy to diagnose and
manage late complications including, in some cases, prosthodontic rehabilitation
(Salazar-Gamarra et al.). The inclusion of dentistry in this multidisciplinary approach
is highly benecial to the patient, but is not yet universal (3).
Oral complications associated with cancer therapy are frequent and can be classied
as early or late onset. Early, or acute complications, are those that begin during therapy
and resolve within 1 month of completion. Acute complications include oral mucositis,
dysgeusia, hyposalivation, candidiasis, radiodermatitis, and dysphagia. Late, or chronic
complications, develop after completion of therapy and in some cases may be
permanent. Chronic complications include hyposalivation, trismus, radiation caries,
osteonecrosis, and dysphagia, among others. In addition, head and neck cancers often
require surgery to treat the primary tumor and regional metastases (neck dissection),
resulting in permanent physical sequela requiring multidisciplinary therapy to address
TYPE Editorial
PUBLISHED 26 January 2023
|
DOI 10.3389/froh.2022.1116885
Frontiers in Oral Health 01 frontiersin.org
functional and social impacts. This topic was chosen to provide
new insights into the epidemiology, pathobiology, impact, and
management of oral toxicities in cancer patients with the goal
of improving patient quality of life.
Mucositis is the principal dose-dependent oral complication
of cancer therapy and may lead to interruption of the treatment.
Oral mucositis (OM) may trigger febrile neutropenia and
blood stream infection and is also commonly associated with
feeding problems and the introduction of enteral nutrition
(Zecha et al.). Oral mucositis is associated with increased
use of hospital resources, physician and multidisciplinary
consultations, and prolonged hospitalization (including
treatment in intensive care units), increasing cost of care, and
the economic burden to patients, in both private and public
health systems across various cancer treatment modalities (4).
Photobiomodulation, delivered intraorally and extraorally, has
shown promising results in OM, including different
management approaches, both preventive and curative (Adnan
et al). It has also been reported to prevent severe hyposalivation
related to radiation therapy (Gobbo et al).
The etiology of oral mucositis has been linked to the direct
effects of chemotherapy and radiation in addition to the effects
of microbiological co-infection, including the oral-gut axis
microbiome. This suggests that control and treatment of
microorganisms could be a novel and successful approach to
reduce mucositis severity (Al-Qadami et al.). Changes in the
microbiome of the oral cavity are related to alteration in saliva,
and probiotics have been proposed as an alternative to reduce
circulating bacteria and candida in the oral environment
(Pispero et al.).
Chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) can broadly
impact the oral cavity and oral function in patients
undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation.
Manifestations include lichenoid mucosal inammation,
lymphocyte-mediated salivary gland dysfunction and
associated dental caries, taste and smell disturbances, and
trismus. Patients with chronic GVHD are also at increased
risk for oral cavity second primary tumors, particularly oral
squamous cell carcinoma (Dean and Sroussi and Boor et al.).
Immune checkpoint inhibitors have been associated with
similar immune-mediated oral toxicities which are still being
characterized (Klein et al.).
Salivary gland dysfunction is a potentially permanent side
effect of multiple cancer therapies, including head and neck
radiation therapy, chronic GVHD, and ICIs. Hyposalivation
contributes to the development of caries, candidiasis, and
psychological complications related to difculties in nutrition
and social interaction (Vistoso Monreal et al.). Additionally,
candidiasis is a common opportunistic infection in cancer
patients, secondary to hyposalivation and changes in the
quality of saliva.
Radiation caries is a frequent complication of head and
neck cancer therapy, characterized rapid onset and
destruction of dentition when not promptly diagnosed and
treated. Radiation caries can lead to pain, infection, and
compromised function. Resulting dental extractions are
associated with increased risk of osteoradionecrosis (ORN),
which may require extensive surgical resection (Vistoso
Monreal et al.). Dental restorations in cancer patients have
been shown to have reduced longevity, however, this has yet
to yield technological advancement in dental adhesives,
resins, and other materials specially designed for patients
treated with head and neck radiotherapy (Pedroso et al.). A
similar pattern of rampant caries can be observed in GVHD
patients. Limited opening secondary to trismus can impede
oral hygiene and dental follow-up. Currently, physiotherapy
is the rst option, but the results are vague and uncertain,
giving space to the introduction of surgical alternatives
(Smeets et al.).
Osteonecrosis of the jaw can be one of the most impactful
late complications, particularly in more extensive cases.
Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ), like
ORN, can be very challenging to manage and may require
aggressive surgical resection (Singh et al.). MRONJ is
characterized by the exposed necrotic bone and may be
related to drug therapy, including antiresorptive and
antiangiogenic targeted therapies (Migliorati). Conservative
therapy is favored as the rst-line intervention and may
include irrigation with chlorhexidine, sequestrectomy, and
pharmacological coverage with systemic antibiotics and
pentoxifylline and tocopherol (Migliorati and Singh et al.).
This condition is clinically like ORN, but the differences in
etiology and risk factors may affect its treatment and
prognosis.
Strategies for risk prediction of oral toxicities related to
cancer therapies are needed for a personalized prevention
protocol (Sonis) and they have been primarily used in OM.
Articial intelligence and machine learning approaches have
been proposed for risk prediction of toxicity for cancer
therapy in patients with head and neck cancer (Fanizzi et al.).
These strategies have great benets for the patients and
oncologic services because the use of resources is most
efcient and effective, reducing the high costs of prevention
and treatment of collateral effects.
The rapid evolution of oncologic therapies requires
specialists to constantly update themselves to respond to the
requirements of patients and their services. It is important to
draw attention to the fact that many clinical trials report oral
complications in a supercial and protocol-directed manner.
We believe that these toxicities need to be considered during
the study design stage, including oral medicine expertise
within the research team, in order to best characterize these
conditions.
This Research Topic provides a glimpse into this
complex and ever-evolving oncologic realm of clinical oral
medicine.
González-Arriagada et al. 10.3389/froh.2022.1116885
Frontiers in Oral Health 02 frontiersin.org
Author contributions
WG-A wrote the rst draft of the manuscript. GO (2nd
author), DD, GO (4th author) and AS-S guided and revised
the manuscript. NT conceptualized and guided the editorial.
All authors contributed to the article and approved the
submitted version.
Funding
GO (2nd author) was supported, in part, by the Piano di
Sostegno alla Ricerca (PSR) 2020, Linea 2: Dotazione Annuale
per attività istituzionali, Department of Biomedical, Surgical
and Dental Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan,
Italy. WG-A was supported by Fondecyt Regular number
1190775 from Chilean National Agency for Research and
Development.
Conict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted
in the absence of any commercial or nancial
relationships that could be construed as a potential
conict of interest.
Publishers note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of
the authors and do not necessarily represent those of
their afliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the
editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be
evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its
manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the
publisher.
References
1. Rahib L, Wehner MR, Matrisian LM, Nead KT. Estimated projection of US
cancer incidence and death to 2040. JAMA Netw Open. (2021) 4:e214708.
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.4708
2. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer
J Clin. (2022) 72:733. doi: 10.3322/caac.21708
3.BertlK,SavvidisP,KuklaEB,SchneiderS,ZauzaK,BruckmannC,
et al. Including dental professionals in the multidisciplinary treatment
team of head and neck cancer patients improves long-term oral health
status. Clin Oral Investig. (2022) 26:293748. doi: 10.1007/s00784-021-
04276-x
4. Rodrigues-Oliveira L, Kowalski LP, Santos M, Marta GN, Bensadoun R-J,
Martins MD, et al. Direct costs associated with the management of mucositis: a
systematic review. Oral Oncol. (2021) 118:105296. doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.
2021.105296
González-Arriagada et al. 10.3389/froh.2022.1116885
Frontiers in Oral Health 03 frontiersin.org
... It doesn't matter how many pages the editorial takes up, because it can contain extremely important data about the evolution/discontinuation/ceasing of the journal, 5-10 specialty, 11 pivotal decisions of the editorial board, 12 summaries of the contents of this specific issue of the journal, 13 and much more. ...
Article
Full-text available
of the peer-reviewed article is a short description of its main sections and simultaneously with the title is the most visible part of the paper. Articles of such types as case reports, case series, original research, review, essays, and many other types have their own abstract. Many, except of editorials. Considering the fact that as of 2023, the science unfortunately has been replaced by the pursuit of citations, the insufficient number of citations of editorial articles may be caused by the lack of an open abstract in them. We oppose discrimination of editorials. Editorial articles are permanently evolving and the number of editorials in which the number of pages reaches 9 is increasing. And an article with so many pages should have its own abstract. We demand that editorials be given the right to have their abstracts. The problem of the absence of an abstract in editorials is like a coin—it has two sides. On the one side, scientist, or editor of other journal, especially in the case of closed (i.e., paid) editorial, may not understand from the editorial title alone the details of what the article is about and whether this article can be useful in their research, practice, or editorial office work. On the other side, the article lacks visitors and, as a result, its authors do not receive dividends in the form of citations. Let’s not forget about the publishers, who in turn receive less revenue in the case of closed editorials, which in turn does not allow reinvesting in technological innovations of journals. In this editorial, we analyze and present the advantages of integrating abstracts into such an important type of article as editorial.
Article
Full-text available
Simple Summary Several oral problems occurring during cancer treatment can lead to the discontinuation or interruption of the scheduled treatment, with a negative impact on patient’s overall survival. Very few studies focused on patients’ self-reported oral problems during chemotherapy treatment for solid tumors. Through the administration of a dedicated questionnaire, we aim at correlating the presence of oral complications to demographic and medical information. Metastatic disease represented a risk factor for the onset of oral mucositis and salivary gland hypofunction, while specific chemotherapy regimens increased the risk to develop a subjective reduction in the salivary flow and difficulty in swallowing. Most of the participants were informed by the oncologist about the possibility of oral problems arising during oncological therapies. It is of paramount importance to collect observational data on oral problems from the patients’ perspective in order to plan information and prevention campaigns to inform patients about their possible occurrence by providing useful tools for prevention and management. Abstract PURPOSE: Oral problems in a group of oncological patients undergoing chemotherapy (CT) for solid tumors have been examined. Incidence and severity of patients’ self-reported oral problems have been evaluated along their interaction with age, gender, tumor diagnosis and stage, presence of mestastasis, CT agent type, and number of CT cycle. We also analyzed the presence of paraesthesia and anaesthesia and their predisposing factors associated with clinical and treatment-related variables. METHODS: Patients were asked to fill in a questionnaire to evaluate the onset and the intensity of oral and perioral pain, oral mucositis, salivary gland hypofunction, dysgeusia, dysphagia, dysphonia, and sensitivity neuropathy (paraesthesia or dysaesthesia) since the last CT infusion. We also investigated which types of medications have possibly been used and who recommended it, as well as patients’ degree of awareness about the possibility of oral problems arising during CT. RESULTS: We recruited 194 patients and obtained 491 questionnaires. We found that a metastatic disease was a risk factor for OM (OR 2.02, p = 0.026) and salivary gland hypofunction (OR 1.66, p = 0.042) and that platinum agents, compared to mitotic inhibitors, increased the risk of developing salivary gland hypofunction (OR 2.16, p = 0.013), dysphagia (OR 3.26, p = 0.001), and anaesthesia (OR 5.16, p = 0.041). Young age was a slight protective factor for most symptoms. The 80% of enrolled patients were informed by the oncologist about possible oral problems arising during CT. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlighted the importance of collecting observational data from the patients’ perspective on oral problems arising during the routine oncology practice, across a range of solid tumors and CT regimens. The relevance of these findings focused on the key role of the multidisciplinary team in advising the patients on the possible occurrence of oral problems, also by recommending their management.
Article
Full-text available
Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the numbers of new cancer cases and deaths in the United States and compiles the most recent data on population‐based cancer occurrence and outcomes. Incidence data (through 2018) were collected by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program; the National Program of Cancer Registries; and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Mortality data (through 2019) were collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2022, 1,918,030 new cancer cases and 609,360 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States, including approximately 350 deaths per day from lung cancer, the leading cause of cancer death. Incidence during 2014 through 2018 continued a slow increase for female breast cancer (by 0.5% annually) and remained stable for prostate cancer, despite a 4% to 6% annual increase for advanced disease since 2011. Consequently, the proportion of prostate cancer diagnosed at a distant stage increased from 3.9% to 8.2% over the past decade. In contrast, lung cancer incidence continued to decline steeply for advanced disease while rates for localized‐stage increased suddenly by 4.5% annually, contributing to gains both in the proportion of localized‐stage diagnoses (from 17% in 2004 to 28% in 2018) and 3‐year relative survival (from 21% to 31%). Mortality patterns reflect incidence trends, with declines accelerating for lung cancer, slowing for breast cancer, and stabilizing for prostate cancer. In summary, progress has stagnated for breast and prostate cancers but strengthened for lung cancer, coinciding with changes in medical practice related to cancer screening and/or treatment. More targeted cancer control interventions and investment in improved early detection and treatment would facilitate reductions in cancer mortality.
Article
Full-text available
Objective To assess in a cross-sectional study the impact of including dental professionals in the multidisciplinary treatment team of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients on the long-term oral health status. Materials and methods Oral health status, dental care behaviours, and oral health–related quality of life were assessed based on a clinical and radiographic examination, interview, and medical records in patients treated for HNSCC ≥ 6 months ago. This patient group (‘cohort 2’) was treated in a multidisciplinary treatment team including dental professionals and compared to a group of HNSCC patients previously treated at the same university, but without dental professionals included in the multidisciplinary treatment team (‘cohort 1’). Results Cohort 2 consisted of 34 patients, who had received a dental check-up and if necessary, treatment by dental professionals prior to the initiation of cancer treatment. This cohort showed significantly improved oral hygiene habits and a better periodontal health status compared to cohort 1. However, cohort 2 still presented high demand for treatment due to active carious lesions; only a few, statistically insignificant improvements were detected compared to cohort 1. Conclusion Including dental professionals in the multidisciplinary treatment team of HNSCC patients has a positive impact on patient oral health status—primarily in terms of periodontal disease—6 months and longer after finishing cancer therapy. Clinical relevance A team-based approach including dental professionals specialised in head and neck cancer improves oral health status.
Article
Full-text available
Importance Coping with the current and future burden of cancer requires an in-depth understanding of trends in cancer incidences and deaths. Estimated projections of cancer incidences and deaths will be important to guide future research funding allocations, health care planning, and health policy efforts. Objective To estimate cancer incidences and deaths in the United States to the year 2040. Design and Setting This cross-sectional study’s estimated projection analysis used population growth projections and current population-based cancer incidence and death rates to calculate the changes in incidences and deaths to the year 2040. Cancer-specific incidences and deaths in the US were estimated for the most common cancer types. Demographic cancer-specific delay-adjusted incidence rates from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program were combined with US Census Bureau population growth projections (2016) and average annual percentage changes in incidence and death rates. Statistical analyses were performed from July 2020 to February 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures Total cancer incidences and deaths to the year 2040. Results This study estimated that the most common cancers in 2040 will be breast (364 000 cases) with melanoma (219 000 cases) becoming the second most common cancer; lung, third (208 000 cases); colorectal remaining fourth (147 000 cases); and prostate cancer dropping to the fourteenth most common cancer (66 000 cases). Lung cancer (63 000 deaths) was estimated to continue as the leading cause of cancer-related death in 2040, with pancreatic cancer (46 000 deaths) and liver and intrahepatic bile duct cancer (41 000 deaths) surpassing colorectal cancer (34 000 deaths) to become the second and third most common causes of cancer-related death, respectively. Breast cancer (30 000 deaths) was estimated to decrease to the fifth most common cause of cancer death. Conclusions and Relevance These findings suggest that there will be marked changes in the landscape of cancer incidence and deaths by 2040.
Article
Mucositis is one of the more frequent and costly adverse events following cancer treatment. To evaluate and report the direct economic outcomes associated with the management of mucositis across several cancer treatments we conducted a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Scopus, MEDLINE/PubMed, and Embase were searched electronically and a total of 37 relevant studies were included. The costs attributable to mucositis in the hematopoietic stem cell transplantation setting ranged from 1124,47 US dollars (USD) to 299 214,14 USD per patient. The radiotherapy/chemoradiotherapy/radiotherapy plus molecular targeted therapy accounted for mucositis costs that ranged from 51,23 USD to 33 560,58 USD per patient. Costs for mucositis in the chemotherapy setting ranged from 4,18 USD to 31 963,64 USD per patient. When the cancer treatment was not specified, costs of mucositis ranged from 565,85 USD to as high as 20 279, 12 USD per patient. Mucositis costs from multimodal therapy ranged from 12,42 USD to 5670,46 USD per patient. The molecular targeted therapy setting included only one study and depending on the healthcare providers’ perspective of each country evaluated, mucositis’ costs ranged from 45,78 USD to 3484,91 USD per patient. Mucositis is associated with increased resource use, consultations, hospitalizations and extended hospitalizations, leading to a substantial incremental cost that exacerbates the economic burden on the patient, health plan and health system across several cancer treatments and diagnosis. More studies with a prospective evaluation of the economic costs associated with mucositis management are needed.