Palifermin Compared to Supersaturated Calcium Phosphate Rinse in Prevention of Severe Oral Mucositis after Stem Cell Transplantation in Patients Receiving Radiotherapy-Based Myeloablative Conditioning

IF 0.9 Q4 HEMATOLOGY

Hemato Pub Date : 2023-02-10 DOI:10.3390/hemato4010006

Tarik Hadid, A. Al-Katib, J. Binongo, Gina Berteotti, Salman Fazal, J. Rossetti, J. Lister

{"title":"Palifermin Compared to Supersaturated Calcium Phosphate Rinse in Prevention of Severe Oral Mucositis after Stem Cell Transplantation in Patients Receiving Radiotherapy-Based Myeloablative Conditioning","authors":"Tarik Hadid, A. Al-Katib, J. Binongo, Gina Berteotti, Salman Fazal, J. Rossetti, J. Lister","doi":"10.3390/hemato4010006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Oral mucositis (OM) is a common, debilitating complication of conditioning regimens for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Supersaturated calcium phosphate rinse (SCPR) and palifermin have shown efficacy in preventing severe OM. However, whether their efficacy differs is unknown. We aimed to compare the efficacy of SCPR and palifermin in HSCT patients receiving myeloablative conditioning. Methods: A comprehensive review of our institutional database was performed to identify patients who received myeloablative-conditioning therapy over 5 years. All HSCT patients who received radiotherapy-based myeloablative conditioning and received either palifermin or SCPR within the study period were included. Most patients received Fludarabine, Busulfan, and total body irradiation (FBT). Patients were divided into two groups based on the OM prophylactic agent received. The primary outcome is prevalence of severe OM (WHO Grade 3 and 4). The secondary outcomes are a prevalence of all-grade OM and WHO Grade 4 OM. These outcomes were compared between the two groups. Results: We identified 26 patients who received SCPR and 122 patients who received palifermin for OM prophylaxis. The prevalence of World Health Organization (WHO) Grade 3 or 4 OM was significantly lower in the palifermin group (57% vs. 100%, p = 0.01). In addition, the palifermin group had lower WHO Grade 4 OM (22% vs. 62%, p = 0.0006). The overall prevalence of OM was not significantly different between the two groups (86% for palifermin group vs. 100% for SCPR arm, p = 0.15). Subgroup analyses demonstrated improved outcomes with palifermin, regardless of age, sex, disease status, donor type, and primary diagnosis. Conclusion: When compared to SCPR, the use of palifermin is associated reduced severity of OM in HSCT patients receiving radiotherapy-based myeloablative conditioning.","PeriodicalId":93705,"journal":{"name":"Hemato","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hemato","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/hemato4010006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Oral mucositis (OM) is a common, debilitating complication of conditioning regimens for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Supersaturated calcium phosphate rinse (SCPR) and palifermin have shown efficacy in preventing severe OM. However, whether their efficacy differs is unknown. We aimed to compare the efficacy of SCPR and palifermin in HSCT patients receiving myeloablative conditioning. Methods: A comprehensive review of our institutional database was performed to identify patients who received myeloablative-conditioning therapy over 5 years. All HSCT patients who received radiotherapy-based myeloablative conditioning and received either palifermin or SCPR within the study period were included. Most patients received Fludarabine, Busulfan, and total body irradiation (FBT). Patients were divided into two groups based on the OM prophylactic agent received. The primary outcome is prevalence of severe OM (WHO Grade 3 and 4). The secondary outcomes are a prevalence of all-grade OM and WHO Grade 4 OM. These outcomes were compared between the two groups. Results: We identified 26 patients who received SCPR and 122 patients who received palifermin for OM prophylaxis. The prevalence of World Health Organization (WHO) Grade 3 or 4 OM was significantly lower in the palifermin group (57% vs. 100%, p = 0.01). In addition, the palifermin group had lower WHO Grade 4 OM (22% vs. 62%, p = 0.0006). The overall prevalence of OM was not significantly different between the two groups (86% for palifermin group vs. 100% for SCPR arm, p = 0.15). Subgroup analyses demonstrated improved outcomes with palifermin, regardless of age, sex, disease status, donor type, and primary diagnosis. Conclusion: When compared to SCPR, the use of palifermin is associated reduced severity of OM in HSCT patients receiving radiotherapy-based myeloablative conditioning.

查看原文本刊更多论文

帕利费明与过饱和磷酸钙冲洗液预防接受放射治疗的骨髓清除条件患者干细胞移植后严重口腔粘膜炎的比较

目的：口腔粘膜炎（OM）是造血干细胞移植（HSCT）调理方案中常见的、使人衰弱的并发症。过饱和磷酸钙冲洗液（SCPR）和帕利费明已显示出预防严重OM的疗效。然而，它们的疗效是否不同尚不清楚。我们旨在比较SCPR和帕利费明在接受清髓性条件治疗的HSCT患者中的疗效。方法：对我们的机构数据库进行全面审查，以确定5年以上接受清髓性条件治疗的患者。所有在研究期内接受基于放疗的清髓性条件治疗并接受帕利费明或SCPR的HSCT患者都包括在内。大多数患者接受氟达拉滨、白消安和全身照射（FBT）。根据接受的OM预防剂将患者分为两组。主要结果是严重OM的患病率（世界卫生组织3级和4级）。次要结果是全级OM和世界卫生组织4级OM的患病率。这些结果在两组之间进行了比较。结果：我们确定了26名接受SCPR的患者和122名接受帕利费明预防OM的患者。世界卫生组织（世界卫生组织）3级或4级OM在帕利费明组中的患病率显著降低（57%对100%，p＝0.01），帕利费明组的世界卫生组织4级OM较低（22%对62%，p=0.0006）。两组OM的总体患病率无显著差异（帕利费敏组为86%，SCPR组为100%，p=0.15）。亚组分析表明，无论年龄、性别、疾病状况、供体类型和初级诊断如何，帕利费明均能改善预后。结论：与SCPR相比，帕利费明的使用可降低接受放疗的HSCT患者OM的严重程度。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Hemato

CiteScore

1.30

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

11 weeks