Trehalose versus carboxymethylcellulose oral spray for relieving radiation-induced xerostomia in head and neck cancer patients: a randomized controlled trial

dc.contributor.authorPiboonratanakit P.
dc.contributor.authorFerreira J.N.
dc.contributor.authorPravinvongvuthi K.
dc.contributor.authorMaison K.
dc.contributor.authorUrkasemsin G.
dc.contributor.authorBoonroung T.
dc.contributor.authorPrayongrat A.
dc.contributor.authorLertbutsayanukul C.
dc.contributor.authorSucharitakul J.
dc.contributor.authorVacharaksa A.
dc.contributor.otherMahidol University
dc.date.accessioned2023-05-24T17:07:59Z
dc.date.available2023-05-24T17:07:59Z
dc.date.issued2023-12-01
dc.description.abstractBackground: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of trehalose oral spray to relieve radiation-induced xerostomia on a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Methods: Prior to RCT, the effect of trehalose (5–20%) on the epithelial growth of fetal mouse salivary gland (SG) explants was evaluated to confirm if 10% trehalose exerted the best epithelial outcomes. Participants who completed radiotherapy for head and neck cancer (HNC) treatment were enrolled in a double-blind RCT, according to inclusion and exclusion criteria as per the CONSORT statement. The experimental group (n = 35) received 10% trehalose spray, while the control group (n = 35) received carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) spray to apply intra-orally 4 times/day for 14 days. Salivary pH and unstimulated salivary flow rate were recorded pre- and post-interventions. The Xerostomia-related Quality of Life scale (XeQoLs) was filled, and scores assessed post-interventions. Results: In the SG explant model, pro-acinar epithelial growth and mitosis was supported by 10% topical trehalose. As for RCT outcomes, salivary pH and unstimulated salivary flow rate were significantly improved after use of 10% trehalose spray when compared to CMC (p < 0.05). Participants reported an improvement of XeQoLs dimension scores after using trehalose or CMC oral sprays in terms of physical, pain/discomfort, and psychological dimensions (p < 0.05), but not social (p > 0.05). When comparing between CMC and trehalose sprays, XeQoLs total scores were not statistically different (p > 0.05). Conclusions: The 10% trehalose spray improved salivary pH, unstimulated salivary flow rate, and the quality-of-life dimensions linked with physical, pain/discomfort, and psychological signs. The clinical efficacy of 10% trehalose spray was equivalent with CMC-based saliva substitutes for relieving radiation-induced xerostomia; therefore, trehalose may be suggested in alternative to CMC-based oral spray.(Thai Clinical Trials Registry; https://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org/ TCTR20190817004).
dc.identifier.citationBMC Oral Health Vol.23 No.1 (2023)
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12903-023-02966-4
dc.identifier.eissn14726831
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85159193684
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/82757
dc.rights.holderSCOPUS
dc.subjectDentistry
dc.titleTrehalose versus carboxymethylcellulose oral spray for relieving radiation-induced xerostomia in head and neck cancer patients: a randomized controlled trial
dc.typeArticle
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85159193684&origin=inward
oaire.citation.issue1
oaire.citation.titleBMC Oral Health
oaire.citation.volume23
oairecerif.author.affiliationChulalongkorn University
oairecerif.author.affiliationKing Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital
oairecerif.author.affiliationMahidol University
oairecerif.author.affiliationFaculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University

Files

Collections