A comparison of the prevalence of dry mouth and other symptoms using two different versions of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System on an inpatient palliative care unit.

BACKGROUND: Symptom assessment is key to effective symptom management and palliative care for patients with advanced cancer. Symptom prevalence and severity estimates vary widely, possibly dependent on the assessment tool used. Are symptoms specifically asked about or must the patients add them as additional symptoms? This study compared the prevalence and severity of patient-reported symptoms in two different versions of a multi-symptom assessment tool. In one version, three symptoms dry mouth, constipation, sleep problems were among those systematically assessed, while in the other, these symptoms had to be added as an "Other problem". METHODS: This retrospective cross-sectional study included adult patients with advanced cancer at an inpatient palliative care unit. Data were collected from two versions of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS): modified (ESAS-m) listed 11 symptoms and revised (ESAS-r) listed 9 and allowed patients to add one "Other problem". Seven similar symptoms were listed in both versions. RESULTS: In 2013, 184 patients completed ESAS-m, and in 2017, 156 completed ESAS-r. Prevalence and severity of symptoms listed in both versions did not differ. In ESAS-m, 83% reported dry mouth, 73% constipation, and 71% sleep problems, but on ESAS-r, these symptoms were reported by only 3%, 15% and < 1%, respectively. Although ESAS-r severity scores for these three symptoms were higher than on ESAS-m, differences did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: We identified significant differences in patient symptom reporting based on whether symptoms like dry mouth, obstipation and sleep problems were specifically assessed or had to be added by patients as an "Other problem".

Identification and susceptibility testing of oral candidiasis in advanced cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced cancer are prone to develop different opportunistic oral infection due to anti-cancer treatment or the malignancies themselves. Studies of oral fungal samples show an increased prevalence of non-Candida albicans species in mixed oral infections with Candida albicans. Non-C. albicans and C. albicans are associated with varying degrees of resistance to azoles, which may have implications for treatment. This study aimed to assess the diversity and antifungal susceptibility of Candida species detected in the oral cavity. METHODS: An observational study with microbiological analysis was conducted. Clinical fungal isolates were collected from patients in a hospice unit in 2014-2016. Isolates were re-grown on chromID® Candida plates in 2020. Single colony of each species was re-cultivated and prepared for biochemical identification with a VITEK2® system and verified by gene sequencing. Etest was performed on RPMI agar, and the antifungals fluconazole, amphotericin B, anidulafungin and nystatin were applied. RESULTS: Fifty-six isolates from 45 patients were identified. Seven different Candida species and one Saccharomyces species were detected. The results of biochemical identification were confirmed with sequencing analysis. Thirty-six patients had mono infection, and nine out of 45 patients had 2-3 different species detected. Of C. albicans strains, 39 out of 40 were susceptible to fluconazole. Two non-C. albicans species were resistant to fluconazole, one to amphotericin B and three to anidulafungin. CONCLUSION: C. albicans was the predominant species, with a high susceptibility to antifungal agents. Different Candida species occur in both mono and mixed infections. Identification and susceptibility testing may therefore lead to more effective treatment and may prevent the development of resistance among patients with advanced cancer. TRAIL REGISTRATION: The study Oral Health in Advanced Cancer was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (#NCT02067572) in 20/02/2014.

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.

A mouth rinse based on a tea solution of Salvia officinalis for oral discomfort in palliative cancer care: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Few clinical studies evaluate interventions to reduce oral discomfort among patients in palliative care. AIM: This study examines the efficacy of a Salvia officinalis (SO) based herbal mouth rinse compared to conventional normal saline (NS) in order to improve oral health. DESIGN: A block-randomized controlled trial. Data were collected before and after a 4-day intervention with either SO (n=44) or NS (n=44). Numerical rating scales (NRS, 0-10) and 12 items from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire-Oral Health 17 (EORTC QLQ-OH17) measured patient-reported oral symptoms. An oral examination was performed before and after the intervention. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: This study included adult patients with late-stage cancer in an inpatient hospice unit. RESULTS: Of the 88 patients included (mean age=63.9 years, SD=10.6), 73 (83%) completed the study. At baseline, 78% reported dry mouth on the EORTC QLQ-OH17, and 80% rated dry mouth ≥4 on the NRS. Total oral health scores based on the 12 EORTC QLQ-OH17 items improved similarly in both groups (p<0.001). However, dry mouth ratings on both the EORTC QLQ-OH17 (p=0.036) and NRS (p=0.045) improved more in the SO group than in the NS group. Plaque on the teeth improved in both the SO (p=0.008) and NS (p=0.018) groups, but plaque on the tongue and erythema only improved with NS. CONCLUSIONS: This study did not detect an overall significant difference between SO and NS. Both mouth rinses improved oral health parameters, indicating that systematic assessment and oral care may reduce oral discomfort. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02067572.