Display options
Share it on

Curr Oncol. 2010 Aug;17(4):94-112. doi: 10.3747/co.v17i4.493.

Prophylaxis and management of acute radiation-induced skin reactions: a systematic review of the literature.

Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.)

N Salvo, E Barnes, J van Draanen, E Stacey, G Mitera, D Breen, A Giotis, G Czarnota, J Pang, C De Angelis

Affiliations

  1. Department of Pharmacy, Edmond Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON.

PMID: 20697521 PMCID: PMC2913836 DOI: 10.3747/co.v17i4.493

Abstract

Radiation therapy is a common treatment for cancer patients. One of the most common side effects of radiation is acute skin reaction (radiation dermatitis) that ranges from a mild rash to severe ulceration. Approximately 85% of patients treated with radiation therapy will experience a moderate-to-severe skin reaction. Acute radiation-induced skin reactions often lead to itching and pain, delays in treatment, and diminished aesthetic appearance-and subsequently to a decrease in quality of life. Surveys have demonstrated that a wide variety of topical, oral, and intravenous agents are used to prevent or to treat radiation-induced skin reactions. We conducted a literature review to identify trials that investigated products for the prophylaxis and management of acute radiation dermatitis. Thirty-nine studies met the pre-defined criteria, with thirty-three being categorized as prophylactic trials and six as management trials.For objective evaluation of skin reactions, the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group criteria and the U.S. National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria were the most commonly used tools (65% of the studies). Topical corticosteroid agents were found to significantly reduce the severity of skin reactions; however, the trials of corticosteroids evaluated various agents, and no clear indication about a preferred corticosteroid has emerged. Amifostine and oral enzymes were somewhat effective in preventing radiation-induced skin reactions in phase II and phase III trials respectively; further large randomized controlled trials should be undertaken to better investigate those products. Biafine cream (Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceuticals, Titusville, NJ, U.S.A.) was found not to be superior to standard regimes in the prevention of radiation-induced skin reactions (n = 6).In conclusion, the evidence is insufficient to support the use of a particular agent for the prevention and management of acute radiation-induced skin reactions. Future trials should focus on comparing agents and approaches that, in phase I and II trials, suggest efficacy. These future phase III randomized controlled trials must clearly distinguish between preventive and management strategies for radiation-induced dermatitis. Only then can evidence-based guidelines be developed, with the hope of standardizing the approach across centres and of improving the prevention and management of radiation-induced dermatitis.

Keywords: Radiation dermatitis; radiotherapy; review; skin reaction

References

  1. Zhongguo Zhong Xi Yi Jie He Za Zhi. 2005 Jul;25(7):623-5 - PubMed
  2. J Clin Oncol. 2004 Apr 15;22(8):1447-53 - PubMed
  3. Radiother Oncol. 2004 Nov;73(2):153-62 - PubMed
  4. Strahlenther Onkol. 2002 Jun;178(6):321-9 - PubMed
  5. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2004 Mar;130(3):351-6 - PubMed
  6. Oncol Rep. 2001 Mar-Apr;8(2):305-9 - PubMed
  7. Cancer Nurs. 2008 Jan-Feb;31(1):E8-14 - PubMed
  8. Br J Dermatol. 2002 Jun;146(6):983-91 - PubMed
  9. Clin Transl Oncol. 2008 Mar;10(3):163-7 - PubMed
  10. Acta Oncol. 2001;40(6):751-5 - PubMed
  11. Radiother Oncol. 2001 Mar;58(3):333-9 - PubMed
  12. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2001 Apr;28(3):543-7 - PubMed
  13. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001 Sep 1;51(1):81-6 - PubMed
  14. J Tradit Chin Med. 2007 Sep;27(3):193-6 - PubMed
  15. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2006 Jan;54(1):28-46 - PubMed
  16. Lasers Surg Med. 2007 Feb;39(2):164-8 - PubMed
  17. Strahlenther Onkol. 2004 May;180(5):315-22 - PubMed
  18. Indian J Cancer. 2006 Oct-Dec;43(4):180-4 - PubMed
  19. Strahlenther Onkol. 2000 Sep;176(9):416-21 - PubMed
  20. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004 Jan 1;58(1):241-6 - PubMed
  21. South Med J. 2004 Oct;97(10):989-93 - PubMed
  22. Cancer Nurs. 2000 Jun;23(3):220-9 - PubMed
  23. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006 Jul 1;65(3):745-50 - PubMed
  24. Support Care Cancer. 2006 Aug;14(8):802-17 - PubMed
  25. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007 Jul 1;68(3):864-72 - PubMed
  26. Eur J Dermatol. 2008 May-Jun;18(3):317-21 - PubMed
  27. Radiother Oncol. 2000 Feb;54(2):109-16 - PubMed
  28. Radiother Oncol. 2001 Jun;59(3):257-65 - PubMed
  29. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2001 Jul;47 Suppl:S29-34 - PubMed
  30. Am J Surg. 2005 May;189(5):627-30; discussion 630-1 - PubMed
  31. J Clin Oncol. 2006 May 1;24(13):2092-7 - PubMed
  32. Complement Ther Clin Pract. 2005 Nov;11(4):224-31 - PubMed
  33. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2005 Mar;14(1):28-42 - PubMed
  34. Strahlenther Onkol. 2003 Oct;179(10):708-12 - PubMed
  35. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2001 Jul;47 Suppl:S23-8 - PubMed
  36. Br Homeopath J. 2000 Jan;89(1):8-12 - PubMed
  37. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2007 May-Jun;73(3):209 - PubMed
  38. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004 Jul 1;59(3):809-14 - PubMed
  39. Wound Repair Regen. 2001 May-Jun;9(3):187-93 - PubMed
  40. Semin Oncol Nurs. 2006 Aug;22(3):163-73 - PubMed
  41. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 1995;7(3):184-7 - PubMed
  42. Ann Dermatol Venereol. 2008 Jan;Spec No 1:5-10 - PubMed
  43. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2008 Feb;37(1):124-9 - PubMed
  44. Cancer Nurs. 2002 Dec;25(6):442-51 - PubMed
  45. Cutan Ocul Toxicol. 2006;25(3):165-71 - PubMed
  46. Eur J Dermatol. 2002 Sep-Oct;12(5):458-62 - PubMed
  47. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000 Dec 1;48(5):1307-10 - PubMed
  48. Isr Med Assoc J. 2007 Jun;9(6):439-42 - PubMed
  49. Onkologie. 2001 Feb;24(1):44-6 - PubMed
  50. J Clin Oncol. 2008 May 1;26(13):2085-92 - PubMed

Publication Types