What do systematic reviews say?

Oral cryotherapy (ice chips, ice-cold water, ice cubes or crushed ice held in the mouth during cancer treatment) vs no intervention or control intervention (control)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for preventing oral mucositis in patients with cancer receiving treatment: oral cryotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Fluorouracil (5FU) treatment for solid cancers
  No studies in the 5FU subgroup assessed the number of days of treatment with opioid analgesics.
  0 studies
  No studies found
• Interventions for preventing oral mucositis in patients with cancer receiving treatment: oral cryotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  High-dose melphalan-based treatment prior to HSCT (haematological cancers)
  MD -2.28 [-5.33, 0.77]
  1 study · 78 participants
  Very low

Non-specific immunotherapy (recombinant interleukin-2 or BCG cell wall preparation) plus standard therapy vs Standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy)

It is very uncertain whether non-specific immunotherapy (recombinant interleukin-2 or BCG cell… changes disease-free survival compared with standard therapy alone (very low certainty).

• Interventions for the treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancers: targeted therapy and immunotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  24 to 70 months · Recombinant interleukin-2 + surgery (De Stefani 2002)
  HR 0.66 [0.43, 1.02]
  1 study · 201 participants
  Very low

EGFR monoclonal antibody (cetuximab or nimotuzumab) plus standard therapy (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) vs Standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy)

EGFR monoclonal antibody (cetuximab or nimotuzumab) plus standard… showed no clear difference in progression-free survival compared with standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy); GRADE not reported.

• Interventions for the treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancers: targeted therapy and immunotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  24 to 70 months · Monoclonal antibody + chemoradiotherapy vs chemoradiotherapy alone
  HR 1.08 [0.89, 1.32]
  1 study · 891 participants
  GRADE not reported
• Interventions for the treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancers: targeted therapy and immunotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  24 to 70 months · Monoclonal antibody + radiotherapy vs radiotherapy alone
  HR 0.70 [0.54, 0.91]
  1 study · 424 participants
  GRADE not reported

Oral cryotherapy (ice chips, ice-cold water, ice cubes or crushed ice held in the mouth during cancer treatment) vs no intervention or control intervention (control)

• Interventions for preventing oral mucositis in patients with cancer receiving treatment: oral cryotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  High-dose melphalan-based treatment prior to HSCT (haematological cancers)
  Summary of findings 2 (melphalan/HSCT): Quality of life - '1 study assessed this outcome but the data are currently unavailable as the study report and analysis have not yet been completed' (Toro 2013; measured with…
  1 study
  GRADE not reported
• Interventions for preventing oral mucositis in patients with cancer receiving treatment: oral cryotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Fluorouracil (5FU) treatment for solid cancers
  Summary of findings for the main comparison (5FU solid cancers): Quality of life - 'No studies assessed this outcome'.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Pacifier withdrawal vs No treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for the cessation of non‐nutritive sucking habits in children 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
  There were no studies that looked at barrier techniques or pacifier withdrawal.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Oral cryotherapy (ice chips, ice-cold water, ice cubes or crushed ice held in the mouth during cancer treatment) vs no intervention or control intervention (control)

• Interventions for preventing oral mucositis in patients with cancer receiving treatment: oral cryotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  High-dose melphalan-based treatment prior to HSCT (haematological cancers)
  Adverse events reported narratively: one study did not report adverse events (Askarifar 2015); another reported no serious adverse events (Toro 2013); the remaining two reported low rates of shooting pain from the…
  3 studies
  GRADE not reported
• Interventions for preventing oral mucositis in patients with cancer receiving treatment: oral cryotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Fluorouracil (5FU) treatment for solid cancers
  Adverse events reported narratively (not meta-analysed): one study reported no adverse effects (Katranci 2012); the other four 5FU studies reported low rates of very minor adverse events (headache, chills,…
  5 studies · 444 participants
  GRADE not reported

Oral cryotherapy (ice chips, ice-cold water, ice cubes or crushed ice held in the mouth during cancer treatment) vs Low-dose leucovorin rinse

• Interventions for preventing oral mucositis in patients with cancer receiving treatment: oral cryotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Oral mucositis (severe). Not estimable - no participants had developed severe oral mucositis by the fourth day after chemotherapy when the data were reported (Zhang 2011, Analysis 4.3, subgroup 3.1); 118 participants…
  1 study · 118 participants
  GRADE not reported

Glass ionomer sealant (with fluoride gel plus dentifrice) vs Fluoride gel plus fluoride toothpaste/dentifrice (non-invasive control)

Glass ionomer sealant (with fluoride gel plus dentifrice) showed no clear difference in caries (lesion) progression (radiographic) compared with fluoride gel plus fluoride toothpaste/dentifrice (non-invasive…; GRADE not reported.

• Micro‐invasive interventions for managing proximal dental decay in primary and permanent teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  12 to 36 months (radiographic follow-up) · Glass ionomer sealant
  OR 0.13 [0.01, 2.52]
  1 study
  GRADE not reported

Cryotherapy (ice chips) 30 minutes vs Cryotherapy (ice chips) 60 minutes

It is very uncertain whether oral cryotherapy for 30 minutes changes oral mucositis (moderate to severe) compared with oral cryotherapy for 60 minutes (very low certainty).

• Interventions for preventing oral mucositis in patients with cancer receiving treatment: oral cryotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
  RR 0.68 [0.36, 1.30]
  1 study · 178 participants
  Very low

Tyrosine kinase inhibitor (erlotinib, gefitinib or lapatinib) plus standard therapy (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) vs Standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy)

It is very uncertain whether tyrosine kinase inhibitor (erlotinib, gefitinib or lapatinib) plus… changes progression-free survival compared with standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) (very low certainty).

• Interventions for the treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancers: targeted therapy and immunotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  40 to 60 months
  HR 0.80 [0.51, 1.28]
  2 studies · 271 participants
  Very low

EGFR monoclonal antibody (cetuximab or nimotuzumab) plus standard therapy (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) vs Standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for the treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancers: targeted therapy and immunotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  24 to 70 months
  No included studies addressed participant satisfaction (review-wide gap).
  0 studies
  No studies found

Orthodontic appliances (palatal crib) vs no treatment

Orthodontic appliances (palatal arch/palatal crib) may leads to higher sucking cessation (short term) compared with no treatment (low certainty).

• Interventions for the cessation of non‐nutritive sucking habits in children 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Short term (less than 12 months)
  RR 6.53 [1.67, 25.53]
  2 studies · 70 participants
  Low

Orthodontic appliances (palatal crib) vs no treatment

• Interventions for the cessation of non‐nutritive sucking habits in children 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Short term (3 months)
  Table 1 (reduction in malocclusion), Villa 1997 (n=24), palatal crib vs no treatment: net change in overjet (mm) - no treatment 0.02; palatal crib -0.2; no statistically significant net change in overjet between…
  1 study · 24 participants
  GRADE not reported

Oral cryotherapy (ice chips, ice-cold water, ice cubes or crushed ice held in the mouth during cancer treatment) vs no intervention or control intervention (control)

It is very uncertain whether oral cryotherapy (ice chips, ice-cold water, ice cubes or crushed… changes oral mucositis (mean severity on WHO 0 to 4 scale) compared with control (no treatment or standard/usual oral care, e.g. saline rinse) (very low certainty).

• Interventions for preventing oral mucositis in patients with cancer receiving treatment: oral cryotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Radiotherapy to the head and neck
  MD -0.25 [-0.72, 0.22]
  1 study · 40 participants
  Very low

EGFR monoclonal antibody (cetuximab or nimotuzumab) plus standard therapy (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) vs Standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for the treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancers: targeted therapy and immunotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  24 to 70 months
  No included studies addressed direct and indirect costs to participants and health services (review-wide gap).
  0 studies
  No studies found

Root canal medications and canal filling, splinting, extraction of teeth, or surgical removal of any relevant pathology vs Each other, placebo, or no treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for the management of external root resorption 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Any follow-up period
  None of the studies fulfilled our inclusion criteria and therefore no data analysis was conducted. (Main results: no RCTs that met the inclusion criteria were identified; one ongoing study, NCT00423956, potentially…
  0 studies
  No studies found

Micro-invasive treatment (proximal sealing or resin infiltration): resin sealant, glass ionomer sealant, polyurethane/adhesive patch, or resin infiltration vs Non-invasive / control treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Micro‐invasive interventions for managing proximal dental decay in primary and permanent teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
  None of the studies reported on participant or operator perception
  0 studies
  No studies found

Adhesive/polyurethane sealant patch vs No treatment (both arms received flossing plus fluoride toothpaste)

Adhesive/polyurethane sealant patch showed no clear difference in caries (lesion) progression (radiographic) compared with no treatment (both arms received flossing plus fluoride toothpaste); GRADE not reported.

• Micro‐invasive interventions for managing proximal dental decay in primary and permanent teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  12 to 36 months (radiographic follow-up) · Sealant patch
  OR 1.00 [0.14, 7.23]
  1 study
  GRADE not reported

Micro-invasive treatment (proximal sealing or resin infiltration): resin sealant, glass ionomer sealant, polyurethane/adhesive patch, or resin infiltration vs Non-invasive / control treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Micro‐invasive interventions for managing proximal dental decay in primary and permanent teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
  None of the studies reported on costs for micro-invasive treatment or non-invasive control
  0 studies
  No studies found

Oral cryotherapy (ice chips, ice-cold water, ice cubes or crushed ice held in the mouth during cancer treatment) vs no intervention or control intervention (control)

• Interventions for preventing oral mucositis in patients with cancer receiving treatment: oral cryotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Radiotherapy to the head and neck
  Oral pain was assessed in this subgroup but the study (Kakoei 2013) did not report details of the scale used, so the data could not be used (no usable estimate).
  1 study
  GRADE not reported
• Interventions for preventing oral mucositis in patients with cancer receiving treatment: oral cryotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Fluorouracil (5FU) treatment for solid cancers
  MD -1.93 [-2.37, -1.49]
  1 study · 80 participants
  Very low
• Interventions for preventing oral mucositis in patients with cancer receiving treatment: oral cryotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  High-dose melphalan-based treatment prior to HSCT (haematological cancers)
  MD -1.5 [-2.11, -0.89]
  2 studies · 85 participants
  Low