PURPOSE: To provide evidence-based recommendations for prevention and management of salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia induced by nonsurgical cancer therapies. METHODS: Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO) and ASCO convened a multidisciplinary Expert Panel to evaluate the evidence and formulate recommendations. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials published between January 2009 and June 2020. The guideline also incorporated two previous systematic reviews conducted by MASCC/ISOO, which included studies published from 1990 through 2008. RESULTS: A total of 58 publications were identified: 46 addressed preventive interventions and 12 addressed therapeutic interventions. A majority of the evidence focused on the setting of radiation therapy for head and neck cancer. For the prevention of salivary gland hypofunction and/or xerostomia in patients with head and neck cancer, there is high-quality evidence for tissue-sparing radiation modalities. Evidence is weaker or insufficient for other interventions. For the management of salivary gland hypofunction and/or xerostomia, intermediate-quality evidence supports the use of topical mucosal lubricants, saliva substitutes, and agents that stimulate the salivary reflex. RECOMMENDATIONS: For patients who receive radiation therapy for head and neck cancer, tissue-sparing radiation modalities should be used when possible to reduce the risk of salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia. Other risk-reducing interventions that may be offered during radiation therapy for head and neck cancer include bethanechol and acupuncture. For patients who develop salivary gland hypofunction and/or xerostomia, interventions include topical mucosal lubricants, saliva substitutes, and sugar-free lozenges or chewing gum. For patients with head and neck cancer, oral pilocarpine and oral cevimeline, acupuncture, or transcutaneous electrostimulation may be offered after radiation therapy. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines .

Salivary gland hypofunction is a common and permanent adverse effect of radiotherapy to the head and neck. Randomised trials of available treatment modalities have produced unclear results and offer little reliable guidance for clinicians to inform evidence-based therapy. We have undertaken this systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the effectiveness of available interventions for radiotherapy-induced xerostomia and hyposalivation. We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, EMBASE, AMED, and CINAHL database through July 2016 for randomised controlled trials comparing any topical or systemic intervention to active and/or non-active controls for the treatment of radiotherapy-induced xerostomia. The results of clinically and statistically homogenous studies were pooled and meta-analyzed. 1732 patients from twenty studies were included in the systematic review. Interventions included systemic or topical pilocarpine, systemic cevimeline, saliva substitutes/mouthcare systems, hyperthermic humidification, acupuncture, acupuncture-like transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, low-level laser therapy and herbal medicine. Results from the meta-analysis, which included six studies, suggest that both cevimeline and pilocarpine can reduce xerostomia symptoms and increase salivary flow compared to placebo, although some aspects of the relevant effect size, duration of the benefit, and clinical meaningfulness remain unclear. With regard to interventions not included in the meta-analysis, we found no evidence, or very weak evidence, that they can reduce xerostomia symptoms or increase salivary flow in this population. Pilocarpine and cevimeline should represent the first line of therapy in head and neck cancer survivors with radiotherapy-induced xerostomia and hyposalivation. The use of other treatment modalities cannot be supported on the basis of current evidence.

Oral cancer is a potentially fatal disease with an increasing incidence and an unchanged 5-year mortality rate. Unfortunately, oral cancer is often still late diagnosed, which leads to an increase in the likelihood of functional impairment due to treatment and mortality rate. Definitive diagnosis of oral cancer must be confirmed by scalpel biopsy and histological assessment. However despite its benefits, scalpel biopsy is invasive and it is burdened by a potential morbidity. Furthermore, previous studies have suggested a high degree of intraobserver and interobserver variability regarding the histological evaluation of malignancy. As a consequence, in recent years there has been a growing and persisting demand towards developing new non-invasive, practical diagnostic tools that might facilitate the early detection of oral cancer. The most investigated non-invasive adjunctive techniques are vital staining, autofluorescence, chemiluminescence, narrow band imaging, and exfoliative cytology. Aim of the review is to critically describe these adjunctive aids and, after considering the literature data, an expert opinion on the effectiveness and the possible use of each technique will be provided.