Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40928526›Full record

Trial reportSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2025

Intraoral vs. extraoral photobiomodulation therapy for oral mucositis in head and neck cancer patients: a multicenter, randomized, single-blind clinical trial.

Isadora Peres Klein, Mariana Bitu Ramos Pinto, Bruna Barcelos Só, Amanda de Farias Gabriel, Nathália Felix Mendonça, Letícia Beatriz da Cruz Santos, Karina Morais Farias, Ana Leticia Mores, Marco Antonio Trevizani Martins, Ana Carolina Prado Ribeiro E Silva and 4 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter StudyComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05242991 (Comparison of Two Photobiomodulation Protocols for the Oral Mucositis and Xerostomia Prevention in Irradiated Head and Neck Cancer Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT05242991 naunknown statusnot on this map

Comparison of Two Photobiomodulation Protocols for the Oral Mucositis and Xerostomia Prevention in Irradiated Head and Neck Cancer Patients: a Randomized, Multicenter, Single-blind Controlled Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorFederal University of Rio Grande do SulRan2021 to 2024Enrolled132ConditionsMucositis, Xerostomia, HyposalivationArmsPhotobiomodulation therapy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Acceptance and perceived efficacy of intraoral versus extraoral photobiomodulation for oral mucositis prevention in pediatric patients.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Isadora Peres KleinDepartment of Oral Pathology, School of Dentistry, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Mariana Bitu Ramos PintoStomatology Department, A.C.Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Bruna Barcelos SóDepartment of Oral Pathology, School of Dentistry, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Amanda de Farias GabrielDepartment of Oral Pathology, School of Dentistry, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Nathália Felix MendonçaStomatology Department, A.C.Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Letícia Beatriz da Cruz SantosStomatology Department, A.C.Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Karina Morais FariasDental Oncology Service, Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo (ICESP), Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Ana Leticia MoresDental Oncology Service, Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo (ICESP), Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Marco Antonio Trevizani MartinsDepartment of Oral Pathology, School of Dentistry, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Ana Carolina Prado Ribeiro E SilvaDental Oncology Service, Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo (ICESP), Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Thaís Bianca BrandãoDental Oncology Service, Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo (ICESP), Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Alan Roger Santos-SilvaOral Diagnosis Department, Piracicaba Dental School, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Semiology Area, Campinas, Brazil.
Fábio Abreu AlvesStomatology Department, A.C.Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Manoela Domingues MartinsDepartment of Oral Pathology, School of Dentistry, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil. manomartins@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare the efficacy of intraoral (IOPBM) and extraoral photobiomodulation (EOPBM) protocols for the prevention and treatment of oral mucositis (OM) in patients with oral or oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) to submitted radiotherapy (RT).

methodsThis randomized, blinded, multicenter clinical trial enrolled 58 patients with oral or oropharyngeal SCC, who were allocated into two groups matched by treatment type, clinical stage, and RT modality. Group I (IOPBM) received intraoral photobiomodulation (PBM) with a continuous InGaAlP diode laser (660 nm, 100 mW, 0.03 cm

resultsA total of 58 patients were included from February 2021 to August 2023. The mean age of patients was 59.41 years. Forty (69%) were male, and 18 (31%) were female. All patients experienced some degree of OM during RT. No significant differences were observed between the groups for all OM grades (WHO scale, p = 0.69; NCI scale, p = 0.82) or in the meantime to the development of ulcerated OM (WHO scale, p = 0.63; NCI scale, p = 0.61). On day 20 (week 4) and day 30 (week 6), patients in the EOPBM group reported significantly less difficulty swallowing compared to the IOPBM group (Mann-Whitney test, p = 0.02 and p = 0.04, respectively). On day 25 (week 5), the EOPBM group demonstrated a significantly smaller decline in taste perception compared to the IOPBM group, as determined by the Mann-Whitney test (p = 0.01).

conclusionThe EOPBM protocol was found to be as effective as IOPBM in managing OM, with the added benefit of providing greater patient comfort during application.

trial registrationRegistered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05242991).

Indexed as

Head and Neck NeoplasmsLow-Level Light TherapyOropharyngeal NeoplasmsStomatitisAdultAgedCarcinoma, Squamous CellFemaleHumansLasers, SemiconductorMaleMiddle AgedSingle-Blind MethodHead and neck cancerOral mucositisPhotobiomodulationRadiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID40928526

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.