Evidence Hub

Is Pilocarpine Effective in Preventing Radiation-Induced Xerostomia? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Wei-Fa Yang, G. Liao, S. Hakim, Dai-qiao Ouyang, J. Ringash, Yu-Xiong Su

International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, 2016

49 citations

Abstract

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of concomitant administration of pilocarpine on radiation-induced xerostomia in patients with head and neck cancers.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials were searched to identify randomized, controlled trials studying the effect of concomitant administration of pilocarpine for radiation-induced xerostomia. Included trials were systematically reviewed, and quantifiable outcomes were pooled for meta-analysis. Outcomes of interest included salivary flow, clinician-rated xerostomia grade, patient-reported xerostomia scoring, quality of life, and adverse effects.

RESULTS

Six prospective, randomized, controlled trials in 8 articles were included in this systematic review. The total number of patients was 369 in the pilocarpine group and 367 in the control group. Concomitant administration of pilocarpine during radiation could increase the unstimulated salivary flow rate in a period of 3 to 6 months after treatment, and also reduce the clinician-rated xerostomia grade. Patient-reported xerostomia was not significantly impacted by pilocarpine in the initial 3 months but was superior at 6 months. No significant difference of stimulated salivary flow rate could be confirmed between the 2 arms. Adverse effects of pilocarpine were mild and tolerable.

CONCLUSIONS

The concomitant administration of pilocarpine during radiation increases unstimulated salivary flow rate and reduces clinician-rated xerostomia…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free