# Therapeutic Interventions to Manage Oral Mucositis and Their Impact on Quality of Life in Cancer Patients: An Umbrella Review

## TL;DR

This umbrella review evaluates interventions for managing oral mucositis in cancer patients and their impact on quality of life.

## Contribution

The study synthesizes evidence on therapeutic interventions for oral mucositis and their effects on quality of life in cancer patients.

## Key findings

- Photobiomodulation, honey, black mulberry, and SAMITAL consistently improved quality of life domains.
- Gabapentin showed potential in reducing opioid use and early mucositis-related pain, though results were mixed.
- Heterogeneity in intervention protocols and QoL instruments limited comparability across studies.

## Abstract

Oral mucositis (OM) is a debilitating complication of cancer therapy, particularly in head and neck cancer patients, with significant adverse effects on quality of life (QoL). Although numerous interventions have been investigated, their impact on QoL remains inconsistently reported and poorly synthesized.

An umbrella review was conducted following PRISMA 2020 and Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidelines. Five databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) were searched from inception to March 2024. Reviews were eligible if they evaluated any therapeutic intervention for OM and reported QoL‐related outcomes using validated tools. Methodological quality was appraised using AMSTAR 2, and findings were narratively synthesized and thematically categorized. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251044088).

Eight systematic reviews (257 primary studies) met the inclusion criteria. Photobiomodulation, honey, black mulberry, and botanical agents such as SAMITAL showed consistent improvement in QoL domains, including pain relief, oral function, and emotional well‐being. Gabapentin demonstrated potential in reducing opioid use and early mucositis‐related pain, though findings were mixed across trials. QoL was most commonly assessed using the EORTC QLQ‐C30, FACT‐HN, and UW‐QOL. Overall, heterogeneity in intervention protocols and QoL instruments limited comparability.

This review highlights the most promising interventions for improving QoL in patients with OM. Standardizing QoL measurement and prioritizing patient‐reported outcomes in future trials is essential to inform evidence‐based supportive oncology care.