ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT07810530Updated Sep 9, 2026

Study of a Copaiba-Based Mouthwash Combined With Low-Level Laser Therapy in the Prevention of Oral Mucositis in Patients Undergoing Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

A Phase 2 interventional study of Copaíba and Placebo in Oral Mucositis, Oral Mucositis (Ulcerative) Due to Antineoplastic Therapy and Oral Mucositis Due to Chemotherapy, sponsored by Instituto Nacional de Cancer, Brazil. Recruiting at 1 site in Brazil. Open to participants aged 12 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-09-09.

Sponsored by Instituto Nacional de Cancer, Brazil · Phase 2, Interventional, and Prevention

From the registry’s dates

  • Started Mar 2026; still recruiting 7 months later.
Phase
Phase 2
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
76
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
12 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Oral mucositis (OM) one of the most significant acute toxicity of Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (HSCT). There is already scientific evidence suporting OM the use of: low-level laser therapy (LLLT), cryotherapy (in autologous HSCT when conditioning regimens include high-dose melphalan), and keratinocyte growth factor (in autologous HSCT with high-dose chemotherapy associated with RT). In this sense, an alternative treatment becomes necessary. Based on the preliminary results of the phase I study, a double-blind, randomized phase II study is suggested to evaluate the effectiveness of copaiba-based mouthwash in the prevention of oral mucositis in HSCT was proposed. Patients will be randomized into 2 groups: A (copaíba) and B (placebo) and will use the mouthwash 4x/day. Each group will have 38 patients and be blind to the group in which they are included. They will be evaluated daily by a dental surgeon about oral mucositis, pain in the oral cavity and oropharynx, and dysphagia and will undergo daily laser therapy sessions, until neutropenic recovery.

Read the detailed description

INTRODUCTION Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (HSCT) involves the infusion of hematopoietic progenitor cells from a donor into a patient with compromised bone marrow, aiming to replace the marrow and restore immune function. This bone marrow impairment may result from neoplastic infiltration or malfunction due to benign, malignant, hereditary, or acquired conditions.

The progenitor cells to be infused may originate from a compatible donor or from the patient themself. These cells can be harvested directly from the iliac crest through bone marrow aspirations and punctures; from peripheral blood using apheresis machines; or, less commonly, from umbilical cord blood. In allogeneic HSCT (allo-HSCT), the infused cells come from a compatible donor; in autologous HSCT (auto-HSCT), the cells are from the patient and are re-infused after collection and processing.

Allo-HSCT can be used to treat a variety of conditions, including leukemia, lymphoma, myeloproliferative disorders, myelodysplastic syndromes, bone marrow failure syndromes, congenital immunodeficiencies, enzymatic deficiencies, and hemoglobinopathies.

Auto-HSCT, on the other hand, is commonly used in neoplastic diseases and autoimmune conditions. Its purpose is to enable the administration of high-dose chemotherapy (HDC) in diseases that are particularly sensitive to increased chemotherapy intensity. Since the dose-limiting toxicity of HDC is myelosuppression, the reinfusion of hematopoietic progenitor cells allows the use of higher doses that would otherwise be unfeasible. Current evidence supports the use of auto-HSCT in diseases such as Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL), non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL), advanced neuroblastoma, Ewing sarcoma, acute myeloid leukemia (AML), Wilms tumor, germ cell tumors, high-risk medulloblastoma, and multiple myeloma (MM).

Hematological malignancies collectively accounted for 6.6% of the total estimated new cancer cases globally, according to The Global Cancer Observatory (GLOBOCAN) in 2021: NHL: 544,352 cases (2.8%); leukemia: 474,519 (2.5%); MM: 176,404 (0.9%); HL: 83,087 (0.4%).

In Brazil, according to the National Cancer Institute (INCA), NHL is the ninth most common cancer in men and the tenth in women. Considering the most prevalent hematological malignancies, 26,600 new cases are expected annually between 2023-2025, with 14,170 in men and 12,490 in women (NHL: 6,420 in men and 5,620 in women; HL: 1,500 in men and 1,580 in women; leukemias: 6,250 in men and 5,290 in women). It's worth noting that MM is not included in INCA's estimates due to its classification as a rare disease.

According to the Brazilian Transplant Registry, over the last 10 years (2013-2023), a total of 36,432 HSCT procedures were performed. In 2023 alone, 4,262 procedures were registered: 2,568 autologous and 1,694 allogeneic transplants.

LITERATURE REVIEW Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (HSCT) The first step in the HSCT process is mobilization, which involves stimulating the bone marrow to release hematopoietic progenitor cells into the peripheral blood. Various regimens of chemotherapeutic agents and granulocyte colony-stimulating factors can be used during this phase.

The second phase is cell collection. Once progenitor cells are present in the peripheral blood, they are harvested: in allogeneic HSCT, this typically occurs via bone marrow aspiration from the donor; in autologous HSCT, collection is done via apheresis from peripheral blood.

The third phase is conditioning, a critical step for successful HSCT. This phase consists of a chemotherapy regimen, with or without total body irradiation (TBI), designed to eliminate the recipient's hematopoietic system, thereby preparing the bone marrow niche to receive the donor cells. In addition, the conditioning regimen may exert anti-tumor effects against the underlying disease. Conditioning regimens are classified as follows: myeloablative (high-intensity): leads to prolonged pancytopenia, typically indicated for younger patients (under 55 years) with few or no comorbidities; reduced-intensity (intermediate); non-myeloablative (low-intensity): induces minimal cytopenia and is suitable for older or medically fragile patients.

The fourth phase is the infusion of hematopoietic cells, which marks Day 0 (D0) of the transplant process. The days preceding this event-during which conditioning occurs-are referred to as negative days (D-3, D-2, D-1), while subsequent days are denoted as positive (D+1, D+2, D+3, etc.). After infusion, the transplanted bone marrow typically enters a phase of aplasia, lasting approximately 2-3 weeks. Depending on the conditioning regimen and underlying disease, white blood cell counts often drop below 100 cells/mm³ around D+4.

The fifth phase is neutrophil recovery, defined as the first of three consecutive days with an absolute neutrophil count of ≥500 cells/μL (0.5 × 10⁹/L).

The sixth phase is platelet recovery, defined as the first of three days with unsupported platelet counts ≥20 × 10⁹/L.

The seventh phase involves graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis, applicable specifically to allogeneic HSCT. This includes administration of immunosuppressive therapy-most commonly calcineurin inhibitors such as cyclosporine or tacrolimus-to prevent GVHD and graft rejection.

An HSCT is considered successful when engraftment occurs-i.e., when blood cell counts remain above 500 cells/mm³ for three consecutive days.

Despite advances in HSCT techniques, the procedure is still associated with a range of complications. Patients undergoing HSCT comprise a highly specific population, whose most prominent characteristic is profound immunosuppression, resulting from the underlying disease, the oncologic treatment, or both. All blood cell lines are often affected, leading to neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and anemia. These hematological changes, combined with immunosuppression, result in a common set of complications, including infections, bleeding, and oral manifestations.

One of the most critical phases for complications in autologous HSCT is conditioning, due not only to immunosuppression, but also to the direct and indirect effects of cytotoxic therapies on oral tissues, leading to a range of oral toxicities such as oral mucositis (OM), xerostomia, dysgeusia, and pain. These toxicities affect up to 80% of patients, significantly impairing oral function, including the ability to eat, drink, and speak.

Oral Mucositis Oral mucositis (OM) is a process triggered by the generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and oxidative stress caused by chemotherapy (CT) and total body irradiation (TBI) on epithelial cells and connective tissues. These agents cause direct cellular and tissue damage and stimulate the activation of transcription factors, leading to an acute inflammatory response in the mucosal tissues.

ROS cause DNA damage and cell death in the epithelial layer and stimulate the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines, which further exacerbate tissue injury and apoptosis. Additionally, ROS indirectly stimulates the cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) pathway, promoting angiogenesis. Pro-inflammatory cytokines also amplify tissue injury caused by CT or CT+TBI by inducing the production of further inflammatory mediators. The final stage of this pathophysiological process is ulceration, resulting from tissue damage, apoptosis, and necrosis of the basal epithelial layer, ultimately leading to mucosal breakdown.

Previous studies have established that ROS play a central role in the pathogenesis of CT- and RT-induced OM, by causing direct DNA damage, increasing transcription factor expression, and triggering a cascade of pro-inflammatory cytokines, such as interleukin-1β (IL-1β), interleukin-6 (IL-6), and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α). This results in a self-perpetuating cycle of tissue damage and inflammation, which may persist even after the cessation of CT or CT+TBI.

The studies by Martins (2021), Kiyomi (2022), and Bossi (2016) indicated that increased levels of certain cytokines-namely IL-1β, IL-6, and TNF-α-were associated with greater inflammatory responses and higher OM severity in patients compared to control groups.

The classical clinical signs of OM include mucosal erythema, which may or may not be accompanied by ulcerations. These lesions are often associated with patient-reported symptoms of pain, burning sensation, dysgeusia, and dysphagia, which significantly impair swallowing, oral hygiene, speech, and mastication. The disruption of the mucosal barrier also increases the risk of secondary and opportunistic infections, which in extreme cases may lead to septic shock. Collectively, these factors result in a significant decline in quality of life during and immediately following cancer treatment.

The most widely used OM grading system is that of the World Health Organization (WHO), which classifies OM into the following grades: grade 0 - no change; grade 1 - erythema only; grade 2 - erythema and ulcers, but the patient can maintain a solid diet; grade 3 - erythema and ulcers, with the patient limited to a liquid or semi-liquid diet; grade 4 - severe ulceration requiring enteral or parenteral nutritional support.

Several studies have identified laboratory parameters as potential predictors for the development of OM. Wardill et al. (2020), in a systematic review, found that lymphopenia in laboratory tests may serve as a predictor of OM. Similarly, Nishii (2019), in a multicenter retrospective study involving 326 patients, showed that low leukocyte and lymphocyte counts were associated with a higher risk of OM development. However, it is important to note that these studies did not specify at which point during cancer therapy these lab values were assessed, and results should therefore be interpreted with caution.

The management of oral mucositis can be both preventive and therapeutic, and various strategies have been proposed and studied. These include the use of topical anesthetics, anti-inflammatory agents, systemic analgesics (opioids and non-opioids), growth factors, reinforcement of oral hygiene, low-level laser therapy (LLLT), cryotherapy, and natural products - among which zinc, propolis, aloe vera, and chamomile are notable.

There is already scientific evidence, particularly in the context of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), supporting the use of: LLLT, cryotherapy (in autologous HSCT when conditioning regimens include high-dose melphalan), and keratinocyte growth factor (in autologous HSCT with high-dose chemotherapy associated with RT).

However, even within the specific context of autologous HSCT, preventive measures for OM remain limited to specific conditioning regimens.

LLLT has become widely used in the context of OM due to its ease of application and demonstrated efficacy. Its mechanism is based on the interaction of low-energy-density light with cells and tissues, producing photochemical, photophysical, and photobiological effects. The effect is primarily due to the activation of mitochondrial respiratory chain receptors by light, leading to cellular stimulation or inhibition, depending on the dosage used - importantly, without producing heat.

To date, nine randomized clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of LLLT in preventing OM in the HSCT setting. Of these, six studies used red-spectrum diode lasers with a 660 nm wavelength.

In a randomized clinical trial, Antunes et al. (2007) evaluated 38 patients undergoing either autologous or allogeneic HSCT using both the Oral Mucositis Assessment Scale (OMAS) and WHO OM scale. Patients were randomized into two groups: one group (n=19) received prophylactic LLLT, the other (n=19) did not receive LLLT, and the laser parameters were: InGaAlP diode laser, 660 nm, 50 mW, 4 J/cm², applied daily from D-7 to the day of marrow recovery (D+). Once OM lesions were identified, therapeutic LLLT (8 J/cm²) was applied directly to affected areas. 63.2% of patients receiving prophylactic LLLT had no ulceration (Grades 0 and 1), compared to only 10.5% in the control group (p \< 0.001).

Since this was the first study to use prophylactic LLLT from the beginning of conditioning until marrow recovery, it significantly influenced clinical practice, and LLLT is now used as a preventive measure in various HSCT centers, including the National Cancer Institute (INCA) in Brazil.

However, despite the efficacy of LLLT, some patients still develop OM, highlighting the need for additional preventive strategies that are scalable and easily incorporated into standard care.

Copaiba In 2002, the World Health Organization (WHO) acknowledged the importance of traditional medicine as part of comprehensive patient care. Since then, the use of phytotherapeutic agents has increased significantly due to their efficacy, low toxicity, biocompatibility, and low cost.

The copaiba tree (Copaifera spp.) is native to Latin America, with several species found in the Brazilian flora. Some of these species are used to produce copaiba oil, which is traditionally employed in folk medicine for its anti-inflammatory and wound-healing properties, either through oral ingestion or topical application.

Given that oral mucositis (OM) is a toxicity induced by antineoplastic therapy, the use of natural compounds for its prevention and management is attractive. These agents are expected to have fewer side effects compared to synthetic drugs.

A systematic review by Menezes et al. (2022) assessed the anti-inflammatory and wound-healing effects of copaiba oil (CPB) in oral lesions, including five preclinical studies conducted in animal models. Two studies demonstrated wound-healing activity, evidenced by a reduction in wound area and increased formation of immature bone tissue. Two other studies revealed anti-inflammatory effects, such as reduced acute inflammatory response, advancement in tissue repair stages, early collagen fibril formation, stronger anti-inflammatory response, reduced edema, and decreased concentration of CD68+ macrophages.

The anti-inflammatory effect is primarily attributed to β-caryophyllene, a sesquiterpene that reduces matrix metalloproteinase production, decreases leukocyte count in circulating blood, and blocks cytokine receptors on leukocytes, thus reducing their recruitment to inflamed areas.

This effect is further enhanced by inhibition of nuclear factor kappa-B (NF-κB), which consequently reduces the secretion of pro-inflammatory cytokines.

The wound-healing activity is linked to increased vascular network formation, granulation tissue development, and fibroblast proliferation, all of which support the second phase of the healing process.

Other studies have suggested that copaiba may also possess: antioxidant, osteogenic (bone-stimulating), cytotoxic, gastroprotective, analgesic, antimicrobial, antileishmanial, anti-edematous, antifungal, antigonorrheal, anthelmintic, and antiseptic properties.

Its analgesic potential has been associated with kaurenoic acid, which interacts with opioid receptors.

The antimicrobial effect - effective against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, including Streptococcus mutans and other plaque-forming bacteria - appears to result from the compound's ability to penetrate or disrupt bacterial cell membranes.

Although inhibition of fungal growth - particularly of Candida species - has also been observed, the antifungal effect of copaiba oil has not yet been conclusively proven.

Despite the lack of clinical studies specifically investigating the use of copaiba in HSCT patients, its demonstrated anti-inflammatory, analgesic, antimicrobial, antifungal, and wound-healing effects make it a promising candidate for the prevention and supportive management of OM. Its use may help relieve symptoms and improve quality of life during oncologic treatment.

This research line aims to propose an alternative and adjunctive methodology for the prevention of OM in patients undergoing HSCT. While LLLT is effective, some patients still develop OM, underscoring the importance of developing complementary preventive strategies.

A Phase I dose-escalation clinical trial was previously conducted by the present research group to evaluate the safety and tolerability of copaiba-based mouthwash in patients with oral cancer undergoing radiotherapy (RT).

In that study:

  • No dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was observed at any tested concentration.
  • The maximum tested dose (used in the 6th cohort), which was 15% copaiba oil, administered four times daily, was deemed safe for use in a Phase II trial.
  • None of the patients reported pain or burning associated with the mouthwash in the absence of OM lesions, suggesting it is safe and non-toxic for this application.
  • No participant required interruption of cancer therapy (RT or chemotherapy) due to copaiba-related toxicity.

JUSTIFICATION Based on studies available up to the start date of this study, it is observed that Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (HSCT) presents significant toxicity to oral cavity tissues, with oral mucositis (OM) being the most limiting acute effect. There is scientific evidence supporting the use of Low-Level Laser Therapy (LLLT), cryotherapy in autologous HSCT with high-dose melphalan conditioning, and keratinocyte growth factor, also in autologous HSCT with high-dose chemotherapy or chemotherapy plus total body irradiation conditioning. However, it is known that despite LLLT, patients still develop OM. Regarding cryotherapy and keratinocyte growth factor, their applications are limited to specific regimens and do not apply to all patients in need. Our group's experience with the use of Copaiba Oil-based Mouthwash (CPB) for preventing OM in radiotherapy for head and neck cancer patients in a phase I study defined the appropriate dose to propose a phase II study aimed at providing a treatment that reduces morbidity in these patients and can be widely applied within the Brazilian Public Health System (SUS). Thus, the proposed project constitutes a decisive tool in reducing the incidence of OM.

In this regard, it is expected that Copaiba mouthwash, combined with LLLT, will be effective in preventing OM in patients undergoing autologous HSCT.

02

Conditions studied

  • Oral Mucositis
  • Oral Mucositis (Ulcerative) Due to Antineoplastic Therapy
  • Oral Mucositis Due to Chemotherapy
  • Oral Mucositis in Patients Undergoing HSCT

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Oral mucositis
  • Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
03

In context

Stomatitis

306 studies on the registry are indexed under Stomatitis; 75 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 76 is above the median of 60 across 276 interventional studies indexed under Stomatitis.

Browse Stomatitis studies →

Lead sponsor

Instituto Nacional de Cancer, Brazil is the lead sponsor of 41 studies on the registry; 7 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
12 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients aged 12 years or older;
  • Patients indicated for HSCT;
  • Patients with intact oral mucosa on the first day of conditioning;
  • Patients able to understand and adhere to the protocol;
  • Patients able to perform the oral hygiene protocol;
  • Patients who, after receiving information and instructions, can provide free and (ICF) and assent forms.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients currently receiving drugs for treatment and/or prevention of oral mucositis (OM);
  • Patients who had indicated but whose procedure was canceled for any reason;
  • Patients undergoing a second autologous HSCT;
  • Patients reporting any allergy to copaiba-based compounds.
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(2)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Allogeneic and autologous transplant

Stem cell (bone marrow) transplants. Allogeneic uses cells from a donor; autologous uses your own cells, collected earlier and given back.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

05

Study design

Phase
Phase 2
Primary purpose
Prevention
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Quadruple (Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
76 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Copaíba

    Patients that will recieve Low-level laser therapy + copaiba mouthwash

    Drug: Copaíba

  • Placebo comparator
    Placebo

    Patients that will recieve Low-level laser therapy + placebo mouthwash

    Drug: Placebo

Interventions

  • DrugCopaíba

    An aqueous solution of copaíba (Copaifera Officinalis Resin) at 15% concentration will be used, manufactured by Interativo Pharmacy, according to the formula: copaíba oil (Copaifera Officinalis Resin) 15%, liquid mint aroma 5%, Tween 80 1%, aqueous solution (distilled water + Nipagin 0.1%) q.s.p. 100%. The product will be stored at room temperature and kept in the pharmacy of INCA. Patients will receive the solution once a week. They will be instructed to shake the bottle before use to homogenize the solution. They should use 10 mL of the solution per mouthwash (measured with the 10 mL dosing cup provided with each bottle), 4 times daily, performing vigorous mouthwashes for 1 minute and then spitting out all the solution after use. Swallowing the mouthwash is not recommended.

  • DrugPlacebo

    Placebo will be used, formulated as: liquid mint aroma 5%, Nipagin 0.1%, and distilled water q.s.p. 60 mL, packaged in a container identical to the investigational product to maintain physical characteristics and blinding. The product will be stored at room temperature and kept in the INCA pharmacy. Patients will receive the solution once a week. They will be instructed to shake the bottle before use to homogenize the solution. They should use 10 mL per mouthwash (measured with the 10 mL dosing cup provided), 4 times daily, performing vigorous mouthwashes for 1 minute and then spitting out all the solution after use. Patients will be instructed not to swallow the mouthwash.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Safety and efficacy evaluation through adverse event related to the use of the product (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0 and the Visual Analogic Scale)

    Evaluate the safety and efficacy of Copaiba mouthwash combined with LLLT in patients undergoing autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation by evaluating the occurrence of an adverse event related to the use of the product under investigation (pain 4 degrees above the Visual Analogic Scale score previously reported by the patient, nausea or vomiting for 7 consecutive days exclusively associated with the times of use of the mouthwash) The Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0 ranks the events from 1 to 5, with higher scores meaning worse outcome. The Visual Analogic Scale score ranks the eventos from 0 to 10, with higher scores meaning worse outcome.

    Time frame: From the first day (day 1) of conditioning and continuing until engraftment (defined as the third consecutive day with neutrophil count ≥ 500 cells/mm³), approximately 28 days.

Secondary outcomes

  1. OM (World Health Organization scale)

    Compare the incidence of the maximum grade of oral mucositis between the two groups. The World Health organization scale is used for mucositis assessment and ranks the lesions from 1 to 4, with higher scores meaning worse outcome.

    Time frame: From the first day (day 1) of conditioning and continuing until engraftment (defined as the third consecutive day with neutrophil count ≥ 500 cells/mm³), approximately 28 days.

  2. OM ulcerated area (Sonis scale)

    Compare the average ulcerated area between the two groups according to the Sonis scale. The Sonis scale is used for mucositis assessment and ranks the ulcers from 0 to 2 and the erithema from 0 to 1, with higher scores meaning worse outcome.

    Time frame: From the first day (day 1) of conditioning and continuing until engraftment (defined as the third consecutive day with neutrophil count ≥ 500 cells/mm³), approximately 28 days.

  3. OM erythema area (Sonis scale)

    Compare the average erythema area between the two groups according to the Sonis scale. The Sonis scale is used for mucositis assessment and ranks the ulcers from 0 to 2 and the erithema from 0 to 1, with higher scores meaning worse outcome.

    Time frame: From the first day (day 1) of conditioning and continuing until engraftment (defined as the third consecutive day with neutrophil count ≥ 500 cells/mm³), approximately 28 days.

  4. OM (Sonis scale)

    Compare the average sum of ulcerated and erythema areas between the two groups according to the Sonis scale. The Sonis scale is used for mucositis assessment and ranks the ulcers from 0 to 2 and the erithema from 0 to 1, with higher scores meaning worse outcome.

    Time frame: From the first day (day 1) of conditioning and continuing until engraftment (defined as the third consecutive day with neutrophil count ≥ 500 cells/mm³), approximately 28 days.

  5. Oral pain

    Compare the oral cavity pain index between the two groups according to the Visual Analog Scale and the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0. The Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0 ranks the events from 1 to 3, with higher scores meaning worse outcome. The Visual Analogic Scale score ranks the eventos from 0 to 10, with higher scores meaning worse outcome.

    Time frame: From the first day (day 1) of conditioning and continuing until engraftment (defined as the third consecutive day with neutrophil count ≥ 500 cells/mm³), approximately 28 days.

  6. Oropharyngeal pain

    Compare the oropharyngeal pain index between the two groups according to Visual Analogic Scale and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0. The Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0 ranks the events from 1 to 3, with higher scores meaning worse outcome. The Visual Analogic Scale score ranks the eventos from 0 to 10, with higher scores meaning worse outcome.

    Time frame: From the first day (day 1) of conditioning and continuing until engraftment (defined as the third consecutive day with neutrophil count ≥ 500 cells/mm³), approximately 28 days.

  7. Dysphagia

    Compare the dysphagia index between the two groups according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0. The Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0 ranks the events from 1 to 3, with higher scores meaning worse outcome. The Visual Analogic Scale score ranks the eventos from 0 to 10, with higher scores meaning worse outcome.

    Time frame: From the first day (day 1) of conditioning and continuing until engraftment (defined as the third consecutive day with neutrophil count ≥ 500 cells/mm³), approximately 28 days.

  8. Pro-inflammatory cytokines

    Compare the levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines IL-1β, IL-6, and TNF-α between the two groups at the three specified time points (in pg/mL)

    Time frame: On the first day (+/- 2 days) of conditioning, on day +6 (+/- 2 days), and on the day of "engraftment" (patient presenting 500 neutrophils for three consecutive days) (+/- 2 days).

  9. Laboratorial analysis

    Compare, in patients who develop oral mucositis lesions, the leukocyte and neutrophil counts (by cell/mm³)

    Time frame: On day one, on the day oral mucositis lesions are detected (up to 2 weeks after the HSCT), and on the day oral mucositis lesions heal (up to 4 weeks after the HSCT).

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Zadik Y, Arany PR, Fregnani ER, Bossi P, Antunes HS, Bensadoun RJ, Gueiros LA, Majorana A, Nair RG, Ranna V, Tissing WJE, Vaddi A, Lubart R, Migliorati CA, Lalla RV, Cheng KKF, Elad S; Mucositis Study Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO). Systematic review of photobiomodulation for the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients and clinical practice guidelines. Support Care Cancer. 2019 Oct;27(10):3969-3983. doi: 10.1007/s00520-019-04890-2. Epub 2019 Jul 8. PubMed 31286228 ↗
  • Yarom N, Hovan A, Bossi P, Ariyawardana A, Jensen SB, Gobbo M, Saca-Hazboun H, Kandwal A, Majorana A, Ottaviani G, Pentenero M, Nasr NM, Rouleau T, Lucas AS, Treister NS, Zur E, Ranna V, Vaddi A, Barasch A, Lalla RV, Cheng KKF, Elad S; Mucositis Study Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer / International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO). Systematic review of natural and miscellaneous agents, for the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients and clinical practice guidelines - part 2: honey, herbal compounds, saliva stimulants, probiotics, and miscellaneous agents. Support Care Cancer. 2020 May;28(5):2457-2472. doi: 10.1007/s00520-019-05256-4. Epub 2020 Feb 13. PubMed 32056010 ↗
  • Yarom N, Ariyawardana A, Hovan A, Barasch A, Jarvis V, Jensen SB, Zadik Y, Elad S, Bowen J, Lalla RV; Mucositis Study Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO). Systematic review of natural agents for the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients. Support Care Cancer. 2013 Nov;21(11):3209-21. doi: 10.1007/s00520-013-1869-5. Epub 2013 Jun 14. PubMed 23764678 ↗
  • WHO. WHO handbook for reporting results of cancer treatment. International Journal of Radiation Biology, 1979.
  • Wardill HR, Sonis ST, Blijlevens NMA, Van Sebille YZA, Ciorba MA, Loeffen EAH, Cheng KKF, Bossi P, Porcello L, Castillo DA, Elad S, Bowen JM; Mucositis Study Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO). Prediction of mucositis risk secondary to cancer therapy: a systematic review of current evidence and call to action. Support Care Cancer. 2020 Nov;28(11):5059-5073. doi: 10.1007/s00520-020-05579-7. Epub 2020 Jun 26. PubMed 32592033 ↗
  • Wagner VP, Webber LP, Ortiz L, Rados PV, Meurer L, Lameira OA, Lima RR, Martins MD. Effects of Copaiba Oil Topical Administration on Oral Wound Healing. Phytother Res. 2017 Aug;31(8):1283-1288. doi: 10.1002/ptr.5845. Epub 2017 Jun 21. PubMed 28635033 ↗
  • Valadas LAR, Gurgel MF, Mororo JM, Fonseca SGDC, Fonteles CSR, de Carvalho CBM, Fechine FV, Rodrigues Neto EM, de Franca Fonteles MM, Chagas FO, Lobo PLD, Bandeira MAM. Dose-response evaluation of a copaiba-containing varnish against streptococcus mutans in vivo. Saudi Pharm J. 2019 Mar;27(3):363-367. doi: 10.1016/j.jsps.2018.12.004. Epub 2018 Dec 15. PubMed 30976179 ↗
  • Tobouti PL, de Andrade Martins TC, Pereira TJ, Mussi MCM. Antimicrobial activity of copaiba oil: A review and a call for further research. Biomed Pharmacother. 2017 Oct;94:93-99. doi: 10.1016/j.biopha.2017.07.092. Epub 2017 Jul 27. PubMed 28756369 ↗
  • Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, Bray F. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021 May;71(3):209-249. doi: 10.3322/caac.21660. Epub 2021 Feb 4. PubMed 33538338 ↗
  • Sonis ST. Mucositis: The impact, biology and therapeutic opportunities of oral mucositis. Oral Oncol. 2009 Dec;45(12):1015-20. doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2009.08.006. Epub 2009 Oct 13. PubMed 19828360 ↗
  • Sonis ST, Elting LS, Keefe D, Peterson DE, Schubert M, Hauer-Jensen M, Bekele BN, Raber-Durlacher J, Donnelly JP, Rubenstein EB; Mucositis Study Section of the Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer; International Society for Oral Oncology. Perspectives on cancer therapy-induced mucosal injury: pathogenesis, measurement, epidemiology, and consequences for patients. Cancer. 2004 May 1;100(9 Suppl):1995-2025. doi: 10.1002/cncr.20162. PubMed 15108222 ↗
  • SONIS, S. T. The pathobiology of mucositis. Nature Reviews CancerNature Publishing Group, , 2004. . Acesso em: 1 fev. 2020
  • Sonis ST, Eilers JP, Epstein JB, LeVeque FG, Liggett WH Jr, Mulagha MT, Peterson DE, Rose AH, Schubert MM, Spijkervet FK, Wittes JP. Validation of a new scoring system for the assessment of clinical trial research of oral mucositis induced by radiation or chemotherapy. Mucositis Study Group. Cancer. 1999 May 15;85(10):2103-13. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(19990515)85:103.0.co;2-0. PubMed 10326686 ↗
  • Simoes CA, Conde NC, Venancio GN, Milerio PS, Bandeira MF, da Veiga Junior VF. Antibacterial Activity of Copaiba Oil Gel on Dental Biofilm. Open Dent J. 2016 May 11;10:188-95. doi: 10.2174/1874210601610010188. eCollection 2016. PubMed 27386004 ↗
  • Silva LC, Sacono NT, Freire Mdo C, Costa LR, Batista AC, Silva GB. The Impact of Low-Level Laser Therapy on Oral Mucositis and Quality of Life in Patients Undergoing Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Using the Oral Health Impact Profile and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bone Marrow Transplantation Questionnaires. Photomed Laser Surg. 2015 Jul;33(7):357-63. doi: 10.1089/pho.2015.3911. PubMed 26154723 ↗
  • Silva GB, Mendonca EF, Bariani C, Antunes HS, Silva MA. The prevention of induced oral mucositis with low-level laser therapy in bone marrow transplantation patients: a randomized clinical trial. Photomed Laser Surg. 2011 Jan;29(1):27-31. doi: 10.1089/pho.2009.2699. Epub 2010 Oct 22. PubMed 20969443 ↗
  • Scully C, Epstein J, Sonis S. Oral mucositis: a challenging complication of radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and radiochemotherapy. Part 2: diagnosis and management of mucositis. Head Neck. 2004 Jan;26(1):77-84. doi: 10.1002/hed.10326. PubMed 14724910 ↗
  • Schubert MM, Eduardo FP, Guthrie KA, Franquin JC, Bensadoun RJ, Migliorati CA, Lloid CM, Eduardo CP, Walter NF, Marques MM, Hamdi M. A phase III randomized double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial to determine the efficacy of low level laser therapy for the prevention of oral mucositis in patients undergoing hematopoietic cell transplantation. Support Care Cancer. 2007 Oct;15(10):1145-54. doi: 10.1007/s00520-007-0238-7. Epub 2007 Mar 29. PubMed 17393191 ↗
  • Salvador DRN, Soave DF, Sacono NT, de Castro EF, Silva GBL, E Silva LP, Silva TA, Valadares MC, Mendonca EF, Batista AC. Effect of photobiomodulation therapy on reducing the chemo-induced oral mucositis severity and on salivary levels of CXCL8/interleukin 8, nitrite, and myeloperoxidase in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a randomized clinical trial. Lasers Med Sci. 2017 Nov;32(8):1801-1810. doi: 10.1007/s10103-017-2263-1. Epub 2017 Jun 29. PubMed 28664388 ↗
  • Sahebjamee M, Mansourian A, Hajimirzamohammad M, Zadeh MT, Bekhradi R, Kazemian A, Manifar S, Ashnagar S, Doroudgar K. Comparative Efficacy of Aloe vera and Benzydamine Mouthwashes on Radiation-induced Oral Mucositis: A Triple-blind, Randomised, Controlled Clinical Trial. Oral Health Prev Dent. 2015;13(4):309-15. doi: 10.3290/j.ohpd.a33091. PubMed 25431805 ↗
  • Ricardo LM, Dias BM, Mugge FLB, Leite VV, Brandao MGL. Evidence of traditionality of Brazilian medicinal plants: The case studies of Stryphnodendron adstringens (Mart.) Coville (barbatimao) barks and Copaifera spp. (copaiba) oleoresin in wound healing. J Ethnopharmacol. 2018 Jun 12;219:319-336. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2018.02.042. Epub 2018 Mar 2. PubMed 29501844 ↗
  • Ramos GA, Piragibe MMM, Moreira MCR, Antunes HS. Polymicrobial infection of the oral mucosa after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Case report. Hematol Transfus Cell Ther. 2019 Oct-Dec;41(4):360-364. doi: 10.1016/j.htct.2019.02.003. Epub 2019 May 12. No abstract available. PubMed 31582339 ↗
  • PIERI, F. A.; MUSSI, M. C.; MOREIRA, M. A. S. Óleo de copaíba (Copaifera sp.): Histórico, extração, aplicações industrials e propriedades medicinais. Revista Brasileira de Plantas Medicinais, v. 11, n. 4, p. 465-472, 2009.
  • Pieri FA, Mussi MC, Fiorini JE, Moreira MA, Schneedorf JM. Bacteriostatic effect of copaiba oil (Copaifera officinalis) against Streptococcus mutans. Braz Dent J. 2012;23(1):36-8. doi: 10.1590/s0103-64402012000100006. PubMed 22460312 ↗
  • Pfeifer Barbosa AL, Wenzel-Storjohann A, Barbosa JD, Zidorn C, Peifer C, Tasdemir D, Cicek SS. Antimicrobial and cytotoxic effects of the Copaifera reticulata oleoresin and its main diterpene acids. J Ethnopharmacol. 2019 Apr 6;233:94-100. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2018.11.029. Epub 2018 Nov 23. PubMed 30472403 ↗
  • Oton-Leite AF, Silva GB, Morais MO, Silva TA, Leles CR, Valadares MC, Pinezi JC, Batista AC, Mendonca EF. Effect of low-level laser therapy on chemoradiotherapy-induced oral mucositis and salivary inflammatory mediators in head and neck cancer patients. Lasers Surg Med. 2015 Apr;47(4):296-305. doi: 10.1002/lsm.22349. Epub 2015 Mar 30. PubMed 25824475 ↗
  • Nishii M, Soutome S, Kawakita A, Yutori H, Iwata E, Akashi M, Hasegawa T, Kojima Y, Funahara M, Umeda M, Komori T. Factors associated with severe oral mucositis and candidiasis in patients undergoing radiotherapy for oral and oropharyngeal carcinomas: a retrospective multicenter study of 326 patients. Support Care Cancer. 2020 Mar;28(3):1069-1075. doi: 10.1007/s00520-019-04885-z. Epub 2019 Jun 8. PubMed 31177394 ↗
  • NIH, U. S. D. O. H. A. H. S. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events - Version 5.0. Definitions, 2017.
  • NEVILLE, B. W. et al. Patologia oral e maxilofacial. Quarta edição ed. Rio de Janeiro: Saunders Elsevier, 2016.
  • Migliorati C, Hewson I, Lalla RV, Antunes HS, Estilo CL, Hodgson B, Lopes NN, Schubert MM, Bowen J, Elad S; Mucositis Study Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO). Systematic review of laser and other light therapy for the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients. Support Care Cancer. 2013 Jan;21(1):333-41. doi: 10.1007/s00520-012-1605-6. Epub 2012 Sep 22. PubMed 23001179 ↗
  • Menezes ACDS, Alves LDB, Ramos GA, Schirmer MR, Moreira MCR, Piragibe MMM, de Melo AC, Antunes HS. The multiple presentation of oral actinomycosis in post-hematopoietic stem cell transplantation patients: case series. Hematol Transfus Cell Ther. 2024 Dec;46 Suppl 6(Suppl 6):S398-S404. doi: 10.1016/j.htct.2023.11.003. Epub 2023 Dec 20. No abstract available. PubMed 38182467 ↗
  • Menezes ACDS, Alves LDB, Goldemberg DC, de Melo AC, Antunes HS. Anti-inflammatory and wound healing effect of Copaiba oleoresin on the oral cavity: A systematic review. Heliyon. 2022 Feb 19;8(2):e08993. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e08993. eCollection 2022 Feb. PubMed 35243105 ↗
  • MENEZES, A. C. et al. Abordagem clínica e terapêutica da mucosite oral induzida por radioterapia e quimioterapia em pacientes com câncer. Revistas, v. 71, n. 1, p. 35, 2014.
  • Mauramo M, Grolimund P, Egli A, Passweg J, Halter J, Waltimo T. Dissociations of oral foci of infections with infectious complications and survival after haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. PLoS One. 2019 Dec 18;14(12):e0225099. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0225099. eCollection 2019. PubMed 31851665 ↗
  • Martins AFL, Morais MO, Sousa-Neto SS, Oton-Leite AF, Pereira CH, Valadares MC, Freitas NMA, Batista AC, Leles CR, Mendonca EF. The Effect of Photobiomodulation on Nitrite and Inflammatory Activity in Radiotherapy-Induced Oral Mucositis: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Lasers Surg Med. 2021 Jul;53(5):671-683. doi: 10.1002/lsm.23328. Epub 2020 Sep 30. PubMed 32997817 ↗
  • Mackall C, Fry T, Gress R, Peggs K, Storek J, Toubert A; Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR); National Marrow Donor Program (NMDP); European Blood and Marrow Transplant Group (EBMT); American Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation (ASBMT); Canadian Blood and Marrow Transplant Group (CBMTG); Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA); Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA); Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Canada (AMMI); Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Background to hematopoietic cell transplantation, including post transplant immune recovery. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2009 Oct;44(8):457-62. doi: 10.1038/bmt.2009.255. No abstract available. PubMed 19861978 ↗
  • Logan RM, Al-Azri AR, Bossi P, Stringer AM, Joy JK, Soga Y, Ranna V, Vaddi A, Raber-Durlacher JE, Lalla RV, Cheng KKF, Elad S; Mucositis Study Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO). Systematic review of growth factors and cytokines for the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients and clinical practice guidelines. Support Care Cancer. 2020 May;28(5):2485-2498. doi: 10.1007/s00520-019-05170-9. Epub 2020 Feb 21. PubMed 32080767 ↗
  • Lima CS, de Medeiros BJ, Favacho HA, dos Santos KC, de Oliveira BR, Taglialegna JC, da Costa EV, de Campos KJ, Carvalho JC. Pre-clinical validation of a vaginal cream containing copaiba oil (reproductive toxicology study). Phytomedicine. 2011 Sep 15;18(12):1013-23. doi: 10.1016/j.phymed.2011.05.004. Epub 2011 Jun 12. PubMed 21665449 ↗
  • Leandro LM, Vargas Fde S, Barbosa PC, Neves JK, da Silva JA, da Veiga-Junior VF. Chemistry and biological activities of terpenoids from copaiba (Copaifera spp.) oleoresins. Molecules. 2012 Mar 30;17(4):3866-89. doi: 10.3390/molecules17043866. PubMed 22466849 ↗
  • Lalla RV, Bowen J, Barasch A, Elting L, Epstein J, Keefe DM, McGuire DB, Migliorati C, Nicolatou-Galitis O, Peterson DE, Raber-Durlacher JE, Sonis ST, Elad S; Mucositis Guidelines Leadership Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer and International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO). MASCC/ISOO clinical practice guidelines for the management of mucositis secondary to cancer therapy. Cancer. 2014 May 15;120(10):1453-61. doi: 10.1002/cncr.28592. Epub 2014 Feb 25. PubMed 24615748 ↗
  • Kiyomi A, Yoshida K, Arai C, Usuki R, Yamazaki K, Hoshino N, Kurokawa A, Imai S, Suzuki N, Toyama A, Sugiura M. Salivary inflammatory mediators as biomarkers for oral mucositis and oral mucosal dryness in cancer patients: A pilot study. PLoS One. 2022 Apr 27;17(4):e0267092. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267092. eCollection 2022. PubMed 35476641 ↗
  • Khouri VY, Stracieri AB, Rodrigues MC, Moraes DA, Pieroni F, Simoes BP, Voltarelli JC. Use of therapeutic laser for prevention and treatment of oral mucositis. Braz Dent J. 2009;20(3):215-20. doi: 10.1590/s0103-64402009000300008. PubMed 19784467 ↗
  • Jones JA, Avritscher EB, Cooksley CD, Michelet M, Bekele BN, Elting LS. Epidemiology of treatment-associated mucosal injury after treatment with newer regimens for lymphoma, breast, lung, or colorectal cancer. Support Care Cancer. 2006 Jun;14(6):505-15. doi: 10.1007/s00520-006-0055-4. Epub 2006 Apr 7. PubMed 16601950 ↗
  • INCA, I. N. DE C. J. A. G. DA S. Estimativa 2023: Incidêcia de Câncer no Brasil. Disponível em: <https://www.gov.br/inca/pt-br/assuntos/cancer/numeros/estimativa/estado-capital/brasil>. Acesso em: 24 nov. 2022.
  • INCA, I. N. DE C. Cuidados paliativos oncológicos. [s.l: s.n.].
  • Hong CHL, Gueiros LA, Fulton JS, Cheng KKF, Kandwal A, Galiti D, Fall-Dickson JM, Johansen J, Ameringer S, Kataoka T, Weikel D, Eilers J, Ranna V, Vaddi A, Lalla RV, Bossi P, Elad S; Mucositis Study Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society for Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO). Systematic review of basic oral care for the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients and clinical practice guidelines. Support Care Cancer. 2019 Oct;27(10):3949-3967. doi: 10.1007/s00520-019-04848-4. Epub 2019 Jul 8. PubMed 31286232 ↗
  • Gomes Nde M, de Rezende CM, Fontes SP, Matheus ME, Pinto Ada C, Fernandes PD. Characterization of the antinociceptive and anti-inflammatory activities of fractions obtained from Copaifera multijuga Hayne. J Ethnopharmacol. 2010 Mar 2;128(1):177-83. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2010.01.005. Epub 2010 Jan 12. PubMed 20064592 ↗
  • Gelmini F, Beretta G, Anselmi C, Centini M, Magni P, Ruscica M, Cavalchini A, Maffei Facino R. GC-MS profiling of the phytochemical constituents of the oleoresin from Copaifera langsdorffii Desf. and a preliminary in vivo evaluation of its antipsoriatic effect. Int J Pharm. 2013 Jan 20;440(2):170-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2012.08.021. Epub 2012 Aug 20. PubMed 22939967 ↗
  • Ferreira B, da Motta Silveira FM, de Orange FA. Low-level laser therapy prevents severe oral mucositis in patients submitted to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a randomized clinical trial. Support Care Cancer. 2016 Mar;24(3):1035-42. doi: 10.1007/s00520-015-2881-8. Epub 2015 Aug 7. PubMed 26248655 ↗
  • Estevao LR, Medeiros JP, Baratella-Evencio L, Simoes RS, Mendonca Fde S, Evencio-Neto J. Effects of the topical administration of copaiba oil ointment (Copaifera langsdorffii) in skin flaps viability of rats. Acta Cir Bras. 2013 Dec;28(12):863-9. doi: 10.1590/s0102-86502013001200009. PubMed 24316860 ↗
  • Elad S, Cheng KKF, Lalla RV, Yarom N, Hong C, Logan RM, Bowen J, Gibson R, Saunders DP, Zadik Y, Ariyawardana A, Correa ME, Ranna V, Bossi P; Mucositis Guidelines Leadership Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer and International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO). MASCC/ISOO clinical practice guidelines for the management of mucositis secondary to cancer therapy. Cancer. 2020 Oct 1;126(19):4423-4431. doi: 10.1002/cncr.33100. Epub 2020 Jul 28. PubMed 32786044 ↗
  • Elad S, Raber-Durlacher JE, Brennan MT, Saunders DP, Mank AP, Zadik Y, Quinn B, Epstein JB, Blijlevens NM, Waltimo T, Passweg JR, Correa ME, Dahllof G, Garming-Legert KU, Logan RM, Potting CM, Shapira MY, Soga Y, Stringer J, Stokman MA, Vokurka S, Wallhult E, Yarom N, Jensen SB. Basic oral care for hematology-oncology patients and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation recipients: a position paper from the joint task force of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO) and the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT). Support Care Cancer. 2015 Jan;23(1):223-36. doi: 10.1007/s00520-014-2378-x. Epub 2014 Sep 5. PubMed 25189149 ↗
  • Diefenbach AL, Muniz FWMG, Oballe HJR, Rosing CK. Antimicrobial activity of copaiba oil (Copaifera ssp.) on oral pathogens: Systematic review. Phytother Res. 2018 Apr;32(4):586-596. doi: 10.1002/ptr.5992. Epub 2017 Nov 29. PubMed 29193389 ↗
  • Dias-da-Silva MA, Pereira AC, Marin MC, Salgado MA. The influence of topic and systemic administration of copaiba oil on the alveolar wound healing after tooth extraction in rats. J Clin Exp Dent. 2013 Oct 1;5(4):e169-73. doi: 10.4317/jced.51104. eCollection 2013 Oct 1. PubMed 24455075 ↗
  • de Castro CG Jr, Gregianin LJ, Brunetto AL. [Bone marrow transplantation and cord blood transplantation in children]. J Pediatr (Rio J). 2001 Sep-Oct;77(5):345-60. doi: 10.2223/jped.275. Portuguese. PubMed 14647838 ↗
  • Davies AN, Broadley K, Beighton D. Salivary gland hypofunction in patients with advanced cancer. Oral Oncol. 2002 Oct;38(7):680-5. doi: 10.1016/s1368-8375(01)00133-6. PubMed 12167420 ↗
  • Dalenogare DP, Ferro PR, De Pra SDT, Rigo FK, de David Antoniazzi CT, de Almeida AS, Damiani AP, Strapazzon G, de Oliveira Sardinha TT, Galvani NC, Boligon AA, de Andrade VM, da Silva Brum E, Oliveira SM, Trevisan G. Antinociceptive activity of Copaifera officinalis Jacq. L oil and kaurenoic acid in mice. Inflammopharmacology. 2019 Aug;27(4):829-844. doi: 10.1007/s10787-019-00588-3. Epub 2019 May 16. PubMed 31098702 ↗
  • da Trindade R, da Silva JK, Setzer WN. Copaifera of the Neotropics: A Review of the Phytochemistry and Pharmacology. Int J Mol Sci. 2018 May 18;19(5):1511. doi: 10.3390/ijms19051511. PubMed 29783680 ↗
  • Bossi P, Bergamini C, Miceli R, Cova A, Orlandi E, Resteghini C, Locati L, Alfieri S, Imbimbo M, Granata R, Mariani L, Iacovelli NA, Huber V, Cavallo A, Licitra L, Rivoltini L. Salivary Cytokine Levels and Oral Mucositis in Head and Neck Cancer Patients Treated With Chemotherapy and Radiation Therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016 Dec 1;96(5):959-966. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.08.047. Epub 2016 Sep 6. PubMed 27745982 ↗
  • Barrach RH, Souza MP, Silva DP, Lopez PS, Montovani JC. Oral changes in individuals undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2015 Mar-Apr;81(2):141-7. doi: 10.1016/j.bjorl.2014.04.004. Epub 2014 Oct 22. PubMed 25458262 ↗
  • Balassa K, Danby R, Rocha V. Haematopoietic stem cell transplants: principles and indications. Br J Hosp Med (Lond). 2019 Jan 2;80(1):33-39. doi: 10.12968/hmed.2019.80.1.33. PubMed 30592675 ↗
  • ASSOCIAÇÃO BRASILEIRA DE TRANSPLANTE DE ÓRGÃOS. Registro Brasileiro de Transplante. Veículo Oficial da Associação Brasileira de Transplante de Órgãos, n. n°4, 2023.
  • Armitage JO. Bone marrow transplantation. N Engl J Med. 1994 Mar 24;330(12):827-38. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199403243301206. No abstract available. PubMed 8114836 ↗
  • Ariyawardana A, Cheng KKF, Kandwal A, Tilly V, Al-Azri AR, Galiti D, Chiang K, Vaddi A, Ranna V, Nicolatou-Galitis O, Lalla RV, Bossi P, Elad S; Mucositis Study Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society for Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO). Systematic review of anti-inflammatory agents for the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients and clinical practice guidelines. Support Care Cancer. 2019 Oct;27(10):3985-3995. doi: 10.1007/s00520-019-04888-w. Epub 2019 Jul 8. PubMed 31286230 ↗
  • Antunes HS, Herchenhorn D, Small IA, Araujo CM, Viegas CM, Cabral E, Rampini MP, Rodrigues PC, Silva TG, Ferreira EM, Dias FL, Ferreira CG. Phase III trial of low-level laser therapy to prevent oral mucositis in head and neck cancer patients treated with concurrent chemoradiation. Radiother Oncol. 2013 Nov;109(2):297-302. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2013.08.010. Epub 2013 Sep 14. PubMed 24044799 ↗
  • Antunes HS, de Azevedo AM, da Silva Bouzas LF, Adao CA, Pinheiro CT, Mayhe R, Pinheiro LH, Azevedo R, D'Aiuto de Matos V, Rodrigues PC, Small IA, Zangaro RA, Ferreira CG. Low-power laser in the prevention of induced oral mucositis in bone marrow transplantation patients: a randomized trial. Blood. 2007 Mar 1;109(5):2250-5. doi: 10.1182/blood-2006-07-035022. Epub 2006 Oct 19. PubMed 17053058 ↗
  • Ames-Sibin AP, Barizao CL, Castro-Ghizoni CV, Silva FMS, Sa-Nakanishi AB, Bracht L, Bersani-Amado CA, Marcal-Natali MR, Bracht A, Comar JF. beta-Caryophyllene, the major constituent of copaiba oil, reduces systemic inflammation and oxidative stress in arthritic rats. J Cell Biochem. 2018 Dec;119(12):10262-10277. doi: 10.1002/jcb.27369. Epub 2018 Aug 21. PubMed 30132972 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Started Mar 2026 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for Nov 2027, 20 months after the start.

Of 39 phase 2 interventional studies under Stomatitis, half reached primary completion within 35 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 10 and three quarters within 48. This study's planned 20 months is below that.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Jan 7, 2026
First posted
Sep 9, 2026
StartActual
Mar 29, 2026
Primary completionEst.
Nov 2027
CompletionEst.
Feb 2028
Last update
Sep 9, 2026
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 9, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07810530
Lead sponsor
Instituto Nacional de Cancer, Brazil
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Sep 9, 2026
Start date
Mar 29, 2026
Primary completion
Nov 2027 (estimated)
Completion
Feb 2028 (estimated)
Last update
Sep 9, 2026

Study contacts

Ana Carolina Menezes, PhD' student
Contact
ana.smenezes@gmail.com
+55 21 32041859
Héliton Spíndola, PhD
study director · Instituto Nacional de Cancer

Oversight

FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion