Topical interventions for preventing hand-foot syndrome resulting from antineoplastic therapy: A scoping review

Abstract

Objective: To map topical interventions used to prevent hand-foot syndrome in cancer patients undergoing antineoplastic therapy. Method: This is a scoping review reported in accordance with the recommendations of PRISMA-ScR (extension for scoping review) and the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual. The searches were carried out in the electronic databases CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, LILACS, LIVIVO, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science; and gray literature (Google Scholar, Pro-Quest). Results: The searches resulted in 12,016 references and the final sample consisted of 45 studies. A total of 42 topical interventions were identified, including: moisturizing creams, corticosteroids, acids, mapisal, silymarin, and henna. However, urea was the most cited intervention (62%). As for the presentations of the interventions, they varied among creams, ointments, gels, hydrocolloids, decoctions, patches, powders, oils, and soaps. Conclusion: The results allowed reviewing topical interventions, with emphasis on the use of urea and moisturizing creams. However, most of the interventions identified in this review require evaluation in future studies for better understanding of their benefits.

Therapeutic Effect of Anti-inflammatory Tripeptide Cream in Hand-Foot Syndrome/Skin Reaction Related to Anticancer Drugs: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Pilot Trial

“…Urea cream is a topical agent that has no systemic effects and is readily available and inexpensive. It has keratolytic properties, softens hyperkeratotic areas, and reduces epidermal proliferation [22][23][24][25]. A recent metaanalysis reported that celecoxib and urea cream were both effective in preventing HFS/HFSR in patients receiving chemotherapeutic agents or MKIs, while pyridoxine failed to show significant benefits [26].…”

“…It has anti-inflammatory, analgesic, smoothing and skin barrier function and is a topical agent with no systemic effect that can control the various pathogenic and histopathological findings of HFS/HFSR. Most previous studies on HFS/HFSR had focused on prophylactic strategies [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26], and very few focused on therapeutic strategies for HFS/HFSR [30]. When ATPC was applied to mild HFS/HFSR that occurred during systemic cancer treatment with chemotherapeutic agents or TKI, it not only lowered the frequency of moderate or severe development but also showed improvement in mild HFS/HFSR while continuing the anticancer treatment (S4 Fig.…”