Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Demonstrates lower rates of acute radiation dermatitis with Mepitel Film versus StrataXRT in postmastectomy radiotherapy, suggesting greater objective skin protection.
INTRODUCTION: We report a pooled analysis of two multicentre intra-patient randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the silicone-based dressings Mepitel Film and StrataXRT for the prevention of acute radiation dermatitis (ARD) in postmastectomy radiotherapy (RT). METHODS: Each irradiated chest wall was divided into medial and lateral halves, randomised to one dressing each. The primary endpoint was the incidence of grade 2 or 3 ARD. Secondary endpoints included grade 3 ARD, moist desquamation, time to moist desquamation, Radiation-Induced Skin Reaction Assessment Scale (RISRAS) scores, adverse events, and treatment preferences. Discordant-pair methods, conditional logistic regression, paired comparisons of area under the curve (AUC), and longitudinal fixed-effects regression were used. RESULTS: A total of 120 patients (median age, 60 years; interquartile range, 51-69) were included (Australia, n = 40; New Zealand, n = 80); 64.2% received moderately hypofractionated or ultrahypofractionated RT. Among 38 discordant pairs, grade 2 or 3 ARD occurred only on the StrataXRT side in 30 patients and only on the Mepitel Film side in eight patients (odds ratio 3.75, 95% CI 1.72-8.18; p = 0.001). Grade 3 ARD and moist desquamation did not differ significantly. HCP-assessed RISRAS AUCs for erythema (p < 0.001) and moist desquamation (p = 0.034) were significantly lower with Mepitel Film, consistent with the longitudinal analyses. Patient-reported RISRAS AUCs did not differ between treatments. Treatment preferences were broadly balanced. CONCLUSIONS: Mepitel Film reduced the incidence of grade 2 or 3 ARD and cumulative HCP-assessed erythema and moist desquamation burden compared with StrataXRT, while patient-reported symptom burden was similar. Selection of a prophylactic dressing for postmastectomy RT should consider patient preference, cost, ease of application, skin sensitivity, and available resources. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12621000124831 and ACTRN12619001477112.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: