J Compr Ped

Image Credit:J Compr Ped

A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial on the Safety and Efficacy of Ketamine Mouthwash for Chemotherapy-Induced Oral Mucositis in Pediatric Patients

Author(s):
Maral HejratiMaral HejratiMaral Hejrati ORCID1, Peyman EshghiPeyman EshghiPeyman Eshghi ORCID1, Majid NaderiMajid NaderiMajid Naderi ORCID2, Bahador MirrahimiBahador MirrahimiBahador Mirrahimi ORCID3, Shiva NazariShiva NazariShiva Nazari ORCID1, Bibishahin ShamsianBibishahin ShamsianBibishahin Shamsian ORCID1, Samin AlaviSamin AlaviSamin Alavi ORCID1, Fatemeh MalekFatemeh MalekFatemeh Malek ORCID1,*, Nader MomtazmaneshNader MomtazmaneshNader Momtazmanesh ORCID1
1Pediatric Congenital Hematologic Disorders Research Center, Research Institute for Childern's Health, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2Genetics of Non-Communicable Disease Research Centre, Zahedan University of Medical Sciences, Zahedan, Iran
3Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Journal of Comprehensive Pediatrics:Vol. 17, issue 1; e135635
Published online:Dec 09, 2025
Article type:Research Article
Received:Jul 26, 2024
Accepted:Oct 08, 2025
How to Cite:Hejrati M, Eshghi P, Naderi M, Mirrahimi B, Nazari S, et al. A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial on the Safety and Efficacy of Ketamine Mouthwash for Chemotherapy-Induced Oral Mucositis in Pediatric Patients.J Compr Ped.2025;17(1):e135635.https://doi.org/10.5812/jcp-135635.

Abstract

Background:

Oral mucositis (OM) is a common and debilitating adverse effect of chemotherapy in pediatric oncology, resulting in significant pain and impaired nutritional intake.

Objectives:

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and analgesic efficacy of ketamine mouthwash in children with severe chemotherapy-induced OM.

Methods:

We conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving 40 pediatric patients aged 7 - 14 years with World Health Organization (WHO) grade 3 or 4 OM. Participants were randomized to receive either ketamine mouthwash (4 mg/mL) or placebo, administered three times daily for 72 hours. Pain intensity was assessed using a 10-point Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at baseline and at multiple intervals following intervention. Functional recovery and adverse events were monitored throughout the study.

Results:

Baseline pain scores were similar between the two groups. Significant reductions in pain were observed in the ketamine group on days two and three (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.0003, respectively). The onset of analgesia occurred within 15 minutes and lasted for 2 - 3 hours. Oral intake improved markedly in the ketamine group, with no adverse events reported.

Conclusions:

Ketamine mouthwash at a concentration of 4 mg/mL is a safe and effective analgesic for the management of severe OM in pediatric chemotherapy patients. Its rapid onset of action and functional benefits support its use as an adjunctive supportive care measure.

1. Background

Oral mucositis (OM) affects up to 50% of children undergoing chemotherapy, posing a significant barrier to nutritional intake, quality of life, and the continuity of cancer treatment (1, 2). The OM typically manifests within 3 - 15 days following chemotherapy and progresses from mucosal erythema to deep, painful ulcerations that may lead to secondary infections and systemic complications (3-5). The World Health Organization (WHO) classifies OM into five grades, ranging from 0 (no mucositis) to 4 (severe ulceration with complete inability to eat) (5).

Standard treatment approaches — such as topical anesthetics, antiseptic rinses, and systemic analgesics — often fail to provide adequate relief (6, 7). This therapeutic gap has prompted the exploration of novel topical agents that can deliver targeted analgesia with minimal systemic exposure.

Ketamine, a non-competitive N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist, possesses anesthetic, analgesic, and mild anti-inflammatory properties (8). Topically administered ketamine may offer localized pain relief without significant systemic side effects. Although small-scale studies have demonstrated promise in both adult and pediatric populations (9-11), high-quality randomized trials in children remain limited.

2. Objectives

This study aims to evaluate the safety and analgesic efficacy of ketamine mouthwash for chemotherapy-induced OM in pediatric patients, utilizing a rigorous randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled design. The primary objective was to assess the efficacy of ketamine mouthwash in reducing mucositis-related pain intensity compared with placebo. The secondary objectives were to evaluate the onset and duration of the analgesic effect and the safety profile.

3. Methods

This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial was conducted at two tertiary pediatric oncology centers in Iran: Mofid Children’s Hospital (Tehran) and Ali Asghar Hospital (Zahedan). Ethical approval was obtained from the Shahid Beheshti Medical University Ethics Committee. Written informed consent was obtained from all guardians, and assent was obtained from children when appropriate. The study was prospectively registered (IRCT20201218049750N1).

Eligible participants were children aged 7 to 14 years diagnosed with WHO grade 3 or 4 OM following chemotherapy. Exclusion criteria included ketamine use within 48 hours prior to enrollment, known hypersensitivity to ketamine, and a history of acute psychosis. This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel trial with a 1:1 allocation ratio.

Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio using a permuted block design (block size = 8). Allocation concealment was ensured through sealed opaque envelopes. No protocol changes were made after trial commencement.

The intervention group received 5 mL of ketamine mouthwash (4 mg/mL) every 8 hours for 72 hours, with instructions to swish for 30 seconds and then spit. The placebo group received an identical-appearing normal saline solution. Blinding was maintained across participants and care providers.

1. Primary outcome: Pain intensity was measured on a 10-point Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at baseline, 1 hour after each dose, and every 8 hours.

2. Secondary outcomes: Dietary intake (none, liquid, soft, regular), onset and duration of pain relief, and adverse event monitoring.

3.1. Sample Size

Based on pilot data, 40 patients (20 per group) provided 80% power to detect a 2-point difference in pain scores (α = 0.05). No interim analyses or stopping rules were planned.

3.2. Randomization and Blinding

Randomization was computer-generated with block size 4. Allocation was concealed by the pharmacist, who prepared sequentially numbered, identical syringes. Participants, caregivers, and investigators were blinded. Ketamine and placebo solutions were indistinguishable.

3.3. Statistical Analysis

Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used for pain score comparisons. Categorical data were analyzed using chi-square tests. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. No subgroup analyses were performed.

Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS v19. Continuous variables were compared using t-tests or Mann-Whitney U tests; categorical variables were analyzed using chi-square or Fisher’s exact tests. A P-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

4. Results

All 40 randomized participants completed the study. The ketamine group (n = 20; mean age: 9.9 ± 2.97 years) and the placebo group (n = 20; mean age: 8.9 ± 2.1 years) were comparable at baseline. Underlying malignancies included acute lymphoblastic leukemia (n = 19), acute myeloid leukemia (n = 11), lymphoma (n = 8), and germ cell tumors (n = 2). Demographic Information is presented in Table 1.

Table 1.Baseline Characteristics of Participants (N = 20) a
CharacteristicsKetamine GroupPlacebo Group
Age (y); mean ± SD9.9 ± 2.18.9 ± 1.9
Sex
Male8 (40)12 (60)
Female12 (60)8 (40)
Diagnosis
ALL10 (50)9 (45)
AML5 (25)6 (30)
Lymphoma4 (20)4 (20)
Germ cell tumor1 (5)1 (5)

a Values are expressed as No. (%) unless indicated.

All 40 randomized participants (20 per arm) were included in the analysis according to intention-to-treat principles. We clarified that 20 patients were allocated to the ketamine group and 20 to the placebo group. All participants received the assigned intervention and were analyzed for both the primary and secondary outcomes. A CONSORT-style flow diagram has been added Figure 1. Recruitment took place between January 2021 and December 2022, with follow-up completed in January 2023.

CONSORT flow diagram
Figure 1.

CONSORT flow diagram

We reported the mean reduction in pain scores for each group with corresponding P-values. Confidence intervals (95%) for effect sizes have been added. As the outcomes were continuous (pain scores), binary effect sizes were not applicable. This has been clarified.

4.1. Pain Scores

No difference was observed on day one (P = 1.0). However, by day two, pain scores had significantly declined in the ketamine group (mean reduction: 3.2 vs. 1.1; P < 0.0001) and continued to improve on day three (mean reduction: 4.1 vs. 1.9; P = 0.0003). Figure 2 is a line chart depicting the reduction in pain scores among patients. Patients in the ketamine group consistently reported pain relief within 15 minutes, lasting 2 - 3 hours.

Pain reduction over time
Figure 2.

Pain reduction over time

4.2. Oral Intake

By day two, 70% of ketamine-treated patients resumed soft or regular diets compared to 20% in the placebo group (P < 0.001). By day three, this increased to 90% in the ketamine group, indicating superior functional recovery.

4.3. Adverse Events

No adverse events were reported in either group, and no patient required discontinuation or rescue therapy.

5. Discussion

This is the first double-blind, randomized, parallel trial to administer ketamine mouthwash to pediatric oncologic patients every eight hours over three days. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of ketamine mouthwash (4 mg/1 mL) in children with severe chemotherapy-induced mucositis above seven years of age. At the end of the second and third days, statistically significant pain reduction was reported by participants in the ketamine group compared to the placebo group (P < 0.001).

In contrast to our findings, the Satya Prakash research group reported that pain reduction did not differ significantly between their patients and the placebo group. However, they prescribed only a single dose of ketamine (9). Notably, they utilized a face scale for assessing pain, which is less suitable for patients in this age range. We used a numeric pain scale, which is the most reliable subjective pain assessment appropriate for our patients’ age group. Shillingburg et al. indicated that 30 adult oncologic patients who received ketamine solution at a concentration of 20 mg/5 mL experienced significant reductions in mucositis pain. Their study design was open-label and therefore more susceptible to bias compared to our trial, which was randomized, double-blinded, and placebo-controlled (10). Slatkin and Rhiner described a case of a 32-year-old female with tongue squamous carcinoma who suffered from severe and refractory pain; ketamine mouthwash (20 mg/5 mL) was administered, resulting in significant pain reduction lasting for one hour, and she was discharged with this medication to be used every 3 hours (11). According to a retrospective study, pain reduction was observed in 5 out of 8 patients (12). Similar results were seen in a trial by Saenz et al.; their study found ketamine mouthwash to be effective in treating orofacial pain in adult cancer patients. When combined with oral transmucosal fentanyl citrate, the analgesic efficacy reached 94.1%. However, some transient side effects were associated with the ketamine mouthwash (13). That study was retrospective, and the efficacy of ketamine mouthwash was not analyzable; in contrast, our trial was a prospective, randomized, controlled study with an appropriate methodological design. Our study limitations include the limited sample size, although the impact was mitigated by the rigorous study design.

This trial demonstrates that ketamine mouthwash (4 mg/mL) administered every 8 hours for 72 hours is safe, well-tolerated, and effective in reducing pain and improving oral intake in pediatric patients with severe chemotherapy-induced mucositis.

Our findings are consistent with adult case series and early pediatric reports suggesting a benefit of topical ketamine (9-11), but differ in the strength of design: A double-blind, placebo-controlled methodology utilizing self-reported numeric pain scores. This enhances reliability and reduces observer bias, which affected previous open-label studies. Our results also align with case reports (11) and small series (12), and are comparable to retrospective adult experiences (13). Furthermore, our findings contribute to the body of evidence on interventions such as doxepin rinse (14), herbal mouthwashes (15), and sucralfate rinse (16). These findings support ketamine mouthwash as a promising analgesic option in pediatric oncology.

The analgesic effect was rapid (onset within 15 minutes) and sustained over multiple doses, underscoring ketamine’s value in localized pain management. The significant improvement in oral intake highlights functional recovery, an often overlooked but crucial endpoint in mucositis trials.

In light of emerging literature on ketamine’s evolving role in pain management, including concerns regarding systemic safety and optimal dosing strategies (12, 13), our study provides valuable pediatric-specific data demonstrating localized benefit without systemic complications.

5.1. Conclusions

Ketamine mouthwash (4 mg/mL) appears to be a safe and effective intervention for severe OM in pediatric oncology patients. Its rapid analgesic onset, lack of systemic toxicity, and facilitation of oral intake support its role as a valuable supportive care option during chemotherapy.

5.2. Limitations

The small sample size and short follow-up period limit generalizability. Larger multicenter studies are needed to determine optimal dosing frequency, long-term safety, and effects across different cancer protocols.

Footnotes

References

  • 1.
    Sonis ST. Is oral mucositis an inevitable consequence of intensive therapy for hematologic cancers? Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2005;2(3):134-5. [PubMed ID: 16264905]. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncponc0104.
  • 2.
    Cheng KK, Lee V, Li CH, Yuen HL, Epstein JB. Oral mucositis in pediatric and adolescent patients undergoing chemotherapy: the impact of symptoms on quality of life. Support Care Cancer. 2012;20(10):2335-42. [PubMed ID: 22167295]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-011-1343-1.
  • 3.
    Villa A, Sonis ST. Mucositis: pathobiology and management. Curr Opin Oncol. 2015;27(3):159-64. [PubMed ID: 25774860]. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCO.0000000000000180.
  • 4.
    Peterson DE, Boers-Doets CB, Bensadoun RJ, Herrstedt J; Esmo Guidelines Committee. Management of oral and gastrointestinal mucosal injury: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2015;26:v139-51. [PubMed ID: 26142468]. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdv202.
  • 5.
    World Health Organization. WHO handbook for reporting results of cancer treatment. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization,; 1979. Contract No.: 9241700483.
  • 6.
    Lalla RV, Bowen J, Barasch A, Elting L, Epstein J, Keefe DM, et al. MASCC/ISOO clinical practice guidelines for the management of mucositis secondary to cancer therapy. Cancer. 2014;120(10):1453-61. [PubMed ID: 24615748]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC4164022]. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.28592.
  • 7.
    Worthington HV, Clarkson JE, Bryan G, Furness S, Glenny AM, Littlewood A, et al. Interventions for preventing oral mucositis for patients with cancer receiving treatment. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;2011(4). CD000978. [PubMed ID: 21491378]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC7032547]. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD000978.pub5.
  • 8.
    Hirota K, Lambert DG. Ketamine: its mechanism(s) of action and unusual clinical uses. Br J Anaesth. 1996;77(4):441-4. [PubMed ID: 8942324]. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/77.4.441.
  • 9.
    Ip WY, Epstein JB, Lee V, Yuen HL, Li R, Thompson DR, et al. Oral mucositis in paediatric patients after chemotherapy for cancer. Hong Kong Med J. 2014;20 Suppl 7:4-8. [PubMed ID: 25647816].
  • 10.
    Shillingburg A, Eckstein AS, Hamadani M, Wen S, Craig M, Cumpston A. Treatment of severe mucositis pain with oral ketamine mouthwash. Support Care Cancer. 2017;25(7):2215-9. [PubMed ID: 28190158]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC5500907]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-017-3627-6.
  • 11.
    Slatkin NE, Rhiner M. Topical ketamine in the treatment of mucositis pain. Pain Med. 2003;4(3):298-303. [PubMed ID: 12974832]. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1526-4637.2003.03032.x.
  • 12.
    Namuangchan Y, Chailertwanich O, Susinsamphan S, Supakalin N, Supaadirek C, Krusun S, et al. Prophylaxis of Oral Mucositis with Iodine Solution during Concurrent Chemoradiation of Head and Neck Cancer: Preliminary Results of a Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2023;24(7):2445-54. [PubMed ID: 37505779]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC10676485]. https://doi.org/10.31557/APJCP.2023.24.7.2445.
  • 13.
    Saenz MC, Galvez FE, Garcia IA, Alonso MBM, Salvador AV, Garcia-Carricondo A. Treatment with ketamine mouthwashes with and without transmucosal fentanyl in major opiate-resistant orofacial cancer pain. Rev Esp Cir Oral Maxilofac. 2015;37(2):80-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maxile.2013.11.001.
  • 14.
    Leenstra JL, Miller RC, Qin R, Martenson JA, Dornfeld KJ, Bearden JD, et al. Doxepin rinse versus placebo in the treatment of acute oral mucositis pain in patients receiving head and neck radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy: a phase III, randomized, double-blind trial (NCCTG-N09C6 [Alliance]). J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(15):1571-7. [PubMed ID: 24733799]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC4026580]. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2013.53.2630.
  • 15.
    Ardakani M, Ghassemi S, Mehdizadeh M, Mojab F, Salamzadeh J, Ghassemi S, et al. Evaluating the effect of Matricaria recutita and Mentha piperita herbal mouthwash on management of oral mucositis in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: A randomized, double blind, placebo controlled clinical trial. Complement Ther Med. 2016;29:29-34. [PubMed ID: 27912953]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctim.2016.08.001.
  • 16.
    Dodd MJ, Miaskowski C, Greenspan D, MacPhail L, Shih AS, Shiba G, et al. Radiation-induced mucositis: a randomized clinical trial of micronized sucralfate versus salt & soda mouthwashes. Cancer Invest. 2003;21(1):21-33. [PubMed ID: 12643006]. https://doi.org/10.1081/cnv-120016400.

Crossmark
Crossmark
Checking
Share on
Cited by
Metrics

Purchasing Reprints

  • Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) handles bulk orders for article reprints for Brieflands. To place an order for reprints, please click here (   https://www.copyright.com/landing/reprintsinquiryform/ ). Clicking this link will bring you to a CCC request form where you can provide the details of your order. Once complete, please click the ‘Submit Request’ button and CCC’s Reprints Services team will generate a quote for your review.
Search Relations

Author(s):

Related Articles