-
Cochlear Implantation in Children With Single-Sided Deafness: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA Otolaryngology-- Head & Neck... Jan 2021In 2019, the US Food and Drug Administration approved cochlear implantation for children with single-sided deafness (SSD). The absence of robust clinical data specific... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
In 2019, the US Food and Drug Administration approved cochlear implantation for children with single-sided deafness (SSD). The absence of robust clinical data specific to pediatric patients to guide shared decision-making and to identify potential advantages is a challenge in family counseling.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the audiological and patient-reported outcomes in children who underwent cochlear implantation for SSD and to assess the association between time of implantation, subjective outcomes, and cochlear implant device use rates.
DATA SOURCE
MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, and PubMed were searched for English-language articles that were published in a peer-reviewed journal from database inception to February 18, 2020.
STUDY SELECTION
Inclusion criteria were designed to capture studies that evaluated pediatric patients (1) younger than 18 years, (2) with a diagnosis of SSD for which they underwent a cochlear implantation, and (3) with at least 1 outcome of interest measured numerically: speech perception, sound localization, device use, and patient-reported outcomes. Of the 526 articles reviewed, 12 (2.3%) met the selection criteria.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
The Meta-analyses Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) reporting guidelines were followed. Data were pooled using fixed-effect and random-effect models. The following information was obtained from each article: study characteristics, patient characteristics, hearing loss and intervention characteristics, and outcomes.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Outcomes were (1) postoperative changes in speech perception (in quiet was measured as a proportion of correct responses, and in noise was measured as decibel signal to noise ratio for speech reception threshold) and sound localization (measured in degree of localization error), (2) patient-reported audiological outcomes (measured by the speech, spatial, and qualities of hearing scale), and (3) device use rates among children who received cochlear implantation for SSD.
RESULTS
Twelve observational studies that evaluated 119 children (mean [SD] age, 6.6 [4.0] years) with SSD who received a cochlear implant were included. Most children showed clinically meaningful improvement in speech perception in noise (39 of 49 children [79.6%]) and in quiet (34 of 42 children [81.0%]). Long duration of deafness (>4 years in congenital SSD and >7 years in perilingual SSD) was the most commonly proposed reason for lack of improvement. Sound localization as measured by degrees of error from true location (mean difference [MD], -24.78°; 95% CI, -34.16° to -15.40°; I2 = 10%) improved statistically significantly after cochlear implantation. Patients with acquired SSD and shorter duration of deafness compared with those with congenital SSD reported greater improvements in speech (MD, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.89-2.65 vs 1.58; 95% CI, 1.00-2.16) and spatial (MD, 2.95; 95% CI, 2.66-3.24 vs 1.68; 95% CI, 0.96-2.39) hearing qualities. The duration of deafness among device nonusers was statistically significantly longer than the duration of deafness among regular device users (median difference, 6.84; 95% CI, 4.02-9.58).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
This systematic review and meta-analysis found that cochlear implantation for children with SSD was associated with clinically meaningful improvements in audiological and patient-reported outcomes; shorter duration of deafness may lead to better outcomes. These findings can guide future research efforts, refine cochlear implantation candidacy criteria, and aid in family counseling and shared decision-making.
Topics: Child; Cochlear Implantation; Hearing Loss, Unilateral; Humans; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Sound Localization; Speech Perception
PubMed: 33151295
DOI: 10.1001/jamaoto.2020.3852 -
Survey of Ophthalmology 2023Wolfram-like syndrome (WFLS) is a recently described autosomal dominant disorder with phenotypic similarities to autosomal recessive Wolfram syndrome (WS), including... (Review)
Review
Wolfram-like syndrome (WFLS) is a recently described autosomal dominant disorder with phenotypic similarities to autosomal recessive Wolfram syndrome (WS), including optic atrophy, hearing impairment, and diabetes mellitus. We summarize current literature, define the clinical characteristics, and investigate potential genotype phenotype correlations. A systematic literature search was conducted in electronic databases Pubmed/MEDLINE, EMBACE, and Cochrane Library. We included studies reporting patients with a clinical picture consisting at least 2 typical clinical manifestations of WSF1 disorders and heterozygous mutations in WFS1. In total, 86 patients from 35 studies were included. The most common phenotype consisted of the combination of optic atrophy (87%) and hearing impairment (94%). Diabetes mellitus was seen in 44% of the patients. Nineteen percent developed cataract. Patients with missense mutations in WFS1 had a lower number of clinical manifestations, less chance of developing diabetes insipidus, but a younger age at onset of hearing impairment compared to patients with nonsense mutations or deletions causing frameshift. There were no studies reporting decreased life expectancy. This review shows that, within the spectrum of WFS1-associated disorders or "wolframinopathies," autosomal dominantly inherited WFLS has a relatively mild phenotype compared to autosomal recessive WS. The clinical manifestations and their age at onset are associated with the specific underlying mutations in the WFS1 gene.
Topics: Humans; Hearing Loss; Mutation; Optic Atrophy; Tungsten; Wolfram Syndrome
PubMed: 36764396
DOI: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2023.01.012 -
Brain Sciences Oct 2021Stroke is the leading cause of cortical deafness (CD), the most severe form of central hearing impairment. CD remains poorly characterized and perhaps underdiagnosed. We... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Stroke is the leading cause of cortical deafness (CD), the most severe form of central hearing impairment. CD remains poorly characterized and perhaps underdiagnosed. We perform a systematic review to describe the clinical and radiological features of stroke-associated CD.
METHODS
PubMed and the Web of Science databases were used to identify relevant publications up to 30 June 2021 using the MeSH terms: "deafness" and "stroke", or "hearing loss" and "stroke" or "auditory agnosia" and "stroke".
RESULTS
We found 46 cases, caused by bilateral lesions within the central auditory pathway, mostly located within or surrounding the superior temporal lobe gyri and/or the Heschl's gyri (30/81%). In five (13.51%) patients, CD was caused by the subcortical hemispheric and in two (0.05%) in brainstem lesions. Sensorineural hearing loss was universal. Occasionally, a misdiagnosis by peripheral or psychiatric disorders occurred. A few (20%) had clinical improvement, with a regained oral conversation or evolution to pure word deafness (36.6%). A persistent inability of oral communication occurred in 43.3%. A full recovery of conversation was restricted to patients with subcortical lesions.
CONCLUSIONS
Stroke-associated CD is rare, severe and results from combinations of cortical and subcortical lesions within the central auditory pathway. The recovery of functional hearing occurs, essentially, when caused by subcortical lesions.
PubMed: 34827382
DOI: 10.3390/brainsci11111383 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2018Allergic rhinitis is a common condition affecting both adults and children. Patients experience symptoms of nasal obstruction, rhinorrhoea, sneezing and nasal itching,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Allergic rhinitis is a common condition affecting both adults and children. Patients experience symptoms of nasal obstruction, rhinorrhoea, sneezing and nasal itching, which may affect their quality of life.Nasal irrigation with saline (salty water), also known as nasal douching, washing or lavage, is a procedure that rinses the nasal cavity with isotonic or hypertonic saline solutions. It can be performed with low positive pressure from a spray, pump or squirt bottle, with a nebuliser or with gravity-based pressure in which the person instils saline into one nostril and allows it to drain out of the other. Saline solutions are available over the counter and can be used alone or as an adjunct to other therapies.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects of nasal saline irrigation in people with allergic rhinitis.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the ENT Trials Register; CENTRAL; Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 23 November 2017.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing nasal saline irrigation, delivered by any means and with any volume, tonicity and alkalinity, with (a) no nasal saline irrigation or (b) other pharmacological treatments in adults and children with allergic rhinitis. We included studies comparing nasal saline versus no saline, where all participants also received pharmacological treatment (intranasal corticosteroids or oral antihistamines).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Primary outcomes were patient-reported disease severity and a common adverse effect - epistaxis. Secondary outcomes were disease-specific health-related quality of life (HRQL), individual symptom scores, general HRQL, the adverse effects of local irritation or discomfort, ear symptoms (pain or pressure) and nasal endoscopy scores. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome; this is indicated in italics.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 14 studies (747 participants). The studies included children (seven studies, 499 participants) and adults (seven studies, 248 participants). No studies reported outcomes beyond three months follow-up. Saline volumes ranged from 'very low' to 'high' volume. Where stated, studies used either hypertonic or isotonic saline solution.Nasal saline versus no saline treatmentAll seven studies (112 adults; 332 children) evaluating this comparison used different scoring systems for patient-reported disease severity, so we pooled the data using the standardised mean difference (SMD). Saline irrigation may improve patient-reported disease severity compared with no saline at up to four weeks (SMD -1.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.84 to -0.81; 407 participants; 6 studies; low quality) and between four weeks and three months (SMD -1.44, 95% CI -2.39 to -0.48; 167 participants; 5 studies; low quality). Although the evidence was low quality the SMD values at both time points are considered large effect sizes. Subgroup analysis showed the improvement in both adults and children. Subgroup analyses for volume and tonicity were inconclusive due to heterogeneity.Two studies reported methods for recording adverse effects and five studies mentioned them. Two studies (240 children) reported no adverse effects (epistaxis or local discomfort) in either group and three only reported no adverse effects in the saline group.One study (48 children) reported disease-specific HRQL using a modified RCQ-36 scale. It was uncertain whether there was a difference between the groups at any of the specified time points (very low quality). No other secondary outcomes were reported.Nasal saline versus no saline with adjuvant use of intranasal steroids or oral antihistamines Three studies (40 adults; 79 children) compared saline with intranasal steroids versus intranasal steroids alone; one study (14 adults) compared saline with oral antihistamines versus oral antihistamines alone. It is uncertain if there is a difference in patient-reported disease severity at up to four weeks (SMD -0.60, 95% CI -1.34 to 0.15; 32 participants; 2 studies; very low quality) or from four weeks to three months (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.85 to 0.21; 58 participants; 2 studies; very low quality). Although none of the studies reported methods for recording adverse effects, three mentioned them: one study (40 adults; adjuvant intranasal steroids) reported no adverse effects (epistaxis or local discomfort) in either group; the other two only reported no adverse effects in the saline group.It is uncertain if saline irrigation in addition to pharmacological treatment improved disease-specific HRQL at four weeks to three months, compared with pharmacological treatment alone (SMD -1.26, 95% CI -2.47 to -0.05; 54 participants; 2 studies; very low quality). No other secondary outcomes were reported.Nasal saline versus intranasal steroidsIt is uncertain if there was a difference in patient-reported disease severity between nasal saline and intranasal steroids at up to four weeks (MD 1.06, 95% CI -1.65 to 3.77; 14 participants; 1 study), or between four weeks and three months (SMD 1.26, 95% CI -0.92 to 3.43; 97 participants; 3 studies), or indisease-specific HRQL between four weeks and three months (SMD 0.01, 95% CI -0.73 to 0.75; 83 participants; 2 studies). Only one study reported methods for recording adverse effects although three studies mentioned them. One (21 participants) reported two withdrawals due to adverse effects but did not describe these or state which group. Three studies reported no adverse effects (epistaxis or local discomfort) with saline, although one study reported that 27% of participants experienced local discomfort with steroid use. No other secondary outcomes were reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Saline irrigation may reduce patient-reported disease severity compared with no saline irrigation at up to three months in both adults and children with allergic rhinitis, with no reported adverse effects. No data were available for any outcomes beyond three months. The overall quality of evidence was low or very low. The included studies were generally small and used a range of different outcome measures to report disease severity scores, with unclear validation. This review did not include direct comparisons of saline types (e.g. different volume, tonicity).Since saline irrigation could provide a cheap, safe and acceptable alternative to intranasal steroids and antihistamines further high-quality, adequately powered research in this area is warranted.
Topics: Administration, Intranasal; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; Child; Histamine Antagonists; Humans; Nasal Sprays; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rhinitis, Allergic; Sodium Chloride; Therapeutic Irrigation
PubMed: 29932206
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012597.pub2 -
Frontiers in Neurology 2023The recognition of Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) as a distinct clinical condition that impacts hearing capacity and mental health has gained attention. Although... (Review)
Review
The recognition of Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) as a distinct clinical condition that impacts hearing capacity and mental health has gained attention. Although pure tone audiometry is the gold standard for assessing hearing, it inadequately reflects everyday hearing abilities, especially in challenging acoustic environments. Deficits in speech perception in noise, a key aspect of APD, have been linked to an increased risk of dementia. The World Health Organization emphasizes the need for evaluating central auditory function in cases of mild hearing loss and normal audiometry results. Specific questionnaires play a crucial role in documenting and quantifying the difficulties faced by individuals with APD. Validated questionnaires such as the Children's Auditory Processing Performance Scale, the Fisher's Auditory Problems Checklist, and the Auditory Processing Domains Questionnaire are available for children, while questionnaires for adults include items related to auditory functions associated with APD. This systematic review and meta-analysis identified six questionnaires used for screening and evaluating APD with a total of 783 participants across 12 studies. The questionnaires exhibited differences in domains evaluated, scoring methods, and evaluation of listening in quiet and noise. Meta-analysis results demonstrated that individuals with APD consistently exhibited worse scores compared to healthy controls across all questionnaires. Additionally, comparisons with clinical control groups showed varying results. The study highlights (i) the importance of standardized questionnaires in identifying and assessing APD, aiding in its diagnosis and management, and (ii) the need to use sub-scores as well as overall scores of questionnaires to elaborate on specific hearing and listening situations. There is a need to develop more APD specific questionnaires for the adult population as well as for more focused research on APD diagnosed individuals to further establish the validity and reliability of these questionnaires.
PubMed: 37621857
DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2023.1243170 -
International Archives of... Jan 2016Introduction Current data show that binaural hearing is superior to unilateral hearing, specifically in the understanding of speech in noisy environments. Furthermore,... (Review)
Review
Introduction Current data show that binaural hearing is superior to unilateral hearing, specifically in the understanding of speech in noisy environments. Furthermore, unilateral hearing reduce onés ability to localize sound. Objectives This study provides a systematic review of recent studies to evaluate the outcomes of cochlear implantation in patients with single-sided deafness (SSD) with regards to speech discrimination, sound localization and tinnitus suppression. Data Synthesis We performed a search in the PubMed, Cochrane Library and Lilacs databases to assess studies related to cochlear implantation in patients with unilateral deafness. After critical appraisal, eleven studies were selected for data extraction and analysis of demographic, study design and outcome data. Conclusion Although some studies have shown encouraging results on cochlear implantation and SSD, all fail to provide a high level of evidence. Larger studies are necessary to define the tangible benefits of cochlear implantation in patients with SSD.
PubMed: 26722349
DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1559586 -
BMC Public Health Aug 2023Pain is a common reason for seeking out healthcare professionals and support services. However, certain populations, such as people with deafness, may encounter...
BACKGROUND
Pain is a common reason for seeking out healthcare professionals and support services. However, certain populations, such as people with deafness, may encounter difficulties in effectively communicating their pain; on the other side, health care professionals may also encounter challenges to assess pain in this specific population.
AIMS
To describe (a) the state of the research in the field of pain assessment in individuals with deafness; (b) instruments validated; and (b) strategies facilitating the pain communication or assessment in this population.
METHODS
A systematic review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines were performed, searching Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, Embase and PsycInfo databases, from their initiation to July 2023. Primary and secondary studies, involving adults with deafness and investigating pain assessment and communication difficulties, facilitators, or barriers, were eligible. The included studies were assessed in their methodological quality with the Quality Assessment for Diverse Studies tool; data extraction and the narrative synthesis was provided by two researchers.
RESULTS
Five studies were included. Two were validation studies, while the remaining were a case report, a case study and a qualitative study. The interRAI Community Health Assessment and the Deafblind Supplement scale have been validated among people with deafness by reporting few psychometric properties; in contrast, instruments well established in the general population (e.g. Visual Analogue Scale) have been assessed in their usability and understandability among individuals with deafness, suggesting their limitations. Some strategies have been documented as facilitating pain communication and assessment: (a) ensuring inclusiveness (the presence of family members as mediators); (b) ensuring the preparedness of healthcare professionals (e.g. in sign language); and (c) making the environment friendly to this population (e.g. removing masks).
CONCLUSIONS
The research regarding pain in this population is in its infancy, resulting in limited evidence. In recommending more research capable of establishing the best pain assessment instrument, some strategies emerged for assessing pain in which the minimum standards of care required to offer to this vulnerable population should be considered.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Communication; Deafness; Narration; Pain; Pain Measurement
PubMed: 37608263
DOI: 10.1186/s12889-023-16535-5 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Nov 2023To summarize the breadth and quality of evidence supporting commonly recommended early childhood autism interventions and their estimated effects on developmental... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To summarize the breadth and quality of evidence supporting commonly recommended early childhood autism interventions and their estimated effects on developmental outcomes.
DESIGN
Updated systematic review and meta-analysis (autism intervention meta-analysis; Project AIM).
DATA SOURCES
A search was conducted in November 2021 (updating a search done in November 2017) of the following databases and registers: Academic Search Complete, CINAHL Plus with full text, Education Source, Educational Administration Abstracts, ERIC, Medline, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, PsycINFO, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, and SocINDEX with full text, , and ClinicalTrials.gov.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES
Any controlled group study testing the effects of any non-pharmacological intervention on any outcome in young autistic children younger than 8 years.
REVIEW METHODS
Newly identified studies were integrated into the previous dataset and were coded for participant, intervention, and outcome characteristics. Interventions were categorized by type of approach (such as behavioral, developmental, naturalistic developmental behavioral intervention, and technology based), and outcomes were categorized by domain (such as social communication, adaptive behavior, play, and language). Risks of bias were evaluated following guidance from Cochrane. Effects were estimated for all intervention and outcome types with sufficient contributing data, stratified by risk of bias, using robust variance estimation to account for intercorrelation of effects within studies and subgroups.
RESULTS
The search yielded 289 reports of 252 studies, representing 13 304 participants and effects for 3291 outcomes. When contributing effects were restricted to those from randomized controlled trials, significant summary effects were estimated for behavioral interventions on social emotional or challenging behavior outcomes (Hedges' g=0.58, 95% confidence interval 0.11 to 1.06; P=0.02), developmental interventions on social communication (0.28, 0.12 to 0.44; P=0.003); naturalistic developmental behavioral interventions on adaptive behavior (0.23, 0.02 to 0.43; P=0.03), language (0.16, 0.01 to 0.31; P=0.04), play (0.19, 0.02 to 0.36; P=0.03), social communication (0.35, 0.23 to 0.47; P<0.001), and measures of diagnostic characteristics of autism (0.38, 0.17 to 0.59; P=0.002); and technology based interventions on social communication (0.33, 0.02 to 0.64; P=0.04) and social emotional or challenging behavior outcomes (0.57, 0.04 to 1.09; P=0.04). When effects were further restricted to exclude caregiver or teacher report outcomes, significant effects were estimated only for developmental interventions on social communication (0.31, 0.13 to 0.49; P=0.003) and naturalistic developmental behavioral interventions on social communication (0.36, 0.23 to 0.49; P<0.001) and measures of diagnostic characteristics of autism (0.44, 0.20 to 0.68; P=0.002). When effects were then restricted to exclude those at high risk of detection bias, only one significant summary effect was estimated-naturalistic developmental behavioral interventions on measures of diagnostic characteristics of autism (0.30, 0.03 to 0.57; P=0.03). Adverse events were poorly monitored, but possibly common.
CONCLUSION
The available evidence on interventions to support young autistic children has approximately doubled in four years. Some evidence from randomized controlled trials shows that behavioral interventions improve caregiver perception of challenging behavior and child social emotional functioning, and that technology based interventions support proximal improvements in specific social communication and social emotional skills. Evidence also shows that developmental interventions improve social communication in interactions with caregivers, and naturalistic developmental behavioral interventions improve core challenges associated with autism, particularly difficulties with social communication. However, potential benefits of these interventions cannot be weighed against the potential for adverse effects owing to inadequate monitoring and reporting.
Topics: Child; Humans; Child, Preschool; Autistic Disorder; Behavior Therapy; Early Intervention, Educational; Social Skills; Adaptation, Psychological
PubMed: 37963634
DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2023-076733 -
The Lancet. Respiratory Medicine Apr 2020Treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis requires long-term therapy with a combination of multiple second-line drugs. These drugs are associated with numerous... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis requires long-term therapy with a combination of multiple second-line drugs. These drugs are associated with numerous adverse events that can cause severe morbidity, such as deafness, and in some instances can lead to death. Our aim was to estimate the absolute and relative frequency of adverse events associated with different tuberculosis drugs to provide useful information for clinicians and tuberculosis programmes in selecting optimal treatment regimens.
METHODS
We did a meta-analysis using individual-level patient data that were obtained from studies that reported adverse events that resulted in permanent discontinuation of anti-tuberculosis medications. We used a database created for our previous meta-analysis of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis treatment and outcomes, for which we did a systematic review of literature published between Jan 1, 2009, and Aug 31, 2015 (updated April 15, 2016), and requested individual patient-level information from authors. We also considered for this analysis studies contributing patient-level data in response to a public call made by WHO in 2018. Meta-analysis for proportions and arm-based network meta-analysis were done to estimate the incidence of adverse events for each tuberculosis drug.
FINDINGS
58 studies were identified, including 50 studies from the updated individual patient data meta-analysis for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis treatment. 35 of these studies, with 9178 patients, were included in our analysis. Using meta-analysis of proportions, drugs with low risks of adverse event occurrence leading to permanent discontinuation included levofloxacin (1·3% [95% CI 0·3-5·0]), moxifloxacin (2·9% [1·6-5·0]), bedaquiline (1·7% [0·7-4·2]), and clofazimine (1·6% [0·5-5·3]). Relatively high incidence of adverse events leading to permanent discontinuation was seen with three second-line injectable drugs (amikacin: 10·2% [6·3-16·0]; kanamycin: 7·5% [4·6-11·9]; capreomycin: 8·2% [6·3-10·7]), aminosalicylic acid (11·6% [7·1-18·3]), and linezolid (14·1% [9·9-19·6]). Risk of bias in selection of studies was judged to be low because there were no important differences between included and excluded studies. Variability between studies was significant for most outcomes analysed.
INTERPRETATION
Fluoroquinolones, clofazimine, and bedaquiline had the lowest incidence of adverse events leading to permanent drug discontinuation, whereas second-line injectable drugs, aminosalicylic acid, and linezolid had the highest incidence. These results suggest that close monitoring of adverse events is important for patients being treated for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. Our results also underscore the urgent need for safer and better-tolerated drugs to reduce morbidity from treatment itself for patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis.
FUNDING
Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (USA), American Thoracic Society, European Respiratory Society, and Infectious Diseases Society of America.
Topics: Adult; Aminosalicylic Acid; Antitubercular Agents; Canada; Clofazimine; Diarylquinolines; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Female; Fluoroquinolones; Humans; Incidence; Linezolid; Male; Mycobacterium tuberculosis; Tuberculosis, Multidrug-Resistant; Tuberculosis, Pulmonary
PubMed: 32192585
DOI: 10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30047-3 -
Laryngoscope Investigative... Aug 2021Olfactory neuroblastoma (ONB) or esthesioneuroblastoma (ENB) is a rare malignancy of the nasal cavity believed to arise from the olfactory epithelium. The goal of this... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Olfactory neuroblastoma (ONB) or esthesioneuroblastoma (ENB) is a rare malignancy of the nasal cavity believed to arise from the olfactory epithelium. The goal of this study was to systematically review the genomics, epigenetics, and cytogenetics of ONB and to understand the potential clinical implications of these studies.
METHODS
A systematic literature review was performed for articles published before May 2020 using Cochrane, Embase, Pubmed, and Scopus databases. Inclusion criteria included genomics, cytogenetics, and epigenetics studies on ONB. Exclusion criteria included studies not in English or systematic reviews. Articles and abstracts were reviewed by two independent reviewers to reduce bias during article selection and synthesis of results. Of the 36 studies included in this review, 24 were research articles and 12 were abstracts.
RESULTS
Although recurrent mutations among ONB tumors are uncommon, alterations in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , and genes have been reported in several recent studies. In addition, cytogenetic studies revealed that the landscape of chromosomal aberrations varies widely amongst ONB tumors.
CONCLUSIONS
The rare character of ONB has limited the sample size available for cytogenetic, genomic, and epigenetic studies and contributes to the limitations of this systematic review. Comprehensive genomic and epigenomic studies with larger cohorts are warranted to validate the initial reports summarized in this review and to identify potential therapeutic targets for ONB.
PubMed: 34401496
DOI: 10.1002/lio2.597