Literature DB >> 20835542

Audiological findings in patients treated with radiotherapy for head and neck tumors.

Ana Helena Bannwart Dell'Aringa1, Myrian de Lima Isaac, Gustavo Viani Arruda, Alfredo Rafael Dell'Aringa, Maria Carolina B N Esteves.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Radiotherapy has been widely used given its increase in the successful outcomes and cure of some cancers. AIM: To evaluate the functionality of the auditory system in patients who underwent radiotherapy treatment for head and neck tumors.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: From May 2007 to May 2008, otorhinolaryngological and audiological evaluation (Pure Tone Audiometry (air and bone conduction), Speech Audiometry, Tympanometry, Acoustic Reflex testing and Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emissions) were performed in 19 patients diagnosed with head and neck neoplasia and treated with radiotherapy. Prospective case series study.
RESULTS: 10.5% left ears and 26.3% right ears had bilateral hearing loss soon after radiotherapy according to ASHA criteria.
CONCLUSIONS: Radiotherapy treatment for head and neck cancer has ototoxic effects. Early programs of auditory rehabilitation should be offered to these patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20835542      PMCID: PMC9446213     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Braz J Otorhinolaryngol        ISSN: 1808-8686


INTRODUCTION

Hearing loss is one of the main complications of head and neck cancer tumors. Recently, adding chemotherapy (QT) with cisplatin to radiotherapy (RT) has enhanced the survival of patients with such neoplasia, thus becoming the standard treatment for locally advanced tumors. Nonetheless, all types of treatment, radiotherapy and chemotherapy with cisplatin, are known for their ototoxic effects. Irreversible hearing loss, as a consequence of head and neck radiotherapy has been studied and the literature shows a great variability in the incidence of ototoxicity, varying between 18% and 50%.2, 3, 4, 5 Insofar as the ototoxic effects caused by radiation to the head and neck are concerned, the literature is full of controversies. Smouha and Karmody reported external auditory meatus necrosis, osteoradionecrosis of the temporal bone, otitis media, conductive hearing loss, otalgia and tinnitus as main consequences. Bohne et al. reported that the degeneration of hair cells, both sensorial and support cells may happen up to two years after the end of radiotherapy. Other authors have reported a bilateral sensorineural deficiency in the high frequencies as a consequence to the radiation.8, 9, 10 Our study aimed at assessing the auditory system function in patients submitted to radiotherapy in the head and neck region because of the concern with its ototoxic effects.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Prospective study carried out at the Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Oncology/Radiotherapy, approved by the Ethics in Research Committee, under protocol # 165/06. We had a total of 19 male patients diagnosed with head and neck neoplasia enrolled in this study. Because of primary tumor characteristics and clinical staging, all the patients were treated with radiotherapy. After confirming the diagnosis of neoplasia through a pathology exam and indication of radiotherapy as treatment, the patients were referred to the ENT ward for otolaryngological and audiological evaluation, made up in two stages: before and after radiotherapy. The following procedures were held: Clinical-ENT anamneses and evaluation, speech and hearing therapy interview, air conduction and bone tonal threshold audiometry, logoaudiometry, immittance evaluation, stapes reflex study and distortion product evoked otoacoustic emissions (DP-EOAE). Previous chemo and/or radiotherapy treatment, whether concurrent or not was considered as an exclusion factor, as well as patients with rhinopharynx neoplasia. We took off the sample two patients with this type of neoplasia because of the presence of unilateral pretreatment conductive hearing loss (neoplasia side) and normal post-treatment hearing (probably due to a reduction in tumor size and Eustachian tube decompression). In the radiotherapy program, all the patients were staged by means of a complete physical exam, direct or indirect laryngoscopy, head and neck CT scan and chest x-ray before treatment. The dose of radiotherapy prescribed varied according to the disease's primary site and primary tumor staging. Before starting the radiotherapy sessions, the patients were submitted to conventional simulation (x-Ray), in order to outline the radiotherapy field and make up of moldable thermoplastic masks used for immobilization in the supine position and to outline the treatment area. Treatment limits (radiation field) vary according to the disease's primary site. Nonetheless, because of the advanced nature of the cases, all the patients had the upper border of the radiotherapy field on the skull base, which resulted in the inclusion of the cochlea in the radiotherapy field. In order to calculate the radiotherapy treatment volume (RTV) we used the patient's side-to-side distance, measured during the process of simulation and multiplied by the resulting area of simulation in each patient.

Statistical analysis

In order to analyze the differences between the tonal threshold mean values for the different frequencies before and after treatment, we did the t-student test. In order to check and see which mean values (above or below) for age, volume and RT dose variables would have some association with the reduction of the tonal thresholds after treatment we employed the Fisher's Exact test; and according to the contingency table we calculated the Odds Ratio in order to establish the relationship between the likelihood of occurrence and non-occurrence of a post-treatment auditory change, considering the variables: age, volume and RT dose. As a reduction of hearing acuity we considered the ASHA criteria which considers a 20dB increase in ototoxicity effect in one isolate frequency or of 10 dB in two or more successive frequencies. For all the statistical tests, we considered the value up to 5% for significance level (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

The patients' characteristics, including gender, age, tumor anatomical location, distribution by clinical staging, radiotherapy dose by fraction, total dose of radiotherapy and radiotherapy treatment volume are described on Chart 1.
Chart 1

Distribution of the individual characteristics of each patient from Group 1 (n = 19).

GenderAgeAnatomical LocationStagingFractioned doseTotal doseTreatment volume
1M66ParotidT4N0M02,060,0768
2M64LarynxT4N0M01,870,21.261
3M73OropharynxT4N3M01,870,22.828
4M62LarynxT3N0M02,072,01.562
5M66ParotidT1N1M02,060,01.411
6M59OropharynxT2N3M01,872,02.608
7M52LarynxT2N0M02,066,01.664
8M45OropharynxT3N0M02,060,0992
9M52OropharynxT4N0M01,8 −2,061,01.930
10M64OropharynxT2N1M01,861,21875
11M66LarynxT4N2M02,072,02.044
12M77LarynxT2N0M01,866,61.822
13M74LarynxT4N3M01,872,01.980
14M58OropharynxT2N0M02,060,01.605
15M78LarynxT4N0M02,064,01.060
16M58LarynxT4N0M01,860,01.597
17M76HypopharynxT2N0M01,8 −2,072,02.400
18M82OropharynxT2N1M02,062,01.905
19M37LarynxT2N0M01,866,61.822
Distribution of the individual characteristics of each patient from Group 1 (n = 19). As seen on Chart 1, all the patients in this group were males in the age range between 37 and 82 years, and the mean age was 63.6 years and median of 64 years. The total radiotherapy dose varied between 60.0 Gy and 72.0 Gy - mean dose of 65.6 Gy and median dose of 64 Gy, with daily dose variation between 1.8Gy −2,0 Gy. As to radiotherapy mean treatment volume we found 1,743.8 cm3, median of 1,664 cm3 and a variation of 768 cm3 to 2,828 cm3. Among the 19 patients and 38 ears evaluated we noticed through the ENT evaluation that one ear had perforated tympanic membrane and 37 tympanic membranes were intact. During the radiotherapy sessions, only one ear showed otoscopic changes, and this membrane was intact before treatment and it was retracted after it. In the first audiologic evaluation this ear had sensorineural auditory loss and after treatment the loss was mixed. As to the audiological evaluations performed before the radiotherapy treatment we noticed in our sample that only 4 ears had thresholds within the normal ranges (lower than 20 dB in all the frequencies) and most of the assessed patients already had some type of hearing disorder. One ear had moderate mixed hearing loss. The remaining ears had sensorineural changes: moderate hearing loss (8 ears); mild hearing loss (5 ears), hearing loss starting at 2KHz (2 ears), starting at 3KHz (8 ears), starting at 4KHz (7 ears) and starting at 6KHz (3 ears). By analyzing the data we can see that the mean values of the frequencies assessed between 250Hz and 8 KHz were changed when pre and post radiotherapy treatments were compared, as shown on Chart 2, which also shows data concerning standard deviation, confidence interval and p-value for each frequency bilaterally.
Chart 2

Distribution of the tonal auditory thresholds and the difference among them before and after treatment, confidence interval and p-value for each frequency in both ears (n=19).

FrequencyPretreatment mean valuePost-treatment mean valueDifference between the mean valuesConfidence intervalp-value
250 Hz21,5723,151,58−6,12 2,960,47
500 Hz19,4722,102,63−7,47 2,210,26
1 KHz21,8423,681,84−6,40 2,710,40
RE2 KHz27,8931,313,42−8,44 1,590,16
3 KHz37,1142,365,25−12,00 1,480,18
4 KHz45,0052,897,89−15,31 −0,470,38
6 KHz62,1055,00−7,10−0,27 14,480,58
8 KHz62,8955,79−7,100,13 14,070,04
250 Hz21,8421,57−0,27−2,57 3,100,84
500 Hz17,6317,890,26−2,86 2,330,83
1 KHz18,6820,782,10−4,27 0,060,05
LE2 KHz26,0527,631,58−3,85 0,700,16
3 KHz36,5734,47−2,10−0,82 5,030,14
4 KHz45,2643,68−1,58−1,32 4,480,26
6 KHz53,1551,31−1,84−2,02 5,710,33
8 KHz55,0062,897,89−14,18 −1,600,01
Distribution of the tonal auditory thresholds and the difference among them before and after treatment, confidence interval and p-value for each frequency in both ears (n=19). According to ASHA criteria, 10.5% left ears and 26.3% right ears had reduction in their tonal auditory thresholds immediately after the end of the radiotherapy. Post-treatment audiological evaluations were carried out within 15 days after the last radiotherapy session. Age, radiotherapy treatment value and total radiation dose according to Fisher's exact test analyses did not show relationship with a reduction on the post-treatment tonal auditory thresholds when ASHA criteria were considered (Chart 3).
Chart 3

Data from the relationship between the likelihood of occurrence and non-occurrence of post-radiotherapy hearing loss, taking into account the variables: age, total dose of radiation and volume of radiotherapy treatment volume with ASHA criteria.

AgeTotalp-value
≤ 64 years> 64 years
Hearing lossYes87150,667
ASHANo224
Total10919
RT total doseTotalp-value
≤ 64 Gy> 64 Gy
Hearing lossYes1230,41
ASHANo81624
Total91827
RT Treatment volumeTotalp-value
≤ 1800 cm> 1800 cm
Hearing lossYes1340,333
ASHANo8715
Total91019
Data from the relationship between the likelihood of occurrence and non-occurrence of post-radiotherapy hearing loss, taking into account the variables: age, total dose of radiation and volume of radiotherapy treatment volume with ASHA criteria.

DISCUSSION

Radiotherapy is one of the effective treatment modalities for head and neck tumors. For initial T1 and T2 lesions the results for RT alone are comparable to those obtained from surgical treatment. For more advanced lesions, such as some head and neck anatomical sites, RT associated with QT has been preferred because of the possibility of preserving the organ. Radiotherapy complications happen in specific sites, in other words, they depend on the area (radiotherapy field) where the radiation is being deployed. Especially for advanced disease, because of the presence of large tumors, there is the need to irradiate the primary site of the disease and those areas suspected of microscopic disease, having potential side effects as consequences, especially on the healthy tissue near the tumor site. As an example of this we have ototoxicity in the cases of head and neck RT, especially when the cochlea is inside the radiation field. Although we do not do 3-D image shaped RT, we were able to estimate the RTV for each patient using the technical parameters for simulation and treatment. In a statistical analysis we compared the group of patients who received RTV in greater or lower than 1,800 cm3, and no significant auditory changes were seen among them. Therefore, for the sample investigated, the radiotherapy treatment volume was not considered an important risk factor for ototoxicity (Chart 3). As to the radiation dose factor, Che et al. reported a relationship between ototoxicity and the punctual dose of radiation received by the cochlea. When using the 3-D shaped RT, there was a significant increase in the risk of acquiring hearing loss in patients who received radiation doses starting from 48 Gy. According to results from our statistical analyses, we did not observe significant association regarding tonal auditory thresholds after treatment for patients who received radiation doses higher than 64 Gy. It is worth stressing that this is the total radiation dose administered to the treatment field and not the dose received by the cochlea (Chart 3). The increase in the age of the patients submitted to treatment has also been shown as a factor involved in the increase of risk for hearing reduction. Some studies associate age increase with the increase in ototoxicity., In our sample, all the patients assessed had ages ≥ 40 years, and the mean age of 64 years. In a statistical analysis we also did not notice statistically significant differences between the groups of patients with ages above and below 64 years (Chart 3). As to changes in tonal auditory thresholds immediately after radiotherapy, we find in our sample an increase in tonal thresholds for the frequencies of 4 KHz in the right ear and 8 KHz in the left ear. All the patients in our sample had hearing disorders; 36.8% of them had significant changes according to ASHA ototoxicity criteria and 63.2% had threshold increases which did not fit these criteria. In a prospective study, Ho et al. assessed 526 ears from patients with nasopharynx cancer treated by radiotherapy alone. With a follow up of 4.5 years they observed that the hearing changes started immediately after the end of the radiotherapy. After two years, 40% of the patients partially recovered from their hearing change, while the remaining of the patients had a worsening as the years passed. We stress that nasopharyngeal neoplasias may cause conductive hearing loss because of Eustachian tube compression. In regards of the auditory complaints presented by the patients, some studies report tinnitus, while others report that tinnitus is usually transitional, disappearing within hours or weeks after the treatment and it happens to 2% to 36% of the patients.17, 18, 19. In our sample, only one patient complained of tinnitus during and after radiotherapy. Three patients already complained of tinnitus before the treatment and did not show changes during treatment. One patient complained of post-treatment otalgia.

CONCLUSION

Patients with head and neck cancer submitted to conventional radiotherapy have a high incidence of tonal hearing threshold increases at the end of treatment. Our data stress the importance of doing a pre and post treatment audiologic evaluation in all the patients submitted to conventional radiotherapy to treat head and neck tumors. Thus, we stress the importance of these instructions on the consequences of radiotherapy, so that the patients can be included early on in hearing rehabilitation programs.

FINAL REMARKS

All the patients with hearing reduction and who reported hearing problems were instructed regarding the use of hearing aids.
  16 in total

1.  Prospective study of inner ear radiation dose and hearing loss in head-and-neck cancer patients.

Authors:  Charlie C Pan; Avraham Eisbruch; Julia S Lee; Rhonda M Snorrason; Randall K Ten Haken; Paul R Kileny
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2005-04-01       Impact factor: 7.038

2.  Sensori-neural hearing loss after radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma: individualized risk estimation.

Authors:  Henriette B Honoré; Søren M Bentzen; Kitty Møller; Cai Grau
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 6.280

Review 3.  Is sensorineural hearing loss a possible side effect of nasopharyngeal and parotid irradiation? A systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Esther Raaijmakers; Antoine M Engelen
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 6.280

4.  Delayed effects of ionizing radiation on the ear.

Authors:  B A Bohne; J E Marks; G P Glasgow
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  1985-07       Impact factor: 3.325

5.  Long-term sensorineural hearing deficit following radiotherapy in patients suffering from nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A prospective study.

Authors:  W K Ho; W I Wei; D L Kwong; J S Sham; P T Tai; A P Yuen; D K Au
Journal:  Head Neck       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 3.147

6.  Sensorineural hearing loss in combined modality treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Authors:  William C Chen; Andrew Jackson; Amy S Budnick; David G Pfister; Dennis H Kraus; Margie A Hunt; Hilda Stambuk; Sabine Levegrun; Suzanne L Wolden
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2006-02-15       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  Risk factors for ototoxicity due to cisplatin.

Authors:  B W Blakley; A K Gupta; S F Myers; S Schwan
Journal:  Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  1994-05

8.  A prospective longitudinal study on radiation-induced hearing loss.

Authors:  L J Anteunis; S L Wanders; J J Hendriks; J A Langendijk; J J Manni; J M de Jong
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 2.565

9.  High-dose cisplatin in advanced head and neck cancer.

Authors:  A A Forastiere; B J Takasugi; S R Baker; G T Wolf; V Kudla-Hatch
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 3.333

10.  Non-osteitic complications of therapeutic radiation to the temporal bone.

Authors:  E E Smouha; C S Karmody
Journal:  Am J Otol       Date:  1995-01
View more
  2 in total

1.  Audiological profile of patients treated for childhood cancer.

Authors:  Patricia Helena Pecora Liberman; Maria Valéria Schmidt Goffi-Gomez; Christiane Schultz; Paulo Eduardo Novaes; Luiz Fernando Lopes
Journal:  Braz J Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-04-13

2.  Cancer treatment in determination of hearing loss.

Authors:  Priscila Feliciano de Oliveira; Camila Silva Oliveira; Joice Santos Andrade; Tamara Figueiredo do Carmo Santos; Aline Cabral de Oliveira-Barreto
Journal:  Braz J Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2015-10-17
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.