ABSTRACT
Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the oral cavity is one of the most common malignancies of the head and neck. Risk factors for the development of SCC include infection with human papillomavirus (HPV), tobacco use, and alcohol use. HPV-positive SCC of the oral cavity is more commonly seen in young adult patients, whereas HPV-negative disease is more prevalent in older patients with histories of alcohol and tobacco use. We describe the case of a young adult with an extensive history of vaping using nicotine-delivery systems who was diagnosed with HPV-negative SCC that was rapidly progressive and fatal.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/etiology , Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems , Tongue Neoplasms/etiology , Vaping/adverse effects , Age Factors , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/pathology , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/therapy , Disease Progression , Equipment Design , Fatal Outcome , Humans , Male , Mouth Neoplasms/etiology , Mouth Neoplasms/pathology , Mouth Neoplasms/therapy , Papillomaviridae , Risk Factors , Syncope/etiology , Tongue Neoplasms/pathology , Tongue Neoplasms/therapy , Young AdultABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Eosinophilic otitis media (EOM) is a rare form of middle ear disease characterized by a viscous effusion rich in eosinophils, a resistance to conventional treatments, and an association with bronchial asthma. The relationship between asthma and EOM suggests similarities in pathogenesis and treatment possibilities. Recent biologic therapies, specifically those that target interleukin 5 (IL-5), have demonstrated efficacy in controlling eosinophil-driven asthma, yet their impact on the treatment of pathologically similar diseases remains unmeasured. This study identifies patients who have EOM, reviews their otologic clinical course, and investigates the impact of anti-IL-5 drugs on chronic ear disease. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: University of Florida Health, an academic medical center. METHODS: A review of 120 patients treated with benralizumab or mepolizumab was performed. Imaging evidence of otomastoiditis was used to identify 9 patients with possible EOM. Two patients were treated with benralizumab, and the remaining 7 received mepolizumab injections. RESULTS: After starting treatment, 5 patients had complete resolution of middle ear effusions (3 with mepolizumab and 2 with benralizumab); 1 had stable middle ear effusion; and 1 patient's disease status could not be determined due to a lack of follow-up. The remaining 2 patients did not have effusions at the time when anti-IL-5 therapy was initiated, and they have not relapsed since starting treatment. CONCLUSION: EOM is a rare disease that otolaryngologists should include in their differential diagnosis, especially in refractory cases. Anti-IL-5 agents show efficacy in treating EOM, and prospective multicenter clinical trials are needed to further characterize the effect of anti-IL-5 therapies.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The study systematically reviewed the existing literature on the management of autoimmune inner ear disease (AIED). STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: We performed a literature search of Embase, NCBI, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases from April 1990 to April 2020. Inclusion criteria included studies that were retrospective or prospective in nature evaluating the treatment of AIED with audiometric data measuring hearing outcomes during treatment. Hearing improvement was the primary study outcome and improvement in vestibular symptoms was the secondary study outcome. RESULTS: Sixteen of 412 candidate articles were included in our study. Systemic steroid treatment is most commonly described. Alternative treatment modalities included intratympanic steroid treatment, methotrexate, cyclophosphamide, azathioprine, infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab, golimumab, methylprednisolone, rituximab, and anakinra. CONCLUSION: Systemic corticosteroids are the first line treatment of AIED. Intratympanic steroids are a potential adjuvant or alternative treatment for patients who cannot tolerate or become refractory to steroid treatment. Steroid nonresponders may benefit from biologic therapy. Alternative treatment modalities including nonsteroidal immunosuppressants and biologics have been studied in small cohorts of patients with varying results. Prospective studies investigating the efficacy of biologic and nonsteroidal therapy are warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.
