Genetic Information and Precision Medicine in Hearing Loss

Clinical characteristics and hearing loss etiology of cochlear implantees undergoing surgery in their teens, 20s, and 30s

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate the etiology of hearing loss, including genetic variants, in individuals who underwent cochlear implantation (CI) in their teens to thirties. It also sought to analyze post-CI speech performance and identify prognostic factors affecting CI outcomes in this age group.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of 421 cochlear implant patients at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, focusing on 63 subjects aged 10-39 years who underwent their first CI by a single surgeon between July 2018 and June 2022. The study included audiologic evaluation, molecular genetic testing, and analysis of speech performance post-CI. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 25 and GraphPad Prism 7.

RESULTS

Among 63 participants (M:F, 24:39), nine underwent CI in their teens, 24 in their 20 s, and 30 in their 30 s. Most of them (40, 63.5%) had postlingual deafness. The study found that 65.2% (40/63) of subjects received a genetic diagnosis, with DFNB4 being the most common etiology (37.5%, 15/40). Post-CI speech evaluation showed an average sentence score of 80% across all subjects. Factors such as the onset of hearing loss, duration of deafness (DoD), and preoperative Speech Intelligibility Rating (SIR) significantly influenced CI outcomes. Notably, longer DoD was associated with poorer CI outcomes, but this did not affect individuals with postlingual hearing loss as much.

CONCLUSION

The study concludes that in individuals aged 10-39 undergoing CI, the onset of hearing loss and preoperative SIR are critical predictors of postoperative outcomes. CI is recommended for those with postlingual hearing loss in this age group, irrespective of the DoD. The study highlights the importance of genetic factors especially DFNB4 in hearing loss etiology and underscores the value of the relatively easy-to-evaluate factor, preoperative SIR in predicting CI outcomes.

Hearing Loss: Genetic Testing, Current Advances and the Situation in Latin America

Congenital hearing loss is the most common birth defect, estimated to affect 2-3 in every 1000 births, with ~50-60% of those related to genetic causes. Technological advances enabled the identification of hundreds of genes related to hearing loss (HL), with important implications for patients, their families, and the community. Despite these advances, in Latin America, the population with hearing loss remains underdiagnosed, with most studies focusing on a single locus encompassing the GJB2/GJB6 genes. Here we discuss how current and emerging genetic knowledge has the potential to alter the approach to diagnosis and management of hearing loss, which is the current situation in Latin America, and the barriers that still need to be overcome.

Improving genetic diagnosis by disease-specific, ACMG/AMP variant interpretation guidelines for hearing loss

The 2018 Hearing Loss Expert Panel (HL-EP)-specific guidelines specified from the universal 2015 ACMG/AMP guidelines are proposed to be used in genetic HL, which prompted this study. A genetic HL cohort comprising 135 unrelated probands with available exome sequencing data was established. Overall, 169 variants were prioritized as candidates and interpreted using the 2015 ACMG/AMP and 2018 HL-EP guidelines. Changes in rule application and variant classification between the guidelines were compared. The concordance rate of variant classification of each variant between the guidelines was 71.60%, with significant difference. The proportion of pathogenic variants increased from 13.02% (2015) to 29.59% (2018). Variant classifications of autosomal recessive (AR) variants that previously belonged to VUS or likely pathogenic in the 2015 guidelines were changed toward pathogenic in the 2018 guidelines more frequently than those of autosomal dominant variants (29.17% vs. 6.38%, P = 0.005). Stratification of the PM3 and PP1 rules in the 2018 guidelines led to more substantial escalation than that in the 2015 guidelines. We compared the disease-specific guidelines (2018) with the universal guidelines (2015) using real-world data. Owing to the sophistication of case-level data, the HL-specific guidelines have more explicitly classified AR variants toward "likely pathogenic" or "pathogenic", serving as potential references for other recessive genetic diseases.

Molecular aetiology of ski-slope hearing loss and audiological course of cochlear implantees

PURPOSE

A challenge for patients with ski-slope hearing loss is that hearing aids do not adequately amplify the mid-to-high frequencies necessary for speech perception and conversely, cochlear implant (CI) may damage low-frequency hearing. We aimed to describe the clinical profile of patients with ski-slope hearing loss, with a special focus on aetiology of such hearing loss and audiological course of low-frequency hearing after CI.

METHODS

We recruited hearing-impaired patients who visited a tertiary referral centre and met the criteria for ski-slope hearing loss patients from 2015 to 2021. Genetic testing was performed in all ski-slope hearing loss patients unless refused. Baseline audiograms of patients who continued to use hearing aids or who finally underwent CIs were reviewed. As for CI patients, outcome and hearing preservation rate were rigorously analysed.

RESULTS

Of 46 recruited patients with ski-slope hearing loss, 45 agreed to undergo genetic testing and causative variants were identified in 17 (37.8%) patients. The TMC1, MYO7A, and TMPRSS3 variants were the most common, while LRTOMT was newly identified as a causative gene. Twenty-five patients eventually received CI, while 13 continued to wear the hearing aid and 8 patients did not ever try hearing aids. CI in ski-slope hearing loss led to immediate and sufficient improvement of sentence recognition by as early as 3 months, however, the duration of hearing loss was inversely correlated with the sentence recognition score. The average hearing preservation rate (using the HEARRING classification) after CI was 53.0% (SD 30.0) and 45.6% (SD 31.1) at 1 year. Seventy-nine percent of implantees maintained functional low-frequency hearing (better than 85 dB at 250 and 500 Hz) eligible for electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS). A trend was found that patients with hair cell stereocilia-associated genetic variants may have a slightly better preservation, albeit with no statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

Detection rate of a molecular genetic aetiology of ski-slope hearing loss appears to be lower than other type of hearing loss reported in the literature. Especially with short hearing loss duration, CI in ski-slope hearing loss leads to immediate and sufficient speech improvement, while preserving functional low-frequency hearing eligible for EAS as many as in 79%. A certain genetic aetiology might be associated with a trend towards better low-frequency hearing preservation.

Detection of unknown ototoxic adverse drug reactions: an electronic healthcare record-based longitudinal nationwide cohort analysis

Ototoxic medications can lead to significant morbidity. Thus, pre-marketing clinical trials have assessed new drugs that have ototoxic potential. Nevertheless, several ototoxic side effects of drugs may remain undetected. Hence, we sought to retrospectively investigate the potential risk of ototoxic adverse drug reactions among commonly used drugs via a longitudinal cohort study. An electronic health records-based data analysis with a propensity-matched comparator group was carried out. This study was conducted using the MetaNurse algorithm for standard nursing statements on electronic healthcare records and the National Sample Cohort obtained from the South Korea National Health Insurance Service. Five target drugs capable of causing ototoxic adverse drug reactions were identified using MetaNurse; two drugs were excluded after database-based analysis because of the absence of bilateral hearing loss events in patients. Survival analysis, log-rank test, and Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to calculate the incidence, survival rate, and hazard ratio of bilateral hearing loss among patients who were prescribed candidate ototoxic drugs. The adjusted hazard ratio of bilateral hearing loss was 1.31 (1.03–1.68), 2.20 (1.05–4.60), and 2.26 (1.18–4.33) in cimetidine, hydroxyzine, and sucralfate users, respectively. Our results indicated that hydroxyzine and sucralfate may cause ototoxic adverse drug reactions in patients. Thus, clinicians should consider avoiding co-administration of these drugs with other well-confirmed ototoxic drugs should be emphasized.