98%
921
2 minutes
20
Background: Hearing loss is a common late effect in childhood cancer survivors, caused by ototoxic cancer treatments, such as platinum chemotherapy, cranial radiation with doses of ≥30 Gray, and surgery involving the auditory system. Early recognition of hearing loss as part of follow-up care allows for therapeutic support to mitigate consequences. However, hearing tests are usually only repeated in childhood cancer survivors with abnormal hearing during or right after treatment ends, leaving hearing loss undetected in childhood cancer survivors with late onset or when missed during cancer treatment. Further, general follow-up care attendance may be low after childhood cancer survivors transition to adult care, contributing to missing hearing screening posttherapy. Low attendance may be attributed to childhood cancer survivors finding follow-up care burdensome and time-consuming, lacking awareness of their risk for certain late effects, or the absence of suitable interdisciplinary follow-up clinics. A low-threshold, easily accessible screening program requiring minimal participant effort may address these barriers and improve access to hearing loss screening for childhood cancer survivors.
Objective: The HEAR study aims to develop, conduct, and evaluate the feasibility of a low-threshold, community-based screening program for hearing loss in childhood cancer survivors, using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework, a tool to plan and evaluate health interventions. Within the screening program, participating childhood cancer survivors completed a standardized hearing assessment at a local Swiss hearing aid provider's shop. This approach provides low-threshold access to detect hearing loss as it is easily and conveniently accessible for everyone.
Methods: Eligible childhood cancer survivors were identified through the Childhood Cancer Registry Switzerland and included those diagnosed with cancer between 1976 and 2019 before 21 years and who were ≥2 years post diagnosis. We invited eligible childhood cancer survivors by post. Participants scheduled a hearing test appointment at a hearing aid shop. They completed a baseline questionnaire before the hearing test, and 2 follow-up questionnaires afterward to assess program feasibility and participant experiences. Semistructured interviews with participants, hearing aid shop staff, and group discussions with health care professionals will provide qualitative insights. The RE-AIM framework will guide the program evaluation using the quantitative and qualitative data collected.
Results: As of February 2025, all participants have been recruited, and all steps of the study up to the group discussions and the RE-AIM evaluation have been completed.
Conclusions: The HEAR study introduces a novel, simple, and low-threshold approach to screening for hearing loss after cancer treatment through hearing aid shops located in the community and close to participants' homes. This approach has the potential to supplement existing follow-up care programs by reducing the burden of hearing screening for adult childhood cancer survivors and reaching those who might otherwise be lost to follow-up.
Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06036407; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06036407.
International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): DERR1-10.2196/63627.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12138297 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/63627 | DOI Listing |
Turk J Pediatr
September 2025
Department of Pediatric Hematology, Faculty of Medicine, Dokuz Eylül University, İzmir, Türkiye.
Backround: Leukemia is the most common childhood malignancy and often presents with nonspecific symptoms, which may lead to delays in diagnosis. Early recognition of clinical signs and laboratory abnormalities is essential to ensure timely referral and improve outcomes. This study assesses the clinical and laboratory characteristics of pediatric patients with acute and relapsed leukemia, points out key considerations during diagnosis, and investigates potential factors contributing to delayed diagnosis.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJCO Glob Oncol
May 2025
Department of Medical Oncology, Dr B.R.A. Institute Rotary Cancer Hospital, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Purpose: Gender bias against girls may affect health-seeking behavior and outcomes of childhood cancer. This study aimed to study the nature and extent of gender bias in health care among caregivers of childhood patients with cancer and also in community.
Methods: This cross-sectional mixed-methods study was conducted in a tertiary cancer hospital and an urban community between July 2021 and July 2023.
J Natl Cancer Inst
September 2025
Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland, United States.
Background: Among childhood cancer survivors, germline rare variants in autosomal dominant cancer susceptibility genes (AD CSGs) could increase subsequent neoplasm (SNs) risks, but risks for rarer SNs and by age at onset are not well understood.
Methods: We pooled the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study and St Jude Lifetime Cohort (median follow-up = 29.7 years, range 7.
J Neurooncol
September 2025
Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA.
Purpose: Cranial irradiation is associated with health-related quality of life (HRQoL) deficits in childhood cancer survivors. We investigated the relationship between radiation dose to brain substructures and HRQoL in children with brain tumors treated with proton beam therapy (PBT).
Methods: Data were obtained from children in the Pediatric Proton/Photon Consortium Registry who received PBT for primary brain tumors between 2015 and 2021.
Pediatr Surg Int
September 2025
Pediatric Surgery Department, Fattouma Bourguiba University Hospital, Monastir, Tunisia.
Purpose: This meta-analysis compares thoracoscopic versus open thoracotomy repair of esophageal atresia with tracheoesophageal fistula (EA/TEF).
Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus from inception to April 2025 for studies comparing thoracoscopic versus conventional thoracotomy approaches. Two independent reviewers screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using appropriate tools.