Biomarkers of Presbycusis and Tinnitus in a Portuguese Older Population

Introduction: Presbycusis or age-related hearing loss (ARHL) is a ubiquitous health problem. It is estimated that it will affect up to 1.5 billion people by 2025. In addition, tinnitus occurs in a large majority of cases with presbycusis. Glutamate metabotropic receptor 7 (GRM7) and N-acetyltransferase 2 (NAT2) are some of the genetic markers for presbycusis. Objectives: To explore patterns of hearing loss and the role of GRM7 and NAT2 as possible markers of presbycusis and tinnitus in a Portuguese population sample. Materials and Methods: Tonal and speech audiometry, tinnitus assessment, clinical interview, and DNA samples were obtained from patients aged from 55 to 75 with or without tinnitus. GRM7 analysis was performed by qPCR. Genotyping of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in NAT2 was performed by PCR amplification followed by Sanger sequencing or by qPCR. Results: We screened samples from 78 individuals (33 men and 45 women). T allele at GRM7 gene was the most observed (60.3% T/T and 33.3% A/T). Individuals with a T/T genotype have a higher risk for ARHL and 33% lower risk for tinnitus, compared to individuals with A/A and A/T genotype, respectively. Being a slow acetylator (53%) was the most common NAT2 phenotype, more common in men (55.8%). Intermediate acetylator was the second most common phenotype (35.9%) also more frequent in men (82.6%). Noise exposed individuals and individuals with ‘high frequency’ hearing loss seem to have a higher risk for tinnitus. Our data suggests that allele AT of GRM7 can have a statistically significant influence toward the severity of tinnitus. Conclusion: For each increasing year of age the chance of HL increases by 9%. The risk for ARHL was not significantly associated with GRM7 neither NAT2. However, we cannot conclude from our data whether the presence of T allele at GRM7 increases the odds for ARHL or whether the A allele has a protective effect. Genotype A/T at GRM7 could potentially be considered a biomarker of tinnitus severity. This is the first study evaluating the effect of GRM7 and NAT2 gene in tinnitus

the COMIT’ID study protocol for using a Delphi process and face-to-face meetings to establish consensus

Background The reporting of outcomes in clinical trials of subjective tinnitus indicates that many different tinnitus-related complaints are of interest to investigators, from perceptual attributes of the sound (e.g. loudness) to psychosocial impacts (e.g. quality of life). Even when considering one type of intervention strategy for subjective tinnitus, there is no agreement about what is critically important for deciding whether a treatment is effective. The main purpose of this observational study is, therefore to, develop Core Outcome Domain Sets for the three different intervention strategies (sound, psychological, and pharmacological) for adults with chronic subjective tinnitus that should be measured and reported in every clinical trial of these interventions. Secondary objectives are to identify the strengths and limitations of our study design for recruiting and reducing attrition of participants, and to explore uptake of the core outcomes. Methods The ‘Core Outcome Measures in Tinnitus: International Delphi’ (COMIT’ID) study will use a mixed-methods approach that incorporates input from health care users at the pre-Delphi stage, a modified three-round Delphi survey and final consensus meetings (one for each intervention). The meetings will generate recommendations by stakeholder representatives on agreed Core Outcome Domain Sets specific to each intervention. A subsequent step will establish a common cross-cutting Core Outcome Domain Set by identifying the common outcome domains included in all three intervention-specific Core Outcome Domain Sets. To address the secondary objectives, we will gather feedback from participants about their experience of taking part in the Delphi process. We aspire to conduct an observational cohort study to evaluate uptake of the core outcomes in published studies at 7 years following Core Outcome Set publication. Discussion The COMIT’ID study aims to develop a Core Outcome Domain Set that is agreed as critically important for deciding whether a treatment for subjective tinnitus is effective. Such a recommendation would help to standardise future clinical trials worldwide and so we will determine if participation increases use of the Core Outcome Set in the long term. Trial registration This project has been registered (November 2014) in the database of the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative

A Systematic Review of Existing Clinical Guidelines for the Assessment and Treatment of Tinnitus in Adults

Background: Though clinical guidelines for assessment and treatment of chronic subjective tinnitus do exist, a comprehensive review of those guidelines has not been performed. The objective of this review was to identify current clinical guidelines, and compare their recommendations for the assessment and treatment of subjective tinnitus in adults. Method: We systematically searched a range of sources for clinical guidelines (as defined by the Institute of Medicine, United States) for the assessment and/or treatment of subjective tinnitus in adults. No restrictions on language or year of publication were applied to guidelines. Results: Clinical guidelines from Denmark, Germany, Sweden, The Netherlands, and the United States were included in the review. There was a high level of consistency across the guidelines with regard to recommendations for audiometric assessment, physical examination, use of a validated questionnaire(s) to assess tinnitus related distress, and referral to a psychologist when required. Cognitive behavioral treatment for tinnitus related distress, use of hearing aids in instances of hearing loss and recommendations against the use of medicines were consistent across the included guidelines. Differences between the guidelines centered on the use of imaging in assessment procedures and sound therapy as a form of treatment for tinnitus distress respectively. Conclusion: Given the level of commonality across tinnitus guidelines from different countries the development of a European guideline for the assessment and treatment of subjective tinnitus in adults seems feasible. This guideline would have the potential to benefit the large number of clinicians in countries where clinical guidelines do not yet exist, and would support standardization of treatment for patients across Europe

Systematic review of outcome domains and instruments used in clinical trials of tinnitus treatments in adults

BACKGROUND: There is no evidence-based guidance to facilitate design decisions for confirmatory trials or systematic reviews investigating treatment efficacy for adults with tinnitus. This systematic review therefore seeks to ascertain the current status of trial designs by identifying and evaluating the reporting of outcome domains and instruments in the treatment of adults with tinnitus. METHODS: Records were identified by searching PubMed, EMBASE CINAHL, EBSCO, and CENTRAL clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN, ICTRP) and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Eligible records were those published from 1 July 2006 to 12 March 2015. Included studies were those reporting adults aged 18 years or older who reported tinnitus as a primary complaint, and who were enrolled into a randomised controlled trial, a before and after study, a non-randomised controlled trial, a case-controlled study or a cohort study, and written in English. Studies with fewer than 20 participants were excluded. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty-eight studies were included. Thirty-five different primary outcome domains were identified spanning seven categories (tinnitus percept, impact of tinnitus, co-occurring complaints, quality of life, body structures and function, treatment-related outcomes and unclear or not specified). Over half the studies (55 %) did not clearly define the complaint of interest. Tinnitus loudness was the domain most often reported (14 %), followed by tinnitus distress (7 %). Seventy-eight different primary outcome instruments were identified. Instruments assessing multiple attributes of the impact of tinnitus were most common (34 %). Overall, 24 different patient-reported tools were used, predominantly the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (15 %). Loudness was measured in diverse ways including a numerical rating scale (8 %), loudness matching (4 %), minimum masking level (1 %) and loudness discomfort level (1 %). Ten percent of studies did not clearly report the instrument used. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate poor appreciation of the basic principles of good trial design, particularly the importance of specifying what aspect of therapeutic benefit is the main outcome. No single outcome was reported in all studies and there was a broad diversity of outcome instruments. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: The systematic review protocol is registered on PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews): CRD42015017525. Registered on 12 March 2015 revised on 15 March 2016. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-016-1399-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

The COMiT’ID Study:Developing Core Outcome Domains Sets for Clinical Trials of Sound-, Psychology-, and Pharmacology-Based Interventions for Chronic Subjective Tinnitus in Adults

Subjective tinnitus is a chronic heterogeneous condition that is typically managed using intervention approaches based on sound devices, psychologically informed therapies, or pharmaceutical products. For clinical trials, there are currently no common standards for assessing or reporting intervention efficacy. This article reports on the first of two steps to establish a common standard, which identifies what specific tinnitus-related complaints (‘outcome domains’) are critical and important to assess in all clinical trials to determine whether an intervention has worked. Using purposive sampling, 719 international healthcare users with tinnitus, healthcare professionals, clinical researchers, commercial representatives and funders were recruited. Eligibility was primarily determined by experience of one of the three interventions of interest. Following recommended procedures for gaining consensus, three intervention-specific, three-round, Delphi surveys were delivered online. Each Delphi survey was followed by an in-person consensus meeting. Viewpoints and votes involved all stakeholder groups, with approximately a 1:1 ratio of healthcare users to professionals. ‘Tinnitus intrusiveness’ was voted in for all three interventions. For sound-based interventions, the minimum set included ‘ability to ignore’, ‘concentration’, ‘quality of sleep’, and ‘sense of control’. For psychology-based interventions, the minimum set included ‘acceptance of tinnitus’, ‘mood’, ‘negative thoughts and beliefs’, and ‘sense of control’. For pharmacology-based interventions, ‘tinnitus loudness’ was the only additional core outcome domain. The second step will next identify how those outcome domains should best be measured. The uptake of these intervention-specific standards in clinical trials will improve research quality, enhance clinical decision-making and facilitate meta-analysis in systematic reviews