Usage Information
Citation Information: JCI Insight. 2025;10(20):e196230. https://doi.org/10.1172/jci.insight.196230.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cisplatin is often the cytotoxic drug of choice for chemoradiation therapy (CRT) for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), but it can lead to irreversible hearing loss. There may be similar oncologic outcomes but different toxicity profiles depending on whether cisplatin is given at 75–100 mg/m2 every 3 weeks or 30–40 mg/mg2 weekly. This study compares cisplatin-induced hearing loss in patients with HNSCC receiving similar cumulative doses of cisplatin administered either on higher-dose or lower-dose treatment schedules.METHODS Using the Enhancing Cancer Hearing Outcomes (ECHO) dataset from 5 academic centers, we conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study of adults (≥18 years) with HNSCC receiving cisplatin-based CRT. Participants were grouped by cisplatin dose schedule: every 3 weeks (≥75 mg/m²) or weekly (<75 mg/m²). Hearing loss was assessed using American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v5.0 threshold shift criteria based on audiograms obtained ≤120 days before and after treatment. Risk differences and predictors of hearing loss were evaluated using χ2 analyses and multivariate regression. Kaplan-Meier curves assessed overall and disease-free survival.RESULTS Among 564 participants (1,127 ears), lower-dose weekly cisplatin was associated with significantly lower incidence of hearing loss (ASHA criteria: 57% vs. 82%; CTCAE criteria: 39% vs. 69%). CTCAE grade ≥2 hearing loss occurred in 18% of the weekly group versus 50% of the 3-week group. Multivariate analysis confirmed treatment schedule as an independent predictor of ototoxicity. Two-year survival outcomes did not differ between groups.CONCLUSIONS Weekly low-dose cisplatin significantly reduced the incidence and severity of hearing loss without compromising survival, supporting its broader use in CRT for HNSCC.
Authors
Katharine A. Fernandez, Abu S. Chowdhury, Amanda Bonczkowski, Paul D. Allen, Maura H. Campbell, David S. Lee, Charvi Malhotra, Brandi R. Page, Deborah A. Mulford, Candice Evita Ortiz, Peter L. Santa Maria, Peter Kullar, Saad A. Khan, Shawn D. Newlands, Nicole C. Schmitt, Lisa L. Cunningham
Usage data is cumulative from October 2025 through December 2025.
| Usage | JCI | PMC |
|---|---|---|
| Text version | 784 | 0 |
| 248 | 0 | |
| Figure | 192 | 0 |
| Table | 44 | 0 |
| Supplemental data | 41 | 0 |
| Citation downloads | 46 | 0 |
| Totals | 1,355 | 0 |
| Total Views | 1,355 | |
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.
