Medical interventions for the prevention of platinum-induced hearing loss in children with cancer.
BACKGROUND
Platinum-based therapy, including cisplatin, carboplatin, oxaliplatin or a combination of these, is used to treat a variety of paediatric malignancies. One of the most important adverse effects is the occurrence of hearing loss or ototoxicity. In an effort to prevent this ototoxicity, different otoprotective medical interventions have been studied. This review is the second update of a previously published Cochrane review.


OBJECTIVE
To assess the efficacy of medical interventions to prevent hearing loss and to determine possible effects of these interventions on anti-tumour efficacy, toxicities other than hearing loss and quality of life in children with cancer treated with platinum-based therapy.


METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 6), MEDLINE (PubMed) (1945 to 8 July 2016) and EMBASE (Ovid) (1980 to 8 July 2016). In addition, we handsearched reference lists of relevant articles and we assessed the conference proceedings of the International Society for Paediatric Oncology (2006 up to and including 2015), the American Society of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology (2007 up to and including 2016) and the International Conference on Long-Term Complications of Treatment of Children and Adolescents for Cancer (2010 up to and including 2015). We scanned the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) Register (www.isrctn.com) and the National Institute of Health Register (www.clinicaltrials.gov) for ongoing trials (both searched on 12 July 2016).


METHODS
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled clinical trials (CCTs) evaluating platinum-based therapy together with an otoprotective medical intervention versus platinum-based therapy with placebo, no additional treatment or another protective medical intervention in children with cancer.


METHODS
Two review authors independently performed the study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment and GRADE assessment of included studies, including adverse effects. We performed analyses according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.


RESULTS
We identified two RCTs and one CCT (total number of participants 149) evaluating the use of amifostine versus no additional treatment in the original version of the review; the updates identified no additional studies. Two studies included children with osteosarcoma, and the other study included children with hepatoblastoma. Children received cisplatin only or a combination of cisplatin and carboplatin, either intra-arterially or intravenously. Pooling of results of the included studies was not possible. However, in the individual studies there was no significant difference in symptomatic ototoxicity only (that is, grade 2 or higher) and combined asymptomatic and symptomatic ototoxicity (that is, grade 1 or higher) between children treated with or without amifostine. Only one study, including children with osteosarcoma treated with intra-arterial cisplatin, provided information on tumour response, defined as the number of participants with a good or partial remission. The available data analysis (data were missing for one participant), best case scenario analysis and worst case scenario analysis all showed a difference in favour of amifostine, but this difference was significant only in the worst case scenario analysis (P = 0.04). There was no information on survival for any of the included studies. Only one study, including children with osteosarcoma treated with intra-arterial cisplatin, provided data on the number of participants with adverse effects other than ototoxicity grade 3 or higher. There was a significant difference in favour of the control group in the occurrence of vomiting grade 3 or 4 (risk ratio (RR) 9.04; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.99 to 41.12; P = 0.004). There was no significant difference between treatment groups for cardiotoxicity and renal toxicity grade 3 or 4. None of the studies evaluated quality of life. The quality of evidence for the different outcomes was low. We found no eligible studies for possible otoprotective medical interventions other than amifostine and other types of malignancies.


CONCLUSIONS
At the moment there is no evidence from individual studies in children with osteosarcoma or hepatoblastoma treated with different platinum analogues and dosage schedules that underscores the use of amifostine as an otoprotective intervention as compared to no additional treatment. Since pooling of results was not possible and all studies had serious methodological limitations, no definitive conclusions can be made. It should be noted that 'no evidence of effect', as identified in this review, is not the same as 'evidence of no effect'. Based on the currently available evidence, we are unable to give recommendations for clinical practice. We identified no eligible studies for other possible otoprotective medical interventions and other types of malignancies, so no conclusions can be made about their efficacy in preventing ototoxicity in children treated with platinum-based therapy. More high quality research is needed.
c/o Cochrane Childhood Cancer, Emma Children's Hospital/Academic Medical Center, PO Box 22660, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1100 DD.
Jorrit W
JW
van As
Henk
H
van den Berg
Elvira C
EC
van Dalen
Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2007 Sep;24(6):403-8
17710657
J Clin Oncol. 1989 Jun;7(6):754-60
2715805
Cancer Chemother Rep. 1974 Nov-Dec;58(6):871-5
4447919
J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2004 Oct;26(10):649-655
27811606
J Clin Oncol. 2008 Aug 1;26(22):3749-55
18669462
J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2008 Feb;30(2):130-4
18376265
Cancer. 2009 Dec 15;115(24):5623-6
19813276
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Jul 01;(7):CD009219
24984156
Tohoku J Exp Med. 2009 Nov;219(3):177-86
19851045
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Jun 26;(6):CD010885
24968257
Cancer Treat Rep. 1982 Jan;66(1):19-23
7198012
Pediatrics. 2010 Apr;125(4):e938-50
20194279
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Jan 10;27(2):317-8; author reply 318-9
19064953
Lancet. 2000 Mar 25;355(9209):1075-6
10744098
J Pediatr. 2013 Mar;162(3):629-634.e2
23084708
Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2006 Aug;47(2):120-2
16206212
Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 1986 Dec;11(6):403-9
3815865
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Aug 03;(8):CD010181
27486906
Nat Genet. 2009 Dec;41(12):1345-9
19898482
Eur J Cancer. 2004 Nov;40(16):2352-4
15519505
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 May 07;5:CD009219
31063591
Eur J Cancer. 2004 Nov;40(16):2445-51
15519518
Control Clin Trials. 2000 Jun;21(3):167-89
10822117
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 May 16;(5):CD009219
22592737
Cancer Treat Res. 2009;150:195-213
19834670
Gan To Kagaku Ryoho. 2004 Aug;31(8):1187-92
15332541
Med Pediatr Oncol. 1991;19(4):295-300
2056973
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1996 Aug;42(2):233-5
8864323
J Pediatr. 1983 Feb;102(2):314-7
6681630
Ann Intern Med. 1979 Nov;91(5):744-5
496112
Neuro Oncol. 2014 Jun;16(6):848-55
24414535
J Clin Oncol. 2007 Jun 1;25(16):2274-80
17538173
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Aug 08;(8):CD010885
27498707
Clin Cancer Res. 2001 Mar;7(3):493-500
11297239
Eur J Cancer. 2004 Jul;40(11):1713-23
15251161
Cancer. 2005 Aug 15;104(4):841-7
15999362
J Clin Oncol. 2006 Mar 1;24(7):1161-8
16505436
Br J Cancer. 2005 Sep 5;93(5):529-37
16136028
Cancer. 2009 Dec 15;115(24):5828-35
19813275
Mutat Res. 2001 Nov 15;498(1-2):145-58
11673080
Hear Res. 2007 Apr;226(1-2):157-67
17113254
J Clin Oncol. 2010 Jul 20;28(21):3516-24
20567002
Clin Cancer Res. 2001 Aug;7(8):2205-12
11489793
Pediatr Rev. 2004 Jul;25(7):224-34
15231988
J Clin Oncol. 2005 Dec 1;23(34):8588-96
16314621
J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2002 Mar-Apr;24(3):188-91
11990304
J Pediatr. 1983 Dec;103(6):1006-7
6685758
Oncology (Williston Park). 2008 Apr;22(4 Suppl Nurse Ed):35-7
19856560
Pediatrics. 2007 Nov;120(5):e1229-36
17974716