Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 18585

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"

Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018

Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."

Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018

Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."

Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018

Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."

Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
On Sep 2018

Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."

Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata

Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
On Aug 2018

Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".

Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
On Aug 2018

Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".

Dr. Mamta Gupta
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018

Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.

Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."

Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
On May 11,2011

Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."

Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
On April 2011

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.

Dr. Anuradha
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2023 | Month : January | Volume : 17 | Issue : 1 | Page : MC05 - MC09 Full Version

Pure Tone Audiometry Findings before and after Radiotherapy in Head and Neck Cancer Patients: A Hospital-based Prospective Interventional Study

Published: January 1, 2023 | DOI:
MD Taher Ahmed Mazumder, Jyotirmoy Phookan, Nabajyoti Saikia, Monikuntal Sarmah

1. Postgraduate Trainee, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Assam Medical College and Hospital, Dibrugarh, Assam, India. 2. Professor and Head, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Assam Medical College and Hospital, Dibrugarh, Assam, India. 3. Associate Professor, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Assam Medical College and Hospital, Dibrugarh, Assam, India. 4. Registrar, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Assam Medical College and Hospital, Dibrugarh, Assam, India.

Correspondence Address :
Md Taher Ahmed Mazumder,
Hatigaon, Guwahati, Dibrugarh, Assam, India.


Introduction: Radiotherapy is still the major treatment modality for Head and Neck malignancies preferred by patients as well as surgeons. Temporal bone and brain stem are mostly included in the portals. So the middle ear, inner ear and brain stem may receive a significant radiation dose causing hearing loss.

Aim: To study the effect of radiotherapy on hearing in patients with head and neck cancer.

Materials and Methods: This study was a hospital-based prospective interventional study, done in Assam Medical College and Hospital, Dibrugarh, Assam, India, from 1st July, 2020 to 30th June, 2021. A total of 33 patients with head and neck malignancies receiving radiotherapy as a mode of treatment attending Ear Nose Throat (ENT) Outpatient Department (OPD) and Department of Radiation Oncology were included. Pure Tone Audiometry was done for hearing assessment before and after radiotherapy. Microsoft excel version 2010 was used for recording the data.

Results: A total of 66 ears (33 patients) have been evaluated. Out of 33 patients, 29 patients (87.88%) had decreased hearing in one/both the ear after radiotherapy. Out of 29 patients, 19 patients (65.51%) had hearing loss less than 10 dB whereas, 10 patients (34.49%) had hearing loss >10 dB, which is considered as significant hearing loss. Among the 19 patients, 3 patients (15.78%) had hearing loss <10 dB on the same ear, i.e. on the same side of malignancy where the radiotherapy was given. Other 16 patients (48.48%) had hearing loss on both ear.

Conclusion: Effect of radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy on hearing is a well known phenomenon. This study also established the fact of hearing loss in majority of patients receiving radiotherapy.


Chemotherapy, Conductive hearing loss, Mixed hearing loss, Sensorineural hearing loss

Cancer is in the rise causing death all over the world. It is the second most leading cause of death globally, and is projected to rise continuously, with an estimated 12 million deaths in 2030 (1). In India, head and neck cancers are the major cause of cancer morbidity and mortality (1). Due to lifestyle changes and use of tobacco and smoking in the society, the prevalence of head and neck cancer is on the rise in our country. Also, the lack of awareness among people about cancer and non existence of proper cancer prevention programs have made the scenario even worse. Thus, these factors result in a late presentation and delayed diagnosis of these patients (2). Various treatment modalities of head and neck malignancies are radiotherapy, surgery and chemotherapy, or any combination among them. Radiotherapy is still a major treatment modality preferred by patients as well as surgeons (2).

Radiotherapy comes with side-effects on normal tissues of head and neck which are relatively common and unavoidable. It depends on various factors such as the site of radiation, total dose delivered and daily fraction of radiation used. Higher the total dose or larger the daily fractions, more is the complications. Common side-effects are the mucositis, cutaneous erythema and xerostomia. Other side-effects include pain on swallowing, alteration of taste and hair loss on head, neck or face. Fatigue is also very common. The acute reactions are usually self-limited. The long term side-effects manifests many months or years after completion of radiotherapy. Organ dysfunction often manifests by cell lines with slow turn over e.g. radio-necrosis of bone. In some tissues, such as inner ear hair cells, functional progenitor cells may be lacking, resulting in greater organ system dysfunction (3). The total recommended dose limit for use in clinical practice with fractionated and single dose radiotherapy is <60 grey (Gy) for brain and <45 grey (Gy) for cochlea (4).

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (RT) has allowed for better dose conformation, improving dose escalation to the target and sparing of more normal tissue. For head-and-neck tumours, many normal tissue structures co-exist in this region, but our understanding of their response to RT varies by structure. Sensorineural Hearing Loss (SNHL) as a result of RT to the inner ear and cochlea is a radiation dose-limiting toxicity that needs additional investigation (5).

Since the radiotherapy used in management of head and neck tumours often includes the temporal bone and brain stem in the portals. So the middle ear, inner ear and brain stem may receive a significant radiation dose. Hearing loss is a common complication of radiation treatment, which may be conductive, sensorineural and mixed. Temporary hearing impairment can result from Eustachian tube dysfunction, radiation induced otitis media and transient vasculitis of inner ear vessels, whereas the delayed radiation induced hearing loss has been attributed to the effects of radiation on inner ear with cellular changes, inflammatory reaction and haemorrhage involving the vessel (6).

Due to various modalities of advanced treatment options available for the management of head and neck malignancies, the survival has improved significantly. Hence the hearing disability due to radiation can significantly affect the quality of life (7). Therefore, hearing impairment is an especially morbid sequelae of head-and-neck RT. It was observed that the hearing changes started immediately after the end of the radiotherapy while some patients recover from their hearing change (8). In the present study, the authors aimed to study the effect of radiotherapy on hearing in patients with head and neck cancer.

Material and Methods

The present study was a hospital-based prospective interventional study conducted in the Department of ENT and Head and Neck Surgery, Assam Medical College and Hospital, Dibrugarh, Assam, India, from 8th July, 2020 to 30th June, 2021. Ethical clearance was taken from IEC (No. AMC/EC/PG/8886).

Inclusion criteria: Patients of clinically diagnosed head and neck malignancies of either sex in age group of 20-80 years and willing for radiotherapy, histopathological examinations, regular follow-up were included in the study after taking informed consent.

Exclusion criteria: Patients having past history of hearing disability (self-reported) and chronic suppurative otitis media, severe to profound hearing loss, those already received chemotherapy or radiotherapy and those not willing to give consent for the study were excluded from the study.

Sample size comprised of the total number of patients attending ENT OPD during the study period with head and neck carcinoma and fulfilling the inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Study Procedure

All the patients included in the study were subjected to detailed history including age of the patient, gender, socio-economic status (graded according to B.G Prasad Socio-economic classification) (9), locality of the patient were recorded. Complete general, systemic and ENT examination was done. The relevant details of each patient were filled. ENT examination included otoscopy, tuning fork test, EUM (Examination Under Microscope) of both the ear was done; any previous abnormality of the ear was noted. In case of nasopharyngeal carcinoma, endoscopic examinations were done to rule out any Eustachian tube dysfunction. Clinical staging of the carcinoma using 8th edition of American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging (10) of head and neck cancer was done and then final staging of the carcinoma was also done (after investigations). Pure Tone Audiometries (PTA) were done in all the recruited cases before and after one month of the radiation treatment. PTA: Air conduction threshold level was measured at frequencies 0.25-4 kHz and bone conduction threshold level was measured at frequencies 0.5-4 kHz (11). Degree of hearing was classified according to the threshold and recorded (12). Hearing loss=10 dB was considered as insignificant and >10 dB was considered as significant. All the information was recorded and assessed. Symptoms pertaining to ear, nose and throat after receiving radiotherapy were also recorded.

• Investigations performed were Haemoglobin (Hb%), Total Count (TC), Differential Leucocyte Count (DLC), Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR), Bleeding Time (BT), Clotting Time (CT), Prothrombin Time (PT), Platelet count, Random Blood Sugar (RBS), Renal Function Test (RFT), Liver Function Test (LFT) Thyroid profile. Serological test- Integrated Counselling and Testing Centres (ICTC), Hepatitis B surface Antigen (HBsAg), Anti-Hepatitis C virus (HCV), Electrocardiography (ECG) and Chest X-ray (PA view). Biopsy was performed from the tumour/growth for histopathological examination. Fine needle aspiration from palpable neck nodes/swelling if present. Direct nasal endoscopy, video direct laryngoscopy were also performed.

Pure Tone Audiometry before and after one month of completion of radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy were performed.

Treatment protocol with radiotherapy alone or in combination with chemotherapy was decided by the Department of Radiation Oncology. The radiation therapy consisted of a total dose 50-66 Gy (patients receiving only radiotherapy) and 63-70 Gy (patients receiving chemo-radiation therapy); prescribed to the planning target volume 1.8-2 Gy/fraction in 5 consecutive days per week.

Statistical Analysis

Data were presented in tabular form mentioning the frequency of hearing loss along with percentage. Software Microsoft excel 2010 version was used for recording of all the findings.


Total 33 patients with head and neck cancers receiving radiotherapy with/without chemotherapy were included as sample in the study. Most of the patients belonged to 51-60 years age group (39.39%) receiving radiotherapy for head and neck cancer followed by 61-70 years age group (30.3%) (Table/Fig 1).

A total of 26 patients were males (78.79%) and 7 were females (21.21%) (Table/Fig 1). In the present study, 21 cases i.e 63.64% belonged to rural areas while 12 cases i.e 33.36% were from urban areas. This study showed that majority of the patients chosen for the study belonged to lower socio-economic status (Table/Fig 1). A total of 11 patients (33.33%) had oropharyngeal carcinoma and another 11 patients (33.33%) had laryngeal carcinoma (Table/Fig 2). (Table/Fig 3) shows CT neck of a patient with left Aryepiglottic fold and Pyriform sinus squamous cell carcinoma.

Out of 33 patients, 25 of them received only radiotherapy, whereas 8 patients received both radiotherapy and chemotherapy (Table/Fig 4). Out of 33 patients, 17 patients were found to be having SNHL, 1 patient was having CHL, 7 patients were having mixed type of hearing loss. A total of 8 patients had no effect in hearing in right ear (Table/Fig 5).

Out of 33 patients, 18 patients were found to be having SNHL, 6 patients were having mixed type of hearing loss and 9 patients had no effect in hearing in left ear (Table/Fig 6).

(Table/Fig 7) shows the hearing status before and after Radiotherapy/Chemotherapy on both ears.

(Table/Fig 8) shows the hearing loss in patients pre and post radiotherapy. (Table/Fig 9) shows the distribution of hearing loss in accordance with age.

(Table/Fig 10) shows the distribution of radiation dose dependent hearing loss after radiotherapy. Distribution of patients according to audiometric changes can be seen in (Table/Fig 11).

In the present study, out of 33 cases, majority of the patients i.e. 9 patients (27.27%) presented with alterations in hearing following radiotherapy. 2 patients (6.06%) presented with ear fullness and 1 patient (3.03%) each presented with tinnitus, vertigo and nausea and vomiting (Table/Fig 12). Other nose and throat symptoms after radiotherapy can be seen in (Table/Fig 13). (Table/Fig 14) gives a summary of site specific distribution of hearing loss.


In the present study, most of the patients belonged to 51-60 years age group (39.39%) receiving radiotherapy for head and neck cancer followed by 61-70 years age group (30.3%). Only one patient (3.03%) was in the age group of 21-30 years. The mean age of the patients included in the study was 55.09 years. The youngest patient included in the study was 25 years and the oldest patient was 75 years. Most of the previous studies including that of Kaul A, found that maximum number of male patients were in the age group of 41-50 years of age, whereas maximum numbers of female patients were in the age group of 51-60 years of age (13),(14),(15),(17),(18).

In the present study, the authors found most of the patients belonged to 5th to 6th decade of life i.e. 39.39%. However, 30.3% of patients belonged to 6th to 7th decade of life. This shifting of the age group is seen in the study done by Llewellyn CD et al. In his study he found that during the past decades, there has been an alarming rise in the incidence of oral cancer particularly among younger men, a trend that appears to be continuing (13). In a previous study, it was seen that many younger patients had never smoked or consumed alcohol compared to older people, or duration of exposure may be too short for malignant transformation to occur. This may be the reason, older patients are more prone for cancers (13).

The present study showed male to female ratio as 3.7:1. Males are mostly affected and continue to rise in relation to the unfavourable trends in the smoking epidemic (14).

Dobrossy L in their study found out that relative to men, head-and-neck cancer is relatively rare in women. Particularly in the developed countries, men are affected more often as women, the sex ratios might exceed 10:1. In this case it corresponds to the present study (14). Baghat S, in their study too found males were affected more than females; 23: 7, similar to the present study (15). In the present study, 21 cases i.e 63.64% belonged to rural areas while 12 cases i.e 33.36% were from urban areas.

Siddiqui MS et al., in their study found out more number of patients of Head and Neck Cancer belong to the urban background than rural background. The study reported that Head and Neck Cancer cases are not reaching higher centres due to lesser access of healthcare among the rural population, as well as due to prevailing regional mindset, patients often resort to locally available and sometimes cheaper alternative medical therapies thus getting deprived of a proper cancer diagnosis at a higher centre. Low socio-economic status, illiteracy, ignorance of patients often act as a barrier in getting their primary symptoms of HNC checked with proper work-up; thus also preventing their diagnosis (16).

This study showed that majority of the patients chosen for the study belonged to lower socio-economic status. According to updated B.G Prasad Socio-economic classification. Class III (middle class) includes 8 (24.24%) cases. Class II, class IV and class V had, respectively 2 (6.06%), 4 (12.12%) and 7 (21.21%) cases (9). This leads to the inference that lower socio-economic living status is an important contributing factor for advanced head and neck carcinoma, most probably due illiteracy, less medical facility, and use of firewoods during cooking.

Joshi P et al., in their study on Head and Neck Cancers in Developing Countries like India on the distribution of head and neck cancers according to socio-economic condition. They found most of the patients, approximately 90% of patients belong to lower and lower middle socio-economic group. This corresponds to the present study (17).

Amongst total patients included in the present study, maximum patients had oropharyngeal carcinoma and laryngeal carcinoma, followed by those with carcinoma of tongue, tonsil, palate and floor of mouth etc. Siddiqui MS et al., in their study on epidemiology and histopathological spectrum of head and neck cancers in Bihar, found out that out of 173 patients with head and neck cancer, 73 patients (42.19%) had laryngeal carcinoma followed by 59 patients (34.1%) with carcinoma of oral cavity. This may be ascribed to more smoking habits in this population, specially bidi which is a form of crude cigarette (16).

In the present study, out of 33 cases, majority of the patients i.e 9 patients (27.27%) presented with decrease in hearing following radiotherapy, followed by those with ear fullness, tinnitus, vertigo and nausea and vomiting while Kaul A et al., in their prospective study on auditory alterations following radiotherapy saw most patients came with complain of ear fullness (40%) followed by decreased hearing and tinnitus (24%) (18).

Dellaringa AHB et al., in their study on audiological findings in head and neck cancer, found out 26.3% patients had hearing loss after radiotherapy for head and neck cancers. Most of them had sensorineural hearing loss (19). Other clinical features observed were dysphagia, dryness of mouth, mucositis, difficulty in speech and pain in the localised area of carcinoma. Similar results were observed by Muller R et al., in their prospective study in patients with laryngeal carcinoma (20).

In the present study 7 patients (21.21%) of oropharyngeal carcinoma had significant hearing loss (>10 dB) followed by 2 patients (6.06%) of laryngeal carcinoma and 1 (3.03%) patient of nasopharyngeal carcinoma had hearing loss more than 10 dB after one month of radiotherapy. Anteunis LJC et al., in their prospective study on radiation induced hearing loss found out hearing loss is seen mostly in patients with carcinoma of nasopharynx, tonsils, salivary gland tumours. This is probably due to the site of the tumour which is near to the temporal bone. Thus, temporal bone too receives radiation that leads to the damage of cochlea resulting in hearing loss (11).

The present study reported radiation induced hearing loss is most commonly seen in elderly age group. Pan CC et al., in their prospective study on hearing loss after radiotherapy observed that the hearing loss is more common in elderly patient as the older patients are more susceptible to hearing loss. The effect on hearing loss is most noticeable at the higher frequencies, especially 4000 Hz and 8000 Hz (21).

Theunissan EAR et al., in their study observed an increased risk of developing SNHL with increasing age. They stated the baseline hearing level itself is related to age. Therefore, patients with a good baseline hearing level (i.e., younger patients) may endure relatively more hearing loss (in dB) but will finish with lower threshold (in dB HL) after treatment compared to older patients. In reverse, patients with unfavourable baseline hearing levels (ie, older patients) may not have large hearing deteriorations in terms of dB, but are characterised by a higher chance of higher threshold in dB HL after treatment (22).

In the present study, authors observed that the patients receiving higher dose of radiation had more chance of hearing loss. 13 patients out of 23 patients (56.52%) receiving 72 Gy has hearing loss more than that of the patients who received 60 Gy (50%). While Mota MM et al., in their prospective study observed that an increase in the mean radiation dose to the inner ear was associated with increased hearing loss. This effect varied across frequencies, with identical radiation doses causing more hearing loss in the higher than in the lower frequencies (23).

Out of the 66 ears studied, 17 patients had sensorineural hearing loss in the right ear and 18 patients had sensorineural hearing loss in the left ear after one month of radiotherapy. Only 1 patient showed conductive hearing loss on the right ear. Eight patients in the right ear and nine patients in the left ear showed no change in hearing after one month of completion of radiotherapy. Severe sensorineural hearing loss (71-90 dB) is seen in one patient in both the ear and one patient in the left ear, same ear to the side of malignancy.

Schultz C et al., in their prospective study on hearing loss in patients with Head and Neck Cancer treated with Radiotherapy, it is seen that hearing losses of the sensorineural type predominated. But occurrences of conductive hearing losses (<0.7%) and mixedtype hearing losses (<16.3%) were also seen in either ear and in both control and study groups. They studied on 141 patients exposed to radiotherapy, out of which 102 patients had hearing loss. Sensorineural hearing loss is seen in 72 patients (51.06%). In the group of individuals exposed to radiotherapy, mild to moderate hearing losses were observed in 57.4% of right ears and 59.6% of left ears. In the control group, hearing abilities were within normal limits in 56.7% of right ears and 55.3% of left ears, and there were mild to moderate hearing losses in 42.6% and 43.3% of right and left ears, respectively; that is, the exposed group presented with hearing losses 20% more frequently (24).

Hence it can be said that the patients exposed for radiation therapy for head and cancers are in risk factors for hearing loss. A few of them recover with time while a majority of them can have permanent hearing loss.


Number of patients in the study group could have been more but because of COVID-19 pandemic, less number of patients attended ENT OPD. As the sample size is low, further studies with bigger sample size would provide concrete results.


Effect of radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy on hearing is a well known phenomenon. It was established that, hearing loss occured in one or both ears, in majority of patients receiving radiotherapy.


Organization WH. Key facts about cancer. In. Available from: cancer/about/facts/en/. Accessed on 24th May, 2021.
Ahluwalia, H, Gupta, SC, Singh M. Spectrum of head-neck cancer. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001;53(1):16-21. [crossref] [PubMed]
Bhandare N, Mendenhall WM, Antonelli P. Radiation effects on the auditory and vestibular systems- Radiation biology. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2009;42(4):623-34. [crossref] [PubMed]
Anker CJ, Shrieve DC. Basic principles of radiobiology applied to radiosurgery and radiotherapy of benign skull tumors. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2009;42(4):601-21. [crossref] [PubMed]
Pan CC, Eisbruch A, Lee JS, Snorrason RM, Ten Haken RK, Kileny PR. Prospective study of inner ear radiation dose and hearing loss in head-and-neck cancer patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;61(5):1393-02. [crossref] [PubMed]
Fraass BA, Kessler ML, McShan DL, Marsh LH, Watson BA, Dusseau WJ, et al. Optimization and clinical use of multisegment intensity-modulated radiation therapy for high-dose conformal therapy. Semin Radiat Oncol. 1999;9(1):60-77. [crossref] [PubMed]
Wan Leung S, Lee TF, Chien CY, Chien CY, Tsai WL, Fang FM, et al. Health-related Quality of life in 640 head and neck cancer survivors after radiotherapy using EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-H&N35 questionnaries. BMC Cancer. 2011;11:128. Doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-11-128. [crossref] [PubMed]
Ho WK, Wei WI, Kwong DL, Sham JS, Tai PT, Yuen AP, et al. Long-term sensorineural hearing deficit following radiotherapy in patients suffering from nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A prospective study. Head Neck. 1999;21(6):547-53. 3.0.CO;2-Y>[crossref]
Mathiyalagen P, Davis P, Sarasveni M. Updated BG Prasad Socio-Economic Classification: The 2020 Update [Internet]. Indian Journal of Pediatrics. Springer; 2020 [cited 2020 Aug 28]. Available from: [crossref] [PubMed]
Huang SH, O’Sullivan B. Overview of the 8 th Edition TNM Classification for Head and Neck Cancer. Curr Treat Options in Oncol. 2017;18(7):40. [crossref] [PubMed]
Anteunis LJC, Wanders SL, Hendriks JJT, Langendijk JA, Manni JJ, de Jong JMA. A prospective longitudinal study on radiation-induced hearing loss. Am J Surg. 1994;168(5):408-11. [crossref] [PubMed]
Clark JG: Uses and abuses of hearing loss classification. ASHA. 1981;23(7):493-500.
Llewellyn CD, Johnson NW, Warnakulasuriya KAAS. Risk factors for squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity in young people- A comprehensive literature review. Oral Oncol. 2001;37(5):401-18. [crossref] [PubMed]
Döbróssy L. Epidemiology of head and neck cancer: Magnitude of the problem. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2005;24(1):09-17. [crossref] [PubMed]
Baghat S. Clinicopathological study of tumours of hypopharynx. 2003;55(4):05-07.
Siddiqui MS, Chandra R, Aziz A, Suman S. Epidemiology and histopathological spectrum of head and neck cancers in Bihar, a State of Eastern India. Asian Pacific J Cancer Prev. 2012;13(8):3949-53. [crossref] [PubMed]
Joshi P, Dutta S, Chaturvedi P, Nair S. Head and neck cancers in developing countries. Rambam Maimonides Med J. 2014;5(2):e0009. [crossref] [PubMed]
Kaul A, Gupta R, Gupta N, Kotwal S. Auditory alterations following radiotherapy in patients with head and neck malignancy: A prospective study. Indian J Otol. 2015;21(2):119-23. [crossref]
Dellaringa AHB, de Lima Isaac M, Arruda GV, DellAringa AR, Esteves MCBN. Audiological findings in pacients treated with radiotherapy for head and neck tumors. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2010;76(4):527-32.
Müller R, Paneff J, Paneff J, Koch R. Quality of life of patients with laryngeal carcinoma: A post-treatment study. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2001;258(6):276-80. [crossref] [PubMed]
Pan CC, Eisbruch A, Lee JS, Snorrason RM, Ten Haken RK, Kileny PR. Prospective study of inner ear radiation dose and hearing loss in head-and-neck cancer patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;61(5):1393-02. [crossref] [PubMed]
Theunissen EAR, Zuur CL, Bosma SCJ, Lopez-Yurda M, Hauptmann M, Van Der Baan S, et al. Long-term hearing loss after chemoradiation in patients with head and neck cancer. Laryngoscope. 2014;124(12):2720-25. [crossref] [PubMed]
Mota MM, Waissbluth S, Daniel SJ. Characteristics of radiation-induced sensorineural hearing loss in head and neck cancer: A systematic review. Head Neck. 2013;35(11):1662-68. [crossref] [PubMed]
Schultz C, Goffi-Gomez MV, Pecora Liberman PH, Pellizzon AC, Carvalho AL. Hearing loss and complaint in patients with head and neck cancer treated with radiotherapy. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010;136(11):1065-69. [crossref] [PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2023/58318.17210

Date of Submission: Jun 08, 2022
Date of Peer Review: Aug 29, 2022
Date of Acceptance: Oct 07, 2022
Date of Publishing: Jan 01, 2023

• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA

• Plagiarism X-checker: Jun 12, 2022
• Manual Googling: Sep 27, 2022
• iThenticate Software: Oct 06, 2022 (20%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)