Diabetes mellitus (DM), one of the most common life-threatening illnesses worldwide, is a group of metabolic diseases, characterized by sustained hyperglycemia. The global prevalence of diabetes mellitus among adults reached 387 millions in 2014 and is still rising. It is suggested there is a strong association between diabetes mellitus (especially type 2 diabetes mellitus) and carcinogenesis. The possible biological links between diabetes mellitus and cancer comprise hyperinsulinemia, hyperglycemia and fat-induced chronic inflammation. Although, the strongest association refers to pancreas and liver, there are many other organs involved in carcinogenesis in diabetic patients including breast, endometrium, bladder and kidney. Recent studies suggest that there is also association between cancer incidence and anti-diabetic medications. It was observed that some medications decrease the risk of carcinogenesis and some increase that risk. The majority of studies concern metformin, a drug of choice in type 2 diabetes mellitus, and its anti-neoplastic and tumor-suppressing activity. The positive effect of metformin was found in numerous researches investigating breast, pancreas, liver, colon, ovaries and prostate tumors. Because a variety of studies have suggested that diabetes mellitus and cancer are frequently coexisting diseases, recently published studies try to explain the influence of diabetes mellitus and anti-diabetic medications on carcinogenesis in different organs. We present the review of the latest studies investigating the association between both diabetes mellitus and anti-diabetic medications and cancer incidence and prognosis. Particularly we highlight the problem of concomitant head and neck cancers in diabetics, rarely analysed and often omitted in studies.

Granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA) is an idiopathic vasculitis of medium and small arteries, characterized by necrotizing granulomatous inflammation. GPA typically affects upper and lower respiratory tract with coexisting glomerulonephritis. This disease is generally characterized by antineutrophil cytoplasm antibodies (ANCA), nevertheless, there are rare cases with negative ANCA. GPA affects people at any age, with predominance of the sixth and seventh decade of life. In 80%–95% of the patients the first symptoms of GPA are otorhinolaryngological manifestations of head and neck including nose/sinuses, ears, eyes, larynx/trachea, oral cavity, and salivary glands. Diagnosis of GPA is based on Criteria of the American College of Rheumatology. In clinical practice diagnosis, the presence of distinctive ANCA antibodies and biopsy of affected organ are crucial. GPA must be differentiated from neoplastic, infectious or inflammatory ulcerative lesions of the head and neck. The standard treatment procedure is divided into two essential phases, induction and maintenance. The induction phase is based on combination of systemic corticosteroid and immunosuppressant therapy, whereas the maintenance phase comprises corticosteroids and azathioprine/methotrexate supplementation. Surgical treatment ought to be considered for patients who are not responding to pharmacotherapy.

BackgroundHearing screening tests based on pure-tone audiometry may be conducted on mobile devices, provided that the devices are specially calibrated for the purpose. Calibration consists of determining the reference sound level and can be performed in relation to the hearing threshold of normal-hearing persons. In the case of devices provided by the manufacturer, together with bundled headphones, the reference sound level can be calculated once for all devices of the same model.ObjectiveThis study aimed to compare the hearing threshold measured by a mobile device that was calibrated using a model-specific, biologically determined reference sound level with the hearing threshold obtained in pure-tone audiometry.MethodsTrial participants were recruited offline using face-to-face prompting from among Otolaryngology Clinic patients, who own Android-based mobile devices with bundled headphones. The hearing threshold was obtained on a mobile device by means of an open access app, Hearing Test, with incorporated model-specific reference sound levels. These reference sound levels were previously determined in uncontrolled conditions in relation to the hearing threshold of normal-hearing persons. An audiologist-assisted self-measurement was conducted by the participants in a sound booth, and it involved determining the lowest audible sound generated by the device within the frequency range of 250 Hz to 8 kHz. The results were compared with pure-tone audiometry.ResultsA total of 70 subjects, 34 men and 36 women, aged 18-71 years (mean 36, standard deviation [SD] 11) participated in the trial. The hearing threshold obtained on mobile devices was significantly different from the one determined by pure-tone audiometry with a mean difference of 2.6 dB (95% CI 2.0-3.1) and SD of 8.3 dB (95% CI 7.9-8.7). The number of differences not greater than 10 dB reached 89% (95% CI 88-91), whereas the mean absolute difference was obtained at 6.5 dB (95% CI 6.2-6.9). Sensitivity and specificity for a mobile-based screening method were calculated at 98% (95% CI 93-100.0) and 79% (95% CI 71-87), respectively.ConclusionsThe method of hearing self-test carried out on mobile devices with bundled headphones demonstrates high compatibility with pure-tone audiometry, which confirms its potential application in hearing monitoring, screening tests, or epidemiological examinations on a large scale.

No abstract

BackgroundHearing tests carried out in home setting by means of mobile devices require previous calibration of the reference sound level. Mobile devices with bundled headphones create a possibility of applying the predefined level for a particular model as an alternative to calibrating each device separately.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to determine the reference sound level for sets composed of a mobile device and bundled headphones.MethodsReference sound levels for Android-based mobile devices were determined using an open access mobile phone app by means of biological calibration, that is, in relation to the normal-hearing threshold. The examinations were conducted in 2 groups: an uncontrolled and a controlled one. In the uncontrolled group, the fully automated self-measurements were carried out in home conditions by 18- to 35-year-old subjects, without prior hearing problems, recruited online. Calibration was conducted as a preliminary step in preparation for further examination. In the controlled group, audiologist-assisted examinations were performed in a sound booth, on normal-hearing subjects verified through pure-tone audiometry, recruited offline from among the workers and patients of the clinic. In both the groups, the reference sound levels were determined on a subject’s mobile device using the Bekesy audiometry. The reference sound levels were compared between the groups. Intramodel and intermodel analyses were carried out as well.ResultsIn the uncontrolled group, 8988 calibrations were conducted on 8620 different devices representing 2040 models. In the controlled group, 158 calibrations (test and retest) were conducted on 79 devices representing 50 models. Result analysis was performed for 10 most frequently used models in both the groups. The difference in reference sound levels between uncontrolled and controlled groups was 1.50 dB (SD 4.42). The mean SD of the reference sound level determined for devices within the same model was 4.03 dB (95% CI 3.93-4.11). Statistically significant differences were found across models.ConclusionsReference sound levels determined in the uncontrolled group are comparable to the values obtained in the controlled group. This validates the use of biological calibration in the uncontrolled group for determining the predefined reference sound level for new devices. Moreover, due to a relatively small deviation of the reference sound level for devices of the same model, it is feasible to conduct hearing screening on devices calibrated with the predefined reference sound level.

BackgroundPotential methods of application of self-administered Web-based pure-tone audiometry conducted at home on a PC with a sound card and ordinary headphones depend on the value of measurement error in such tests.ObjectiveThe aim of this research was to determine the measurement error of the hearing threshold determined in the way described above and to identify and analyze factors influencing its value.MethodsThe evaluation of the hearing threshold was made in three series: (1) tests on a clinical audiometer, (2) self-tests done on a specially calibrated computer under the supervision of an audiologist, and (3) self-tests conducted at home. The research was carried out on the group of 51 participants selected from patients of an audiology outpatient clinic. From the group of 51 patients examined in the first two series, the third series was self-administered at home by 37 subjects (73%).ResultsThe average difference between the value of the hearing threshold determined in series 1 and in series 2 was -1.54dB with standard deviation of 7.88dB and a Pearson correlation coefficient of .90. Between the first and third series, these values were -1.35dB±10.66dB and .84, respectively. In series 3, the standard deviation was most influenced by the error connected with the procedure of hearing threshold identification (6.64dB), calibration error (6.19dB), and additionally at the frequency of 250Hz by frequency nonlinearity error (7.28dB).ConclusionsThe obtained results confirm the possibility of applying Web-based pure-tone audiometry in screening tests. In the future, modifications of the method leading to the decrease in measurement error can broaden the scope of Web-based pure-tone audiometry application.

MCM2, MCM3 and MCM7 are minichromosome maintenance proteins found in dividing cells and they play a role in DNA synthesis. Increased MCM expression level is observed in cells of different cancer types. Additionally, metallothioneins (MT-I/II) are involved in control of cell proliferation and differentiation and changes of their expression are observed in many types of cancer. Ki-67 is known cancer cell proliferation antigen currently used in prognostic evaluation. The study material consisted of 83 laryngeal squamous cell cancer (LSCC) cases and 10 benign hypertrophic lesions of larynx epithelium as a control group. For the present study, laryngeal cancer cell line HEp-2 and human keratinocytes were employed, and to evaluate expression of all the markers, immunohistochemical method (IHC), immunofluorescence (IF) and western blot analysis were used. Statistical analysis showed strong positive correlation between expression of MCM2, MCM3, MCM7 and Ki-67 antigen in LSCC. Additionally, moderate positive correlation was observed between MCM3 and MT-I/II expression. In cancer cells, the level of expression of MCM3, MCM2, MCM7 and Ki-67 markers was increasing with the grade of LSCC malignancy. IF and western blot analysis showed higher MCM2, MCM3, MCM7 expression in HEp-2 cells in comparison to their expression in keratinocytes. MCM proteins might be useful markers of cell proliferation in LSCC.

BackgroundOnline hearing tests conducted in home settings on a personal computer (PC) require prior calibration. Biological calibration consists of approximating the reference sound level via the hearing threshold of a person with normal hearing.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to identify the error of the proposed methods of biological calibration, their duration, and the subjective difficulty in conducting these tests via PC.MethodsSeven methods have been proposed for measuring the calibration coefficients. All measurements were performed in reference to the hearing threshold of a normal-hearing person. Three methods were proposed for determining the reference sound level on the basis of these calibration coefficients. Methods were compared for the estimated error, duration, and difficulty of the calibration. Web-based self-assessed measurements of the calibration coefficients were carried out in 3 series: (1) at a otolaryngology clinic, (2) at the participant’s home, and (3) again at the clinic. Additionally, in series 1 and 3, pure-tone audiometry was conducted and series 3 was followed by an offline questionnaire concerning the difficulty of the calibration. Participants were recruited offline from coworkers of the Department and Clinic of Otolaryngology, Wroclaw Medical University, Poland.ResultsAll 25 participants, aged 22-35 years (median 27) completed all tests and filled in the questionnaire. The smallest standard deviation of the calibration coefficient in the test-retest measurement was obtained at the level of 3.87 dB (95% CI 3.52-4.29) for the modulated signal presented in accordance with the rules of Bekesy’s audiometry. The method is characterized by moderate duration time and a relatively simple procedure. The simplest and shortest method was the method of self-adjustment of the sound volume to the barely audible level. In the test-retest measurement, the deviation of this method equaled 4.97 dB (95% CI 4.53-5.51). Among methods determining the reference sound level, the levels determined independently for each frequency revealed the smallest error. The estimated standard deviations of the difference in the hearing threshold between the examination conducted on a biologically calibrated PC and pure-tone audiometry varied from 7.27 dB (95% CI 6.71-7.93) to 10.38 dB (95% CI 9.11-12.03), depending on the calibration method.ConclusionsIn this study, an analysis of biological calibration was performed and the presented results included calibration error, calibration time, and calibration difficulty. These values determine potential applications of Web-based hearing tests conducted in home settings and are decisive factors when selecting the calibration method. If there are no substantial time limitations, it is advisable to use Bekesy method and determine the reference sound level independently at each frequency because this approach is characterized by the lowest error.