The publication rate of Otorhinolaryngology Research Society presentations remains high and many are subsequently published in high-impact factor otolaryngology journals. More Otorhinolaryngology Research Society presentations are now published in American and European journals.

Epidemiological studies demonstrated that human exposure to methylmercury (MeHg) may contribute to the development and progression of metabolic and cardiovascular disorders. However, the mechanisms involved and the role of selenium (Se) and vitamin E (V(E)) supplementation in modulating MeHg cardiovascular toxicities remain unclear. This study examined the effects of Se and V(E) supplementation on MeHg-mediated systemic oxidative stress, antioxidant defense, inflammation, and endothelial dysfunction in an animal model. Male Sprague-Dawley rats were fed a starch-based casein diet or the same diet supplemented with 1 or 3 mg Se/kg diet and with or without 250 or 750 mg V(E)/kg diet. After 28 days of dietary treatment, rats were gavaged with 0 or 3 mg MeHg/kg BW for 14 consecutive days. Results suggested that exposure to MeHg may increase the risk of cardiovascular disease by decreasing circulating paraoxonase-1 activities, increasing serum oxidized low density lipoprotein levels, and associated systemic inflammation and endothelial dysfunction as reflected by increased leukocyte counts and serum levels of intercellular adhesion molecule-1 and monocyte chemotactic protein-1. Se and V(E) supplementation may either alleviate or augment the effects of MeHg, depending on their doses and combinations.

Background A cost-minimization analysis (CMA) was performed to estimate the economic impact of introducing the SQ house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy (SQ HDM SLIT)-tablet marketed as ACARIZAX™ (regulatory approval May 2017) for the treatment of HDM-induced allergic rhinitis in Canada (Ontario and Quebec), where house dust mite subcutaneous immunotherapy (HDM SCIT) is already an available treatment option. Methods A CMA was deemed appropriate and was based on the assumption that the SQ HDM SLIT-tablet has comparable efficacy to HDM SCIT. A societal perspective was adopted in the model, including relevant costs of medications, health care services and productivity loss. A 3 year time horizon was used corresponding to a recommended treatment course of allergy immunotherapy. Resource use and costs were based on published sources, where possible, and validated and complemented by a Canadian specialist clinician (allergist) in active practice in Ontario and in Quebec, respectively, where applicable. A discount rate of 1.5% was applied in accordance with the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) guidelines. To assess the robustness of the results, sensitivity analyses were performed by testing alternative assumptions for selected parameters, to understand their impact on the results of the analysis. Results The direct treatment costs for a 3-year treatment with SQ HDM SLIT-tablets were higher than for HDM SCIT for both provinces, Ontario and Quebec ($4732.12 and $4829.03 vs. $3434.51 and $2987.74). However, when adding the indirect costs to the model, total savings for the treatment with SQ HDM SLIT-tablets of $1833.00 for Ontario and $769.03 for Quebec were observed. Sensitivity analyses with varying HDM SCIT resource use, discount rates, titration and maintenance injections, nurse time, and number of injections per vial resulted in savings of SQ HDM SLIT-tablets over HDM SCIT in all scenarios analysed. Conclusions The CMA indicates that SQ HDM SLIT-tablets are a cost-minimizing alternative to HDM SCIT when considered from a societal perspective in Ontario and Quebec.

Objective: To report imaging protocol and scheduling variance in routine care of glioblastoma patients in order to demonstrate challenges of integrating deep learning models in glioblastoma care pathways. Additionally, to understand the most common imaging studies and image contrasts to inform the development of potentially robust deep learning models. Methods: MR imaging data were analysed from a random sample of 5 patients from the prospective cohort across five participating sites of the ZGBM consortium. Reported clinical and treatment data alongside DICOM header information were analysed to understand treatment pathway imaging schedules. Results: All sites perform all structural imaging at every stage in the pathway except for the presurgical study, where in some sites only contrast-enhanced T1-weighted imaging is performed. Diffusion MRI is the most common non-structural imaging type, performed at every site. Conclusion: The imaging protocol and scheduling varies across the UK, making it challenging to develop machine learning models that could perform robustly at other centres. Structural imaging is performed most consistently across all centres. Advances in knowledge: Successful translation of deep learning models will likely be based on structural post-treatment imaging unless there is significant effort made to standardise non-structural or peri-operative imaging protocols and schedules.

No abstract