Objective Intralabyrinthine schwannomas (ILSs) are a rare cause of deafness. Patients with ILS confined to the semicircular canals and the vestibule (intravestibular schwannomas) are potential candidates for cochlear implantation for hearing rehabilitation, a new option for patients with unilateral hearing loss since the 2019 FDA approval of cochlear implant (CI) for single-sided deafness. In this report, we describe an evolving management approach for ILSs causing hearing loss. Patients Adults (≥18 years) who underwent simultaneous ILS resection and CI between January 2019 and June 2023 (n = 3). Intervention Transmastoid labyrinthectomy with simultaneous cochlear implantation. Main Outcome Measures Hearing performance with cochlear implantation measured as CNC Word Recognition scores and AzBio Sentence scores. Results Three patients with ILS confined to the semicircular canals and vestibule underwent simultaneous tumor resection via labyrinthectomy with CI placement. In all cases, complete tumor resection and full CI insertion were achieved. No patients experienced postoperative complications. Patients 1 and 2 underwent 6- and 9-month postactivation testing, respectively, with CNC scores 64% to 80% and AzBio 81% to 99% in the implanted ears. Patient 3 scored 0% on CNC and AzBio testing at 3 months and deferred her 6-month audiometry. Conclusions Patients with ILS confined to the vestibule and semicircular canals can be considered for simultaneous tumor resection and CI placement.

Background With rising healthcare costs and campaigns aimed at avoiding low-value care, reducing cancer overtreatment has emerged as an important measure of cancer care quality. The extent to which avoidance of low-value care has been incorporated in cancer-specific quality measures is unknown. We aimed to identify and characterize cancer quality measures that promote the avoidance of low-value care, and identify gaps that may guide future measure development. Methods We systematically identified cancer-specific quality measures from leading quality measure organizations [e.g., National Quality Forum (NQF), National Quality Measures Clearinghouse (NQMC)]. We reviewed measures promoting the avoidance of low-value cancer care and subclassified them into disease site- or non-disease site-specific categories and the phase of care they targeted. Results We reviewed 313 quality measures from six organizations. Of these, 18% (n = 55) focused on avoidance of low-value care. Quality measures focused on end-of-life care were most likely to focus on low-value care [n = 13 (50%)], followed by breast [n = 12 (18%)], lung [n = 9 (31%)], colon [n = 8 (20%)], prostate [n = 5 (38%)], general cancer care [n = 4 (3%)], symptoms and toxicities [n = 2 (40%)], and palliative cancer care [n = 2 (11%)] measures. The phases of care quality measures targeted included low-value screening [n = 5 (9%)], diagnostic testing and staging [n = 7 (13%)], treatment [n = 19 (34%)], surveillance [n = 6 (11%)], and clinical outcomes [n = 18 (33%)]. All categories had a treatment-specific quality measure, but no category had a representative measure for every phase of care. Discussion A minority of cancer quality measures are aimed at avoiding low-value care, and multiple evidence-based recommendations targeting low-value care have not been incorporated.

Importance:Surveillance imaging and visits are costly and have not been shown to improve oncologic outcomes for patients with head and neck cancer (HNC). However, the benefit of surveillance visits may extend beyond recurrence detection. To better understand surveillance and potentially develop protocols to tailor current surveillance paradigms, it is important to elicit the perspectives of the clinicians who care for patients with HNC.Objective:To characterize current surveillance practices and explore clinician attitudes and beliefs on deintensifying surveillance for patients with HNC.Design, Setting, and Participants:This qualitative study was performed from January to March 2021. Guided by an interpretive description approach, interviews were analyzed to produce a thematic description. Data analysis was performed from March to April 2021. Otolaryngologists and radiation oncologists were recruited using purposive and snowball sampling strategies.Main Outcomes and Measures:The main outcomes were current practice, attitudes, and beliefs about deintensifying surveillance and survivorship as well as patients' values and perspectives collected from interviews of participating physicians.Results:Twenty-one physicians (17 [81%] men) were interviewed, including 13 otolaryngologists and 8 radiation oncologists with a median of 8 years (IQR, 5-20 years) in practice. Twelve participants (57%) stated their practice comprised more than 75% of patients with HNC. Participants expressed that there was substantial variation in the interpretation of the surveillance guidelines. Participants were open to the potential for deintensification of surveillance or incorporating symptom-based surveillance protocols but had concerns that deintensification may increase patient anxiety and shift some of the burden of recurrence monitoring to patients. Patient and physician peace of mind, the importance of maintaining the patient-physician relationship, and the need for adequate survivorship and management of treatment-associated toxic effects were reported to be important barriers to deintensifying surveillance.Conclusions and Relevance:In this qualitative study, clinicians revealed a willingness to consider altering cancer surveillance but expressed a need to maintain patient and clinician peace of mind, maintain the patient-clinician relationship, and ensure adequate monitoring of treatment-associated toxic effects and other survivorship concerns. These findings may be useful in future research on the management of posttreatment surveillance.