Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2022 Aug 21;12(8):1347.
doi: 10.3390/jpm12081347.

Endotyping of Cholesteatoma: Which Molecular Biomarkers? A Systematic Review

Elena Cantone  1   2 , Claudio Di Nola  1   2 , Eugenio De Corso  3 , Michele Cavaliere  1   2 , Giusi Grimaldi  1   2 , Anna Rita Fetoni  4   5 , Gaetano Motta  6
Affiliations
Review

Endotyping of Cholesteatoma: Which Molecular Biomarkers? A Systematic Review

Elena Cantone et al. J Pers Med. .

Abstract

Background: So far, no medical treatment is available for cholesteatoma (C) and the only effective therapy is complete surgical removal, but recurrence is common even after surgical treatment. While C is classically divided into two clinical phenotypes, congenital and acquired, only a few studies have focused on its potential biomarkers. This study aims to revise the literature to identify which biomarkers can define the endotype of C.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) process to identify published experimental articles about molecular biomarkers in C.

Results: KGF and its receptor, MMP-9, KRT-1, KRT-10, and MIF might be considered biomarkers of recurrence, whereas Ki-67, TLR-4, RANKL, IL17, MMP-2, MMP-9, IL6, TNF-α, should be considered more specifically as biomarkers of bony erosion.

Conclusions: These results are interesting especially from a prognostic point of view, nevertheless more studies are needed to search new biomarkers of C that could completely change not only the therapeutic standards of the disease, but also the clinical history of C itself in the era of precision medicine.

Keywords: biomarkers; cholesteatoma; chronic otitis media; endotyping; middle ear; precision medicine.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Prisma flow diagram of the systematic search.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Sade J. Treatment of cholesteatoma and retraction pockets. Eur. Arch. Otorhinol. 1993;250:193–199. doi: 10.1007/BF00171523. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Skoloudik L., Simakova E., Kalfert D., Chrobok V. Histological changes of the middle ear ossicles harvested during cholesteatoma surgery. Acta Med. 2015;58:119–122. - PubMed
    1. Kuo C.L., Shiao A.S., Yung M., Sakagami M., Sudhoff H., Wang C.H., Hsu C.H., Lien C.F. Updates and knowledge gaps in cholesteatoma research. BioMed Res. Int. 2015;2015:854024. doi: 10.1155/2015/854024. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kennedy K.L., Singh A.K. Middle Ear Cholesteatoma. StatPearls Publishing; Tampa, FL, USA: 2022. - PubMed
    1. Eggink M.C., de Wolf M.J.F., Ebbens F.A., Dikkers F.G., van Spronsen E. Evaluation of Long-term Cholesteatoma Recidivism: Using the JOS, EAONO-JOS, and STAMCO Cholesteatoma Staging Systems. Otol. Neurotol. 2021;42:1031–1038. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000003150. - DOI - PubMed