Protective Effect of Erdosteine against Cisplatin‐Induced Ototoxicity in a Guinea Pig Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Cisplatin is a commonly used chemotherapeutic agent. One of its major dose-limiting side effects is ototoxicity. No treatment has yet been approved for this condition. The objective of this study was to determine the potential protective effect of a systemic administration of erdosteine against cisplatin-induced ototoxicity. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective controlled trial conducted in an animal model. SETTING: Animal care research facilities of The Montreal Children's Hospital Research Institute. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A total of 27 guinea pigs were assigned to 4 groups, each receiving a different concentration of intraperitoneal erdosteine: group 1 (control group; n = 9) did not receive erdosteine, group 2 (n = 6) received 100 mg/kg/d, group 3 (n = 6) received 200 mg/kg/d, and group 4 (n = 6) received 500 mg/kg/d. The animals in the experimental groups received the erdosteine injection daily for 4 days. All of the animals received 12 mg/kg of intraperitoneal cisplatin. Auditory brainstem response threshold shifts were measured at 4 frequencies (8, 16, 20, and 25 kHz) for all groups. Scanning electron microscopy and outer hair cell counts were performed to assess the protective effect of erdosteine. RESULTS: Significant protection was observed in groups 3 and 4 at 25 kHz. These findings are supported by outer hair cell counts by scanning electron microscopy. CONCLUSION: A systemic administration of erdosteine appears to provide an otoprotective effect at high frequencies for cisplatin-induced ototoxicity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".