Development of an ototoxicity model in the adult CBA/CaJ mouse and determination of a golden window of corticosteroid intervention for otoprotection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of timing of dexamethasone administration on auditory hair cell survival following an ototoxic insult with kanamycin and furosemide. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled experimental study. SETTING: Translational science experimental laboratory. METHODS: 5-6 week old CBA/CaJ mice, divided into 6 groups, were injected with kanamycin (1 mg/g SC) followed by furosemide (0.5 mg/g IP). Dexamethasone (0.1 mg/g IP) was injected at either 1 hour prior to insult, +1 hr, +6 hr, +12 hr, or +72 hr post insult. Temporal bones harvested on day 7 underwent Organ of Corti dissection. Immunohistochemical staining was performed using antibodies to myosin 7a, phalloidin, and TO-PRO. RESULTS: Hair cell counts demonstrate a uniform ototoxicity model with total loss of outer hair cells (OHCs) and near-total loss of inner hair cells (IHCs). The group pre-treated with dexamethasone showed a statistically significant improvement in counts compared to controls (p = 0.004). Counts from the other experimental groups given dexamethasone after the insult were highly variable but demonstrated some apical and middle turn inner hair cell survival. CONCLUSION: Treatment of systemic dexamethasone prior to ototoxic insult attenuates hair cell loss in a reliable, novel, ototoxicity model using kanamycin and furosemide in CBA/CaJ mice. Dosing with dexamethasone following ototoxic insult shows promising yet variable response in hair cell survival.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".