Safety of Repeated‐Dose Intratympanic Injections with AM‐101 in Acute Inner Ear Tinnitus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the safety and tolerability of repeated intratympanic administration of the gel-formulated NMDA receptor antagonist AM-101 in acute patients with inner ear tinnitus. Study Design Prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study. Setting Sixty-nine secondary and tertiary sites in North America, Europe, and Asia. Subjects and Methods In total, 343 subjects with persistent acute tinnitus after traumatic cochlear injury or otitis media were randomized to receive 3 intratympanic doses of either AM-101 0.87 mg/mL or placebo over 3 to 5 days. They were followed for 84 days. The primary safety end point was the incidence of a clinically meaningful hearing deterioration from baseline to study day 35. Further safety assessments included tympanic membrane closure rates, analysis of adverse events, hematology, blood chemistry, and vital signs. In addition, data were collected on applied anesthetics and injection techniques. Results The treatment was well tolerated, with no intervention-related serious adverse events. The incidence of clinically meaningful hearing deterioration was low, comparable between treatment groups ( P = .82 for the primary safety end point) and not different between treated and untreated ears in unilaterally treated subjects. The rate of treatment and procedure-related adverse events was similar among treatment groups. The tympanic membrane was closed in 92% of subjects within 1 week and in all subjects by study day 84. Blood values and vital signs were inconspicuous. Conclusion Repeated intratympanic injections of AM-101 over a 3- to 5-day period appear to be safe and well tolerated, demonstrating the ability to potentially use this delivery approach over longer time periods.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".