A phase I study of an injectable lidocaine paste for spermatic cord block in men with chronic scrotal content pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Patients with chronic scrotal content pain (CSCP) lack effective, non-invasive treatment options. We aimed to determine the local and systemic safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and efficacy of a long-lasting local anesthetic in patients with CSCP. METHODS: This was a prospective, single-center, open-label, single-arm, phase 1, dose-escalating trial completed between October 2019 and March 2021. Twelve patients ≥19 years old with unilateral scrotal pain lasting ≥3 months reporting an average maximum pain score over seven days of ≥4 on a 0-10 numerical rating scale (NRS) were included. Patients underwent a test spermatic cord block and those reporting a decrease of ≥2 points were included. The investigational drug, ST-01 (sustained-release lidocaine polymer solution), is a long-acting injection of lidocaine around the spermatic cord. Subjects were provided a NRS dairy and recorded their NRS score until day 28. The Chronic Epididymitis Symptom Index (CESI) was completed on days 0, 7, 14, and 28. All patients underwent an examination and assessment for adverse events (AE) on days 0, 1, 7, 14, and 28. Exploratory statistical hypothesis testing was planned for this study due to its investigative nature. RESULTS: There were no serious adverse events (SAEs) reported. All subjects reported at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE); 83% of related AEs were injection-site reactions consisting of swelling and bruising. NRS was reduced across all cohorts between baseline and end of study. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that the novel ST-01 treatment is safe and well-tolerated.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".