Auris Medical (AM-102)

#61
whale said:
Perhaps he was talking about

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24979398
AM-111 0.4 mg/ml showed statistically significant, clinically relevant, and persistent improvements in hearing and speech discrimination and higher tinnitus remission compared with placebo. The study drug and the intratympanic injections were well tolerated.
Click to expand...
The beginning of this sentence is important... :
"The study failed to demonstrate a treatment benefit for the entire study population because mild-to-moderate ASNHL cases showed unexpectedly strong spontaneous recovery. In severe-to-profound ASNHL patients (threshold ≥60 dB), [...]".
 
#62
Foncky said:
The beginning of this sentence is important... :
"The study failed to demonstrate a treatment benefit for the entire study population because mild-to-moderate ASNHL cases showed unexpectedly strong spontaneous recovery. In severe-to-profound ASNHL patients (threshold ≥60 dB), [...]".
Click to expand...
Crap ,who are these spontaneous T recover. I'm hoping for that. the reason it was unexpected was because it was uncommon. They ran many trials before and thats never happened.
 
#65
Impossible to say. They will select the lead compound at the end of 2017. We'll have to wait a long time before anything is explained ! Auris didn't show great success after years of development on AM-101.
 
#67
There is a good reason (i think) that usually the go for early onset rather then chronic , if you think about it the test subjects .. rodents are usually given T so almost all test subjects have been early onset. It makes sense that they would want to roll this out focusing early onset and be close to their rodent test subjects..
 
#69
RaZaH said:
There is a good reason (i think) that usually the go for early onset rather then chronic , if you think about it the test subjects .. rodents are usually given T so almost all test subjects have been early onset. It makes sense that they would want to roll this out focusing early onset and be close to their rodent test subjects..
Click to expand...
I thought I read that AM-102 is for chronical T. They'll have at least much more suitable humans to test it on.
 
#71
JurgenG said:
I thought I read that AM-102 is for chronical T.
Click to expand...
Where have you read this? If you look at the pipeline you will see that the stated indication is just "tinnitus". It's not specific about what kind or type it is. This is their second generation treatment, after AM-101. The AM-101 is said to target "acute inner ear tinnitus" as well as "post-acute inner ear tinnitus". They have two different trials running for AM-101. The trials for AM-102 have not started yet. They have not even selected a compound yet. It's still at pre-clinical stage.

JurgenG said:
They'll have at least much more suitable humans to test it on.
Click to expand...
Not sure what you mean by this... They can't test it on humans until they enter human trials. You mean they will get more accurate and objective results once they do get to human trials?

Edit: I think I get it now! :D I had to explain it to myself first. The rubber duck effect! :)
You mean it's better that they test it on humans, despite the fact that they only test it on humans that have the less severe acute tinnitus. Once we have established that it works on acute tinnitus in humans, we can move on to chronic tinnitus in humans. Correct?

RaZaH said:
There is a good reason (i think) that usually the go for early onset rather then chronic , if you think about it the test subjects .. rodents are usually given T so almost all test subjects have been early onset. It makes sense that they would want to roll this out focusing early onset and be close to their rodent test subjects..
Click to expand...
You mean they should do the human trials only with people that have acute tinnitus (less than 3 months since onset)? Because this is how they are testing the drugs in pre-clinical studies in animals? So in order to get matching results with human subjects, they should focus on the acute tinnitus group?

That does make sense. I will keep that in mind when reading research reports. I am not sure how important the window of opportunity is, and I am not sure if there has been any specific mention of this in the research reports I have read so far.

One thing I wonder is, what is "inner ear tinnitus"? I thought they didn't know the location of tinnitus. Some say it's in the ears, some say it's in the brain. It seems to me like the brain side is winning. Perhaps it's a combination of a little bit of both, and there might as well be individual variances.
 
#72
Auris recently announced that they are extending the collaboration with King's College London in the development of AM-102.

Professor David E. Thurston of the Institute of Pharmaceutical Science is leading the team at King's to develop and optimize a range of specific small molecules for Auris Medical's AM-102 project. The project builds on earlier work performed at King's for Auris Medical by Professor Pat Doherty and Dr. Gareth Williams. The AM-102 compounds bind to a novel, undisclosed drug target for treating certain types of tinnitus.
Click to expand...

Thomas Jung, MD, PhD, Auris Medical's Chief Development Officer:
Together with King's College London, we have made great progress on our second generation tinnitus project.

The team's drug discovery expertise has generated interesting leads that have been tested in vitro and in vivo. The extension of our collaboration allows for further development with the aim of selecting a lead compound for our AM-102 program by the end of 2017.
Click to expand...

Source: http://ir.aurismedical.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=253572&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=2248196
 
#73
Samir said:
Where have you read this? If you look at the pipeline you will see that the stated indication is just "tinnitus". It's not specific about what kind or type it is. This is their second generation treatment, after AM-101. The AM-101 is said to target "acute inner ear tinnitus" as well as "post-acute inner ear tinnitus". They have two different trials running for AM-101. The trials for AM-102 have not started yet. They have not even selected a compound yet. It's still at pre-clinical stage.


Not sure what you mean by this... They can't test it on humans until they enter human trials. You mean they will get more accurate and objective results once they do get to human trials?

Edit: I think I get it now! :D I had to explain it to myself first. The rubber duck effect! :)
You mean it's better that they test it on humans, despite the fact that they only test it on humans that have the less severe acute tinnitus. Once we have established that it works on acute tinnitus in humans, we can move on to chronic tinnitus in humans. Correct?


You mean they should do the human trials only with people that have acute tinnitus (less than 3 months since onset)? Because this is how they are testing the drugs in pre-clinical studies in animals? So in order to get matching results with human subjects, they should focus on the acute tinnitus group?

That does make sense. I will keep that in mind when reading research reports. I am not sure how important the window of opportunity is, and I am not sure if there has been any specific mention of this in the research reports I have read so far.

One thing I wonder is, what is "inner ear tinnitus"? I thought they didn't know the location of tinnitus. Some say it's in the ears, some say it's in the brain. It seems to me like the brain side is winning. Perhaps it's a combination of a little bit of both, and there might as well be individual variances.
Click to expand...
Yeah, thought I read it on their roadmap somewhere, might be wrong.

I mean that it's harder to find willing subjects for acute T, (because everyone hopes it might dissapear) and some will be way longer than 3 months before even starting to realise there is something as clinical trials for this medicine.
 
#74
JurgenG said:
Yeah, thought I read it on their roadmap somewhere, might be wrong.

I mean that it's harder to find willing subjects for acute T, (because everyone hopes it might dissapear) and some will be way longer than 3 months before even starting to realise there is something as clinical trials for this medicine.
Click to expand...
So you mean they should do it on everyone with tinnitus, acute and chronic?
 
#76
JurgenG said:
Yeah, thought I read it on their roadmap somewhere, might be wrong.

I mean that it's harder to find willing subjects for acute T, (because everyone hopes it might dissapear) and some will be way longer than 3 months before even starting to realise there is something as clinical trials for this medicine.
Click to expand...

I signed up for AM101 within a week of me getting tinnitus.
Part of the hard process of finding subjects that have acute tinnitus is the screening process. It was nearly 2 months before I got my first injection. I also think the 3 month time frame is really optimistic. More likely tinnitus becomes 'chronic' much faster than that.
 
#77
Samir said:
You mean they should do the human trials only with people that have acute tinnitus (less than 3 months since onset)? Because this is how they are testing the drugs in pre-clinical studies in animals? So in order to get matching results with human subjects, they should focus on the acute tinnitus group?
Click to expand...
yes, makes sense
 
#78
Alue said:
I signed up for AM101 within a week of me getting tinnitus.
Part of the hard process of finding subjects that have acute tinnitus is the screening process. It was nearly 2 months before I got my first injection. I also think the 3 month time frame is really optimistic. More likely tinnitus becomes 'chronic' much faster than that.
Click to expand...

Has it has not helped you at all with the injection?
 
#79
One of the big problem with something like AM101 Is when people get the injection people are listing for they T to see if its gone, but when you start to listen for it, it gets louder and louder, even people who dont suffer from T in daily life can hear T just by focus on it. This could be a reason something like this show bad result many time.
Again could also be because it simply does not work.
 
#80
Rasmus said:
One of the big problem with something like AM101 Is when people get the injection people are listing for they T to see if its gone, but when you start to listen for it, it gets louder and louder, even people who dont suffer from T in daily life can hear T just by focus on it. This could be a reason something like this show bad result many time.
Again could also be because it simply does not work.
Click to expand...
It's supposed to be a cure or at least a huge relief.

The "If I listen to my T it's louder and louder" thing is not a good explanation. If there was a real benefit from AM101, people would know.
 
#81
Foncky said:
It's supposed to be a cure or at least a huge relief.

The "If I listen to my T it's louder and louder" thing is not a good explanation. If there was a real benefit from AM101, people would know.
Click to expand...
I like that last part. "If there was a real benefit from AM101, people would know." I agree!

It's frustrating that they are treating us like we are hallucinating. They need to come up with a method to objectively measure tinnitus. I don't think tinnitus loudness and frequency matching, and questionnaires are a good way of doing that. But it's the only tools we have right now. Which shows just how little we know about tinnitus.

This doesn't make it right though. We need to demand for better ways of detecting and measuring tinnitus. For that, I'm afraid we will need a lot more money to be put into basic tinnitus research. Meanwhile, we can just hope they have enough money to develop and try out some new drugs that might work. If it does work however, I think we will know it. Because we will fail to detect the tinnitus when listening for it.
 
#82
Rasmus said:
One of the big problem with something like AM101 Is when people get the injection people are listing for they T to see if its gone, but when you start to listen for it, it gets louder and louder, even people who dont suffer from T in daily life can hear T just by focus on it. This could be a reason something like this show bad result many time..
Click to expand...
This is why having a placebo in the test is so important. Both the group with the placebo and the group with the drug will be listening harder than usual-- so if you see a difference in the groups, you can know it wasn't caused by that.
 
#89
Since I started this thread more than two years ago, I wanted to inform those who have followed AM-102, that, today via a conference call concerning the full year 2016 results, Auris Medical stated that AM-102 is for the treatment of "acute tinnitus". The information is not in writing but was stated via the conference call only. The information was released by Thomas Jung as part of the slide covering AM-125 (slide #7 in the presentation).

This would seem to indicate that there is no immediate treatment for chronic tinnitus in the near (or distant) future therefore.
 

Attachments

  • Auris Medical_FY Results 2016 (March 2017).PDF
    536.8 KB · Views: 173

Log in or register to get the full forum benefits!

Register

Register on Tinnitus Talk for free!

Register Now

Similar threads

Verify_Checked
Tinnitus, Illness, & Medical Trauma
Replies
5
Views
846
Introduce Yourself
Juliane
Juliane
Sayon
Am I More Susceptible to Further Hearing Damage Compared to Someone without Hearing Loss?
Replies
24
Views
2K
Hearing Loss
Fazdoll
F
F
Four Months After Firearm-Induced Acoustic Shock Tinnitus: Am I Having a Spike? Will It Get Better?
Replies
3
Views
221
Introduce Yourself
Fazdoll
F
N
Amber Therapeutics — Brain Implants
Replies
0
Views
829
Research News
Nick47
N
J
Does Your Medical Insurance Cover the Cost of Glasses (Lenses and/or Frames)?
Replies
11
Views
1K
General Chat
kingsfan
kingsfan
Top Bottom
Back
Forums
Members
Donate
Menu