We don't know much about FX-322, but it seems likely that the basic idea is the same as in the study. There would have to be improvements over what is in the paper, because it seems very unlikely that what is in the paper would result in meaningful improvements in living humans.
If you look at the McLean et al paper from February, they said this about the experiment using adult inner ear tissue (emphasis added),
"We further tested the conditions using one sample of healthy human inner ear tissue isolated from a 40-year-old male patient undergoing a labyrinthectomy to access a tumor on the brain. The inner ear tissue was microdissected to remove bone, debris, and nerve tissue. The tissue was then treated identically to the mouse tissue to isolate single cells for culture. The single cells formed clonal colonies after 12 days under EFICVP6 conditions, although expansion was not as robust as that seen for neonatal cells (Figure 6F). The colonies stained for Sox2, a known marker of inner ear progenitor cells (Figure 6F). After 12 days of expansion, the cultures were treated with LY411575 and CHIR for 10 days to differentiate the colonies. The colonies stained positively for the hair cell marker myosin VIIa (Figure 6G), suggesting that sensory epithelium from adult human inner ear can also give rise to hair cell progenitors."
So in that case they applied the first "treatment" for 12 days and then the second for 10 days. This seems unlikely to work in humans though one of the goals of the first trial is to understand understand diffusion of FX-322 into the inner ear and subsequent concentrations in the perilymph fluid. The trial uses 1 injection, but we don't know if that is where they are in terms of treatment or if that is all they need to understand the diffusion of the drug. As I have said before, we will know much more if/when we see the next paper or papers.
Member
Manager
