Frequency Therapeutics — Hearing Loss Regeneration

Just watched this video for the first time... While I acknowledge that he is a doctor and probably knows more than me about the science behind hearing loss, I feel like he didn't do all of his homework. Frequency, in its own presentation and prior Q&As have debunked some of his critiques of FX-322. As I watch this video I consider that we are seeing "old world" metrics being used to measure a "new world" solution.

Much like we see those in favor of gasoline cars use re-fueling and range as a the measurement for Tesla, but disregarding all of the other benefits of electric vehicles... okay, I'll stop with the analogies.
Yeah I came across this video before and I feel it's potentially slightly misleading as it's just going off the Phase 1 results which are based on a safety dose.

Also I recall FGG (I think!) mentioned that these results had been noted as unprecedented by a audiologist/ENT she spoke to (if I'm remembering this correctly).
 
I came across a video from a hearing doctor on YouTube uploaded last month (not associated with Frequency Therapeutics):



Apologies if this has been discussed before but I don't have the time these days to read everything. But the results that have implied efficacy is that it has increased word recognition (associated with hidden hearing loss) but has not effected pure tone hearing loss. He explains its likely to affect inner hair cell damage but not outer hair cell damage. So far, this only seems that Frequency Therapeutics may just help hearing aid users understand more word recognition while the hearing aids turn the actual volume up.

Am I missing something here, because so far, it would seem people labelling this as a 'cure' for HL exaggerated.

The safety dosage was Phase 1/2 was very small, only barely reaching up to 6 kHz (according to frequency therapeutics). At that concentration, it wouldn't show much efficiency (they weren't measuring for efficiency anyways) higher than 8 kHz on a standard audiogram. If they did take a extended audiogram, it would probably show more efficiency at the areas it was able to reach. Especially in the opening of the round window membrane, where it would have the highest concentration.

If they do show any hearing increase (which they have done with sound clarity during Phase 1/2, never before seen) with the current Phase 2a trial, it's only a matter of increasing dosing (which they are doing Phase 2a) or getting a better vehicle (the drug delivery method, they are hiring a formulation scientist for this according to their careers page) to deliver the drug to the lower frequencies, where the standard audiogram will start showing efficiency. It's not like the drug has some preference for regenerating hair cells in the higher frequencies, it just the concentration isn't high enough to induce regeneration in the lower frequencies.

Also frequency has done testing with human tissue in vitro, which has shown to restore and regenerate both inner and outer hair cells.
 
Just watched this video for the first time... While I acknowledge that he is a doctor and probably knows more than me about the science behind hearing loss, I feel like he didn't do all of his homework. Frequency, in its own presentation and prior Q&As have debunked some of his critiques of FX-322. As I watch this video I consider that we are seeing "old world" metrics being used to measure a "new world" solution. For example, the PTA comment was really a narrow-minded comment.

Much like we see those in favor of gasoline cars use re-fueling and range as a the measurement for Tesla, but disregarding all of the other benefits of electric vehicles... okay, I'll stop with the analogies.

I do like to see that he is increasing awareness of FX-322 with a fairly large audience. The greater awareness, the greater exposure to possible participants. It's also free advertising for Frequency Therapeutics, which is good for business.

I am also a little miffed about FX-322 being presented as a cure by a Doctor! No one should see FX-322 as a cure. It is a treatment. The expectations should be that as a treatment it may reverse damage/loss, and reduce symptoms.
He's an audiologist as I recall, not an MD so his assessment seems largely based on the standard audiogram, which is pretty limited.
 
Thanks. I was going to ask for clarification regarding pain/discomfort hyperacusis.

Being in the same boat as yourself in that regard I am just hoping that the pain/discomfort I experience from those sounds don't then branch out to other sounds as well.
Serendipity gave a great rundown, but I thought I might add that one of the theories regarding noxacusis is that the damaged OHC are leaking ATP and therefore by repairing the culprit hair cells you can stop the A2 nerves from being stimulated.

If this is true then frequency could really help pain, and not just loudness cases.

However if this is not the case the compound Dr. Thanos is developing holds a lot of therapeutic promise.
 
Yeah I came across this video before and I feel it's potentially slightly misleading as it's just going off the Phase 1 results which are based on a safety dose.

Also I recall FGG (I think!) mentioned that these results had been noted as unprecedented by a audiologist/ENT she spoke to (if I'm remembering this correctly).
It was me. She said that the word score results were "completely unprecedented."
 
Thank you for correcting me but since I'm a noob when it comes to this stuff, does that mean I have synapse damage? Because I used to listen to loud music.
I'm sure you could still get a high-frequency audiogram, but as for me it just took a simple video like this one to determine my hearing is fucked in the high frequencies (especially in my right ear):



Start with the volume low and use headphones, if you are comfortable doing so.

Personally I won't be seeing a specialist about my hearing issues until FX-322 or a similar drug is on the brink of hitting the market. I don't see the point in going to one beforehand...
 
He's an audiologist as I recall, not an MD so his assessment seems largely based on the standard audiogram, which is pretty limited.
Dr. Cliff is a practicing, board-certified audiologist and an outstanding resource; his YouTube channel was a godsend when I started my hunt for hearing aids around the time I learned I had hearing loss and tinnitus. I saw the video around the time it came out and while I don't have the time right now to document it, I agree that it seemed as if he didn't do his homework quite as thoroughly as he could have on this one. That plus, rightly so, he can err on the side of conservative claims and doesn't want to create unrealistic expectations.

But my bottom line is that I think the likelihood of success is broader and more likely than the impression that video creates.
 
I'm sure you could still get a high-frequency audiogram, but as for me it just took a simple video like this one to determine my hearing is fucked in the high frequencies (especially in my right ear):



Start with the volume low and use headphones, if you are comfortable doing so.

Personally I won't be seeing a specialist about my hearing issues until FX-322 or a similar drug is on the brink of hitting the market. I don't see the point in going to one beforehand...

The problem with these YouTube hearing tests is that YouTube compresses audio data and adds a low-pass filter at 16kHz. Anything above is rolled off and cannot be heard accurately even in people with healthy hearing at high frequencies.

This one is full-fidelity: https://www.audiocheck.net/audiotests_frequencycheckhigh.php

You also need headphones or speakers that produce a relatively flat response up to at least ~18kHz, since realistically it's rare that the average person in their twenties and above these days can hear beyond 17kHz (due to widespread noise pollution, overuse of headphones, exposure to ototoxins, etc.). Otherwise if you're really young, monitor headphones that go up to 20kHz are the best for these kinds of DIY tests.

Most consumer headphones and speakers roll off around 16-17kHz, and the reasons for that are cheaper design and materials, but also catering to a market that mostly listens to streamed audio that is also rolled off around 16-17kHz for lossy data compression purposes on Spotify, YouTube, etc. Some services offer lossless audio, but again it's not the norm.
 
The problem with these YouTube hearing tests is that YouTube compresses audio data and adds a low-pass filter at 16kHz. Anything above is rolled off and cannot be heard accurately even in people with healthy hearing at high frequencies.

This one is full-fidelity: https://www.audiocheck.net/audiotests_frequencycheckhigh.php

You also need headphones or speakers that produce a relatively flat response up to at least ~18kHz, since realistically it's rare that the average person in their twenties and above these days can hear beyond 17kHz (due to widespread noise pollution, overuse of headphones, exposure to ototoxins, etc.). Otherwise if you're really young, monitor headphones that go up to 20kHz are the best for these kinds of DIY tests.

Most consumer headphones and speakers roll off around 16-17kHz, and the reasons for that are cheaper design and materials, but also catering to a market that mostly listens to streamed audio that is also rolled off around 16-17kHz for lossy data compression purposes on Spotify, YouTube, etc. Some services offer lossless audio, but again it's not the norm.
Thanks for the alternative!

I can't hear anything in my right ear until it gets down to like 9kHz in the video I posted.

I know YouTube is probably not the highest quality source but it did give me an idea of where my problems are originating from.

Also I'm pretty sure YouTube sound fidelity gets better if you set the video quality to high definition, but I could be wrong. Personally I have some decent monitor headphones so that probably also helps.
 
Frequency released an 8-K today:
https://investors.frequencytx.com/sec-filings/sec-filing/8-k/0001193125-20-127683

Not a whole lot new, but I believe this is the first time that they specifically identified the 6 participants in the Phase 1/2 that had word recognition scores improvements as those with Moderate to Moderately Severe hearing loss. Prior to that, it wasn't as specific as to the level of hearing loss of the participants that saw improvements.

8qgRNn5.jpg
 
Frequency released an 8-K today:
https://investors.frequencytx.com/sec-filings/sec-filing/8-k/0001193125-20-127683

Not a whole lot new, but I believe this is the first time that they specifically identified the 6 participants in the Phase 1/2 that had word recognition scores improvements as those with Moderate to Moderately Severe hearing loss. Prior to that, it wasn't as specific as to the level of hearing loss of the participants that saw improvements.

View attachment 38502
They had mentioned it before but I'm not sure if they did it graphically. It was explained that people generally have normal word scores with mild hearing loss so that makes sense.
 
Letter to investors from the CEO:

http://www.conferencecalltranscripts.org/8/summary2/?id=7818517

I'm not liking that they named: noise, infection and age-related but not ototoxic.

I hope that's not significant in some way and more because of the diversity of toxins and they don't want to make definite statements.
I wouldn't worry about the omission of ototoxic. I think he was just listing some of the major causes of hair cell loss.

The release of this letter and the 8-K today is interesting timing, as this is supposed to be the day when Audion releases their results [1]. Maybe they're worried Audion will have some positive news coverage and they want to get in front of things with their own news? Or if Audion fails, maybe they're trying to show that their drug works by talking more about how their drug did in its Phase I study? Whatever the case, the timing of this release is interesting.

Also, as a side note, the CEO of Frequency was on MassBio [2] last week. They haven't uploaded the convo to their YouTube yet though.

[1] http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN59733689
[2]
 
I wouldn't worry about the omission of ototoxic. I think he was just listing some of the major causes of hair cell loss.

The release of this letter and the 8-K today is interesting timing, as this is supposed to be the day when Audion releases their results [1]. Maybe they're worried Audion will have some positive news coverage and they want to get in front of things with their own news? Or if Audion fails, maybe they're trying to show that their drug works by talking more about how their drug did in its Phase I study? Whatever the case, the timing of this release is interesting.

Also, as a side note, the CEO of Frequency was on MassBio [2] last week. They haven't uploaded the convo to their YouTube yet though.

[1] http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN59733689
[2]

That does make sense lol. Audion Therapeutics still haven't released anything so I guess they are delaying it or their business is a bust.
 
I wouldn't worry about the omission of ototoxic. I think he was just listing some of the major causes of hair cell loss.

The release of this letter and the 8-K today is interesting timing, as this is supposed to be the day when Audion releases their results [1]. Maybe they're worried Audion will have some positive news coverage and they want to get in front of things with their own news? Or if Audion fails, maybe they're trying to show that their drug works by talking more about how their drug did in its Phase I study? Whatever the case, the timing of this release is interesting.

Also, as a side note, the CEO of Frequency was on MassBio [2] last week. They haven't uploaded the convo to their YouTube yet though.

[1] http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN59733689
[2]

I think it could be as simple as stock prices have fallen with the market and they want to remind people they are still a good long term investment. They mentioned their MS drug and upcoming platform, too.

I hope you are right about ototoxicity!
 
They had mentioned it before but I'm not sure if they did it graphically. It was explained that people generally have normal word scores with mild hearing loss so that makes sense.
Ahh. Perhaps I didn't catch that in a verbal explanation. Reading it in a regulatory submission makes it much more tangible.
I wouldn't worry about the omission of ototoxic. I think he was just listing some of the major causes of hair cell loss.

The release of this letter and the 8-K today is interesting timing, as this is supposed to be the day when Audion releases their results [1]. Maybe they're worried Audion will have some positive news coverage and they want to get in front of things with their own news? Or if Audion fails, maybe they're trying to show that their drug works by talking more about how their drug did in its Phase I study? Whatever the case, the timing of this release is interesting.

Also, as a side note, the CEO of Frequency was on MassBio [2] last week. They haven't uploaded the convo to their YouTube yet though.

[1] http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN59733689
[2]

Hmm. I hadn't thought about a pre-emptive release in anticipation of an Audion announcement. From an insurance standpoint, it makes sense. It could have a few upsides as it relates to investor sentiment.

I have seen companies do that before; typically not through an 8-K publication. However, when companies like Frequency are burning through cash while relying on a single product to reach the market, it makes sense that they may be overly sensitive to market activity relating to an identified competitor.
 
I think it could be as simple as stock prices have fallen with the market and they want to remind people they are still a good long term investment. They mentioned their MS drug and upcoming platform, too.

I hope you are right about ototoxicity!
I remember in their mouse studies they used an ototoxic substance to destroy hair cells and FX-322 worked very well on those cochleae.
 
I remember in their mouse studies they used an ototoxic substance to destroy hair cells and FX-322 worked very well on those cochleae.
Believe me, I hold onto that study, though the drug is not as widespread destructive as high dose Azithromycin.
 
The problem with these YouTube hearing tests is that YouTube compresses audio data and adds a low-pass filter at 16kHz. Anything above is rolled off and cannot be heard accurately even in people with healthy hearing at high frequencies.

This one is full-fidelity: https://www.audiocheck.net/audiotests_frequencycheckhigh.php

You also need headphones or speakers that produce a relatively flat response up to at least ~18kHz, since realistically it's rare that the average person in their twenties and above these days can hear beyond 17kHz (due to widespread noise pollution, overuse of headphones, exposure to ototoxins, etc.). Otherwise if you're really young, monitor headphones that go up to 20kHz are the best for these kinds of DIY tests.

Most consumer headphones and speakers roll off around 16-17kHz, and the reasons for that are cheaper design and materials, but also catering to a market that mostly listens to streamed audio that is also rolled off around 16-17kHz for lossy data compression purposes on Spotify, YouTube, etc. Some services offer lossless audio, but again it's not the norm.
Interestingly - doing this with a very good quality headset I can still hear the 18kHz with ease. Of course this test isn't the most reliable either. I know it's not my tinnitus tone because that isn't that high in frequency. I'm 23. Shrug.
 
Interestingly - doing this with a very good quality headset I can still hear the 18kHz with ease. Of course this test isn't the most reliable either. I know it's not my tinnitus tone because that isn't that high in frequency. I'm 23. Shrug.
Yeah I can hear up to 18kHz as well, in my left ear. I listened to & made loud music, played videogames loudly, and shot guns unprotected throughout my childhood.

If even one of my ears can still reach 18kHz at age 24 after all the abuse, I think hearing the highest frequencies in our 20's might not be as rare as people make it out to be.

I'm also 90% sure the audio problem with YouTube isn't an issue if you set the media quality to one of the HD settings in the player.
 
Interestingly - doing this with a very good quality headset I can still hear the 18kHz with ease. Of course this test isn't the most reliable either. I know it's not my tinnitus tone because that isn't that high in frequency. I'm 23. Shrug.
You mentioned neck issues in another thread. Sometimes physical therapy can really help with tinnitus if it's related. Have you tried it?
 
You mentioned neck issues in another thread. Sometimes physical therapy can really help with tinnitus if it's related. Have you tried it?
I am currently in physical therapy yes, but due to the current state of the world I've only been able to get one in-person session. I've been doing some stretches for a month, though, and it does seem that the wildest fluctuations are beyond me at this point - which means something is improving. It's really stiff though, so it's going to take some time before I expect real improvement. I need to be more patient but unfortunately that's not one of my best qualities.

I'm also trying to figure out whether something else is going on as I've had chronic congestion issues for years and since this year, a few other odd health issues.
Yeah I can hear up to 18kHz as well, in my left ear. I listened to & made loud music, played videogames loudly, and shot guns unprotected throughout my childhood.

If even one of my ears can still reach 18kHz at age 24 after all the abuse, I think hearing the highest frequencies in our 20's might not be as rare as people make it out to be.

I'm also 90% sure the audio problem with YouTube isn't an issue if you set the media quality to one of the HD settings in the player.
Lol you definitely have a LOT more loud noise exposure than me it seems. I always kept my music fairly quiet, especially on headphones. I can hear frequencies this well in both ears btw.
 
Lol you definitely have a LOT more loud noise exposure than me it seems. I always kept my music fairly quiet, especially on headphones. I can hear frequencies this well in both ears btw.
Haha yeah seems like it! My right ear only can hear up to 9kHz.

I hear pretty well and equally out of both ears in the lower frequencies. Though this can be confusing because speech range actually goes into the frequencies 9kHz+ in addition to the lower ones, so sometimes it seems like I hear more detail/volume in my left ear.

This is also true for other sounds that seem lower; they usually also carry into the higher (8kHz-20kHz) frequency range. You can't tell until you lose most of those frequencies in one ear, lol.

Regardless it seems like FX-322 will likely fix the vast majority of damage I have, hence why I check in on this thread daily.
 

Log in or register to get the full forum benefits!

Register

Register on Tinnitus Talk for free!

Register Now