Inner Ear Hair Cell Regeneration — Maybe We Can Know More

It sounds to me like they are stating that hair cells should last a lifetime for a person. Or if they mean unless loud noise is introduced then the proteins that allow the hair cells/stereocilia to function properly are damaged. I had a hard time understanding some of this article but ultimately they've been able to watch the workings of the inner ear like a movie but in very slow speeds which is awesome.
 
http://www.businesswire.com/news/ho...-218-Data-Association-Research-Otolaryngology

This drug is too late for most of us. What I do like is that they are able to get the molecules in the inner ear using IV or oral administration. So the blood-brain barrier is letting these molecules pass. Could also be a risk I suppose.
Quote: This new data show that systemic administration of SENS-218 resulted in significant concentrations of SENS-218 in perilymph, the fluid located within the cochlea, and in tissular inner ear. It shows the molecule's suitability for an oral or IV way of administration targeted by the Company.
End quote.

Every gain of knowledge in otology is welcome. Especially after reading the following:
http://www.i4u.com/2016/02/106187/protein-shifts-hair-cells-inner-ear-could-repair-damaged-hearing
Quote: "What was surprising in our research with zebrafish is that proteins move so rapidly, implying that protein movement may be required to maintain the integrity of hair bundles in the inner ear,"
End quote.
When I read this I get the feeling that science is still so far removed from being able to repair damaged hearing.

More statements in this article only confirms this feeling:
Quote: "We made movies of the secret inner workings of the hair bundle in a live animal, and what is happening in the ear is amazing and unexpected," McDermott said.
End quote.

But I remain positive. It seems there is another clinical trial under way (SENS-218). And we are only at the beginning of 2016.

This is another quote where I should, may, would, or could get some positive energy from:
Quote: but hearing loss could be healed or repaired if the proteins of the stereocilia could be therapeutically manipulated.
End quote.
If so much is not known yet, I sometimes wonder if one can tell with certainty that (as an example) LLLT actually will not do anything.
 
http://www.businesswire.com/news/ho...-218-Data-Association-Research-Otolaryngology

This drug is too late for most of us. What I do like is that they are able to get the molecules in the inner ear using IV or oral administration. So the blood-brain barrier is letting these molecules pass. Could also be a risk I suppose.
Quote: This new data show that systemic administration of SENS-218 resulted in significant concentrations of SENS-218 in perilymph, the fluid located within the cochlea, and in tissular inner ear. It shows the molecule's suitability for an oral or IV way of administration targeted by the Company.
End quote.

Every gain of knowledge in otology is welcome. Especially after reading the following:
http://www.i4u.com/2016/02/106187/protein-shifts-hair-cells-inner-ear-could-repair-damaged-hearing
Quote: "What was surprising in our research with zebrafish is that proteins move so rapidly, implying that protein movement may be required to maintain the integrity of hair bundles in the inner ear,"
End quote.
When I read this I get the feeling that science is still so far removed from being able to repair damaged hearing.

More statements in this article only confirms this feeling:
Quote: "We made movies of the secret inner workings of the hair bundle in a live animal, and what is happening in the ear is amazing and unexpected," McDermott said.
End quote.

But I remain positive. It seems there is another clinical trial under way (SENS-218). And we are only at the beginning of 2016.

This is another quote where I should, may, would, or could get some positive energy from:
Quote: but hearing loss could be healed or repaired if the proteins of the stereocilia could be therapeutically manipulated.
End quote.
If so much is not known yet, I sometimes wonder if one can tell with certainty that (as an example) LLLT actually will not do anything.

Yes, we are at the beginning of 2016. It's likely that many research news will come this year.
There won't be a cure next year or even in 5 years, it's much more in the future, but they get closer. It's not certain, that the protective approach or even a acute repair approach comes first. From researchers I know that they achive very encouraging results without understanding everything in detail.
First results, after in detail analysis how it works, this is an exoerimental strategy.
So maybe there will some surprises....
While my condition is very tuff, I'm feeling much better with the fact, that there are top researchers looking for some curative treatments.
 
There won't be a cure next year or even in 5 years, it's much more in the future, but they get closer.
My idea exactly. Although there still is discussion if a cure is possible. Five years would need several amazing breakthroughs. The ones that feed of each other. And even than clinical trials take a huge amount of time. There still is discussion if a cure is possible.
without understanding everything in detail.
This is also why I hope that there will be more serendipitous discoveries (yes surprises:eek:??? indeed). And "aha...I understand..this makes sense":dohanimation: moments. I think there are examples of medicine already used where it is not completely understood in detail why they cure a certain affliction.

I had a look on the internet this morning. What happened with computer technology (Moore's law) also seems to be happening in medical science. And why not?
There must be statistics out there that confirm this. But I haven't found them yet. Discussions and documents turned into philosophy most of the time. Which I don't mind reading at all, but it was to much to for one morning.
My brain got saturated. (-;

Quote from@tomytl:
While my condition is very tuff, I'm feeling much better with the fact, that there are top researchers looking for some curative treatments.
End quote
This is also where I get positive energy/outlook from.
 
This seems quite fascinating - an example of where many years have been chopped off the timeline by eliminating animal research and clinical trials for stem cell treatment. Sort of like the stem cell treatments a few people have tried in Asia, except this is in the United States. This article is about eyesight, and of course there are the issues of the eye being much easier to access than the cochlea, but still, very interesting.

http://www.sciencealert.com/a-blind...thanks-to-a-controversial-stem-cell-treatment

http://www.baltimoresun.com/health/bs-hs-stem-cells-for-eyes-20160201-story.html
 
Then how do doctors know if you have no ear hair cells?
I understand there is a rudimentary method. The cochlea also generates sound after sound is introduced. This is picked up by a very sensitive microphone. It is possible to see in which area hair-cells are absent. But like I said, I think this is only a course method to determine hair-cell population in the cochlea.
 
Then how do doctors know if you have no ear hair cells?

They assume. There is no way of seeing this whiteout cutting it out.

This is one of the difficulties with researching hearing disorders. With cancer you can cut a piece of it out and have a look at it, unless it's buried deep inside brain tissue or something. But the cochlea is impossible to do this with. You can't preform a biopsy of the cochlea because that would mean cutting a piece of it out. Imagine that! Just making something like tinnitus 100 times worse by cutting into it!

All the images we see in papers are actually from animals that were used in the study that were killed and then had their cochleas cut out and examined.
 
Finally I found the wall street transcript of Sound Pharmaceuticlas from 2003.
First of all it's absolutely not my intention to blame or doing critics to these guys.
I'm still happy they are doing excellent research and their regeneration programm is for IND in 2017.
I think it's always a play with fire, you need to attract potential investors and keep realistic aims even
you can't know all the obstacles.

I just would like to show how unpredictable time frames are when it comes to a timetable or a release date
of a certain drug.
But even they are years behind their plan, back in 2003 when my ear-torture started, I was very happy
to know a company is working on a solution.

https://web.archive.org/web/20040530195404/http://www.twst.com/pdf/TAT103.pdf
 
I think that Japan is good for academic research but beyond that don't expect much to happen.
Very risk adverse , high testing costs and low level of startup and capital rising , and for drugs the regulatory environment is very strict , bureaucratic and ultra conservative .
Japanese companies and investors don't like to take risks.

A new lot of new drugs you can find approved in Europe or even the USA take decades to make into Japan.
 

Log in or register to get the full forum benefits!

Register

Register on Tinnitus Talk for free!

Register Now