Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31553940›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurosurgery2020

Phase I trial of caudate deep brain stimulation for treatment-resistant tinnitus.

Steven W Cheung, Caroline A Racine, Jennifer Henderson-Sabes, Carly Demopoulos, Annette M Molinaro, Susan Heath, Srikantan S Nagarajan, Andrea L Bourne, John E Rietcheck, Sarah S Wang and 1 more

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurosurgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01988688 phase1completednot on this map

Pilot Study of Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS)in Area LC for Chronic Tinnitus

TypeinterventionalSponsorPaul LarsonRan2014 to 2019Enrolled10ConditionsTinnitusArmsDeep Brain Stimulation (DBS)
NCT06821893 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Vagus Auricular Stimulation for Tinnitus

TypeinterventionalSponsorWashington University School of MedicineRan2025 to 2025Enrolled40ConditionsTinnitusArmsVibrational stimulation, Sham
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Deep brain stimulation of the medial geniculate body for refractory tinnitus: A feasibility study.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2026
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Neuroscientific therapies for subjective tinnitus.Journal of Zhejiang University. Science. B · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Targeting the Limbic System: Insights into Its Involvement in Tinnitus.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Tinnitus Update.Journal of clinical neurology (Seoul, Korea) · 2021
    Review
  15. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Steven W Cheung1Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, UCSF.
Caroline A Racine3Department of Neurological Surgery, UCSF.
Jennifer Henderson-Sabes1Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, UCSF.
Carly Demopoulos4Department of Psychiatry, UCSF.
Annette M Molinaro3Department of Neurological Surgery, UCSF.
Susan Heath2Surgical Services, Veterans Affairs Health Care System, San Francisco.
Srikantan S Nagarajan1Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, UCSF.
Andrea L Bourne6Audiology and Speech Pathology Service, Veterans Affairs Health Care System, San Francisco; and.
John E Rietcheck6Audiology and Speech Pathology Service, Veterans Affairs Health Care System, San Francisco; and.
Sarah S Wang7Department of Neurology, UCSF, San Francisco, California.
Paul S Larson2Surgical Services, Veterans Affairs Health Care System, San Francisco.
Neurological Surgery · USLaboratoire d’Imagerie Biomédicale · FRSan Francisco VA Health Care System · USUniversitetshospitalernes Center for Sundhedsfaglig Forskning · DKUniversity of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

Pilot Clinical Trial of Deep Brain Stimulation for TinnitusU01DC013029 · NIDCD · NORTHERN CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE/RES/EDU · PI CHEUNG, STEVEN WAN, LARSON, PAUL · 2013 to 2017
$3.4M
Vocal sensorimotor control and voice abnormalities in Autism Spectrum DisordersK23DC016637 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI DEMOPOULOS, CARLY · 2018 to 2022
$1.0M
NIDCD NIH HHS K23 DC016637NIDCD NIH HHS U01 DC013029
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe objective of this open-label, nonrandomized trial was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bilateral caudate nucleus deep brain stimulation (DBS) for treatment-resistant tinnitus.

methodsSix participants underwent DBS electrode implantation. One participant was removed from the study for suicidality unrelated to brain stimulation. Participants underwent a stimulation optimization period that ranged from 5 to 13 months, during which the most promising stimulation parameters for tinnitus reduction for each individual were determined. These individual optimal stimulation parameters were then used during 24 weeks of continuous caudate stimulation to reach the endpoint. The primary outcome for efficacy was the Tinnitus Functional Index (TFI), and executive function (EF) safety was a composite z-score from multiple neuropsychological tests (EF score). The secondary outcome for efficacy was the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI); for neuropsychiatric safety it was the Frontal Systems Behavior Scale (FrSBe), and for hearing safety it was pure tone audiometry at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 kHz and word recognition score (WRS). Other monitored outcomes included surgery- and device-related adverse events (AEs). Five participants provided full analyzable data sets. Primary and secondary outcomes were based on differences in measurements between baseline and endpoint.

resultsThe treatment effect size of caudate DBS for tinnitus was assessed by TFI [mean (SE), 23.3 (12.4)] and THI [30.8 (10.4)] scores, both of which were statistically significant (Wilcoxon signed-rank test, 1-tailed; alpha = 0.05). Based on clinically significant treatment response categorical analysis, there were 3 responders determined by TFI (≥ 13-point decrease) and 4 by THI (≥ 20-point decrease) scores. Safety outcomes according to EF score, FrSBe, audiometric thresholds, and WRS showed no significant change with continuous caudate stimulation. Surgery-related and device-related AEs were expected, transient, and reversible. There was only one serious AE, a suicide attempt unrelated to caudate neuromodulation in a participant in whom stimulation was in the off mode for 2 months prior to the event.

conclusionsBilateral caudate nucleus neuromodulation by DBS for severe, refractory tinnitus in this phase I trial showed very encouraging results. Primary and secondary outcomes revealed a highly variable treatment effect size and 60%-80% treatment response rate for clinically significant benefit, and no safety concerns. The design of a phase II trial may benefit from targeting refinement for final DBS lead placement to decrease the duration of the stimulation optimization period and to increase treatment effect size uniformity.Clinical trial registration no.: NCT01988688 (clinicaltrials.gov).

Indexed as

caudate nucleuscorticostriataldeep brain stimulationexecutive functionfunctional neurosurgeryphase I trialtinnitus

Identifiers

PMID31553940
PMCPMC7089839
OpenAlexW2976222803

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.