The heterogeneity of tinnitus is substantial. Its numerous pathophysiological mechanisms and clinical manifestations have hampered fundamental and treatment research significantly. A decade ago, the Tinnitus Research Initiative introduced the Tinnitus Sample Case History Questionnaire, a case history instrument for standardised collection of information about the characteristics of the tinnitus patient. Since then, a number of studies have been published which characterise individuals and groups using data collected with this questionnaire. However, its use has been restricted to a clinical setting and to the evaluation of people with tinnitus only. In addition, it is limited in the ability to capture relevant comorbidities and evaluate their temporal relationship with tinnitus. Here we present a new case history instrument which is comprehensive in scope and can be answered by people with and without tinnitus alike. This 'European School for Interdisciplinary Tinnitus Research Screening Questionnaire' (ESIT-SQ) was developed with specific attention to questions about potential risk factors for tinnitus (including demographics, lifestyle, general medical and otological histories), and tinnitus characteristics (including perceptual characteristics, modulating factors, and associations with co-existing conditions). It was first developed in English, then translated into Dutch, German, Italian, Polish, Spanish, and Swedish, thus having broad applicability and supporting international collaboration. With respect to better understanding tinnitus profiles, we anticipate the ESIT-SQ to be a starting point for comprehensive multi-variate analyses of tinnitus. Data collected with the ESIT-SQ can allow establishment of patterns that distinguish tinnitus from non-tinnitus, and definition of common sets of tinnitus characteristics which might be indicated by the presence of otological or comorbid systemic diseases for which tinnitus is a known symptom.

To investigate whether a four-week course of neuronavigated intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex is superior to the non-neuronavigated F3-EEG method of positioning. We conducted a single-center, two-arm, randomized and double-blinded study (clinicaltrials.gov NCT03953521). 37 inpatients with an at least moderate depressive episode were randomized to receive either neuronavigated or 10-20-EEG-system based F3 guided iTBS. Both groups received twenty week daily sessions of iTBS while continuing to receive standard-of-care treatment by their ward physicians. For navigated iTBS, we used magnetic resonance imaging to target the border between the anterior and middle third of the middle frontal gyrus considered to represent the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (lDLPFC). Differences in the treatment arms were blinded by completely mimicking the procedures of the respective other treatment group. Rating physicians were not involved in the treatment procedure. Primary outcome was defined as the change of the 21-item version of the Hamilton Depression Score (HAMD) from baseline to end of treatment at week 4. Secondary outcomes included HAMD score during the treatment, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, WHO Quality of Life-BREF and Clinical Global Impression. For primary outcome, we used a planned group comparison for the absolute change in the HAMD. For secondary outcome measures we calculated analyses of variance (ANOVAs) with the within-subjects factor time (primary: baseline vs. week 4; secondary: all visits) and the between-subjects factor group (navigated vs. F3 guided group). We also did planned contrasts between both groups for all variables and all treatment and follow-up visits with the aim not to oversee any group differences. For group contrasts we used Student T-tests for metric and chi-square tests for categorial variables. Significance threshold was set to 5% uncorrected for multiple comparisons. Enrolment of 80 patients with interim analysis was planned. Interim analysis was performed after 37 patients (intention to treat). 6 patients dropped out, leaving 31 for analysis. With respect to primary outcome criteria, absolute change in the HAMD did not differ significantly between groups. In accordance, relative change and number of responders and remitters were not significantly different. Overall number of responders was 53% and of remitters was 60%. On a descriptive level, the results favor the clinical effects of the F3 group for the absolute and relative change in the HAMD and the number of responders. Number of remitters were exactly the same for both groups. Therefore, we decided to stop the trial due to the added burden of magnetic resonance imaging and neuronavigated treatment in relation to the effect. Secondary outcomes did also not differ significantly between groups. Patients did not differ in their baseline characteristics nor with respect to intake of medication during the trial period and all had access to the same therapeutic interventions. We noticed a high antidepressive effect of add-on iTBS treatment to standard inpatient treatment but failed to demonstrate a clinical superiority of neuronavigated localization. The non-navigated, F3 guided iTBS treatment used as a control group may be sophisticated enough to dilute potential added benefits, and the difference between the localization approaches is either negligible or too small to justify the additional efforts of navigation. The effects of concomitant treatment may mask effects, but our patient population reflects clinical reality in an inpatient setting. Further prospective studies are warranted to compare neuronavigated with surface-based approaches.

Introduction: Chronic tinnitus is a condition estimated to affect 10–15% of the population. No treatment has shown efficacy in randomized clinical trials to reliably and effectively suppress the phantom perceptions, and little is known why patients react differently to the same treatments. Tinnitus heterogeneity may play a central role in treatment response, but no study has tried to capture tinnitus heterogeneity in terms of treatment response. Research Goals: To test if the individualized treatment response can be predicted using personal, tinnitus, and treatment characteristics. Methods: A survey conducted by the web platform Tinnitus Hub collected data of 5017 tinnitus bearers. The participants reported which treatments they tried and the outcome of the given treatment. Demographic and tinnitus characteristics, alongside with treatment duration were used as predictors of treatment outcomes in both an univariate as well as a multivariate regression setup. First, simple linear regressions were used with each of the 13 predictors on all of 25 treatment outcomes to predict how much variance could be explained by each predictor individually. Then, all 13 predictors were added together in the elastic net regression to predict treatment outcomes. Results: Individual predictors from the linear regression models explained on average 2% of the variance of treatment outcome. “Duration of treatment” was the predictor that explained, on average, most of the variance, 6.8%. When combining all the predictors in the elastic net, the model could explain on average 16% of the deviance of treatment outcomes. Discussion: By demonstrating that different aspects predict response to various treatments, our results support the notion that tinnitus heterogeneity influences the observed variability in treatment response. Moreover, the data suggest the potential of personalized tinnitus treatment based on demographic and clinical characteristics.

Tinnitus, the perception of sound in the absence of a corresponding sound, and the distress caused by it, is rarely a static phenomenon. It rather fluctuates over time depending on endogenous and exogenous factors. The COVID-19 pandemic is a potential environmental stressor that might influence the individually perceived tinnitus distress. Since not all people are affected by the pandemic in the same way, the situation allows one to identify environmental factors and personality traits that impact tinnitus distress differently. In our study, 122 tinnitus patients were included at two time points: in the year 2018 and during the German lockdown in April 2020. We assessed tinnitus-related distress, depressive symptoms, personality characteristics and the individual perception of the pandemic situation. On average, there was only a small increase of tinnitus distress with heterogeneous changes during the lockdown. People perceiving the situation as generally stressful with increased grief, frustration, stress and nervousness reported the worsening of tinnitus distress. People with high values in neuroticism also reported the worsening of tinnitus distress, while the personality traits extraversion, conscientiousness and openness seemed to be a protection factor. The study identifies factors that influence tinnitus distress change during a pandemic and spots those patients that need specific help in the pandemic situation.

Over the past few years extensive body of research was produced investigating the effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for the treatment of chronic tinnitus with heterogeneous results. This heterogeneity is exemplified by two recently published large-scale clinical trials reporting different outcomes. Technical aspects of rTMS were suspected as a potential source for this incongruency. The aim of this systematic review is to examine the overall efficacy as well as to identify possible technical factors relevant for the effectiveness of rTMS tinnitus trials. Via a literature search appropriate original research papers were identified and rTMS parameters were extracted from each study arm for subsequent statistical analysis with respect to observed effects (significant vs. not significant pre-post rTMS effects). Our findings indicate that verum rTMS is superior to sham rTMS as demonstrated by the proportion of significant pre-post contrasts. Some relevant rTMS parameters (e.g., pulse waveform) are not reported. Lower rTMS stimulation intensity was associated with significant effects in verum rTMS arms. An additional stimulation of the DLPFC to the temporal cortex was not found to promote efficacy. Future research should consider differential effects of rTMS induced by technical parameters and strive for an exhaustive reporting of relevant rTMS parameters.

To investigate oscillatory brain activity changes following acoustic stimulation in tinnitus and whether these changes are associated with behavioral measures of tinnitus loudness. Moreover, differences in ongoing brain activity between individuals with and without residual inhibition (RI) are examined (responders vs. non-responders). Three different types of noise stimuli were administered for acoustic stimulation in 45 tinnitus patients. Subjects resting state brain activity was recorded before and after stimulation via EEG alongside with subjective measurements of tinnitus loudness. Delta, theta and gamma band power increased, whereas alpha and beta power decreased from pre to post stimulation. Acoustic stimulation responders exhibited reduced gamma and a trend for enhanced alpha activity with the latter localized in the right inferior temporal gyrus. Post stimulation, individuals experiencing RI showed higher theta, alpha and beta power with a peak power difference in the alpha band localized in the right superior temporal gyrus. Neither correlations with behavioral tinnitus measures nor stimulus-specific changes in EEG activity were present. Our observations might be indicative of trait-specific forms of oscillatory signatures in different subsets of the tinnitus population related to acoustic tinnitus suppression. Results and insights are not only useful to understand basic neural mechanisms behind RI but are also valuable for general neural models of tinnitus.