idea-006 · human · wrapped

Follower bimodal acoustic-plus-electrical tinnitus neuromodulation device under the QVN classification created by DEN210033, aimed first at the VA channel

wrapped stage: verified updated 2026-09-03

Where the evidence stands

7/9
factors scored
3/4
core factors
4/50
claims verified
0
refuted

Read this before anything else on the page. A low count here is usually a statement about this repo's tooling rather than about the idea — a unconfirmed reimbursement claim most often means the CMS cache file is absent and nothing was searched, which is not evidence that a code does not exist.

Read all 50 claims →

The packet

The packet a human reads. See docs/wrap-spec.md. This section says nothing about whether the idea is good — it says the file is finished enough to be read, and names what to do next. Filling it in advances no candidate and approves nothing.

The one-paragraph version. A cheaper second entrant into a new category of tinnitus treatment device. Tinnitus — persistent ringing with no external source — has no cure, and the treatments doctors are told to offer are counselling and hearing aids. In 2023 the FDA created a new device category for a different approach: playing sounds through headphones while delivering small timed electrical pulses to the body, so the brain re-learns to suppress the phantom sound. The device that created that category stimulates the tongue. This one would deliver the electrical half through a skin patch on the face or neck instead, be fitted remotely rather than in a clinic, and sell for less — aimed first at veterans, among whom tinnitus is unusually common.

What would have to be true, quoted from each deck's load-bearing condition:

Cheapest next test: Read the posted results of NCT03621735 — a completed University of Michigan randomized crossover trial of non-intraoral auditory-somatosensory bimodal stimulation, 100 participants actual, hasResults=true [claim 29: unconfirmed]. The file's own unresolved-claims analysis names it in exactly these terms: for the mechanism-transfer question "the settling artifacts are human: NCT03621735 ... is the first read, and an FDA Pre-Submission written response is what actually prices the NSE branch." A free registry record with outcome data already public, bearing on the branch point that decides whether the capital requirement is low single-digit millions or mid-eight figures. Selected from that gap analysis; this is a selection from it, not a new judgement, and not a view about the idea.

Where the evidence actually stands. 4 of 41 claims verified, 37 unconfirmed, none refuted. 7 of 9 factors carry a score in the Stage 2 triage table and 3 of 4 core factors do; the remaining rows carry named gaps rather than blanks.

All four verified claims are regulatory: the De Novo grant and its date [claim 1: verified], the QVN classification it created [claim 2: verified], and two facts about the adjacent tinnitus-masker regulation [claim 5: verified], [claim 6: verified]. They establish that the category exists and how FDA thinks about it. None of them touches the question the candidate itself calls its central risk — whether the mechanism survives moving off the tongue.

Thirteen claims were added by the research lane since 2026-08-24 and not one moved a tag, because they are literature, registry records and company press, none of which any connector here can verify. They nonetheless changed this packet substantially, and a Stage 6 reader should read the change as one finding rather than several: the category's evidence turns out to be good, and all of it belongs to somebody else.

The category is attractive. The treatments the 2014 AAO-HNSF guideline actually recommends underperform on their own measures: a Cochrane review of CBT (28 studies, n=2733) found a mean Tinnitus Handicap Inventory reduction of 5.65 points, below the review's own 7-point minimal clinically important difference [claim 35: unconfirmed], and a Cochrane review of sound therapy (8 studies, n=590) found no evidence that hearing aids, sound generators or combination devices beat waiting-list control, placebo or education-only [claim 36: unconfirmed]. That guideline contains no recommendation addressing bimodal neuromodulation at all [claim 39: unconfirmed].

The incumbent owns it. A 326-adult randomized double-blinded trial reported a Cohen's d of -0.87 to -0.92 on the THI at 12 weeks, P<.001 [claim 31: unconfirmed]. A 220-patient US real-world chart review reported a 91.5% responder rate, 95% CI 86.9%-94.5% [claim 33: unconfirmed]. A randomized settings trial reported 83.8% compliance [claim 32: unconfirmed]. And per company press materials the incumbent has held a VA Federal Supply Schedule 65 II A contract since 2024-06-17, extended beyond VA to Department of Defense, Bureau of Prisons, Indian Health Services and Public Health Service beneficiaries [claim 40: unconfirmed].

That last item answered the previous build's desirability load-bearing condition — whether the VA buys in this category — and answering it moved the question rather than closing it. The channel is open and occupied, so what this candidate now needs to know is whether a second, cheaper device gets ordered when the first is already on contract with a pivotal trial behind it. The file classifies that as evidence class 3, a stakeholder-future claim the adoption connector refuses, so no tooling will ever resolve it [claim 41: unconfirmed]. It needs VA audiologists asked.

Three cautions. The FSS award is sourced to a company press release, not a government record [claim 40: unconfirmed], and no connector here reads VA contracting — it should be confirmed against the VA National Acquisition Center's own listing before anything is built on it. The empirical case for the follower route is three years of silence in a classification created in March 2023 [claim 4: unconfirmed], which reads differently now that the incumbent spent those years compounding evidence and channel. And FTO is unexamined rather than clear [claim 28: unconfirmed] — never asked, on the rubric's one automatic-kill factor, against an incumbent whose patent position is the obvious blocking surface for a strategy that is explicitly to follow it.

The idea

Intended useFor the treatment of adults aged 18 and older with chronic subjective tinnitus of moderate or greater severity, used at home on a prescribed daily schedule under the supervision of a licensed audiologist or physician, as an adjunct to tinnitus counselling.
MechanismPaired bimodal neuromodulation — timed acoustic stimulation delivered by headphones together with non-invasive transcutaneous electrical stimulation of a trigeminal/cervical afferent target, on a fixed daily treatment schedule, with remote (rather than in-clinic) fitting and adherence telemetry
Device class# The launch route exists only because someone else's De Novo; Class II — 21 CFR 874.3410, product code QVN, "combined acoustic and electrical; external stimulation device for the relief of tinnitus" — 510(k) against the DEN210033; grantee as predicate. Launch designation. This regulation and code did not exist before; 2023; the whole candidate is a bet on a pathway a competitor's De Novo opened.; (Section number added post-Stage-3: the Generator originally left this route without a; CFR section, which left 874.3400 below as the only section in the frontmatter and; invited reading the launch and fallback routes as one regulation. They are two; different sections. 874.3410 is the Verifier's primary-source finding from; classification --product-code QVN; see claim 2.); Class II — 21 CFR 874.3400 ("tinnitus masker") — fallback route, live only for a; sound-only variant. Reachable, older, and much weaker commercially: a masker is; indicated to mask tinnitus, not to relieve it, so this route trades the therapeutic; claim for an easier submission.
Predicate or analogLenire (Neuromod Devices), granted via De Novo DEN210033 in March 2023 and,; per the Generator's web search, the device for which FDA created product; code QVN. Adjacent and older: sound-therapy tinnitus maskers under; 21 CFR 874.3400, and tinnitus modes embedded in conventional hearing aids.
Launch jurisdictionUS
Targethuman

The nine factors, and what would settle each

FactorScoreWhat would settle it
Regulatory pathway2python3 -m connectors classification --product-code QVN — settles claim 2 and yields the CFR section. Then python3 -m connectors denovo "Lenire" for DEN210033 (claim 1), `python3 -m connectors regulation <section from classification>…
the rest of this gap analysis --expect "acoustic and electrical", and python3 -m connectors regulation 874.3400 --expect "tinnitus masker" for claims 5-6. The NSE branch is priced by python3 -m connectors clearances --product-code QVN --since 3y then python3 -m connectors clearance-summary <K number> --expect-indication "chronic subjective tinnitus"` on each hit — whether FDA has ever cleared a non-intraoral electrode under QVN is the single most decision-relevant read in this file.
Reimbursement pathway1CPT is unverifiable by connector on purpose (python3 -m connectors cpt always returns unverifiable), so this factor cannot be closed from the repo alone. Runnable: python3 -m connectors hcpcs <candidate DME/L-code> and `python3 -m…
the rest of this gap analysis connectors coverage <code> --expect-stance covered once a candidate code is named; python3 -m connectors payment <code> --min-expected <net price>` to test whether any code pays above cost rather than merely existing. Human-attached primaries: the VA Federal Supply Schedule contract listing or VA prosthetics purchasing terms covering the predicate, and the predicate's published US patient price. A code that exists but pays below cost with no coverage policy would not move this row.
TAM2python3 -m connectors market "<TAM claim>" returns unverifiable by design — this factor cannot be closed by connector. Named primaries a human would have to attach: the VBA Annual Benefits Report PDF itself for claim 8 (no connector in…
the rest of this gap analysis this repo reads VA data), and a peer-reviewed NHANES-based prevalence analysis reporting chronic tinnitus by severity band for claim 10 — specifically a severity-stratified figure, since the widely quoted 25M "any tinnitus" numbers overstate the indicated population by a large multiple. For claim 11, the predicate's published US price list. Claim 12 stays an assumption until the first two resolve.
FTO / IPNeeds a patent number before any connector can run. Scout work item: USPTO Patent Public Search assignee query on "Neuromod Devices" for granted US families claiming paired acoustic-plus-somatosensory stimulation for tinnitus, plus the…
the rest of this gap analysis same on the trigeminal/cervical stimulation art. Then python3 -m connectors patent <US patent number> per family for status, claims and expiry. A live enforceable claim reading on timed bimodal acoustic-plus-electrical stimulation with no workaround is an automatic kill under the rubric, so this row is worth resolving before spending on the others.
Moat / defensibility1Downstream of FTO: the patent search above is what determines whether there is a defensible position at all. Additionally python3 -m connectors clearances --product-code QVN --since 3y — a cleared follower shows the category is already…
the rest of this gap analysis contestable and that the Generator is not first; an empty result over three years is itself informative about barriers.
Mechanism & clinical risk2python3 -m connectors literature-detail <PMIDs from claim 13> for the pivotal trial and the 2025 chart review abstracts — effect size, comparator arm, durability. Then `python3 -m connectors literature "bimodal stimulation tinnitus…
the rest of this gap analysis trigeminal" --since 5y and python3 -m connectors trials --condition tinnitus --intervention "bimodal stimulation" --since 5y, with trial-detail <NCT ID>` on any hit, to find whether any study exists at a non-intraoral electrode site. Note these are Stage 0 scans and return no confidence tag — they locate the evidence, they do not verify claim 14.
Capital intensity & time-to-revenue2Resolved indirectly by the Factor 1 reads: python3 -m connectors clearance-summary <K number> on any QVN clearance shows what evidence FDA actually accepted for that classification. The direct settling artifact is not a connector — it is…
the rest of this gap analysis an FDA Pre-Submission (Q-Sub) written response on the electrode-site change, obtained by a human via a regulatory consultant. Until then this row stays a range, not an estimate.
Competitive intensity1python3 -m connectors clearances --product-code QVN --since 3y (claim 4 — who else is in), python3 -m connectors recalls --firm "Neuromod" --since 3y and python3 -m connectors recalls --product-code QVN --since 3y (incumbent field…
the rest of this gap analysis performance), python3 -m connectors trials --condition tinnitus --intervention "bimodal stimulation" --since 3y (who is running studies). All Stage 0 scans — pointers, not verification.
Strategic fit & portfolio balanceA Tier 3 human input, not a connector read: a stated portfolio thesis and current allocation from whoever owns capital allocation, supplied at Stage 6 shortlist review.

Packet status

All six wrap criteria are met.

Elsewhere

All evidenceDesirability deckViability deckFeasibility deckStoryBusiness case

Domain dossier: chronic-subjective-tinnitus-neuromodulation
Source file: knowledge-base/candidates/idea-006.md

Nothing on this page is a recommendation. Shortlist review, legal and clinical sign-off and capital allocation are human-only decisions, and no agent in this repo may make or simulate one. This is a compilation of what the candidate file says.