Source Paper
E Berry-Kravis, D Hessl, S Coffey, C Hervey, A Schneider et al.
Journal of Medical Genetics • 2009
Objective: A pilot open label, single dose trial of fenobam, an mGluR5 antagonist, was conducted to provide an initial evaluation of safety and pharmacokinetics in adult males and females with fragile X syndrome (FXS). Methods: Twelve subjects, recruited from two fragile X clinics, received a single oral dose of 50–150 mg of fenobam. Blood for pharmacokinetic testing, vital signs and side effect screening was obtained at baseline and numerous time points for 6 h after dosing. Outcome measures included prepulse inhibition (PPI) and a continuous performance test (CPT) obtained before and after dosing to explore the effects of fenobam on core phenotypic measures of sensory gating, attention and inhibition. Results: There were no significant adverse reactions to fenobam administration. Pharmacokinetic analysis showed that fenobam concentrations were dose dependent but variable, with mean (SEM) peak values of 39.7 (18.4) ng/ml at 180 min after the 150 mg dose. PPI met a response criterion of an improvement of at least 20% over baseline in 6 of 12 individuals (4/6 males and 2/6 females). The CPT did not display improvement with treatment due to ceiling effects. Conclusions: Clinically significant adverse effects were not identified in this study of single dose fenobam across the range of dosages utilised. The positive effects seen in animal models of FXS treated with fenobam or other mGluR5 antagonists, the apparent lack of clinically significant adverse effects, and the potential beneficial clinical effects seen in this pilot trial support further study of the compound in adults with FXS.
Objective: Assessment of sensorimotor gating and inhibitory control using acoustic startle stimuli with prepulses at 120 ms and 240 ms intervals while recording electromyographic responses
This is a Prepulse Inhibition Test protocol using human as the model organism. The procedure involves 13 procedural steps, 6 equipment items, 2 materials. Extracted from a 2009 paper published in Journal of Medical Genetics.
Model and subjects
human • N/A • both • Not specified • Not specified • 13
Study window
~4 week study window | ~36 hours hands-on
Core workflow
Screening Visit - Medical Evaluation • Baseline PPI Assessment • Baseline CPT Assessment
Primary readouts
Key equipment and reagents
Verified items
0
Direct vendor links
0
Use this page as an execution guide, then fall back to the source paper whenever you need exact exclusions, dosing details, or assay-specific caveats.
Confirm first
Use the page like this
Start here. The step list is optimized for running the experiment, with direct vendor links available inline when you need to source a cited item.
Subjects undergo comprehensive medical evaluation including medical history, physical exam, vital signs, laboratory testing (routine chemistries, blood counts, thyroid functions), electrocardiogram (ECG), and pregnancy test for females.
Note: Baseline CPT and prepulse inhibition (PPI) outcome measures obtained at this visit
“At the screening visit medical history, exam, vital signs, laboratory testing including routine chemistries, blood counts, thyroid functions, electrocardiogram (ECG), and a pregnancy test (females) were evaluated, and baseline CPT (Carolina Project Fragile X continuous performance test) and prepulse inhibition (PPI) outcome measures were obtained.”
Baseline prepulse inhibition test performed at screening visit to establish baseline sensorimotor gating measurements
Note: Baseline measurements used for comparison with post-treatment PPI
“baseline CPT (Carolina Project Fragile X continuous performance test) and prepulse inhibition (PPI) outcome measures were obtained”
Carolina Fragile X Project Continuous Performance Test administered at screening visit to assess baseline attention, impulsivity, and inhibition
Note: Baseline measurements used for comparison with post-treatment CPT
“baseline CPT (Carolina Project Fragile X continuous performance test) and prepulse inhibition (PPI) outcome measures were obtained”
14-28 days after screening visit, intravenous catheter inserted for blood drawing. Subject receives study medication orally. Dose depends on subject gender and enrollment order: first subject of each gender receives 50 mg fenobam, second receives 100 mg, all subsequent subjects receive 150 mg.
Note: Conference calls held after each subject dosed to confirm absence of adverse events and justify dose escalation or maintenance
“At the treatment visit, 14–28 days after screening, an IV was inserted for blood drawing and the subject received the study medication orally. The first subject for each gender was dosed with 50 mg fenobam, the second with 100 mg, and all subsequent subjects with 150 mg.”
Blood samples collected for pharmacokinetic testing at multiple timepoints: 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 120, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes after dosing
Note: Blood pressure and heart rate also monitored at these timepoints
“Blood for pharmacokinetic testing, blood pressure, heart rate and side effect screening was obtained at 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 120, 180, 240, 300, and 360 min after dosing.”
Structured side effects screening protocol involving questioning of subject and family members about specific symptoms relevant to fenobam effects (aggression, fatigue, hyperactivity, anxiety and fidgetiness, increase in self stimulation, odd behaviour, inappropriate laughter, dizziness, vertigo, nausea, paraesthesia, and headache), plus direct observation by physician and family for these symptoms and other behavioral changes
Note: Conducted at 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 120, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes after dosing
“Our side effects screening protocol involved asking both the subject and family members if the subject was having any of a structured list of symptoms relevant to potential effects of fenobam (aggression, fatigue, hyperactivity, anxiety and fidgetiness, increase in self stimulation, odd behaviour, inappropriate laughter, dizziness, vertigo, nausea, paraesthesia, and headache), and direct observation by the physician and family for the above symptoms and other behavioural changes.”
Prepulse inhibition test performed after 60 minute blood sampling timepoint to assess medication effects on sensorimotor gating
Note: Performed after 60 min blood sampling, before CPT
“Post-treatment PPI was performed after the 60 min blood sampling, followed by CPT.”
Deliver 10 trials of startle stimulus alone. Startle stimuli are 50 ms 105 dB SPL white noise pulses. Participant watches silent movie during trials.
Note: Part of 30 total trial protocol. Electromyographic responses recorded between 20 ms and 200 ms post startle probe onset
“Startle stimuli (SS) were 50 ms 105 db SPL white noise pulses and acoustic prepulses (PP) are 25 ms 75 db SPL 1 kHz tones. These trials are delivered while participants watch a silent movie to maintain compliance and interest in the procedure. resulting in a protocol with 30 total trials (10 with SS alone, 10 with 120 ms prepulse and 10 with 240 ms prepulse)”
Deliver 10 trials with 120 ms prepulse interval. Acoustic prepulses are 25 ms 75 dB SPL 1 kHz tones, followed 120 ms later by startle stimulus (50 ms 105 dB SPL white noise pulse). Participant watches silent movie during trials.
Note: 120 ms prepulse interval has excellent test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation 0.85 for FXS, 0.88 for controls). Most reliable trial latency for determining responders.
“10 with 120 ms prepulse and 10 with 240 ms prepulse. PPI at 120 ms has excellent test-retest reliability with intraclass correlations of 0.85 for FXS and 0.88 for controls”
Deliver 10 trials with 240 ms prepulse interval. Acoustic prepulses are 25 ms 75 dB SPL 1 kHz tones, followed 240 ms later by startle stimulus (50 ms 105 dB SPL white noise pulse). Participant watches silent movie during trials.
Note: 240 ms prepulse interval has good to excellent test-retest reliability. 60 ms interval was eliminated due to inadequate reliability.
“Test-retest studies have demonstrated good to excellent reliability for PPI at 120 ms and 240 ms, but inadequate reliability for PPI at 60 ms. Therefore, for the current study, we eliminated the 60 ms trial type and added two trials per type, resulting in a protocol with 30 total trials”
Digitized orbicularis oculi electromyographic peak magnitudes recorded between 20 ms and 200 ms post startle probe onset. Peak magnitudes averaged across trials within each trial type (SS alone, 120 ms prepulse, 240 ms prepulse).
Note: Three separate averages calculated: one for SS alone trials, one for 120 ms prepulse trials, one for 240 ms prepulse trials
“Digitised obicularis oculi electromyographic peak magnitudes recorded between 20 ms and 200 ms post startle probe onset were averaged across trials within each type.”
Carolina Fragile X Project Continuous Performance Test administered after post-treatment PPI to assess effects on attention, impulsivity, and inhibition. Number of correct hits on target stimuli, omissions (lack of reaction to target), and commissions (reaction to non-target) are tabulated.
Note: Commission score is main focus of analysis as more reliable marker for abnormal performance
“Post-treatment PPI was performed after the 60 min blood sampling, followed by CPT. the number of correct hits on a target stimuli, omissions involving lack of reaction to a target (attention deficit), and commissions involving reacting to a non-target (impulsivity, poor inhibitory control) were tabulated.”
Fenobam concentrations from plasma samples measured using MS-MS based assays validated for human application with positive ion liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS). Plasma samples over 24 hours obtained from three healthy adult male volunteers for comparison.
Note: Assays are validated for human application
“Fenobam concentrations from plasma samples were measured with MS-MS based assays validated for human application, using positive ion liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS). For comparison, plasma samples over 24 h were obtained from three healthy adult male volunteers.”
This section explains what the experiment is doing, which readouts matter, what the data artifacts usually look like, and how the analysis should flow from raw capture to reported result.
Assessment of sensorimotor gating and inhibitory control using acoustic startle stimuli with prepulses at 120 ms and 240 ms intervals while recording electromyographic responses
Objective
Assessment of sensorimotor gating and inhibitory control using acoustic startle stimuli with prepulses at 120 ms and 240 ms intervals while recording electromyographic responses
Subjects
From paperhuman • N/A • both • Not specified • Not specified
Sample count
From paper13
Cohort notes
From paperSubjects with fragile X syndrome (FXS) recruited from fragile X clinics at Rush University Medical Center (RUMC) and MIND Institute at University of California at Davis Medical Center (UCDMC).
Screening Visit - Medical Evaluation (Not specified)
Baseline PPI Assessment (Not specified)
Baseline CPT Assessment (Not specified)
Treatment Visit - IV Insertion and Medication Administration (14-28 days after screening)
Prepulse inhibition (PPI) at 120 ms interval - primary outcome
From paperFor PPI data, positive response defined as 20% or greater improvement over baseline on 120 ms trials.
Artifact type
Endpoint measurements summarized by group or timepoint
Comparison focus
Compare endpoint magnitude between groups, timepoints, or both
Prepulse inhibition (PPI) at 240 ms interval
From paperFor PPI data, positive response defined as 20% or greater improvement over baseline on 120 ms trials.
Artifact type
Endpoint measurements summarized by group or timepoint
Comparison focus
Compare endpoint magnitude between groups, timepoints, or both
Orbicularis oculi electromyographic peak magnitudes
From paperFor PPI data, positive response defined as 20% or greater improvement over baseline on 120 ms trials.
Artifact type
Endpoint measurements summarized by group or timepoint
Comparison focus
Compare endpoint magnitude between groups, timepoints, or both
PPI percentage improvement calculated as: 100 × [(mean response magnitude in startle stimulus alone trials – mean response magnitude in prepulse trials)/mean response magnitude in startle stimulus alone trials]
From paperFor PPI data, positive response defined as 20% or greater improvement over baseline on 120 ms trials.
Artifact type
Endpoint measurements summarized by group or timepoint
Comparison focus
Compare endpoint magnitude between groups, timepoints, or both
Prepulse inhibition (PPI) at 120 ms interval - primary outcome
From paperRaw artifact
Per-sample or per-animal endpoint measurements collected during the experiment
Processed artifact
Structured table with cleaned measurements ready for comparison
Final reported form
Summary statistics and between-group or across-timepoint comparisons
Prepulse inhibition (PPI) at 240 ms interval
From paperRaw artifact
Per-sample or per-animal endpoint measurements collected during the experiment
Processed artifact
Structured table with cleaned measurements ready for comparison
Final reported form
Summary statistics and between-group or across-timepoint comparisons
Orbicularis oculi electromyographic peak magnitudes
From paperRaw artifact
Per-sample or per-animal endpoint measurements collected during the experiment
Processed artifact
Structured table with cleaned measurements ready for comparison
Final reported form
Summary statistics and between-group or across-timepoint comparisons
PPI percentage improvement calculated as: 100 × [(mean response magnitude in startle stimulus alone trials – mean response magnitude in prepulse trials)/mean response magnitude in startle stimulus alone trials]
From paperRaw artifact
Per-sample or per-animal endpoint measurements collected during the experiment
Processed artifact
Structured table with cleaned measurements ready for comparison
Final reported form
Summary statistics and between-group or across-timepoint comparisons
Acquisition
Collect raw experimental outputs with enough metadata to preserve sample identity, condition, and timing.
Preprocessing / cleaning
For PPI data, positive response defined as 20% or greater improvement over baseline on 120 ms trials.
Scoring or quantification
Quantify the primary readouts for this experiment: Prepulse inhibition (PPI) at 120 ms interval - primary outcome; Prepulse inhibition (PPI) at 240 ms interval; Orbicularis oculi electromyographic peak magnitudes; PPI percentage improvement calculated as: 100 × [(mean response magnitude in startle stimulus alone trials – mean response magnitude in prepulse trials)/mean response magnitude in startle stimulus alone trials].
Statistical comparison
Statistical method not yet structured for this page.
Reporting output
Report representative outputs alongside summary comparisons for Prepulse inhibition (PPI) at 120 ms interval - primary outcome, Prepulse inhibition (PPI) at 240 ms interval, Orbicularis oculi electromyographic peak magnitudes, PPI percentage improvement calculated as: 100 × [(mean response magnitude in startle stimulus alone trials – mean response magnitude in prepulse trials)/mean response magnitude in startle stimulus alone trials].
Source links and direct wording from the methods section for validation and deeper review.
Citation
E Berry-Kravis et al. (2009). A pilot open label, single dose trial of fenobam in adults with fragile X syndrome. Journal of Medical Genetics
“”
“”
“”
“”
Direct vendor pages are linked from the protocol above. This section stays focused on the full comparison view and the prep checklist.
Gather these items before starting the experiment. Check off items as you prepare.
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • N/A
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • N/A
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • N/A
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • N/A
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • N/A
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • N/A
Not specified • N/A • Not specified • N/A
Not specified • N/A • Not specified • N/A
Not specified • N/A
1 item with ReplicateScience direct pages
Estimated: $7,990.00
Use this section as the page quality checkpoint. It keeps section navigation, evidence access, readiness, and verification meaning in one place.
Current status surfaces were computed from experiment data updated Feb 28, 2026.
Source access
Jump back into the original paper or the methods evidence section when you need exact wording, exclusions, or method-specific caveats.
This protocol has structured steps plus evidence quotes, and is ready for canonical sync.
Steps
13
Evidence Quotes
21
Protocol Items
8
Linked Products
1
Canonical Sync
Pending
What this means
The completeness score reflects how much structured protocol data is present: steps, methods evidence, listed materials, linked products, and paper provenance.
Computed from the current experiment record updated Feb 28, 2026.
Canonical Sync shows whether a ConductGraph-backed protocol is available for this experiment route right now. It is a sync-status signal, not a claim that every downstream vendor link or step detail is perfect.
Steps
13
Evidence
21
Specific Products
1/1
Canonical Sync
Pending
What this score means
The verification score reflects evidence coverage, subject detail, paper provenance, step depth, and whether linked products resolve to specific item pages instead of generic searches.
Computed from the current experiment record updated Feb 28, 2026.
A page can have structured steps and still need review when evidence is thin, product links are generic, or canonical protocol coverage is still pending.
Music Experience Rating Scale
Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis
Semi-structured Interviews on Music Experience in Psilocybin Therapy
Nicotine Patch Challenge Study