|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Ototoxicity: An Argument for Evaluation of the Cochlea in Safety Testing in Animals
Joel L. Mattsson
Dow AgroSciences LLC, Indianapolis, Indiana 46268
The cochlea is one of the more common targets for toxic effects, yet current toxicologic screening in animals does not routinely evaluate the cochlea as a potential target organ. Although histopathologic sections are routinely taken from the eye and the optic nerve and tract and most studies include at least 1 section through the nasal cavity and olfactory mucosa, the cochlea is not histopathologically examined in routine toxicity studies. Unfortunately, routine clinical examinations frequently miss ototoxicity because rodents and other species can lose most of their high-frequency hearing and still respond to most ambient noises. Ototoxicity as a deficiency in toxicologic screening can be remedied by using well-established histopathologic and behavioral methods or electrophysiologic methods, such as brain stem auditory evoked responses (BAERs). Once the equipment is in place, BAERs can be obtained quickly and easily for ototoxicity screening (approximately 15 minutes for paired testing of 2 rats and 30 minutes each for dogs). BAERs also can be used in virtually all mammalian species. Three or 4 probe frequencies (eg, 4, 8, 16, and 32 kHz), representing different areas of the cochlea, can be tested in a few minutes with subcutaneous electrodes under short-acting chemorestraint. Given the availability of several approaches to screening for ototoxicity and the importance of the auditory function in human health, safety tests of chemicals and drugs should include an effective screening test for ototoxicity.
Key Words: Audiometry brain stem auditory evoked response cochlear pathology hearing loss laboratory animals ototoxicity reflex modulation audiometry safety testing
References
- Brown RD, Henley CM, Penny JE, Kupetz S. (1985). Link between functional and morphological changes in the inner ear—Functional changes produced by ototoxic agents and their interactions. Arch Toxicol Suppl 8: 240-250.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Campbell KC, Durrant J. (1993). Audiologic monitoring for ototoxicity. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 26: 903-914.[Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Cary R., Clarke S., Delic J. (1997). Effects of combined exposure to noise and toxic substances—Critical review. Ann Occup Hyg 41: 455-465.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Coupland SG, Ponton CW, Eggermont JJ, Bowen TJ, Grant RM (1991). Assessment of cisplatin-induced ototoxicity using derived-band ABRs. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 22: 237-248.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Crofton KM, Dean KF, Ménache MG, Janssen R. (1990). Trimethyltin effects on auditory function and cochlear morphology. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 105: 123-132.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Crofton KM, Zhao X. ( 1993). Mid-frequency hearing loss in rats following inhalation exposure to trichloroethylene: Evidence from reflex modification audiometry. Neurotoxicol Teratol 15: 413-423.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Dreschler WA, van der Hulst RJ, Tange RA, Urbanus NA (1985). The role of high-frequency audiometry in early detection of ototoxicity. Audiology 24: 387-395.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Dreschler WA, van der Hulst RJ, Tange RA, Urbanus NA (1989). Role of high-frequency audiometry in the early detection of ototoxicity. II. Clinical aspects. Audiology 28: 211-220.[Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Fausti SA, Larson VD, Noffsinger D., Wilson RH, Phillips DS, Fowler CG (1994). High-frequency audiometric monitoring strategies for early detection of ototoxicity. Ear Hear 15: 232-239.[Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Goldey ES, Crofton KM (1998). Thyroxine replacement attenuates hypothyroxinemia, hearing loss, and motor deficits following developmental exposure to Aroclor 1254 in rats. Toxicol Sci 45: 94-105.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Heffner HE, Heffner RS, Contos C., Ott T. ( 1994). Audiogram of the hooded Norway rat. Hearing Res 73: 244-247.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Henley CM, Rybak LP (1993). Developmental ototoxicity. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 26: 903-914.[Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Hoffman DW, Whitworth CA, Jones-King KL, Rybak LP (1988). Potentiation of ototoxicity by glutathione depletion. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 97: 36-41.[Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Kuzel RA, Smith JM, Trennery PN (1990). Screening procedure for assessment of ototoxicity in the common marmoset. J Pharmacol Methods 24: 9-18.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Mason JA, Herrmann KR (1998). Universal infant hearing screening by automated auditory brainstem response measurement. Pediatrics 101: 221-228.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Mattsson JL, Boyes WK, Ross JF ( 1992). Incorporating evoked potentials into neurotoxicity test schemes. In: Neurotoxicology, Tilson H, Mitchell C (eds). Raven Press, New York, pp 125-145.
- Mehl AL, Thomson V. (1998). Newborn hearing screening: The great omission. Pediatrics 101: e4 (abstract).
- Meyerhoff WL (1979). Hypothyroidism and the ear: Electrophysiological, morphological, and chemical considerations. Laryngoscope 89(suppl 19): 1-25.[Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Morlet T., Ferber-Viart C., Putet G., Sevin F., Duclaux R. (1998). Auditory screening in high-risk pre-term and full-term neonates using transient evoked otoacoustic emissions and brainstem auditory evoked potentials. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 45: 31-40.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Peterson EA, Heaton WC, Wruble SD (1969). Levels of auditory response in fissiped carnivores. J Mammal 50: 566-578.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Rybak LP (1992). Hearing: The effect of chemicals. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 106: 677-686.[Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Seligmann H., Podoshin L., Ben-David J., Fradis M., Goldsher M. (1996). Drug-induced tinnitis and other hearing disorders. Drug Safety 14: 198-212.[Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Sullivan MJ, Rarey KE, Conolly RB (1988). Ototoxicity of toluene in rats. Neurotoxicol Teratol 10: 525-530.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Thomas WG (1982). Clinical assessment of auditory dysfunction. Environ Health Perspect. 44: 67-75.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Uimonen S., Maki-Torkko E., Sorri M. (1998). Hearing and occupation. Int J Circumpolar Health 57: 156-161.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Wessex Universal Neonatal Hearing Screening Trial Group (1998). Controlled trial universal neonatal screening for early identification of permanent childhood hearing impairment. Lancet 352: 1957-1964.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Yano BL, Dittenber DA, Albee RR, Mattsson JL (1992). Abnormal auditory brainstem responses and cochlear pathology in rats induced by an exaggerated styrene exposure regimen. Toxicol Pathol 20: 1-6.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Young JS, Fechter LD (1986). Trimethyltin exposure produces an unusual form of toxic auditory damage in rats. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 82: 87-93.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
Toxicologic Pathology, Vol. 28, No. 1,
137-141 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/019262330002800117

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Twitter What's this?
|
|