4.0 Article

Histopathological Evaluation of the Nervous System in National Toxicology Program Rodent Studies: A Modified Approach

Journal

TOXICOLOGIC PATHOLOGY
Volume 39, Issue 3, Pages 463-470

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0192623311401044

Keywords

neuropathology; histopathology; brain; nervous system; NTP; nervous system; screening

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article outlines the changes and underlying rationale for modifications to the histopathological evaluation of the nervous system during toxicology and carcinogenesis studies conducted by the National Toxicology Program (NTP). In the past, routine evaluation of the nervous system was mostly limited to three sections of brain, and occasionally the spinal cord and peripheral nerves. Factors such as the increasing occurrence of human neurological diseases and associated economical cost burden, the role of unidentified environmental stressors in neurodegenerative disorders, multiple therapeutic drug-induced neuropathies noted in human clinical trials, and the exponential use of environmental chemicals with unknown neurotoxic potential necessitate a more extensive evaluation of the nervous system. The NTP has modified its protocol to include examination of key anatomic subsites related to neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson's disease. Modifications include four additional sections of the brain. Increasing the number of brain sections permits examination of a greater number of specific anatomic subsites with unique vulnerability. In addition, the spinal cord, peripheral nerves, trigeminal ganglion, and intestinal autonomic ganglia will be evaluated as needed. It is expected that this modified approach will increase the sensitivity of detecting neurotoxicants and neurocarcinogens important in human neurologic and neurodegenerative disorders.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available