Search

Abstract: Todd et al. (2014) have recently demonstrated the presence of vestibular dependent changes both in the morphology and in the intensity dependence of auditory evoked potentials (AEPs) when passing through the vestibular threshold as determined by vestibular evoked myogenic potentials (VEMPs). In this paper we extend this work by comparing left vs. right ear stimulation and by conducting a source analysis of the resulting evoked potentials of short and long latency. Ten healthy, right-handed subjects were recruited and evoked potentials were recorded to both left- and right-ear sound stimulation, above and below vestibular threshold. Below VEMP threshold, typical AEPs were recorded, consisting of mid-latency (MLR) waves Na and Pa followed by long latency AEPs (LAEPs) N1 and P2. In the supra-threshold condition, the expected changes in morphology were observed, consisting of: (1) short-latency vestibular evoked potentials (VsEPs) which have no auditory correlate, i.e. the ocular VEMP (OVEMP) and inion response related potentials; (2) a later deflection, labelled N42/P52, followed by the LAEPs N1 and P2. Statistical analysis of the vestibular dependent responses indicated a contralateral effect for inion related short-latency responses and a left-ear/right-hemisphere advantage for the long-latency responses. Source analysis indicated that the short-latency effects may be mediated by a contralateral projection to left cerebellum, while the long-latency effects were mediated by a contralateral projection to right cingulate cortex. In addition we found evidence of a possible vestibular contribution to the auditory T-complex in radial temporal lobe sources. These last results raise the possibility that acoustic activation of the otolith organs could potentially contribute to auditory processing. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The dermatotoxicologist today is faced with a dilemma. Protection of workers and consumers from skin toxicities (irritation and allergy) associated with exposure to products, and the ingredients they contain, requires toxicological skin testing prior to manufacture, transport, or marketing. Testing for skin corrosion or irritation has traditionally been conducted in animals, particularly in rabbits via the long established Draize test method. However, this procedure, among others, has been subject to criticism, both for its limited predictive capacity for human toxicity, as well as for its use of animals. In fact, legislation is pending in the European Union which would ban the sale of cosmetic products, the ingredients of which have been tested in animals. These considerations, and advancements in both in vitro skin biology and clinical testing, have helped drive an intensive effort among skin scientists to develop alternative test methods based either on in vitro test systems (e.g. using rat, pig or human skin ex vivo, or reconstructed human skin models) or ethical clinical approaches (human volunteer studies). Tools are now in place today to enable a thorough skin corrosion and irritation assessment of new ingredients and products without the need to test in animals. Herein, we describe general testing strategies and new test methods for the assessment of skin corrosion and irritation. The methods described, and utilized within industry today, provide a framework for the practicing toxicologist to support new product development initiatives through the use of reliable skin safety testing and risk assessment tools and strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]