Skip to main content
Neural Regeneration Research logoLink to Neural Regeneration Research
. 2013 Aug 25;8(24):2284–2289. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-5374.2013.24.008

Inner ear hair cell regeneration: A look from the past to the future

Francisco Santaolalla 1,2,, Carlos Salvador 1, Agustín Martínez 2, Jose María Sánchez 2, Ana Sánchez del Rey 2
PMCID: PMC4146031  PMID: 25206538

Abstract

Most recent studies on regeneration of inner ear hair cells focus on use of stem cells, gene therapy and neurotrophic factors. Cochlear gene therapy has been successfully used in the treatment of neurosensory hearing loss. This suggests that cochlear hair cell regeneration is possible. The objective of this paper is to review research and clinical application of inner near hair cell regeneration.

Keywords: neural regeneration, reviews, hearing loss, hair cells, cochlea, genes, stem cells, viral vectors, re-generation, neuroregeneration


Research Highlights

  • (1)

    Cochlear gene therapy has been successfully used in the treatment of sensorineural hearing loss. Use of atonal homolog 1 gene delivered by viral vectors contributes to inner ear hair cell regeneration.

  • (2)

    Various types of viruses have been successfully used as vectors for transporting genes in the cochlea.

  • (3)

    Embryonic and adult inner ear neural stem cells can differentiate into hair cells.

INTRODUCTION

Over the last two decades, great progress has been made in physiopathological research on neurosensory hearing loss. The discovery of inner ear hair cell regeneration has important clinical implications. The objective of this paper is to review literatures on theory and clinical application of inner ear sensory hair cell regeneration.

PIONEERING RESEARCH IN INNER EAR HAIR CELL REGENERATION

Epimorphic regeneration in animals has been recognized since the time of Aristotle (4th century B.C.) who described the tail regeneration in urodeles and reptiles. Many animals exhibit the ability to regenerate lost body parts after damage. Starfish[1], lizards[2], and amphibians such as salamanders[3] can spontaneously regenerate skin, muscle, nerve or bone after amputation. In mammals, several adult organs such as the skin[4], blood[5] or placenta[6] show a limited ability to regenerate. A landmark in human regeneration was found since it was observed that the distal phalanges of the hand of a child were able to regenerate after amputation[7]. This type of regeneration is called epimorphic regeneration. This phenomenon occurs in the presence of early mesenchymal blastema cells and neural plate to origin correct innervations.

Moffat and Ramsden were the first authors who discovered the possibility of the auditory system in humans in 1977[8]. Their description is based on a 37-year-old man with malignant hypertension caused by bilateral chronic kidney failure who received a kidney transplant. In the postoperative period, he developed a staphylococcal infection and was administered 240 mg gentamicin over 10 hours. Twenty-four hours after gentamicin administration, the patient developed bilateral deafness. The first pure-tone audiometry test, 9 days after gentamicin administration, confirmed complete deafness in the left ear and severe neurosensory hearing loss in the right ear. Electrocochleography on day 13 showed a hearing threshold of 100 dB and very poor cochlear microphonics (0.64 μV at 110 dB). However, 3 weeks later, the pure-tone audiometry indicated an improvement in hearing at a frequency of 125–500 Hz and by 8 months the threshold of conversational frequency was around 70 dB. Further, in 1980, Fee[9] reported a series of 138 patients who were administered tobramycin and gentamicin. 55% of these patients recovered their hearing between 1 week and 6 months and 53% recovered their vestibular function between 10 days and 9 months after ototoxic treatment.

Cotanche[10] first referred the regeneration of inner ear hair cells of birds after noise-induced hearing loss. He found that the damaged cells were extruded from the epithelium and replaced by a layer of germinal basal cells. This process occurred rapidly: microvilli appeared on the apical surface of the epithelial tissue 48 hours after the noise-induced trauma, and hair cell regeneration was completed after 10 days of the trauma. Regeneration of the basilar papilla of birds after gentamicin intoxication was reported by Cruz and colleagues[11] who observed recovery of the hair cells 3 weeks after use of ototoxic.

Jørgensen and Mathiesen[12] were the first authors to note the capacity for regeneration of the normal vestibular epithelium in adult Australian parrots. Later, Roberson et al[13] studied the normal vestibular epithelium of 12-day-old white Leghorn chicks using tritiated thymidine and bromodeoxyuridine. Their findings with these cell markers suggested that the supporting cells are the precursors of type II hair cells. This regenerative process occurs continuously, even during adulthood and in the absence of stimulus, trauma or ototoxic damage of the epithelium. In this sense, we have described that in the embryonic vestibular epithelium of humans and of rats there seems to be a group of immature cells that are able to differentiate into sensory and supporting cells, depending on the metabolic requirements of the epithelium[14,15,16,17,18]. Therefore, it is currently believed that vestibular epithelium of birds and mammals are renewed depending on the regenerative capacity of the cells that survive to a particular injury.

López et al[19] studied hair cell recovery in the crista ampullaris of the chinchilla, following administration of a 50 μg dose of gentamicin to the perilymphatic space of the superior semicircular canal. They assessed four experimental groups compared to controls histologically using optical and transmission electron microscopy techniques. They recorded cell counts for hair and supporting cells. During 7–14 days after treatment, type I hair cells were not observed, while 85–88% of type II hair cells were lost. The number of supporting cells had decreased to 76% after 7 days, but recovered to 91% by day 14. By 1 month after ototoxic insult, there was a clear recovery of the epithelial cells, 83% of the cells being type II hair cells and 3% type I hair cells. The percentage of supporting cells was 86%, a level they considered close to normal. From days 14 to 28, the number of type II hair cells increased by 1758, indicating around 125 new cells per day, while the number of supporting cells remained steady. These results suggest that new hair cells are originated by the mitotic activity of supporting cells following proliferation and differentiation.

Later, Sliwinska-Kowalska et al[20] studied cell regeneration in the basilar papilla of 1-day-old white Leghorn chicks exposed to wide-band noise at 120 dB sound pressure level for 20, 40 or 72 hours, continuously or intermittently. They observed that initially there was damage in the tectorial membrane and short hair cells, similar to the outer hair cells in humans. Considering the proliferating cell nuclear antigen, cell proliferation activity was detected in the supporting cells and in the ganglion cells of the cochlear nerve. New cells appeared in the epithelium 5 days after noise-induced trauma. Further, Wooley and colleagues[21] studied hair cell regeneration and recovery of auditory thresholds in Bengalese finches after 1 week of daily dose of amikacin. While a normal morphological structure developed in 13 days, functional recovery continued up to 12 weeks after treatment. Results from a previous study[22] showed in 15-day-old white Leghorn chicks (Gallus domesticus) exposed to a 2 kHz pure tones at 120 dB sound pressure level for 48 hours, distortion-product otoacoustic emissions and brainstem auditory evoked potentials started to return to physiologically normal levels from 5 days after the noise-induced trauma, and reached full recovery after 30 days.

With regards to regeneration, Lee and Cotanche[23] described a series of factors that seem to stimulate the synthesis of DNA and induce cell proliferation and differentiation, including insulin-like growth factor 1, platelet-derived growth factor and basic fibroblast growth factor as well as the peptides associated with retinoic acid. On the basis of their findings, these authors suggested that basic fibroblast growth factor and retinoic acid may play an important role in the regulation of the regeneration mechanisms of the basilar papilla of chicks after noise-induced trauma.

RECENT ADVANCES IN INNER EAR HAIR CELL REGENERATION

Stem cells

Some scholars[24,25,26] recently described that both embryonic and adult inner ear stem cells can differentiate into hair cells. These scholars focused on confirming this differentiation, and assessed cell viability and in situ maturation. They confirmed that once implanted, stem cells can become integrated in the inner ear even in the early stage of development.

Vectors used in cochlear genetics

There is evidence that non-viral vectors, including plasmids, have advantages over other vectors of being less toxic and causing less inflammation, although they have lower transduction rate[27,28]. Further, in a recent study, Zhang et al[29] proposed the use of nanoparticles for transporting DNA-polylysine particles into the cochlea of mice.

Nevertheless, most studies focused on use of virus subtypes, for example, adenovirus, adeno-associated virus, herpes virus, helper-dependant adenovirus and lentivirus[30]. Of these virus subtypes, adeno-associated viruses have the greatest potential, given that they do not cause ototoxicity[30,31,32]. Various subtypes of adeno-associated virus have been successfully used for transporting genes in the cochlea and were found to cause little damage to the organ of Corti[33,34]. Kilpatrick et al[34] observed that adeno-associated virus serotypes 1, 2, 5, 6 and 8 have good gene expression in hair cells and basal cells, as well as the cochlear nerve and spiral ganglion. A disadvantage, however, is that these vectors can only carry fragments up to 5 kb, restricting their use for transduction.

Kesser and Lalwani[35] reported that adenoviruses overcome the limitations of adeno-associated viruses. A study published by Duan and Mi[36] indicates that lentiviral vectors do not spread beyond the cochlea, minimizing toxicity in the neighbouring tissue. As for how to deliver the viral vectors, most studies consider that the best method is cochleostomy, or direct injection through the round window membrane, using enzymatic digestion with collagenase[37].

Regeneration of hair cells with the atonal homolog 1 gene

The atonal homolog 1 or Math gene in mice codifies the transcription factor for sensory hair cell differentiation of cochlear basal cells[38,39,40,41]. Izumikawa et al[38] reported that atonal homolog 1 improved the hearing of deaf mice, achieving good results in both cellular and functional terms. Oshima et al[41], from Dr. Stefan Heller's laboratory, showed how to differentiate stem cells to hair cells with bundle structure and function. They used mouse embryonic stem cells and induced pluripotent stem cells, which were directed toward becoming ectoderm capable of responding to otic inducing growth factors. The resulting otic progenitor cells were subjected to varying differentiation conditions, one of which promoted the organization of cells into epithelial clusters displaying hair cell-like cells with stereociliary bundles. Bundle-bearing cells in these clusters responded to mechanical stimulation with currents that were reminiscent of immature hair cell transduction currents.

Gubbels et al[42] showed that in utero transfer of atonal homolog 1 gene produces functional supernumerary hair cells in the mouse cochlea. These hair cells were capable of mechanoelectrical transduction and showed basolateral conductance with age-appropriate specializations. Their results demonstrated that manipulation of cell fate by transcription factor misexpression produces functional sensory cells in the postnatal mammalian cochlea.

Studies carried out in mice with aminoglycoside-induced vestibular toxicity have also demonstrated that vestibular function is recovered due to hair cell regeneration, which is induced by the transcription of the Math-1 gene mediated by viral vectors[27,43,44,45].

Gene therapy

For ototoxicity

Zheng et al[46] reported a study in newborn rats with the organ of Corti affected by aminoglycosides, in which adeno-associated viral vector 2-mediated expression of activity-dependent neurotrophic factor-9 could protect the cochlea from aminoglycoside-induced impairment.

For genetic deafness

Gene therapy for genetic deafness poses the greatest challenge for cochlear gene therapy. There are few publications on this topic. Some scholars[47,48] used connexin 26 mutation as a model to attempt to improve hearing. They used animals in which deafness had been induced by introducing a defective gene and then used RNA interference to suppress this gene. Zhou et al[49] reported an experimental study demonstrating that a lack of interleukin-10 in mice generates a strong autoimmune response that causes hearing loss, while the transport of interleukin-10 to the cochlea improves hearing.

Neurotrophic factors for neuronal preservation in the spiral ganglion

Wise et al[50] explored the protection of brain-derived neurotrophic factor and neurotrophin 3 gene therapy against spiral ganglion neuronal degeneration in animal models. They found that cell regeneration in the cochlea is possible, even when there is severe damage to the organ of Corti. Shibata et al[32] found similar results in guinea pigs, using the same factors mediated by adeno-associated viruses. Wu et al[51] investigated the effect of a human growth factor gene mediated by adenovirus in deaf mice and found that the group that underwent gene therapy had milder hearing impairment than a control group.

Nevertheless, some of these potential treatments may have unfortunated adverse effects. Specifically, some scholars[52,53] have stated that these treatments could initiate tumours. Accordingly, more studies on the cochlea in the mammalian models are needed to test the potential of these treatments for deafness in humans.

CONCLUSION

There are still several questions to be addressed in the clinical implications of neurosensory hearing loss:

Which are stem cells in this area and how can they be identified? Is the destiny of the stem cells predetermined? What are the stimuli for regeneration? How is cell replacement achieved? Is it possible to identify or to develop a “biological implant” that could help in the treatment of neurosensory hearing loss?

Taken together, cochlear gene therapy has been successfully used in the treatment of neurosensory hearing loss and other inner ear disorders. Greatest progress will be achieved, in the near future, in the regeneration of hair cells after use of atonal homolog 1 gene delivered by viral vectors and this may become the best clinical treatment method of certain types of hearing loss.

Footnotes

Conflicts of interest: None declared.

(Reviewed by Xiong W, Zhang N, Wang LS)

(Edited by Song LP, Li CH, Liu WJ, Zhao M)

REFERENCES

  • [1].Thorndyke MC, Chen WC, Beesley PW, et al. Molecular approach to echinoderm regeneration. Microsc Res Tech. 2001;55:474–485. doi: 10.1002/jemt.1192. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [2].Alibardi L. Morphological and cellular aspects of tail and limb regeneration in lizards. A model system with implications for tissue regeneration in mammals. Adv Anat Embryol Cell Biol. 2010;207:1–109. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [3].Roy S, Gatien S. Regeneration in axolotls: a model to aim for! Exp Gerontol. 2008;43:968–973. doi: 10.1016/j.exger.2008.09.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [4].Fukuda M, Okamura K, Fujita S, et al. The different stem cell populations in mouse epidermis and lingual epithelium. Pathol Res Pract. 1978;163:205–227. doi: 10.1016/S0344-0338(78)80015-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [5].Nossal GJ, Makela O. Autoradiographic studies on the immune response. I. The kinetics of plasma cell proliferation. J Exp Med. 1962;115:209–230. doi: 10.1084/jem.115.1.209. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [6].Pattillo RA, Gey GO, Delfs E, et al. In vitro identification of the trophoblastic stem cell of the human villous placenta. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1968;100:582–588. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9378(15)33497-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [7].Douglas BS. Conservative management of guillotine amputations of the finger in children. Aust Paediatr J. 1972;8:86–89. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1754.1972.tb01793.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [8].Moffat DA, Ramsden RT. Profound bilateral sensorineural hearing loss during gentamicin therapy. J Laryngol Otol. 1977;91:511–516. doi: 10.1017/s0022215100083985. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [9].Fee WE. Aminoglycoside ototoxicity in the human. Laryngoscope. 1980;90:1–19. doi: 10.1288/00005537-198010001-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [10].Cotanche DA. Regeneration of hair stereociliary bundles in the chick cochlea following severe acoustic trauma. Hear Res. 1987;30:181–195. doi: 10.1016/0378-5955(87)90135-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [11].Cruz RM, Lambert PR, Rubel EW. Light microscopic evidence of hair cell regeneration after gentamicin toxicity in the chick cochlea. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1987;113:1058–1062. doi: 10.1001/archotol.1987.01860100036017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [12].Jørgensen JM, Mathiesen C. The avian inner ear: continuous production of hair cells in vestibular sensory organs, but not in the auditory papilla. Naturwissenschaften. 1988;75:319–320. doi: 10.1007/BF00367330. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [13].Roberson DF, Weisleder P, Bohrer PS, et al. Ongoing production of sensory cells in the vestibular epithelium of the chick. Hear Res. 1992;57:166–174. doi: 10.1016/0378-5955(92)90149-h. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [14].Sánchez-Fernández JM, Marco J. Ultrastructural study of the human utricular macula and vestibular nerve in meniére's disease. Acta Otolaryngol. 1975;79:180–188. doi: 10.3109/00016487509124673. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [15].Sánchez Fernández JM, Rivera JM, Macias JA. Early aspects of human cochlea development and tectorial membrane histogenesis. Acta Otolaryngol. 1983;95:460–469. doi: 10.3109/00016488309139430. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [16].Sánchez-Fernández JM, Rivera-Pomar JM. Ciliogenesis in human vestibular epithelia. A scanning electron microscopic study. Acta Otolaryngol. 1985;99:405–410. doi: 10.3109/00016488509108931. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [17].Sánchez Del Rey A, Sánchez Fernández JM, Martínez Ibarguen A, Santaolalla Montoya F. Morphologic and morphometric study of human spiral ganglion development. Acta Otolaryngol. 1995;115:211–217. doi: 10.3109/00016489509139294. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [18].Sánchez-Fernández JM, Sánchez-del Rey A, Santaolalla-Montoya F, et al. A contribution to the structural pattern differences between the apical and basal spiral ganglions in mammals. Acta Otolaryngol. 1997;117:250–253. doi: 10.3109/00016489709117781. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [19].López I, Honrubia V, Lee SC, et al. Hair cell recovery in the chinchilla crista ampullaris after gentamicin treatment: A quantitative approach. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1998;119:255–262. doi: 10.1016/S0194-5998(98)70060-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [20].Sliwinska-Kowalska M, Rzadzinska A, Jedlinska U, et al. Hair cell regeneration in the chick basilar papilla after exposure to wide-band noise: evidence for ganglion cell involvement. Hear Res. 2000;148:197–212. doi: 10.1016/s0378-5955(00)00154-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [21].Woolley SM, Wissman AM, Rubel EW. Hair cell regeneration and recovery of auditory thresholds following aminoglycoside ototoxicity in Bengalese finches. Hear Res. 2001;153:181–195. doi: 10.1016/s0378-5955(00)00217-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [22].Sánchez Fernández JM, Martínez Ibargüen A, Avalos Cuica N, et al. Auditory function recovery following acoustic overstimulation. Acta Otolaryngol. 2004;124:427–430. doi: 10.1080/00016480410016289. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [23].Lee KH, Cotanche DA. Potential role of bFGF and retinoic acid in the regeneration of chicken cochlear hair cells. Hear Res. 1996;94:1–13. doi: 10.1016/0378-5955(95)00220-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [24].Smeti I, Savary E, Capelle V, et al. Expression of candidate markers for stem/progenitor cells in the inner ears of developing and adult GFAP and nestin promoter-GFP transgenic mice. Gene Expr Patterns. 2011;11:22–32. doi: 10.1016/j.gep.2010.08.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [25].Yang YM, Jiang HQ. Study on the induced differentiation of bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells into inner ear hair cell-like cells in vitro. Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2010;45:919–923. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [26].Fu Y, Wang SQ, Wang JT, et al. Experimental study on embryonic neural stem cells transplantation into natural rat cochlea via round window. Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2008;43:944–949. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [27].Husseman J, Raphael Y. Gene therapy in the inner ear using adenovirus vectors. Adv Otorhinolaryngol. 2009;66:37–51. doi: 10.1159/000218206. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [28].Staecker H, Li D, O’Malley B, et al. Gene expression in the mammalian cochlea: a study of multiple vector systems. Acta Otolaryngol. 2001;121:157–163. doi: 10.1080/000164801300043307. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [29].Zhang W, Zhang Y, Lobler M, et al. Nuclear entry of hyperbranched polylysine nanoparticles into cochlear cells. Int J Nanomed. 2011;6:535–546. doi: 10.2147/IJN.S16973. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [30].Husseman J, Raphael Y. Gene therapy in the inner ear using adenovirus vectors. Adv Otorhinolaryngol. 2009;66:37–51. doi: 10.1159/000218206. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [31].Ballana E, Wang J, Venail F, et al. Efficient and specific transduction of cochlear supporting cells by adeno-associated virus serotype 5. Neurosci Lett. 2008;442:134–139. doi: 10.1016/j.neulet.2008.06.060. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [32].Shibata SB, Di Pasquale G, Cortez SR, et al. Gene transfer using bovine adeno-associated virus in the guinea pig cochlea. Gene Ther. 2009;16:990–997. doi: 10.1038/gt.2009.57. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [33].Konishi M, Kawamoto K, Izumikawa M, et al. Gene transfer into guinea pig cochlea using adeno-associated virus vectors. J Gene Med. 2008;10:610–618. doi: 10.1002/jgm.1189. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [34].Kilpatrick LA, Li Q, Yang J, et al. Adeno-associated virus-mediated gene delivery into the scala media of the normal and deafened adult mouse ear. Gene Ther. 2011;18:569–578. doi: 10.1038/gt.2010.175. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [35].Kesser BW, Lalwani AK. Gene therapy and stem cell transplantation: strategies for hearing restoration. Adv Otorhinolaryngol. 2009;66:64–86. doi: 10.1159/000218208. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [36].Duan M, Mi Q. Local delivery of reporter gene to the cochlea does not spread to brain tissue in an animal model. Acta Otolaryngol. 2010;130:25–30. doi: 10.3109/00016480902963053. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [37].Wang H, Bland RJ, Mouravlev A, et al. Efficient cochlear gene transfection in guinea pigs with adeno-associated viral vectors by partial digestion of round window membrane. Gene Ther. 2011;17:1692–1702. doi: 10.1038/gt.2011.91. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [38].Izumikawa M, Minoda R, Kawamoto K, et al. Auditory hair cell replacement and hearing improvement by Atoh1 gene therapy in deaf mammals. Nat Med. 2005;11:271–276. doi: 10.1038/nm1193. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [39].Cotanche DA, Kaiser CL. Hair cell fate decisions in cochlear development and regeneration. Hear Res. 2010;266:18–25. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2010.04.012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [40].Zhang JL, Gao WQ. Overexpression of Math1 induces robust production of extra hair cells in postnatal rat inner ears. Nat Neurosci. 2000;3:580–586. doi: 10.1038/75753. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [41].Oshima K, Shin K, Diensthuber M, et al. Mechanosensitive hair cell-like cells from embryonic and induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell. 2010;141:704–716. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2010.03.035. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [42].Gubbels SP, Woessner DW, Mitchell JC, et al. Functional auditory hair cells produced in the mammalian cochlea by in utero gene transfer. Nature. 2008;25(455):537–541. doi: 10.1038/nature07265. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [43].Baker K, Brough DE, Staecker H. Repair of the vestibular system via adenovector delivery of Atoh1: a potential treatment for balance disorders. Adv Otorhinolaryngol. 2009;66:52–63. doi: 10.1159/000218207. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [44].Staecker H, Praetorius M, Baker K, et al. Vestibular hair cell regeneration and restoration of balance function induced by math1 gene transfer. Otol Neurotol. 2007;28:223–231. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e31802b3225. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [45].Huang Y, Chi F, Han Z, et al. New ectopic vestibular hair cell-like cells induced by Math1 gene transfer in postnatal rats. Brain Res. 2009;1276:31–38. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2009.04.036. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [46].Zheng G, Zhu K, Wei J, et al. Adeno-associated viral vector-mediated expression of NT4-ADNF-9 fusion gene protects against aminoglycoside induced auditory hair cell loss in vitro. Acta Otolaryngol. 2011;131:136–141. doi: 10.3109/00016489.2010.518974. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [47].Maeda Y, Sheffield AM, Smith RJ. Therapeutic regulation of gene expression in the inner ear using RNA interference. Adv Otorhinolaryngol. 2009;66:13–36. doi: 10.1159/000218205. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [48].Kesser B, Hashisaki G, Fletcher K, et al. An in vitro model system to study gene therapy in the human ear. Gene Ther. 2007;14:1121–1131. doi: 10.1038/sj.gt.3302980. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [49].Zhou B, Kermany M, Cai Q, et al. Experimental autoimmune hearing loss is exacerbated in IL-10-deficient mice and reversed by IL-10 gene transfer. Gene Ther. 2012;19:228–235. doi: 10.1038/gt.2011.88. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [50].Wise AK, Tu T, Atkinson PJ, et al. The effect of deafness duration on neurotrophin gene therapy for spiral ganglion neuron protection. Hear Res. 2010;278:69–76. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2011.04.010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [51].Wu J, Liu B, Fan J, et al. Study of protective effect on rat cochlear spiral ganglion after blast exposure by adenovirus-mediated human b-nerve growth factor gene. Am J Otolaryngol Head Neck Med Surg. 2011;32:8–12. doi: 10.1016/j.amjoto.2009.08.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [52].Rivolta MN. Stem cells and cell lines from the human auditory organ: applications, hurdles and bottlenecks in the development of regenerative therapies for deafness. Drug Discov Today. 2010;15:283–286. doi: 10.1016/j.drudis.2010.02.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [53].Jongkamonwiwat N, Zine A, Rivolta MN. Stem cell based therapy in the inner ear: appropriate donor cell types and routes for transplantation. Curr Drug Targets. 2010;11:888–897. doi: 10.2174/138945010791320836. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Neural Regeneration Research are provided here courtesy of Wolters Kluwer -- Medknow Publications

RESOURCES