RELSA-A multidimensional procedure for the comparative assessment of well-being and the quantitative determination of severity in experimental procedures.

Good science in translational research requires good animal welfare according to the principles of 3Rs. In many countries, determining animal welfare is a mandatory legal requirement, implying a categorization of animal suffering, traditionally dominated by subjective scorings. However, how such methods can be objectified and refined to compare impairments between animals, subgroups, and animal models remained unclear. Therefore, we developed the RELative Severity Assessment (RELSA) procedure to establish an evidence-based method based on quantitative outcome measures such as body weight, burrowing behavior, heart rate, heart rate variability, temperature, and activity to obtain a relative metric for severity comparisons. The RELSA procedure provided the necessary framework to get severity gradings in TM-implanted mice, yielding four distinct RELSA thresholds L1<0.27, L2<0.59, L3<0.79, and L4<3.45. We show further that severity patterns in the contributing variables are time and model-specific and use this information to obtain contextualized between animal-model and subgroup comparisons with the severity of sepsis > surgery > restraint stress > colitis. The bootstrapped 95% confidence intervals reliably show that RELSA estimates are conditionally invariant against missing information but precise in ranking the quantitative severity information to the moderate context of the transmitter-implantation model. In conclusion, we propose the RELSA as a validated tool for an objective, computational approach to comparative and quantitative severity assessment and grading. The RELSA procedure will fundamentally improve animal welfare, data quality, and reproducibility. It is also the first step toward translational risk assessment in biomedical research.

The Roles of Long-Term Hyperhomocysteinemia and Micronutrient Supplementation in the AppNL-G-F Model of Alzheimer's Disease.

A causal contribution of hyperhomocysteinemia to cognitive decline and Alzheimer's disease (AD), as well as potential prevention or mitigation of the pathology by dietary intervention, have frequently been subjects of controversy. In the present in vivo study, we attempted to further elucidate the impact of elevated homocysteine (HCys) and homocysteic acid (HCA) levels, induced by dietary B-vitamin deficiency, and micronutrient supplementation on AD-like pathology, which was simulated using the amyloid-based AppNL-G-F knock-in mouse model. For this purpose, cognitive assessment was complemented by analyses of ex vivo parameters in whole blood, serum, CSF, and brain tissues from the mice. Furthermore, neurotoxicity of HCys and HCA was assessed in a separate in vitro assay. In confirmation of our previous study, older AppNL-G-F mice also exhibited subtle phenotypic impairment and extensive cerebral amyloidosis, whereas dietary manipulations did not result in significant effects. As revealed by proximity extension assay-based proteome analysis, the AppNL-G-F genotype led to an upregulation of AD-characteristic neuronal markers. Hyperhomocysteinemia, in contrast, indicated mainly vascular effects. Overall, since there was an absence of a distinct phenotype despite both a significant amyloid-ß burden and serum HCys elevation, the results in this study did not corroborate the pathological role of amyloid-ß according to the "amyloid hypothesis," nor of hyperhomocysteinemia on cognitive performance. Nevertheless, this study aided in further characterizing the AppNL-G-F model and in elucidating the role of HCys in diverse biological processes. The idea of AD prevention with the investigated micronutrients, however, was not supported, at least in this mouse model of the disease.