New supporting data to guide the use of evident toxicity in acute oral toxicity studies (OECD TG 420).

Currently there are three test guidelines (TG) for acute oral toxicity studies of substances or mixtures from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). TG 423 and TG 425 use lethality as an endpoint, while TG 420 replaces death with 'evident toxicity', defined as clear signs that exposure to a higher dose would result in death. However, the perceived subjectivity of 'evident toxicity' may be preventing wider use of TG 420. To address this, the UK National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research (NC3Rs) and the European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA) collaborated to provide recommendations on the recognition of 'evident toxicity'. Historical data from acute oral toxicity studies were analysed for clinical signs at the lower dose that could have predicted death at the higher dose. Several signs including ataxia, laboured respiration, and eyes partially closed, alone or in combination, are highly predictive. Others such as lethargy, decreased respiration, and loose faeces have lower but still appreciable positive predictive value (PPV). The data has been used to develop recommendations to promote use of TG 420 and thus reduce the suffering and numbers of animals used in acute oral toxicity studies.

An evaluation of the fixed concentration procedure for assessment of acute inhalation toxicity.

Acute inhalation studies are conducted in animals as part of chemical hazard identification and for classification and labelling. Current methods employ death as an endpoint (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) test guideline (TG) 403 and TG436) while the recently approved fixed concentration procedure (FCP) (OECD TG433) uses fewer animals and replaces lethality as an endpoint with evident toxicity. Evident toxicity is the presence of clinical signs that predict that exposure to the next highest concentration will cause severe toxicity or death in most animals. Approval of TG433 was the result of an international initiative, led by the National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement & Reduction of Animals in Research (NC3Rs), which collected data from six laboratories on clinical signs recorded for inhalation studies on 172 substances. This paper summarises previously published data and describes the additional analyses of the dataset that were essential for approval of the TG.

Steps towards the international regulatory acceptance of non-animal methodology in safety assessment.

The current animal-based paradigm for safety assessment must change. In September 2016, the UK National Centre for Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research (NC3Rs) brought together scientists from regulatory authorities, academia and industry to review progress in bringing new methodology into regulatory use, and to identify ways to expedite progress. Progress has been slow. Science is advancing to make this possible but changes are necessary. The new paradigm should allow new methodology to be adopted once it is developed rather than being based on a fixed set of studies. Regulatory authorities can help by developing Performance-Based Standards. The most pressing need is in repeat dose toxicology, although setting standards will be more complex than in areas such as sensitization. Performance standards should be aimed directly at human safety, not at reproducing the results of animal studies. Regulatory authorities can also aid progress towards the acceptance of non-animal based methodology by promoting "safe-haven" trials where traditional and new methodology data can be submitted in parallel to build up experience in the new methods. Industry can play its part in the acceptance of new methodology, by contributing to the setting of performance standards and by actively contributing to "safe-haven" trials.

Drivers and barriers in the consistency approach for vaccine batch release testing: Report of an international workshop.

Safety and potency assessment for batch release testing of established vaccines still relies partly on animal tests. An important avenue to move to batch release without animal testing is the consistency approach. This approach is based on thorough characterization of the vaccine, and the principle that the quality of subsequent batches is the consequence of the application of consistent production of batches monitored by a GMP quality system. Efforts to implement the consistency approach are supported by several drivers from industry, government, and research, but there are also several barriers that must be overcome. A workshop entitled "Consistency Approach, Drivers and Barriers" was organized, which aimed to discuss and identify drivers and barriers for the implementation of the 3Rs in the consistency approach from three different perspectives/domains (industry, regulatory and science frameworks). The workshop contributed to a better understanding of these drivers and barriers and resulted in recommendations to improve the overall regulatory processes for the consistency approach. With this report, we summarise the outcome of this workshop and intend to offer a constructive contribution to the international discussion on regulatory acceptance of the consistency approach.

Recommendations from a global cross-company data sharing initiative on the incorporation of recovery phase animals in safety assessment studies to support first-in-human clinical trials.

An international expert group which includes 30 organisations (pharmaceutical companies, contract research organisations, academic institutions and regulatory bodies) has shared data on the use of recovery animals in the assessment of pharmaceutical safety for early development. These data have been used as an evidence-base to make recommendations on the inclusion of recovery animals in toxicology studies to achieve scientific objectives, while reducing animal use. Recovery animals are used in pharmaceutical development to provide information on the potential for a toxic effect to translate into long-term human risk. They are included on toxicology studies to assess whether effects observed during dosing persist or reverse once treatment ends. The group devised a questionnaire to collect information on the use of recovery animals in general regulatory toxicology studies to support first-in-human studies. Questions focused on study design, the rationale behind inclusion or exclusion and the impact this had on internal and regulatory decisions. Data on 137 compounds (including 53 biologicals and 78 small molecules) from 259 studies showed wide variation in where, when and why recovery animals were included. An analysis of individual study and programme design shows that there are opportunities to reduce the use of recovery animals without impacting drug development.

Advancing the 3Rs in regulatory toxicology - Carcinogenicity testing: Scope for harmonisation and advancing the 3Rs in regulated sectors of the European Union.

Different government agencies operating in the European Union regulate different types of chemical products but all require testing for carcinogenicity to support applications for product marketing and commercialisation. A conference was held in Brussels in 2013 where representatives of the pharmaceutical, animal health, chemical and plant protection industries, together with representatives of regulatory agencies, universities and other stakeholders, met under the auspices of The European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA) to discuss the varying requirements for carcinogenicity testing, and how these studies might be refined to improve hazard evaluation and risk assessment while implementing principles of the 3Rs (replacement, refinement and reduction in animal studies). While there are some similarities, the regulatory approaches in pharmaceutical, animal health, chemical and plant protection sectors have varying degrees of flexibility in requirements for carcinogenicity testing, to an extent reflecting concerns over the magnitude and duration of human exposure, either directly as in therapeutic exposure to pharmaceuticals, or indirectly through the ingestion of residues of veterinary drugs or plant protection chemicals. The article discusses these differences and other considerations for modified carcinogenicity testing paradigms on the basis of scientific and 3Rs approaches.

Preclinical development of monoclonal antibodies: considerations for the use of non-human primates.

The development of mAbs remains high on the therapeutic agenda for the majority of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. Often, the only relevant species for preclinical safety assessment of mAbs are non-human primates (NHPs), and this raises important scientific, ethical and economic issues. To investigate evidence-based opportunities to minimize the use of NHPs, an expert working group with representatives from leading pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, contract research organizations and institutes from Europe and the USA, has shared and analyzed data on mAbs for a range of therapeutic areas. This information has been applied to hypothetical examples to recommend scientifically appropriate development pathways and study designs for a variety of potential mAbs. The addendum of ICHS6 provides a timely opportunity for the scientific and regulatory community to embrace strategies which minimize primate use and increase efficiency of mAb development.

Consensus document on European brain research.

Brain disease psychiatric and neurologic disease combined represents a considerable social and economic burden in Europe. Data collected by the World Health Organization (WHO) suggest that brain diseases are responsible for 35% of Europe's total disease burden. An analysis of all health economic studies of brain diseases in Europe, published by the European Brain Council (EBC) in June 2005, estimated the total cost of brain disease in Europe in 2004 to be Euro 386 billion. That burden is set to grow, mainly due to the fact that the European population is ageing. Investment in brain sciences does not match that burden now, let alone in the future. Brain research received only 8% of the life science budget in the European Commission's Fifth Framework Programme, which represents less than 0.01% of the annual cost of brain disorders for that period. Over the last decade, Europe has been losing ground to the USA and Japan in terms of both basic and clinical research. Many of Europe's young researchers are taking up posts in the USA and staying there. Big pharmaceutical companies are fleeing Europe for the USA, taking their drug development programmes with them. Research in the brain sciences now holds the promise of therapies that halt and even reverse neurodegeneration, of better diagnostic tools, neural prostheses for the paralysed and drugs for depression and anxiety that are tailored to the individual, thereby eliminating or reducing side effects. Our growing understanding of the normal brain could lead to better prevention of brain disease and to more effective teaching methods. The need for innovative treatments has never been greater, and Europe boasts clusters of excellent researchers in biotechnology who could collaborate with brain scientists and the pharmaceutical industry to realise this promise. But if Europe is to seize these opportunities and meet the challenge of brain disease, it needs to go forward on the basis of greater collaboration between countries, greater collaboration between industry, academia and patient organisations, and increased investment in the brain sciences. The EBC was formed in 2002 to bring together scientists, clinicians, the pharmaceutical industry, charities and patient organisations from all over Europe to campaign for these goals. It takes a novel, bottom-up approach to research policy, and in developing this consensus document, it aims to promote a greater and more focused effort in this area, to improve public understanding of the brain sciences and above all, to support brain research as a priority under the European Commission's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7, 2007-2013). The research programme outlined here was first conceived by the EBC board. An outline was sent to all member organisations and a number of individual experts for comments. Following that, a table of contents was developed. The 45 research themes were written by groups of experts from across Europe who represent a wide range of disciplines. Each one contains a proposal for future research on a specific brain-related theme which the EBC believes could form the basis of one or more integrated projects or strategic targeted research projects (STREP) funded under FP7. The EBC has deliberately focused on the major diseases and then described the basic research needed to understand and treat or perhaps even cure those diseases. The programme is therefore constructed "from man to molecule" and not the other way round, with equal importance attached to basic and clinical research. The EBC suggests that each of the proposed integrated projects or STREP should be awarded a budget in the order of Euro 10 to 15 million. In addition, brain research should be treated as an important element of many other parts of FP7, such as the European Research Council and research programmes on information technology and the causes of violence. Any research programme that concerns human behaviour should, by definition, take account of brain research. The EBC envisages that the priority for brain research it proposes at the European level will translate into higher priority for brain research at the national level, and this document may also serve as a starting point for the development of national consensus programmes. It seems likely that consensus conferences on brain research in Europe may further develop the themes and ideas discussed here. An EBC task force may also be established to further the consensus process. In general, increasing funding in the brain sciences would bring enormous economic returns by lightening the burden on healthcare systems and increasing the productivity of affected individuals-and might easily pay for itself. The human and social returns of such an investment are inestimable. And the time to act is now.