An IQ Consortium Perspective on The Scientific Committee on Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks Final Opinion on the Need for Nonhuman Primates in Biomedical Research, Production and Testing of Products and Devices (Update 2017).

The recent Scientific Committee on Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks Final Opinion on "The need for nonhuman primates in biomedical research, production and testing of products and devices" (2017 SCHEER) highlights approaches that could significantly contribute to the replacement, reduction, and refinement of nonhuman primate (NHP) studies. Initiatives that have the potential to affect NHP welfare and/or their use are expected to be appropriate, fair, and objective and publicly disseminated information focused on NHPs in biomedical research, which includes toxicologic and pathologic research and testing, should be objectively evaluated by stakeholder scientists, researchers, and veterinarians. Thus, IQ Consortium member companies convened to develop an informed and objective response, focusing on identifying areas of agreement, potential gaps, or missing information in 2017 SCHEER. Overall, the authors agree that many positions in the 2017 SCHEER Opinion generally align with industry views on the use of NHPs in research and testing, including the ongoing need of NHPs in many areas of research. From the perspective of the IQ Consortium, there are several topics in the 2017 SCHEER that merit additional comment, attention, or research, as well as consideration in future opinions.

Regulatory Forum Opinion Piece*: Use and Utility of Animal Models of Disease for Nonclinical Safety Assessment: A Pharmaceutical Industry Survey.

An Innovation and Quality (IQ) Consortium focus group conducted a cross-company survey to evaluate current practices and perceptions around the use of animal models of disease (AMDs) in nonclinical safety assessment of molecules in clinical development. The IQ Consortium group is an organization of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies with the mission of advancing science and technology. The survey queried the utilization of AMDs during drug discovery in which drug candidates are evaluated in efficacy models and limited short-duration non-Good Laboratory Practices (GLP) toxicology testing and during drug development in which drug candidates are evaluated in GLP toxicology studies. The survey determined that the majority of companies used AMDs during drug discovery primarily as a means for proactively assessing potential nonclinical safety issues prior to the conduct of toxicology studies, followed closely by the use of AMDs to better understand toxicities associated with exaggerated pharmacology in traditional toxicology models or to derisk issues when the target is only expressed in the disease state. In contrast, the survey results indicated that the use of AMDs in development is infrequent, being used primarily to investigate nonclinical safety issues associated with targets expressed only in disease states and/or in response to requests from global regulatory authorities.