The need for guidance in antidepressant drug development: Revisiting the role of the forced swim test and tail suspension test.

Depressive disorders are one of the most common mental disorders globally and progress in treating these disorders has been hampered, in part, by a lack of suitable nonclinical efficacy tests. Two common tests used in nonclinical efficacy studies of antidepressants-the forced swim test (FST) and tail suspension test (TST)-have come under criticism in recent years for their inconsistency and lack of validity, yet they continue to be used in the pharmaceutical industry. In this review, we provide a rationale for why international pharmaceutical regulatory and guidance agencies should begin issuing direction on methods for non-clinical efficacy testing that traditionally use the FST and TST, particularly considering that some regulators, such as those in the U.S. and E.U., allow the authorization of clinical trials to proceed without requiring tests in animals. The area of antidepressant drug discovery represents an important opportunity for reducing the attrition of psychiatric drugs, harmonizing regulatory requirements, and reducing animal use. Specific recommendations for the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) have been provided.

Author Guide for Addressing Animal Methods Bias in Publishing.

There is growing recognition that animal methods bias, a preference for animal-based methods where they are not necessary or where nonanimal-based methods may already be suitable, can impact the likelihood or timeliness of a manuscript being accepted for publication. Following April 2022 workshop about animal methods bias in scientific publishing, a coalition of scientists and advocates formed a Coalition to Illuminate and Address Animal Methods Bias (COLAAB). The COLAAB has developed this guide to be used by authors who use nonanimal methods to avoid and respond to animal methods bias from manuscript reviewers. It contains information that researchers may use during 1) study design, including how to find and select appropriate nonanimal methods and preregister a research plan, 2) manuscript preparation and submission, including tips for discussing methods and choosing journals and reviewers that may be more receptive to nonanimal methods, and 3) the peer review process, providing suggested language and literature to aid authors in responding to biased reviews. The author's guide for addressing animal methods bias in publishing is a living resource also available online at animalmethodsbias.org, which aims to help ensure fair dissemination of research that uses nonanimal methods and prevent unnecessary experiments on animals.

Proceedings of a workshop to address animal methods bias in scientific publishing.

Animal methods bias in scientific publishing is a newly defined type of publishing bias describing a preference for animal-based methods where they may not be necessary or where nonanimal-based methods may already be suitable, which impacts the likelihood or timeliness of a manuscript being accepted for publication. This article covers the output from a workshop between stakeholders in publishing, academia, industry, government, and non-governmental organizations. The intent of the workshop was to exchange perspectives on the prevalence, causes, and impact of animal methods bias in scientific publishing, as well as to explore mitigation strategies. Output from the workshop includes summaries of presentations, breakout group discussions, participant polling results, and a synthesis of recommendations for mitigation. Overall, participants felt that animal methods bias has a meaningful impact on scientific publishing, though more evidence is needed to demonstrate its prevalence. Significant consequences of this bias that were identified include the unnecessary use of animals in scientific procedures, the continued reliance on animals in research ­ even where suitable nonanimal methods exist, poor rates of clinical translation, delays in publication, and negative impacts on career trajectories in science. Workshop participants offered recommendations for journals, publishers, funders, governments, and other policy makers, as well as the scientific community at large, to reduce the prevalence and impacts of animal methods bias. The workshop resulted in the creation of working groups committed to addressing animal methods bias, and activities are ongoing.

The forced swim test has poor accuracy for identifying novel antidepressants.

Despite the prevalence of treatment-resistant depression, many pharmaceutical companies have abandoned the development of new antidepressants. Experts have attributed this, in part, to the low quality of preclinical tests available in this field, often citing over-reliance on animal behavioral screens, such as the forced swim test (FST). This retrospective review assessed whether compounds tested in the FST by major pharmaceutical companies were shown to have antidepressant effects in humans. Of 109 compounds identified, only 28% had been explored for antidepressant effects in humans. Of these, there were only three for which the FST appeared to positively predict antidepressant efficacy, but none are currently approved to treat any type of depression. With such poor accuracy for identifying novel antidepressants, the FST might not be a useful screening tool for this purpose.

Synergistic Phytochemicals Fail to Protect Against Ovariectomy Induced Bone Loss in Rats.

Menopause induces a loss of bone as a result of estrogen deficiency. Despite pharmaceutical options for the treatment of osteopenia and osteoporosis, many aging women use dietary supplements with estrogenic activity to prevent bone loss and other menopausal-related symptoms. Such supplements are yet to be tested for efficacy against a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved medication for menopausal bone loss such as zoledronic acid (ZA). The postmenopausal rat model was used to investigate the efficacy of various synergistic phytochemical blends mixed into the diet for 16 weeks. Retired-breeder, Fischer 344 rats were randomly assigned to sham or ovariectomy surgery and 4 treatment groups: ZA; genistein supplementation; and a low dose and high dose blend of genistein, resveratrol, and quercetin. Ovariectomy resulted in a loss of both trabecular and cortical bone which was prevented with ZA. The phytochemical blends tested were unable to reverse these losses. Despite the lack of effectiveness in preventing bone loss, a significant dose-response trend was observed in the phytochemical-rich diets in bone adipocyte number compared to ovariectomized control rats. Data from this study indicate that estrogenic phytochemicals are not as efficacious as ZA in preventing menopausal-related bone loss but may have beneficial effects on bone marrow adiposity in rats.