Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 25
Filter
1.
F1000Res ; 13: 192, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38708289

ABSTRACT

On the 26 th January 2023, a free to attend, 'improving in vivo snake venom research: a community discussion' meeting was held virtually. This webinar brought together researchers from around the world to discuss current neutralisation of venom lethality mouse assays that are used globally to assess the efficacy of therapies for snakebite envenoming. The assay's strengths and weaknesses were highlighted, and we discussed what improvements could be made to refine and reduce animal testing, whilst supporting preclinical antivenom and drug discovery for snakebite envenoming. This report summarises the issues highlighted, the discussions held, with additional commentary on key perspectives provided by the authors.


Subject(s)
Antivenins , Snake Bites , Snake Venoms , Antivenins/therapeutic use , Animals , Snake Venoms/antagonists & inhibitors , Mice , Snake Bites/drug therapy , Humans
2.
Biologicals ; 84: 101721, 2023 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37922625

ABSTRACT

The UK National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement, and Reduction of Animals in Research (NC3Rs) is reviewing World Health Organization (WHO) manuals, guidelines and recommendations for vaccines and biotherapeutics to identify the extent to which animal-based testing methods are described. The aim is to recommend where updates to these documents can lead to an increased and more harmonised adoption of 3Rs principles (i.e. Replacement, Reduction and Refinement of animal tests) in the quality control and batch release testing requirements for vaccines and biotherapeutics. Improved adoption of 3Rs principles and non-animal testing strategies will help to reduce the delays and costs associated with product release testing. Developing recommendations that are widely applicable by both the manufacturers and national regulatory authorities for vaccines and biological therapeutics globally requires a detailed understanding of how different organisations view the opportunities and barriers to better integration of the 3Rs. To facilitate this, we developed and distributed a survey aimed at individuals who work for national regulatory authorities (NRAs) and/or national control laboratories (NCLs). In this paper, we present the key findings from this survey and how these will help inform the recommendations for wider integration of 3Rs approaches by WHO in their guidance documents applicable to the quality control and batch release testing of vaccines and biotherapeutics.


Subject(s)
Laboratories , Vaccines , Humans , Animals , Biological Factors , Quality Control , Surveys and Questionnaires
3.
Br J Pharmacol ; 180(3): 255-263, 2023 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36529953

ABSTRACT

Scientists who plan to publish in the British Journal of Pharmacology (BJP) should read this article before undertaking studies utilising anaesthetics in mammalian animals. This editorial identifies certain gaps in the reporting of details on the use of anaesthetics in animal research studies published in the BJP. The editorial also provides guidance, based upon current best practices, for performing in vivo experiments that require anaesthesia. In addition, mechanisms of action and physiological impact of specific anaesthetic agents are discussed. Our goal is to identify best practices and to provide guidance on the information required for manuscripts submitted to the BJP that involve the use of anaesthetic agents in studies with experimental animals.


Subject(s)
Anesthesia , Anesthetics , Animal Experimentation , Animals , Anesthetics/pharmacology , Mammals
4.
Biologicals ; 81: 101660, 2023 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36376163

ABSTRACT

The UK National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement, and Reduction of Animals in Research (NC3Rs) has been tasked by the World Health Organization (WHO) to review the extent to which animal-based testing methods are described in their manuals, guidelines and recommendations for vaccines and biotherapeutics. The aim is to identify and recommend where updates to these documents can lead to an increased and more harmonised adoption of 3Rs principles (i.e. Replacement, Reduction and Refinement of animal tests) in the quality control and batch release testing requirements for vaccines and biotherapeutics. Developing recommendations that are widely applicable by both the manufacturers and national regulatory authorities for vaccines and biologicals globally requires a detailed understanding of how different organisations view the opportunities and barriers to better integration of the 3Rs. To facilitate this, we developed and distributed a survey aimed at vaccine and biotherapeutics manufacturers in July 2021. In this paper, we present the key findings from this survey and how these will help inform the recommendations for wider integration of 3Rs approaches by WHO in their guidance documents applicable to the quality control and batch testing of vaccines and biotherapeutics.


Subject(s)
Vaccines , Animals , Biological Factors , Quality Control , World Health Organization
5.
Biologicals ; 74: 24-27, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34750045

ABSTRACT

Animal testing has long been integral to the development of biologicals, including vaccines. The use of animals can provide important information on potential toxicity, insights into their mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics and dynamics, physiologic distribution, and potency. However, the use of these same methods is often adopted into the post-licensure phase of the product life cycle for the monitoring of product qualities, such as potency or safety, as part of their routine batch release. The UK National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement, and Reduction of Animals in Research (NC3Rs) and the World Health Organization (WHO) are collaborating on a project to review animal-based testing methods described in WHO manuals, guidelines and recommendations for biologicals to identify where updates can lead to a more harmonised adoption of 3Rs principles (i.e. Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement of animal tests) in batch release testing requirements. An international working group consisting of more than 30 representatives from pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, national control laboratories and regulatory bodies is performing this review. This project aims to address concerns about inconsistencies in the guidance for the scientifically justified use of animal methods required for the post-licensure quality control and batch release testing of biologicals, and the near absence of recommendations for the application of 3Rs principles within the relevant guidelines. Improved adoption of 3Rs principles and non-animal testing strategies will help to reduce the delays and costs associated with product release testing and help support faster access to products by the global communities who need them most urgently.


Subject(s)
Biological Products , Quality Control , Vaccines , Animal Testing Alternatives , Animals , Biological Products/standards , Vaccines/standards , World Health Organization
6.
Crit Care Med ; 49(2): 311-323, 2021 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33332817

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: In many jurisdictions, ethical concerns require surrogate humane endpoints to replace death in small animal models of acute lung injury. Heterogenous selection and reporting of surrogate endpoints render interpretation and generalizability of findings between studies difficult. We aimed to establish expert-guided consensus among preclinical scientists and laboratory animal veterinarians on selection and reporting of surrogate endpoints, monitoring of these models, and the use of analgesia. DESIGN: A three-round consensus process, using modified Delphi methodology, with researchers who use small animal models of acute lung injury and laboratory animal veterinarians who provide care for these animals. Statements on the selection and reporting of surrogate endpoints, monitoring, and analgesia were generated through a systematic search of MEDLINE and Embase. Participants were asked to suggest any additional potential statements for evaluation. SETTING: A web-based survey of participants representing the two stakeholder groups (researchers, laboratory animal veterinarians). Statements were rated on level of evidence and strength of support by participants. A final face-to-face meeting was then held to discuss results. SUBJECTS: None. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Forty-two statements were evaluated, and 29 were rated as important, with varying strength of evidence. The majority of evidence was based on rodent models of acute lung injury. Endpoints with strong support and evidence included temperature changes and body weight loss. Behavioral signs and respiratory distress also received support but were associated with lower levels of evidence. Participants strongly agreed that analgesia affects outcomes in these models and that none may be necessary following nonsurgical induction of acute lung injury. Finally, participants strongly supported transparent reporting of surrogate endpoints. A prototype composite score was also developed based on participant feedback. CONCLUSIONS: We provide a preliminary framework that researchers and animal welfare committees may adapt for their needs. We have identified knowledge gaps that future research should address.


Subject(s)
Acute Lung Injury/physiopathology , Animal Care Committees/organization & administration , Animal Welfare/standards , Animals, Laboratory , Consensus , Animals , Biomarkers , Humans , Models, Animal , Veterinarians/standards
7.
Clin Sci (Lond) ; 134(13): 1715-1734, 2020 07 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32648582

ABSTRACT

Sepsis is a major worldwide healthcare issue with unmet clinical need. Despite extensive animal research in this area, successful clinical translation has been largely unsuccessful. We propose one reason for this is that, sometimes, the experimental question is misdirected or unrealistic expectations are being made of the animal model. As sepsis models can lead to a rapid and substantial suffering - it is essential that we continually review experimental approaches and undertake a full harm:benefit impact assessment for each study. In some instances, this may require refinement of existing sepsis models. In other cases, it may be replacement to a different experimental system altogether, answering a mechanistic question whilst aligning with the principles of reduction, refinement and replacement (3Rs). We discuss making better use of patient data to identify potentially useful therapeutic targets which can subsequently be validated in preclinical systems. This may be achieved through greater use of construct validity models, from which mechanistic conclusions are drawn. We argue that such models could provide equally useful scientific data as face validity models, but with an improved 3Rs impact. Indeed, construct validity models may not require sepsis to be modelled, per se. We propose that approaches that could support and refine clinical translation of research findings, whilst reducing the overall welfare burden on research animals.


Subject(s)
Disease Models, Animal , Sepsis/pathology , Translational Research, Biomedical , Animals , Clinical Trials as Topic , Humans , Sepsis/physiopathology
8.
Exp Neurol ; 328: 113273, 2020 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32142803

ABSTRACT

This report was produced by an Expert Working Group (EWG) consisting of UK-based researchers, veterinarians and regulators of animal experiments with specialist knowledge of the use of animal models of spinal cord injury (SCI). It aims to facilitate the implementation of the Three Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement), with an emphasis on refinement. Specific animal welfare issues were identified and discussed, and practical measures proposed, with the aim of reducing animal use and suffering, reducing experimental variability, and increasing translatability within this critically important research field.


Subject(s)
Animal Welfare/standards , Disease Models, Animal , Spinal Cord Injuries , Animals , Rodentia
9.
Animals (Basel) ; 9(11)2019 Nov 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31739641

ABSTRACT

Training in the design of animal experiments focuses all too often on those aspects which can be approached mathematically, such as the number of animals needed to deliver a robust result, allocation of group size, and techniques such as randomization, blocking and statistical analysis. Important as they are, these are only a small part of the process of planning animal experiments. Additional key elements include refinements of housing, husbandry and procedures, health and safety, and attention at all stages to animal welfare. Advances in technology and laboratory animal science have led to improvements in care and husbandry, better provision of anesthetics and analgesics, refined methods of drug administration, greater competence in welfare assessment and application of humane endpoints. These improvements require continual dialogue between scientists, facility managers and technical staff, a practice that is a key feature of what has become known as the culture of care. This embodies a commitment to improving animal welfare, scientific quality, staff care and transparency for all stakeholders. Attention to both the physical and mental health of all those directly or indirectly involved in animal research is now an important part of the process of planning and conducting animal experiments. Efforts during the last 30 years to increase the internal and external validity of animal experiments have tended to concentrate on the production of guidelines to improve the quality of reporting animal experiments, rather than for planning them. Recently, comprehensive guidelines for planning animal studies have been published, to redress this imbalance. These will be described in this paper. Endorsement of this overarching influence of the Three R concept, by all the stakeholders, will not only reduce animal numbers and improve animal welfare, but also lead to more reliable and reproducible research which should improve translation of pre-clinical studies into tangible clinical benefit.

12.
Lab Anim ; 52(2): 135-141, 2018 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28771074

ABSTRACT

There is widespread concern about the quality, reproducibility and translatability of studies involving research animals. Although there are a number of reporting guidelines available, there is very little overarching guidance on how to plan animal experiments, despite the fact that this is the logical place to start ensuring quality. In this paper we present the PREPARE guidelines: Planning Research and Experimental Procedures on Animals: Recommendations for Excellence. PREPARE covers the three broad areas which determine the quality of the preparation for animal studies: formulation, dialogue between scientists and the animal facility, and quality control of the various components in the study. Some topics overlap and the PREPARE checklist should be adapted to suit specific needs, for example in field research. Advice on use of the checklist is available on the Norecopa website, with links to guidelines for animal research and testing, at https://norecopa.no/PREPARE .


Subject(s)
Animal Experimentation/standards , Animals, Laboratory , Guidelines as Topic , Research Design , Animals
13.
Altern Lab Anim ; 45(3): 159-160, 2017 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28816054

ABSTRACT

Poorly predictive animal models of disease cause avoidable suffering and hamper the discovery of new treatments for patients. A focus on mechanistic modelling has the potential to reduce animal suffering as well as improving translation from the bench to the bedside.


Subject(s)
Animal Experimentation , Animals , Disease Models, Animal , Drug Discovery , Humans , Translational Research, Biomedical
14.
PLoS One ; 11(7): e0158791, 2016.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27428071

ABSTRACT

Improving laboratory animal science and welfare requires both new scientific research and insights from research in the humanities and social sciences. Whilst scientific research provides evidence to replace, reduce and refine procedures involving laboratory animals (the '3Rs'), work in the humanities and social sciences can help understand the social, economic and cultural processes that enhance or impede humane ways of knowing and working with laboratory animals. However, communication across these disciplinary perspectives is currently limited, and they design research programmes, generate results, engage users, and seek to influence policy in different ways. To facilitate dialogue and future research at this interface, we convened an interdisciplinary group of 45 life scientists, social scientists, humanities scholars, non-governmental organisations and policy-makers to generate a collaborative research agenda. This drew on methods employed by other agenda-setting exercises in science policy, using a collaborative and deliberative approach for the identification of research priorities. Participants were recruited from across the community, invited to submit research questions and vote on their priorities. They then met at an interactive workshop in the UK, discussed all 136 questions submitted, and collectively defined the 30 most important issues for the group. The output is a collaborative future agenda for research in the humanities and social sciences on laboratory animal science and welfare. The questions indicate a demand for new research in the humanities and social sciences to inform emerging discussions and priorities on the governance and practice of laboratory animal research, including on issues around: international harmonisation, openness and public engagement, 'cultures of care', harm-benefit analysis and the future of the 3Rs. The process outlined below underlines the value of interdisciplinary exchange for improving communication across different research cultures and identifies ways of enhancing the effectiveness of future research at the interface between the humanities, social sciences, science and science policy.


Subject(s)
Animal Welfare , Laboratory Animal Science/methods , Animal Welfare/ethics , Animals , Cooperative Behavior , Humanities , Humans , Interdisciplinary Studies , Laboratory Animal Science/ethics , Social Sciences
15.
Inflammopharmacology ; 23(4): 131-50, 2015 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26168847

ABSTRACT

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a painful, chronic disorder and there is currently an unmet need for effective therapies that will benefit a wide range of patients. The research and development process for therapies and treatments currently involves in vivo studies, which have the potential to cause discomfort, pain or distress. This Working Group report focuses on identifying causes of suffering within commonly used mouse and rat 'models' of RA, describing practical refinements to help reduce suffering and improve welfare without compromising the scientific objectives. The report also discusses other, relevant topics including identifying and minimising sources of variation within in vivo RA studies, the potential to provide pain relief including analgesia, welfare assessment, humane endpoints, reporting standards and the potential to replace animals in RA research.


Subject(s)
Animal Welfare , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/physiopathology , Disease Models, Animal , Animal Testing Alternatives/methods , Animals , Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/pathology , Drug Design , Humans , Mice , Rats
16.
Br J Pharmacol ; 172(13): 3189-93, 2015 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25964986

ABSTRACT

The ARRIVE guidelines have been implemented in BJP for 4 years with the aim of increasing transparency in reporting experiments involving animals. BJP has assessed our success in implementing them and concluded that we could do better. This editorial discusses the issues and explains how we are changing our requirements for authors to report their findings in experiments involving animals. This is one of a series of editorials discussing updates to the BJP Instructions to Authors.


Subject(s)
Animal Experimentation , Editorial Policies , Animals , Biomedical Research , Guideline Adherence , Guidelines as Topic , Pharmacology
17.
Shock ; 43(4): 304-16, 2015 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25565638

ABSTRACT

This report aims to facilitate the implementation of the Three Rs (replacement, reduction, and refinement) in the use of animal models or procedures involving sepsis and septic shock, an area where there is the potential of high levels of suffering for animals. The emphasis is on refinement because this has the greatest potential for immediate implementation. Specific welfare issues are identified and discussed, and practical measures are proposed to reduce animal use and suffering as well as reducing experimental variability and increasing translatability. The report is based on discussions and submissions from a nonregulatory expert working group consisting of veterinarians, animal technologists, and scientists with expert knowledge relevant to the field.


Subject(s)
Animal Welfare , Disease Models, Animal , Sepsis/physiopathology , Shock, Septic/physiopathology , Animal Husbandry/methods , Animals , Biomedical Research/trends , Blood Pressure , Humans , Pain/diagnosis , Pain/prevention & control , Resuscitation/methods , Risk Factors
18.
Altern Lab Anim ; 42(4): 267-72, 2014 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25290947

ABSTRACT

Ending severe suffering is desirable and achievable. In this article we have outlined a 'road map', or series of steps, that can be used to evaluate the extent to which severe suffering occurs within establishments, and some practical principles that can be employed in order to work toward ending it. We urge researchers to act upon these principles, and to begin a journey toward a future where causing severe suffering to animals used in scientific research is a thing of the past.


Subject(s)
Animal Experimentation , Animal Use Alternatives , Animals
19.
20.
J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods ; 67(3): 169-76, 2013.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23357188

ABSTRACT

This report is based on discussions and submissions from an expert working group consisting of veterinarians, animal care staff and scientists with expert knowledge relevant to the field. It aims to facilitate the implementation of the Three Rs (replacement, reduction and refinement) in the use of animal models or procedures involving experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE), an experimental model used in multiple sclerosis research. The emphasis is on refinement since this has the greatest potential for immediate implementation. Specific welfare issues are identified and discussed, and practical measures are proposed to reduce animal use and suffering. Some general issues for refinement are summarised to help achieve this, with more detail provided on a range of specific measures to reduce suffering.


Subject(s)
Animal Husbandry/methods , Animal Welfare , Disease Models, Animal , Encephalomyelitis, Autoimmune, Experimental , Animals , Mice , Multiple Sclerosis , Rats , Research , Stress, Psychological/prevention & control , Veterinarians
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...