Use and Reuse of Animal Behavioral, Molecular, and Biochemical Data in Alzheimer's Disease Research: Focus on 3Rs and Saving People's Tax Dollars.

Several decades of research on cell and animal models contributed tremendously to understanding human diseases. Particularly, research on rodents and non-human primates revealed that animal research is a major and important component in biomedical research in learning complex pathophysiological processes. Further, animal research helped us to understand human diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease. In addition, animal research has also helped us to test hundreds of drugs and develop treatments for human use. Researchers can gain a better understanding of key biological and physiological processes in humans by comparing them to laboratory animals. Based on their relevance and resemblance to people, or even usual living conditions, scientists rationalize the use of particular animal models in their studies. It is suggested that in the National Institutes of Health and other agencies-funded research, animal models should be carefully selected to study the biology and pathophysiology of human health and diseases such as Alzheimer's disease and other dementias. However, it is critical to use a minimum number of animals for human research. Further, it is also noted that the use and reuse of behavioral,  molecular, and biochemical data from wild-type (WT) control mice with mutant lines of disease models, as long as the genetic background is the same in both WT and disease mice. On the other hand, anonymous readers have challenged the use and reuse of WT mice data for comparison. In the current article, we discuss the minimum utility of animals, covering the 3Rs, Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement, and also discuss the use and reuse of behavioral, molecular, and biochemical data.

Challenges and opportunities of translating animal research into human trials in Ethiopia.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Although the goal of translational research is to bring biomedical knowledge from the laboratory to clinical trial and therapeutic products for improving health, this goal has not been well achieved as often as desired because of many barriers documented in different countries. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the challenges and opportunities of translating animal research into human trials in Ethiopia. METHODS: A descriptive qualitative study, using in-depth interviews, was conducted in which preclinical and clinical trial researchers who have been involved in animal research or clinical trials as principal investigator were involved. Data were analyzed using inductive thematic process. RESULTS: Six themes were emerged for challenges: lack of financial and human capacity, inadequate infrastructure, operational obstacles and poor research governance, lack of collaboration, lack of reproducibility of results and prolonged ethical and regulatory approval processes. Furthermore, three themes were synthesized for opportunities: growing infrastructure and resources, improved human capacity and better administrative processes and initiatives for collaboration. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The study found that the identified characteristics/features are of high importance either to hurdle or enable the practice of translating animal research into human trials. The study suggests that there should be adequate infrastructure and finance, human capacity building, good research governance, improved ethical and regulatory approval process, multidisciplinary collaboration, and incentives and recognition for researchers to overcome the identified challenges and allow translating of animal research into human trials to proceed more efficiently.

Conceptual foundations for a clarified meaning of the 3Rs principles in animal experimentation.

Russell and Burch's 1959 original definitions of the 3Rs (replacement, reduction and refinement) are widely used today as standards for the ethical use of non-human animals in research, although they have a number of limitations. Authors and institutions around the world have addressed some of these, coming up in certain cases with more accurate, functional, and up-to-date definitions. However, not only do there still remain limitations needing to be addressed, but some that have been addressed resulted in discrepancies, contradictions, and general confusion as to how best apply the 3Rs in practice. In order to clarify the meaning of the 3Rs and enable more optimal implementation of these principles in animal experimentation, this article provides a theoretical discussion for revised definitions of the original 3Rs via examination of some of their main limitations and inconsistencies. First, we offer up the original definitions as presented in the context of Russell and Burch's book The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique. Then, we examine the main limitations and present clear specifications and requirements for such revised definitions. After presenting our revised definitions, we conclude with various implications for animal welfare within the context of experimentation.

Between animal research and animal welfare: Analysing the openness practices of UK Named Veterinary Surgeons.

The use of animals as scientific models is argued to be crucial for producing new scientific and medical knowledge and clinical treatments. However, animal research continues to raise socio-ethical concerns. In recent years, there has been a push for openness amongst the life science community, with the aim of increasing the transparency of animal research to wider publics. Yet, how this push for openness is experienced by those responsible for the care and welfare of research animals requires further study. This paper draws upon qualitative interviews with Named Veterinary Surgeons (NVS) in the UK and explores how they practise openness, avoid openness, and, at times, challenge the way their role is represented within openness agendas. Overall, this social scientific analysis reveals that the current openness agenda has the potential to create tensions for professionals, as they seek to manage regulatory and public imaginaries of the veterinary identity alongside the animal research controversy. The paper concludes by arguing for a culture of dialogue, where openness includes allowing those with responsibilities for animal welfare to express ambivalence or concern about their own role. Finally, the paper calls for sustained academic work on relations between the veterinary profession and wider society, particularly areas that involve contested practices in which care and harm may coincide.

Beyond Anthropocentrism: The Moral and Strategic Philosophy behind Russell and Burch's 3Rs in Animal Experimentation.

The 3Rs framework in animal experimentation- "replace, reduce, refine" - has been alleged to be expressive of anthropocentrism, the view that only humans are directly morally relevant. After all, the 3Rs safeguard animal welfare only as far as given human research objectives permit, effectively prioritizing human use interests over animal interests. This article acknowledges this prioritization, but argues that the characterization as anthropocentric is inaccurate. In fact, the 3Rs prioritize research purposes even more strongly than an ethical anthropocentrist would. Drawing on the writings of Universities Federation for Animal Welfare (UFAW) founder Charles W. Hume, who employed Russell and Burch, it is argued that the 3Rs originally arose from an animal-centered ethic which was however restricted by an organizational strategy aiming at the voluntary cooperation of animal researchers. Research purposes thus had to be accepted as given. While this explains why the 3Rs focus narrowly on humane method selection, not on encouraging animal-free question selection in the first place, it suggests that governments should (also) focus on the latter if they recognize animals as deserving protection for their own sake.

Why Not Phase Out Animal Experimentation? Considering Objections from Freedom of Inquiry and Cross-Border Displacement.

Animal experimentation raises value conflicts between animal protection and other goods, such as freedom of inquiry or health and safety. If governments can phase out the practice by non-prohibitive incentive-setting, the pro tanto moral rationale for doing so is obvious. So why should they not? This article first sketches a fictional scenario in which a government adopts a phase-out plan for animal experimentation. It then considers two moral objections to this plan: First, the plan unduly restricts freedom of inquiry, and second, it merely displaces animal experimentation across borders and thus fails to reduce animal suffering. Both arguments are refined premise by premise to articulate their strongest versions. The two objections can help to narrow down desiderata for good phase-out plans. However, they do not provide a compelling case against phase-out planning as such because they miss its incremental and constructive nature. Unless better arguments can be provided, it appears that government inaction on phasing out animal experimentation lacks moral justification.

One R or the other - an experimental bioethics approach to 3R dilemmas in animal research.

Sacrificial dilemmas such as the trolley problem play an important role in experimental philosophy (x-phi). But it is increasingly argued that, since we are not likely to encounter runaway trolleys in our daily life, the usefulness of such thought experiments for understanding moral judgments in more ecologically valid contexts may be limited. However, similar sacrificial dilemmas are experienced in real life by animal research decision makers. As part of their job, they must make decisions about the suffering, and often the death, of many non-human animals. For this reason, a context-specific investigation of so-called "3R dilemmas" (i.e., dilemmas where there is a conflict between the principles of replacement, reduction, and refinement of the use of animals in research) is essential to improve the situation of both non-human animals and human stakeholders. An approach well suited for such investigation is experimental philosophical bioethics ("bioxphi"), which draws on methods similar to x-phi to probe more realistic, practical scenarios with an eye to informing normative debates and ethical policy. In this article, we argue for a need to investigate 3R dilemmas among professional decision-makers using the tools of bioxphi. In a first step, we define 3R dilemmas and discuss previous investigations of professionals' attitudes in such cases. In a second step, we show how bioxphi is a promising method to investigate the whys and hows of professional decision-making in 3R dilemmas. In a last step, we provide a bioxphi template for 3R dilemmas, give recommendations on its use, explore the normative relevance of data collected by such means, and discuss important limitations.

Exploring University Students' Perspectives on Animal Experimentation: Insights From a Cross-Sectional Study.

Introduction Attitudes toward animal experimentation are rapidly evolving with time. This cross-sectional study intends to assess the attitudes of university students at Eastern Mediterranean University toward animal research based on different factors and lifestyle choices. Materials and methods Stratified random sampling was used. A total of 215 participants were chosen from the Faculties of Medicine, Pharmacy, Law, and the Department of Psychology (Faculty of Arts and Sciences). An open-access, self-administered, 14-question questionnaire was used. Mann-Whitney U tests were used for score comparisons. Results The response rate was 213 (99.07%). Eighty-eight (41.31%) of the participants were male. The mean age was 21.72 ± 2.23. Mann-Whitney U tests revealed significant differences for Q4, Q10, and Q14 (p = 0.012, 0.020, and 0.016, respectively) with respect to gender. Being a pet owner significantly affected the mean scores of Q7 and Q10 (p = 0.046 and p = 0.000, respectively). Conclusion The present study reveals nuanced student attitudes toward animal experimentation, balancing concern for animal welfare with the necessity of research. Gender and pet ownership significantly influence these views. The findings underscore the need for continued education on humane and ethical research practices. Future studies should broaden the demographic scope to better understand and track these attitudes over time.

Role of Exercise in Pulmonary Hypertension: Evidence from Bench to Bedside.

Background: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is a debilitating condition characterized by elevated pulmonary arterial pressure and progressive vascular remodelling, leading to exercise intolerance. The progression of PAH is regulated at a cellular and molecular level which influences various physiological processes. Exercise plays an important role in improving function in PH. Although the signalling pathways that regulate cardio-protection through exercise have not been fully understood, the positive impact of exercise on the various physiological systems is well established. Summary: Exercise has emerged as a potential adjunctive therapy for PH, with growing evidence supporting its beneficial effects on various aspects of the disease pathophysiology. This review highlights the contributions of cellular and molecular pathways and physiological processes to exercise intolerance. Preclinical studies have provided insight into the mechanisms underlying exercise-induced improvements in PH which are modulated through improvements in endothelial function, inflammation, oxidative stress, and mitochondrial function. Along with preclinical studies, various clinical studies have demonstrated that exercise training can lead to significant improvements in exercise capacity, haemodynamics, quality of life, and functional status. Moreover, exercise interventions have been shown to improve skeletal muscle function and enhance pulmonary vascular remodelling, contributing to overall disease management. Further research efforts aimed at better understanding the role of exercise in PH pathophysiology, and refining exercise interventions are warranted to realize its full potential in the management of this complex disease. Key Messages: Despite the promising benefits of exercise in PH, several challenges remain, including the optimal intensity, duration, and type of exercise training, as well as patient selection criteria and long-term adherence. Additionally, the mechanisms underlying the observed improvements require further elucidation to optimize exercise protocols and personalize treatment strategies. Nonetheless, exercise represents a promising therapeutic approach that can complement existing pharmacological therapies and improve outcomes in PH patients.

A unified approach to investigating 4 dpf zebrafish larval behaviour through a standardised light/dark assay.

Zebrafish are a dynamic research model in the domains of neuropsychopharmacology, biological psychiatry and behaviour. Working with larvae ≤4 days post-fertilisation (dpf) offers an avenue for high-throughput investigation whilst aligning with the 3Rs principles of animal research. The light/dark assay, which is the most widely used behavioural assay for larval neuropharmacology research, lacks experimental reliability and standardisation. This study aimed to formulate a robust, reproducible and standardised light/dark behavioural assay using 4 dpf zebrafish larvae. Considerable between-batch and inter-individual variability was found, which we rectified with a normalisation approach to ensure a reliable foundation for analysis. We then identified that 5-min light/dark transition periods are optimal for locomotor activity. We also found that a 30-min acclimation in the light was found to produce significantly increased dark phase larval locomotion. Next, we confirmed the pharmacological predictivity of the standardised assay using ethanol which, as predicted, caused hyperlocomotion at low concentrations and hypolocomotion at high concentrations. Finally, the assay was validated by assessing the behavioural phenotype of hyperactive transgenic (adgrl3.1-/-) larvae, which was rescued with psychostimulant medications. Our standardised assay not only provides a clear experimental and analytical framework to work with 4 dpf larvae, but also facilitates between-laboratory collaboration using our normalisation approach.

Choice-based severity scale (CSS): assessing the relative severity of procedures from a laboratory animal's perspective.

One primary goal of laboratory animal welfare science is to provide a comprehensive severity assessment of the experimental and husbandry procedures or conditions these animals experience. The severity, or degree of suffering, of these conditions experienced by animals are typically scored based on anthropocentric assumptions. We propose to (a) assess an animal's subjective experience of condition severity, and (b) not only rank but scale different conditions in relation to one another using choice-based preference testing. The Choice-based Severity Scale (CSS) utilizes animals' relative preferences for different conditions, which are compared by how much reward is needed to outweigh the perceived severity of a given condition. Thus, this animal-centric approach provides a common scale for condition severity based on the animal's perspective. To assess and test the CSS concept, we offered three opportunistically selected male rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta) choices between two conditions: performing a cognitive task in a typical neuroscience laboratory setup (laboratory condition) versus the monkey's home environment (cage condition). Our data show a shift in one individual's preference for the cage condition to the laboratory condition when we changed the type of reward provided in the task. Two additional monkeys strongly preferred the cage condition over the laboratory condition, irrespective of reward amount and type. We tested the CSS concept further by showing that monkeys' choices between tasks varying in trial duration can be influenced by the amount of reward provided. Altogether, the CSS concept is built upon laboratory animals' subjective experiences and has the potential to de-anthropomorphize severity assessments, refine experimental protocols, and provide a common framework to assess animal welfare across different domains.

Enhancing guided bone regeneration with cross-linked collagen-conjugated xenogeneic bone blocks and membrane fixation: A preclinical in vivo study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether combining cross-linked (CL) collagen-integrated xenogeneic bone blocks stabilized with the fixation of resorbable collagen membranes (CM) can enhance guided bone regeneration (GBR) in the overaugmented calvarial defect model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four circular defects with a diameter of 8 mm were prepared in the calvarium of 13 rabbits. Defects were randomly assigned to receive one of the following treatments: (i) non-cross-linked (NCL) porcine-derived collagen-embedded bone block covered by a CM without fixation (NCL + unfix group); (ii) NCL bone block covered by CM with fixation using bone-tack (NCL + fix group); (iii) cross-linked (CL) porcine-derived collagen-embedded bone block covered by CM without fixation (CL + unfix group); and (iv) CL bone block covered by CM with fixation using bone-tack fixation (CL + fix group). The efficacy of GBR was assessed through histological and molecular analyses after 2 and 8 weeks. RESULTS: At 2 weeks, there were no significant differences in histologically measured areas of newly formed bone among the groups. At 8 weeks, however, the CL + fix group exhibited a larger area of new bone (5.08 ± 1.09 mm2, mean ± standard deviation) compared to the NCL + unfix (1.62 ± 0.42 mm2; p < .0083), NCL + fix (3.97 ± 1.39 mm2) and CL + unfix (2.55 ± 1.04 mm2) groups. Additionally, the expression levels of tumour necrosis factor-alpha, fibroblast growth factor-2, vascular endothelial growth factor, osteocalcin and calcitonin receptor were significantly higher in the CL + fix group compared to the other three groups (p < .0083). CONCLUSION: Cross-linked bone blocks stabilized with collagen membrane fixation can significantly enhance GBR.

The partnership between statisticians and the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC).

In this tutorial we explore the valuable partnership between statisticians and Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUCs) in the context of animal research, shedding light on the critical role statisticians play in ensuring the ethical and scientifically rigorous use of animals in research. Pharmaceutical statisticians have increasingly become vital members of these committees, contributing expertise in study design, data analysis, and interpretation, and working more generally to facilitate the integration of good statistical practices into experimental procedures. We review the "3Rs" principles (Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement) which are the foundation for the humane use of animals in scientific research, and how statisticians can partner with IACUC to help ensure robust and reproducible research while adhering to the 3Rs principles. We also highlight emerging areas of interest, such as the use of virtual control groups.

How to optimize communication about animal and animal-free research methods.

There is a long-standing debate about experimental non-human animals and animal-free methods in scientific research. Among the various stakeholders involved in the debate are the scientists. During media broadcasts we, animal researchers and animal-free methods researchers, were positioned as 'opponents'. In this essay we describe our initial rational thoughts and emotions after these events, and how we came together to explore our common ground on animal(-free) experimentation. Realizing that all models have advantages and limitations, our common ground lies in the principles of good scientific research and responsible experimentation. Our communication emanating from the broadcasts has been instrumental in improving communication on animal(-free) experimentation issues by teaming up. We strongly believe that this is essential for making well-informed decisions for the methods we are using now and will be using in the future.

Toward an integrated ethical review process: an animal-centered research framework for the refinement of research procedures.

The involvement of animals in research procedures that can harm them and to which they are deemed unable to consent raises fundamental ethical dilemmas. While current ethical review processes emphasize the application of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement), grounded in a human-centered utilitarian ethical approach, a comprehensive ethical review also involves a harm-benefit analysis and the consideration of wider ethical issues. Nevertheless, to our knowledge, approaches are still needed to facilitate the integrative assessment and iterative revision of research designs to improve their ethical value or to identify cases in which using animals is irremediably unethical. Additionally, frameworks are lacking that explicitly include an animal-centered perspective into the ethical review process beyond welfare concerns, failing to cover broader ethical considerations (such as consent). In previous work we proposed an Animal-Centered Research framework (ACRf) comprising four animal-centered research principles (relevance, impartiality, welfare and consent) which could help researchers and ethical review bodies apprise research designs from an animal-centered perspective. This paper builds on and further develops our previous work by contextualizing the ACRf within the bigger picture of animal research ethical review and by illustrating how the ACRf could be operationalized within current ethical review processes. We contribute an extended framework that integrates the application of the ACRf principles within the ethical review process. To this end, we present findings from a theoretical case study focusing on the ethical review of a research protocol on the study of stress response in pigs. We discuss how our extended framework could be easily applied to facilitate a holistic approach to the ethical review process, and inform an iterative process of refinement, to support the development of research designs that are both more ethical and scientifically valid.

Weighing the moral status of brain organoids and research animals.

Recent advances in human brain organoid systems have raised serious worries about the possibility that these in vitro 'mini-brains' could develop sentience, and thus, moral status. This article considers the relative moral status of sentient human brain organoids and research animals, examining whether we have moral reasons to prefer using one over the other. It argues that, contrary to common intuitions, the wellbeing of sentient human brain organoids should not be granted greater moral consideration than the wellbeing of nonhuman research animals. It does so not by denying that typical humans have higher moral status than animals, but instead by arguing that none of the leading justifications for granting humans higher moral status than nonhuman animals apply to brain organoids. Additionally, it argues that there are no good reasons to be more concerned about the well-being of human brain organoids compared to those generated from other species.

Animal Research Regulation: Improving Decision-Making and Adopting a Transparent System to Address Concerns around Approval Rate of Experiments.

The use of nonhuman animals in biomedical research is regulated under stringent conditions, not only in response to societal attitudes towards animal experimentation but also because ethical responsibility in scientific research requires researchers and veterinarians to be more invested and aim to improve the welfare of animals used for experiments. Analyses of animal research oversight reveal the frequent approval of experiments, and the approval of some experiments has raised and continues to raise public concerns. Societal compliance is required for a consensus-based approach to animal research policy, prompting the need to have transparent discussions about oversight and the frequency of approvals. We discuss how frequent approval may be perceived and why it seems problematic from a societal perspective: the regulatory process exists to approve only legitimate experiments. Although some experiments remain unacceptable irrespective of their harm-benefit ratios, almost all experiments are approved. We explain some possible legitimate reasons for frequent approval and how the review process could be leading to the approval of illegitimate studies. To ensure transparency and improve public trust and understanding of oversight, we propose the adoption of a platform to inform society about how unethical experiments are screened out.

Low-cost, open-source device for simultaneously subjecting rodents to different circadian cycles of light, food, and temperature.

Exposure of experimental rodents to controlled cycles of light, food, and temperature is important when investigating alterations in circadian cycles that profoundly influence health and disease. However, applying such stimuli simultaneously is difficult in practice. We aimed to design, build, test, and open-source describe a simple device that subjects a conventional mouse cage to independent cycles of physiologically relevant environmental variables. The device is based on a box enclosing the rodent cage to modify the light, feeding, and temperature environments. The device provides temperature-controlled air conditioning (heating or cooling) by a Peltier module and includes programmable feeding and illumination. All functions are set by a user-friendly front panel for independent cycle programming. Bench testing with a model simulating the CO2 production of mice in the cage showed: a) suitable air renewal (by measuring actual ambient CO2), b) controlled realistic illumination at the mouse enclosure (measured by a photometer), c) stable temperature control, and d) correct cycling of light, feeding, and temperature. The cost of all the supplies (retail purchased by e-commerce) was <300 US$. Detailed technical information is open-source provided, allowing for any user to reliably reproduce or modify the device. This approach can considerably facilitate circadian research since using one of the described low-cost devices for any mouse group with a given light-food-temperature paradigm allows for all the experiments to be performed simultaneously, thereby requiring no changes in the light/temperature of a general-use laboratory.

Phase-out planning for animal experimentation.

Since the late 2010s, the idea of phase-out planning for animal experimentation (PPAE) has come to the foreground of political debates, but central notions and arguments are understood differently by different participants and stand in need of clarification. This article draws on public communications on ten political projects related to PPAE to propose a philosophical explication of PPAE and to artic­ulate the proponents' central moral argument. According to the argument, the phase-out of animal experimentation is morally desirable, and planned interventions are both necessary and sufficient to achieve it. The normative and descriptive premises of the argument are stated and discussed, flagging questions that need answering for a more thorough assessment of the argument. This results in a series of seven action points for researchers and stakeholders of PPAE. The overall goal is to enable an open and productive discussion about PPAE in public, political, and academic settings.

In recent years, a new demand has entered the political arena: that the phase-out of animal experi­mentation should be planned. But it is important to understand exactly what this means. This article draws on ten documents from governments, parliaments, and NGOs to tease out what they mean by "planning the phase-out of animal experimentation." It also discusses the main argument that is advanced in favor of phase-out planning and highlights seven gaps in our knowledge that we should try to fill to move the discussion forward. In sum, the article is the first to explicitly define phase-out planning for animal experimentation and to directly discuss its pros and cons from a phil­osophical point of view. This is helpful in avoiding misunderstandings and talking past each other, enabling an open and productive debate.

Advocating for Generalizability: Accepting Inherent Variability in Translation of Animal Research Outcomes.

Advancing scientific discovery requires investigators to embrace research practices that increase transparency and disclosure about materials, methods, and outcomes. Several research advocacy and funding organizations have produced guidelines and recommended practices to enhance reproducibility through detailed and rigorous research approaches; however, confusion around vocabulary terms and a lack of adoption of suggested practices have stymied successful implementation. Although reproducibility of research findings cannot be guaranteed due to extensive inherent variables in attempts at experimental repetition, the scientific community can advocate for generalizability in the application of data outcomes to ensure a broad and effective impact on the comparison of animals to translation within human research. This report reviews suggestions, based upon work with National Institutes of Health advisory groups, for improving rigor and transparency in animal research through aspects of experimental design, statistical assessment, and reporting factors to advocate for generalizability in the application of comparative outcomes between animals and humans.