Literature DB >> 22446816

Strategies for the optimisation of in vivo experiments in accordance with the 3Rs philosophy.

Judith C Madden1, Mark Hewitt, Katarzyna Przybylak, Rob J Vandebriel, Aldert H Piersma, Mark T D Cronin.   

Abstract

There are a large number of chemicals in current use for which adequate toxicity data are not available. Whilst there are clear ethical and legal obligations to obtain data from sources other than in vivo experiments wherever possible, in certain cases in vivo assays may be deemed necessary. In such circumstances, it is essential to ensure that the maximum amount of high quality data is obtained from the minimum number of animals, using the most humane procedures, in accordance with the philosophy of reduction, refinement and replacement (3Rs). The aim of this report is to provide a strategy for anyone involved in animal experimentation, for either toxicological or pharmacological purposes, as to how in vivo experiments may be optimised. The impact of generic and endpoint specific sources of variability has been highlighted in a proof-of-principle analysis considering the variation in protocols for assays for four human health endpoints (skin sensitisation, reproductive/developmental toxicity, mutagenicity and carcinogenicity). Other factors such as operator training, experimental/statistical design, use of lower species and use of combined assays are also discussed. Recommendations for optimisation of in vivo assays, in terms of the 3Rs philosophy, applied to performing tests, harvesting data and appropriate reporting are summarised as a checklist of issues to be addressed prior to undertaking such assays.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22446816     DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2012.03.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol        ISSN: 0273-2300            Impact factor:   3.271


  6 in total

1.  Factors influencing preclinical in vivo evaluation of mumps vaccine strain immunogenicity.

Authors:  B Halassy; T Kurtović; M Brgles; M Lang Balija; D Forčić
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  Medicating the environment: assessing risks of pharmaceuticals to wildlife and ecosystems.

Authors:  Kathryn E Arnold; A Ross Brown; Gerald T Ankley; John P Sumpter
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2014-11-19       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 3.  Caenorhabditis elegans as a tool for environmental risk assessment: emerging and promising applications for a "nobelized worm".

Authors:  L Queirós; J L Pereira; F J M Gonçalves; M Pacheco; M Aschner; P Pereira
Journal:  Crit Rev Toxicol       Date:  2019-07-03       Impact factor: 5.635

4.  A new in vivo screening paradigm to accelerate antimalarial drug discovery.

Authors:  María Belén Jiménez-Díaz; Sara Viera; Javier Ibáñez; Teresa Mulet; Noemí Magán-Marchal; Helen Garuti; Vanessa Gómez; Lorena Cortés-Gil; Antonio Martínez; Santiago Ferrer; María Teresa Fraile; Félix Calderón; Esther Fernández; Leonard D Shultz; Didier Leroy; David M Wilson; José Francisco García-Bustos; Francisco Javier Gamo; Iñigo Angulo-Barturen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-06-25       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Biodistribution, kinetics, and biological fate of SPION microbubbles in the rat.

Authors:  Åsa Barrefelt; Maryam Saghafian; Raoul Kuiper; Fei Ye; Gabriella Egri; Moritz Klickermann; Torkel B Brismar; Peter Aspelin; Mamoun Muhammed; Lars Dähne; Moustapha Hassan
Journal:  Int J Nanomedicine       Date:  2013-08-26

Review 6.  Large Animal Models in Regenerative Medicine and Tissue Engineering: To Do or Not to Do.

Authors:  Iris Ribitsch; Pedro M Baptista; Anna Lange-Consiglio; Luca Melotti; Marco Patruno; Florien Jenner; Eva Schnabl-Feichter; Luke C Dutton; David J Connolly; Frank G van Steenbeek; Jayesh Dudhia; Louis C Penning
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2020-08-13
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.