Literature DB >> 30112605

Minimum quality threshold in pre-clinical sepsis studies (MQTiPSS): an international expert consensus initiative for improvement of animal modeling in sepsis.

Marcin F Osuchowski1, Alfred Ayala2, Soheyl Bahrami3, Michael Bauer4, Mihaly Boros5, Jean-Marc Cavaillon6, Irshad H Chaudry7, Craig M Coopersmith8, Clifford Deutschman9, Susanne Drechsler3, Philip Efron10, Claes Frostell11, Gerhard Fritsch12,13, Waldemar Gozdzik14, Judith Hellman15, Markus Huber-Lang16, Shigeaki Inoue17, Sylvia Knapp18, Andrey V Kozlov3, Claude Libert19,20, John C Marshall21, Lyle L Moldawer10, Peter Radermacher22, Heinz Redl3, Daniel G Remick23, Mervyn Singer24, Christoph Thiemermann25, Ping Wang26, Willem Joost Wiersinga27, Xianzhong Xiao28, Basilia Zingarelli29.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Pre-clinical animal studies precede the majority of clinical trials. While the clinical definitions of sepsis and recommended treatments are regularly updated, a systematic review of pre-clinical models of sepsis has not been done and clear modeling guidelines are lacking.
OBJECTIVE: To address this deficit, a Wiggers-Bernard Conference on pre-clinical sepsis modeling was held in Vienna in May 2017. The goal of the conference was to identify limitations of pre-clinical sepsis models and to propose a set of guidelines, defined as the "Minimum Quality Threshold in Pre-Clinical Sepsis Studies" (MQTiPSS), to enhance translational value of these models.
METHODS: A total of 31 experts from 13 countries participated and were divided into 6 thematic working groups (WG): (1) study design, (2) humane modeling, (3) infection types, (4) organ failure/dysfunction, (5) fluid resuscitation, and (6) antimicrobial therapy endpoints. As basis for the MQTiPSS discussions, the participants conducted a literature review of the 260 most highly cited scientific articles on sepsis models (2002-2013).
RESULTS: Overall, the participants reached consensus on 29 points; 20 at "recommendation" (R) and 9 at "consideration" (C) strength. This executive summary provides a synopsis of the MQTiPSS consensus (Tables 1, 2, and 3). Detailed commentaries to all Rs and Cs are simultaneously published in three separate full-length papers.
CONCLUSIONS: We believe that these recommendations and considerations will serve to bring a level of standardization to pre-clinical models of sepsis and ultimately improve translation of pre-clinical findings. These guideline points are proposed as "best practices" for animal models of sepsis that should be implemented. In order to encourage its wide dissemination, this article is freely accessible in Shock, Infection and Intensive Care Medicine Experimental.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Antimicrobial therapy; Experiment; Fluid resuscitation; Guidelines; Humane modeling; Infection types; Organ dysfunction; Study design

Year:  2018        PMID: 30112605      PMCID: PMC6093828          DOI: 10.1186/s40635-018-0189-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Intensive Care Med Exp        ISSN: 2197-425X


“This modeling thing, it's pretty easy, but actually it's also really tough.” Cara Delevingne

Review

The necessity

With the ultimate goal to reduce mortality/morbidity in patients, animal modeling of diseases has been limited by poor translation [1, 2]. This is often fueled by the low fidelity of available model systems [3, 4], their inappropriate study designs [2], and selective use of animal data [5, 6]. When compared to other inflammatory states (e.g., arthritis, atherosclerosis), the complexity of sepsis has hampered the development of high-fidelity models. However, this challenge can be aptly embraced by building on recent advances in the understanding of sepsis pathophysiology and avoiding past errors. Any promising sepsis model must be (a) specifically tailored to the posited hypothesis, (b) “reverse translated” to its clinical counterpart [7, 8], and (c) adjusted as new pathophysiological evidence emerges. This is echoed by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in their 2010 Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff: “FDA believes that the animal…(model)…should provide a test system that offers a best attempt at simulating the clinical setting” (General Considerations for Animal Studies for Cardiovascular Devices; https://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ucm220760.htm). Unfortunately, while the clinical definition of sepsis is currently in its third iteration [9] and the Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) Guidelines for patient management have been updated three times [10], pre-clinical sepsis research has not been subjected to any organized attempt at introducing best practices, management guidelines, and standardization [11]. This creates a large quality gap and confusion with conflicting data reflecting huge variations in, for example, insult severity, fluid resuscitation, and study duration. Effective animal modeling and reporting guidelines have recently been proposed for other specific diseases such as pulmonary fibrosis [12], stroke [13, 14], heart failure [15], and malaria [16] making the void in the field of pre-clinical sepsis even more apparent. It is essential that animal models of sepsis continue to evolve. Lack of sufficient standardization of pre-clinical models will continue to limit the utility of sepsis animal research as a useful platform for advancing clinical outcomes and care in sepsis [17, 18] and will reduce the opportunities to identify and test new therapies.

The action

To address this perceived deficit, the Ludwig Boltzmann Institute of Experimental and Clinical Traumatology in the AUVA Research Center organized in May 2017 in Vienna a Wiggers-Bernard Conference on “Pre-clinical Modeling in Sepsis: Exchanging Opinions and Forming Recommendations.” The key goal was to create publishable material that characterizes elements that should be included in pre-clinical sepsis studies and defined by the so called “Minimum Quality Threshold in Pre-Clinical Sepsis Studies” (MQTiPSS) descriptor. The Wiggers-Bernard Conference participants identified and addressed several broad, critically important concepts in animal sepsis modeling. A total of 31 experts from 13 countries participated in the initiative (including five members of the Sepsis-3 definitions task force) and were divided into six thematic Working Groups: (1) study design, (2) humane endpoints, (3) infection types, (4) organ failure/dysfunction, (5) critical fluid resuscitation, and (6) antimicrobial therapy. The initiative consisted of three phases: (a) preparatory (prior to the meeting; approximately 3 months), during which participants performed a systematic review of the 260 top-cited (over 29,000 citations in aggregate) 2003–2012 pre-clinical publications (using ISI Web of Knowledge database; query: “sepsis model;” 374 individual experiments analyzed) and identified the key modeling topics to be discussed; (b) discussion during which the participants spent 2 days at the Wiggers-Bernard Conference examining pre-clinical sepsis models and ultimately voted to reach consensus on the proposed points (either at the “recommendation” or “consideration” strength); and (c) post-meeting refinement of the accepted points and finalization of the arguments to be included in the final publications (using a modified Delphi method; approximately 3 months). Following the format used by the Sepsis-3 task force [8], at least two thirds (over 65%) of the votes were required for approval of a proposed point.

The proposed outcome

First, a definition for an animal model of sepsis was formulated and (unanimously) approved: “An experimental animal (mammal) model of sepsis should be defined as life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to an infection.” Second, Wiggers-Bernard Conference participants reached consensus on 29 points; 20 at “recommendation” strength and 9 at “consideration” strength (listed in Tables 1, 2, and 3). All consensus points were reached either unanimously or with no more than two abstentions per point (point 8). The “recommendation” strength indicates virtually unanimous agreement among the 31 participants, regarding both the content and the need for rapid implementation. Issues that require additional discussion before final recommendations could be made were classified as considerations.
Table 1

Combined recommendations and considerations from the working groups (WG) 1 and 2

Study design (WG-1)1. Survival follow-up should reasonably reflect the clinical time course of the sepsis modelR
2. Therapeutic interventions should be initiated after the septic insult replicating clinical care
3. We recommend that the treatment be randomized and blinded when feasible
4. Provide as much information as possible (e.g., ARRIVE guidelines) on the model and methodology, to enable replication
a. Consider replication of the findings in models that include co-morbidity and/or other biological variables (i.e., age, gender, diabetes, cancer, immuno-suppression, genetic background, and others)C
b. In addition to rodents (mice and rats), consider modeling sepsis also in other (mammal) species
c. Consider need for source control
Humane modeling (WG-2)5. The development and validation of standardized criteria to monitor the well-being of septic animals is recommendedR
6. The development and validation of standardized criteria for euthanasia of septic animals is recommended (exceptions possible)
7. Analgesics recommended for surgical sepsis consistent with ethical considerations
d. Consider analgesics for nonsurgical sepsisC

R recommendation strength, C consideration strength

Table 2

Combined recommendations and considerations from the working groups (WG) 3 and 4

Infection types (WG-3)8. We recommend that challenge with LPS is not an appropriate model for replicating human sepsisR
9. We recommend that microorganisms used in animal models preferentially replicate those commonly found in human sepsis
e. Consider modeling sepsis syndromes that are initiated at sites other than the peritoneal cavity (e.g., lung, urinary tract, brain)C
Organ Failure/ Dysfunction (WG-4)10. Organ/system dysfunction is defined as life-threatening deviation from normal for that organ/system based on objective evidenceR
11. Not all activities in an individual organ/system need to be abnormal for organ dysfunction to be present
12. To define objective evidence of the severity of organ/system dysfunction, a scoring system should be developed, validated and used, or use an existing scoring system
13. Not all experiments must measure all parameters of organ dysfunction but animal models should be fully exploited
f. Avoid hypoglycemiaC

R recommendation strength, C consideration strength

Table 3

Combined recommendations and considerations from the working groups (WG) 5 and 6

Fluid Resuscitation (WG-5)14. Fluid resuscitation is essential unless part of the studyR
15. Administer fluid resuscitation based on the specific requirements of the model
16. Consider the specific sepsis model for the timing of the start and continuation for fluid resuscitation
17. Resuscitation is recommended by the application of iso-osmolar crystalloid solutions
g. Consider using pre-defined endpoints for fluid resuscitation as deemed necessaryC
h. Avoid fluid overload
Antimicrobial Therapy (WG-6)18. Antimicrobials are recommended for pre-clinical studies assessing potential human therapeuticsR
19. Antimicrobials should be chosen based on the model and likely/known pathogen
20. Administration of antimicrobials should mimic clinical practice
i. Antimicrobials should be initiated after sepsis is establishedC

R recommendation strength, C consideration strength

Combined recommendations and considerations from the working groups (WG) 1 and 2 R recommendation strength, C consideration strength Combined recommendations and considerations from the working groups (WG) 3 and 4 R recommendation strength, C consideration strength Combined recommendations and considerations from the working groups (WG) 5 and 6 R recommendation strength, C consideration strength The current executive summary briefly describes the Wiggers-Bernard Conference initiative and presents the compiled consensus points. The details of the recommendations/considerations are published in three separate papers [19-21] appearing in the December issue of Shock. Tables 1, 2, and 3 summarize the main MQTiPSS consensus points published in those articles: part I—Table 1 content [19], part II—Table 2 [20], and part III—Table 3 [21]. Each publication is built on two (related) working group themes and includes a narrative clarifying caveats and intricacies related to the accepted consensus points.

The future

The presented consensus has not received formal endorsement from professional bodies. Writing an initial consensus was a strategic decision given that an expert opinion report has a shorter publication turnaround and our intention was to rapidly introduce the MQTiPSS concept. The Wiggers-Bernard Conference was conceived not as a one-time event but rather as an initial “call-to-arms,” an invitation to interested parties to provide further refinement and expansion of the proposed points. The on-going expansion initiatives include formation of a task force (under the auspices of the Shock Society; June 2017) for creation of robust, defined parameters to score sepsis models for clinical relevance. Another iteration of the Wiggers-Bernard Conference on animal sepsis models is planned for October 2019 at the joint conference of the European Shock Society and International Federation of Shock Societies in Crete, Greece.

Conclusions

In summary, we believe that the proposed guidelines represent the first concrete steps toward creation of a realistic framework for standardization of animal models of sepsis (i.e., MQTiPSS). Such a framework, once widely employed, will improve the quality of pre-clinical investigation and arm clinicians with better tools for combating sepsis in patients.
  20 in total

1.  Researchers urged to tell public how animal studies benefit human health.

Authors:  L Lamberg
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1999-08-18       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 2.  Animal models of heart failure: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association.

Authors:  Steven R Houser; Kenneth B Margulies; Anne M Murphy; Francis G Spinale; Gary S Francis; Sumanth D Prabhu; Howard A Rockman; David A Kass; Jeffery D Molkentin; Mark A Sussman; Walter J Koch; Walter Koch
Journal:  Circ Res       Date:  2012-05-17       Impact factor: 17.367

Review 3.  Murine Models of Sepsis and Trauma: Can We Bridge the Gap?

Authors:  Julie A Stortz; Steven L Raymond; Juan C Mira; Lyle L Moldawer; Alicia M Mohr; Philip A Efron
Journal:  ILAR J       Date:  2017-07-01

Review 4.  Preclinical sepsis models.

Authors:  Tom van der Poll
Journal:  Surg Infect (Larchmt)       Date:  2012-10-09       Impact factor: 2.150

5.  Reporting Standards for Preclinical Studies of Stroke Therapy.

Authors:  Farhaan Vahidy; Wolf-Rüdiger Schäbitz; Marc Fisher; Jaroslaw Aronowski
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2016-09-13       Impact factor: 7.914

6.  Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016.

Authors:  Andrew Rhodes; Laura E Evans; Waleed Alhazzani; Mitchell M Levy; Massimo Antonelli; Ricard Ferrer; Anand Kumar; Jonathan E Sevransky; Charles L Sprung; Mark E Nunnally; Bram Rochwerg; Gordon D Rubenfeld; Derek C Angus; Djillali Annane; Richard J Beale; Geoffrey J Bellinghan; Gordon R Bernard; Jean-Daniel Chiche; Craig Coopersmith; Daniel P De Backer; Craig J French; Seitaro Fujishima; Herwig Gerlach; Jorge Luis Hidalgo; Steven M Hollenberg; Alan E Jones; Dilip R Karnad; Ruth M Kleinpell; Younsuck Koh; Thiago Costa Lisboa; Flavia R Machado; John J Marini; John C Marshall; John E Mazuski; Lauralyn A McIntyre; Anthony S McLean; Sangeeta Mehta; Rui P Moreno; John Myburgh; Paolo Navalesi; Osamu Nishida; Tiffany M Osborn; Anders Perner; Colleen M Plunkett; Marco Ranieri; Christa A Schorr; Maureen A Seckel; Christopher W Seymour; Lisa Shieh; Khalid A Shukri; Steven Q Simpson; Mervyn Singer; B Taylor Thompson; Sean R Townsend; Thomas Van der Poll; Jean-Louis Vincent; W Joost Wiersinga; Janice L Zimmerman; R Phillip Dellinger
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 7.598

7.  Sepsis-3 on the Block: What Does It Mean for Preclinical Sepsis Modeling?

Authors:  Marcin F Osuchowski; Christoph Thiemermann; Daniel G Remick
Journal:  Shock       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 3.454

8.  Can animal models of disease reliably inform human studies?

Authors:  H Bart van der Worp; David W Howells; Emily S Sena; Michelle J Porritt; Sarah Rewell; Victoria O'Collins; Malcolm R Macleod
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2010-03-30       Impact factor: 11.069

Review 9.  Part I: Minimum Quality Threshold in Preclinical Sepsis Studies (MQTiPSS) for Study Design and Humane Modeling Endpoints.

Authors:  Basilia Zingarelli; Craig M Coopersmith; Susanne Drechsler; Philip Efron; John C Marshall; Lyle Moldawer; W Joost Wiersinga; Xianzhong Xiao; Marcin F Osuchowski; Christoph Thiemermann
Journal:  Shock       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 3.454

10.  Preclinical efficacy studies in investigator brochures: Do they enable risk-benefit assessment?

Authors:  Susanne Wieschowski; William Wei Lim Chin; Carole Federico; Sören Sievers; Jonathan Kimmelman; Daniel Strech
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2018-04-05       Impact factor: 8.029

View more
  20 in total

1.  The Influence of Pain and Analgesia in Rodent Models of Sepsis.

Authors:  Kelsey C Carpenter; John M Hakenjos; Christopher D Fry; Jean A Nemzek
Journal:  Comp Med       Date:  2019-06-18       Impact factor: 0.982

2.  Aged IRF3-KO Mice are Protected from Sepsis.

Authors:  Dinesh G Goswami; Wendy E Walker
Journal:  J Inflamm Res       Date:  2021-11-03

Review 3.  Targeting of G-protein coupled receptors in sepsis.

Authors:  Abdul Rehman; Noor Ul-Ain Baloch; John P Morrow; Pál Pacher; György Haskó
Journal:  Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2020-03-19       Impact factor: 12.310

4.  Clinically relevant model of pneumococcal pneumonia, ARDS, and nonpulmonary organ dysfunction in mice.

Authors:  Jeffrey E Gotts; Olivier Bernard; Lauren Chun; Roxanne H Croze; James T Ross; Nicolas Nesseler; Xueling Wu; Jason Abbott; Xiaohui Fang; Carolyn S Calfee; Michael A Matthay
Journal:  Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol       Date:  2019-09-11       Impact factor: 5.464

5.  IL-10 Has Differential Effects on the Innate and Adaptive Immune Systems of Septic Patients.

Authors:  Monty Mazer; Jaqueline Unsinger; Anne Drewry; Andrew Walton; Dale Osborne; Theresa Blood; Richard Hotchkiss; Kenneth E Remy
Journal:  J Immunol       Date:  2019-09-09       Impact factor: 5.422

6.  Old Mice Demonstrate Organ Dysfunction as well as Prolonged Inflammation, Immunosuppression, and Weight Loss in a Modified Surgical Sepsis Model.

Authors:  Julie A Stortz; McKenzie K Hollen; Dina C Nacionales; Hiroyuki Horiguchi; Ricardo Ungaro; Marvin L Dirain; Zhongkai Wang; Quran Wu; Kevin K Wu; Ashok Kumar; Thomas C Foster; Brian D Stewart; Julia A Ross; Marc Segal; Azra Bihorac; Scott Brakenridge; Frederick A Moore; Stephanie E Wohlgemuth; Christiaan Leeuwenburgh; Alicia M Mohr; Lyle L Moldawer; Philip A Efron
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 7.598

7.  Anti-PD-L1 Therapy Does Not Improve Survival in a Murine Model of Lethal Staphylococcus aureus Pneumonia.

Authors:  Colleen S Curran; Lindsay M Busch; Yan Li; Cui Xizhong; Junfeng Sun; Peter Q Eichacker; Parizad Torabi-Parizi
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  2021-12-15       Impact factor: 5.226

8.  Pulmonary and intestinal microbiota dynamics during Gram-negative pneumonia-derived sepsis.

Authors:  W Joost Wiersinga; Floor Hugenholtz; Nora S Wolff; Max C Jacobs
Journal:  Intensive Care Med Exp       Date:  2021-07-12

Review 9.  The future of basic science in orthopaedics and traumatology: Cassandra or Prometheus?

Authors:  Henning Madry; Susanne Grässel; Ulrich Nöth; Borna Relja; Anke Bernstein; Denitsa Docheva; Max Daniel Kauther; Jan Christoph Katthagen; Rainer Bader; Martijn van Griensven; Dieter C Wirtz; Michael J Raschke; Markus Huber-Lang
Journal:  Eur J Med Res       Date:  2021-06-14       Impact factor: 2.175

10.  Peptide VSAK maintains tissue glucose uptake and attenuates pro-inflammatory responses caused by LPS in an experimental model of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome: a PET study.

Authors:  Ismael Luna-Reyes; Eréndira G Pérez-Hernández; Blanca Delgado-Coello; Miguel Ángel Ávila-Rodríguez; Jaime Mas-Oliva
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-07-20       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.