Supportive care for animals on toxicology studies: An industrial best practices survey conducted by the IQ 3Rs TPS CRO Outreach Working Group

S. Salian-Mehta, Jolaine M Wilson, H. Burr, Abigail Greenstein, K. Murray, W. West, N. Poy
{"title":"Supportive care for animals on toxicology studies: An industrial best practices survey conducted by the IQ 3Rs TPS CRO Outreach Working Group","authors":"S. Salian-Mehta, Jolaine M Wilson, H. Burr, Abigail Greenstein, K. Murray, W. West, N. Poy","doi":"10.1177/2397847321999760","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Contract Research Organizations (CROs) conducting toxicology studies on behalf of biopharmaceutical sponsors and others routinely provide supportive care for animals to minimize pain and distress on studies. A large number of guidance documents govern the care of experimental animals, however there is currently no uniform approach on the communication between sponsor and their CRO partners in providing a standard definition of and strategies for administering supportive care in toxicity studies. This survey was conducted by the CRO Outreach Working Group (WG), a part of the 3Rs Translational and Predictive Sciences (TPS) Leadership Group of the International Consortium for Innovation and Quality in Pharmaceutical Development (IQ Consortium), to better understand the provision of supportive care on nonclinical studies. The survey aimed to define supportive care strategies, identify alternatives to supportive care, and understand regulatory feedback and implications about supportive care decisions. The survey was distributed to members of the 3Rs Leadership Group of the IQ Consortium and several CRO partners, representing 35 organizations as potential respondents. The results of the survey from 13 respondents provided positive feedback that helped in highlighting the existing best practices for supportive care. Areas of enhancements identified included greater consistency in the inclusion of sponsor veterinarians on project teams for externalized studies, the timing of initiation of supportive care, and increased sharing of regulatory outcomes. Suggested best practices include creating a plan of action for veterinary care prior to study start, and enhancing information sharing regarding expected toxicities from previous study findings. Improved communication regarding supportive care will pave the way for enhanced 3Rs initiatives, refining the existing animal care paradigm and helping to ensure the most ethical toxicology study designs.","PeriodicalId":23155,"journal":{"name":"Toxicology Research and Application","volume":"113 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Toxicology Research and Application","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2397847321999760","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Contract Research Organizations (CROs) conducting toxicology studies on behalf of biopharmaceutical sponsors and others routinely provide supportive care for animals to minimize pain and distress on studies. A large number of guidance documents govern the care of experimental animals, however there is currently no uniform approach on the communication between sponsor and their CRO partners in providing a standard definition of and strategies for administering supportive care in toxicity studies. This survey was conducted by the CRO Outreach Working Group (WG), a part of the 3Rs Translational and Predictive Sciences (TPS) Leadership Group of the International Consortium for Innovation and Quality in Pharmaceutical Development (IQ Consortium), to better understand the provision of supportive care on nonclinical studies. The survey aimed to define supportive care strategies, identify alternatives to supportive care, and understand regulatory feedback and implications about supportive care decisions. The survey was distributed to members of the 3Rs Leadership Group of the IQ Consortium and several CRO partners, representing 35 organizations as potential respondents. The results of the survey from 13 respondents provided positive feedback that helped in highlighting the existing best practices for supportive care. Areas of enhancements identified included greater consistency in the inclusion of sponsor veterinarians on project teams for externalized studies, the timing of initiation of supportive care, and increased sharing of regulatory outcomes. Suggested best practices include creating a plan of action for veterinary care prior to study start, and enhancing information sharing regarding expected toxicities from previous study findings. Improved communication regarding supportive care will pave the way for enhanced 3Rs initiatives, refining the existing animal care paradigm and helping to ensure the most ethical toxicology study designs.
动物毒理学研究的支持性护理:IQ 3Rs TPS CRO外展工作组进行的工业最佳实践调查
合同研究组织(cro)代表生物制药赞助商和其他人进行毒理学研究,通常为动物提供支持性护理,以尽量减少研究中的疼痛和痛苦。大量的指导文件管理着实验动物的护理,然而,目前在提供毒性研究中支持性护理的标准定义和策略方面,主办者和他们的CRO合作伙伴之间没有统一的沟通方法。这项调查由CRO外展工作组(WG)进行,该工作组是国际药物开发创新和质量联盟(IQ Consortium) 3Rs转化和预测科学(TPS)领导小组的一部分,旨在更好地了解非临床研究中支持性护理的提供。该调查旨在定义支持性护理策略,确定支持性护理的替代方案,并了解监管反馈和支持性护理决策的影响。该调查被分发给智商联盟3r领导小组的成员和几个CRO合作伙伴,代表35个组织作为潜在的受访者。来自13个答复者的调查结果提供了积极的反馈,有助于突出现有的支持性护理最佳做法。确定的改进领域包括在外部化研究的项目团队中纳入赞助兽医的一致性,支持性护理的启动时间,以及增加监管结果的共享。建议的最佳做法包括在研究开始之前制定兽医护理行动计划,并根据以前的研究结果加强有关预期毒性的信息共享。改善支持性护理方面的沟通将为加强3r计划铺平道路,完善现有的动物护理模式,并有助于确保最合乎道德的毒理学研究设计。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信