Poor Translatability of Biomedical Research Using Animals - A Narrative Review.

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Lindsay J Marshall, Jarrod Bailey, Manuela Cassotta, Kathrin Herrmann, Francesca Pistollato
{"title":"Poor Translatability of Biomedical Research Using Animals - A Narrative Review.","authors":"Lindsay J Marshall,&nbsp;Jarrod Bailey,&nbsp;Manuela Cassotta,&nbsp;Kathrin Herrmann,&nbsp;Francesca Pistollato","doi":"10.1177/02611929231157756","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The failure rate for the translation of drugs from animal testing to human treatments remains at over 92%, where it has been for the past few decades. The majority of these failures are due to unexpected toxicity - that is, safety issues revealed in human trials that were not apparent in animal tests - or lack of efficacy. However, the use of more innovative tools, such as organs-on-chips, in the preclinical pipeline for drug testing, has revealed that these tools are more able to predict unexpected safety events prior to clinical trials and so can be used for this, as well as for efficacy testing. Here, we review several disease areas, and consider how the use of animal models has failed to offer effective new treatments. We also make some suggestions as to how the more human-relevant new approach methodologies might be applied to address this.</p>","PeriodicalId":55577,"journal":{"name":"Atla-Alternatives To Laboratory Animals","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Atla-Alternatives To Laboratory Animals","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02611929231157756","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

The failure rate for the translation of drugs from animal testing to human treatments remains at over 92%, where it has been for the past few decades. The majority of these failures are due to unexpected toxicity - that is, safety issues revealed in human trials that were not apparent in animal tests - or lack of efficacy. However, the use of more innovative tools, such as organs-on-chips, in the preclinical pipeline for drug testing, has revealed that these tools are more able to predict unexpected safety events prior to clinical trials and so can be used for this, as well as for efficacy testing. Here, we review several disease areas, and consider how the use of animal models has failed to offer effective new treatments. We also make some suggestions as to how the more human-relevant new approach methodologies might be applied to address this.

使用动物的生物医学研究的可译性差-叙述回顾。
在过去的几十年里,药物从动物试验到人类治疗的失败率一直保持在92%以上。这些失败大多是由于意想不到的毒性——也就是说,在人体试验中发现的安全问题在动物试验中没有显现出来——或缺乏功效。然而,在药物测试的临床前管道中使用更多的创新工具,例如芯片上的器官,表明这些工具更能够在临床试验之前预测意外的安全性事件,因此可以用于此,以及功效测试。在这里,我们回顾了几个疾病领域,并考虑如何使用动物模型未能提供有效的新治疗方法。我们还就如何应用与人类更相关的新方法方法来解决这一问题提出了一些建议。
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
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
3.70%
发文量
60
审稿时长
>18 weeks
期刊介绍: Alternatives to Laboratory Animals (ATLA) is a peer-reviewed journal, intended to cover all aspects of the development, validation, implementation and use of alternatives to laboratory animals in biomedical research and toxicity testing. In addition to the replacement of animals, it also covers work that aims to reduce the number of animals used and refine the in vivo experiments that are still carried out.
×
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