非临床毒性研究中的虚拟对照组:对毒理学临床病理数据解释的影响。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 PATHOLOGY
Adeyemi O Adedeji, Adi Wasserkrug Naor
{"title":"非临床毒性研究中的虚拟对照组:对毒理学临床病理数据解释的影响。","authors":"Adeyemi O Adedeji, Adi Wasserkrug Naor","doi":"10.1177/01926233241300310","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>One of the emerging concepts on the reduction of animal use in non-clinical studies is the use of virtual control group (VCG) to replace concurrent control group (CCG). The VCG involves the generation of a control data from historical control data to match a specific study design. This review focuses on two recently published proof-of-concept (POC) studies conducted in rats. One major issue that was consistently seen across these POC studies was the non-reproducibility of some quantitative endpoints between the CCG and the VCG, with clinical pathology parameters being the most affected. The inconsistencies observed with the clinical pathology parameters when using VCGs may lead to: (1) misconception about the accuracy and sensitivity of traditional clinical pathology biomarkers and its implications on safety monitoring in the clinic; (2) inability to correctly identify and characterize organ dysfunctions; (3) interference with the weight-of-evidence approach used in identifying hazards in toxicologic clinical pathology and toxicology studies at large; and (4) wrong interpretations and data reproducibility issues. Other alternatives to reduce animal use in toxicology studies are also discussed including blood microsampling for toxicokinetics, scientifically justified use of recovery animals, and appropriate use and continuous investments in new alternative methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":23113,"journal":{"name":"Toxicologic Pathology","volume":" ","pages":"1926233241300310"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Virtual Control Groups in Non-clinical Toxicity Studies: Impacts on Toxicologic Clinical Pathology Data Interpretation.\",\"authors\":\"Adeyemi O Adedeji, Adi Wasserkrug Naor\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01926233241300310\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>One of the emerging concepts on the reduction of animal use in non-clinical studies is the use of virtual control group (VCG) to replace concurrent control group (CCG). The VCG involves the generation of a control data from historical control data to match a specific study design. This review focuses on two recently published proof-of-concept (POC) studies conducted in rats. One major issue that was consistently seen across these POC studies was the non-reproducibility of some quantitative endpoints between the CCG and the VCG, with clinical pathology parameters being the most affected. The inconsistencies observed with the clinical pathology parameters when using VCGs may lead to: (1) misconception about the accuracy and sensitivity of traditional clinical pathology biomarkers and its implications on safety monitoring in the clinic; (2) inability to correctly identify and characterize organ dysfunctions; (3) interference with the weight-of-evidence approach used in identifying hazards in toxicologic clinical pathology and toxicology studies at large; and (4) wrong interpretations and data reproducibility issues. Other alternatives to reduce animal use in toxicology studies are also discussed including blood microsampling for toxicokinetics, scientifically justified use of recovery animals, and appropriate use and continuous investments in new alternative methods.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23113,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Toxicologic Pathology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1926233241300310\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Toxicologic Pathology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01926233241300310\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Toxicologic Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01926233241300310","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在非临床研究中减少动物使用的新兴概念之一是使用虚拟对照组(VCG)来代替并发对照组(CCG)。VCG包括从历史对照数据中生成对照数据,以匹配特定的研究设计。本文综述了最近发表的两项在大鼠中进行的概念验证(POC)研究。在这些POC研究中一致发现的一个主要问题是CCG和VCG之间的一些定量终点的不可重复性,其中临床病理参数受到的影响最大。使用vcg时观察到的与临床病理参数的不一致可能导致:(1)对传统临床病理生物标志物的准确性和敏感性及其对临床安全监测的影响的误解;(2)不能正确识别和描述器官功能障碍;(3)干扰用于确定毒理学临床病理学和毒理学研究中危害的证据权重法;(4)错误解释和数据可重复性问题。还讨论了减少毒理学研究中动物使用的其他替代方法,包括用于毒性动力学的血液微采样,科学合理地使用恢复动物,以及适当使用和持续投资新的替代方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Virtual Control Groups in Non-clinical Toxicity Studies: Impacts on Toxicologic Clinical Pathology Data Interpretation.

One of the emerging concepts on the reduction of animal use in non-clinical studies is the use of virtual control group (VCG) to replace concurrent control group (CCG). The VCG involves the generation of a control data from historical control data to match a specific study design. This review focuses on two recently published proof-of-concept (POC) studies conducted in rats. One major issue that was consistently seen across these POC studies was the non-reproducibility of some quantitative endpoints between the CCG and the VCG, with clinical pathology parameters being the most affected. The inconsistencies observed with the clinical pathology parameters when using VCGs may lead to: (1) misconception about the accuracy and sensitivity of traditional clinical pathology biomarkers and its implications on safety monitoring in the clinic; (2) inability to correctly identify and characterize organ dysfunctions; (3) interference with the weight-of-evidence approach used in identifying hazards in toxicologic clinical pathology and toxicology studies at large; and (4) wrong interpretations and data reproducibility issues. Other alternatives to reduce animal use in toxicology studies are also discussed including blood microsampling for toxicokinetics, scientifically justified use of recovery animals, and appropriate use and continuous investments in new alternative methods.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Toxicologic Pathology
Toxicologic Pathology 医学-病理学
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
20.00%
发文量
57
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Toxicologic Pathology is dedicated to the promotion of human, animal, and environmental health through the dissemination of knowledge, techniques, and guidelines to enhance the understanding and practice of toxicologic pathology. Toxicologic Pathology, the official journal of the Society of Toxicologic Pathology, will publish Original Research Articles, Symposium Articles, Review Articles, Meeting Reports, New Techniques, and Position Papers that are relevant to toxicologic pathology.
×
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