研究人员是否因为中风领域的临床翻译不佳而远离动物模型?对意见报纸的分析。

Q1 Medicine
BMJ Open Science Pub Date : 2020-02-24 eCollection Date: 2020-01-01 DOI:10.1136/bmjos-2019-100041
Pandora Pound, Rebecca Ram
{"title":"研究人员是否因为中风领域的临床翻译不佳而远离动物模型?对意见报纸的分析。","authors":"Pandora Pound,&nbsp;Rebecca Ram","doi":"10.1136/bmjos-2019-100041","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Despite decades of research using animals to develop pharmaceutical treatments for patients who have had a stroke, few therapeutic options exist. The vast majority of interventions successful in preclinical animal studies have turned out to have no efficacy in humans or to be harmful to humans. In view of this, we explore whether there is evidence of a move away from animal models in this field.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used an innovative methodology, the analysis of opinion papers. Although we took a systematic approach to literature searching and data extraction, this is not a systematic review because the study involves the synthesis of opinions, not research evidence. Data were extracted from retrieved papers in chronological order and analysed qualitatively and descriptively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty eligible papers, published between 1979 and 2018, were identified. Most authors were from academic departments of neurology, neuroscience or stroke research. Authors agreed that translational stroke research was in crisis. They held diverse views about the causes of this crisis, most of which did not fundamentally challenge the use of animal models. Some, however, attributed the translational crisis to animal-human species differences and one to a lack of human in vitro models. Most of the proposed solutions involved fine-tuning animal models, but authors disagreed about whether such modifications would improve translation. A minority suggested using human in vitro methods alongside animal models. One proposed focusing only on human in vitro methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Despite recognising that animal models have been unsuccessful in the field of stroke, most researchers exhibited a strong resistance to relinquishing them. Nevertheless, there is an emerging challenge to the use of animal models, in the form of human-focused in vitro approaches. For the sake of stroke patients there is an urgent need to revitalise translational stroke research and explore the evidence for these new approaches.</p>","PeriodicalId":9212,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Science","volume":" ","pages":"e100041"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/bmjos-2019-100041","citationCount":"14","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are researchers moving away from animal models as a result of poor clinical translation in the field of stroke? An analysis of opinion papers.\",\"authors\":\"Pandora Pound,&nbsp;Rebecca Ram\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjos-2019-100041\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Despite decades of research using animals to develop pharmaceutical treatments for patients who have had a stroke, few therapeutic options exist. The vast majority of interventions successful in preclinical animal studies have turned out to have no efficacy in humans or to be harmful to humans. In view of this, we explore whether there is evidence of a move away from animal models in this field.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used an innovative methodology, the analysis of opinion papers. Although we took a systematic approach to literature searching and data extraction, this is not a systematic review because the study involves the synthesis of opinions, not research evidence. Data were extracted from retrieved papers in chronological order and analysed qualitatively and descriptively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty eligible papers, published between 1979 and 2018, were identified. Most authors were from academic departments of neurology, neuroscience or stroke research. Authors agreed that translational stroke research was in crisis. They held diverse views about the causes of this crisis, most of which did not fundamentally challenge the use of animal models. Some, however, attributed the translational crisis to animal-human species differences and one to a lack of human in vitro models. Most of the proposed solutions involved fine-tuning animal models, but authors disagreed about whether such modifications would improve translation. A minority suggested using human in vitro methods alongside animal models. One proposed focusing only on human in vitro methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Despite recognising that animal models have been unsuccessful in the field of stroke, most researchers exhibited a strong resistance to relinquishing them. Nevertheless, there is an emerging challenge to the use of animal models, in the form of human-focused in vitro approaches. For the sake of stroke patients there is an urgent need to revitalise translational stroke research and explore the evidence for these new approaches.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9212,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Open Science\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e100041\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-02-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/bmjos-2019-100041\",\"citationCount\":\"14\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Open Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjos-2019-100041\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2020/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjos-2019-100041","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

摘要

目的:尽管几十年来用动物研究开发中风患者的药物治疗方法,但很少有治疗方案存在。绝大多数在临床前动物研究中成功的干预措施对人体无效或对人体有害。鉴于此,我们探讨是否有证据表明在这一领域远离动物模型。方法:我们采用了一种创新的方法,分析意见论文。虽然我们采用了系统的方法进行文献检索和数据提取,但这不是一项系统综述,因为这项研究涉及的是观点的综合,而不是研究证据。数据按时间顺序从检索到的论文中提取,并进行定性和描述性分析。结果:80篇符合条件的论文,发表于1979年至2018年之间。大多数作者来自神经学、神经科学或中风研究的学术部门。作者们一致认为转译性中风研究正处于危机之中。他们对这场危机的原因持有不同的观点,其中大多数观点并没有从根本上质疑动物模型的使用。然而,一些人将翻译危机归因于动物和人类的物种差异,还有一个原因是缺乏人类体外模型。大多数提出的解决方案都涉及对动物模型进行微调,但作者不同意这种修改是否会改善翻译。少数人建议使用人类体外方法和动物模型。有人建议只关注人类体外方法。结论:尽管认识到动物模型在中风领域已经不成功,但大多数研究人员对放弃它们表现出强烈的抵制。然而,以人类为中心的体外方法形式使用动物模型面临着新的挑战。为了脑卒中患者的利益,迫切需要重振转化脑卒中研究,并为这些新方法探索证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Are researchers moving away from animal models as a result of poor clinical translation in the field of stroke? An analysis of opinion papers.

Are researchers moving away from animal models as a result of poor clinical translation in the field of stroke? An analysis of opinion papers.

Are researchers moving away from animal models as a result of poor clinical translation in the field of stroke? An analysis of opinion papers.

Are researchers moving away from animal models as a result of poor clinical translation in the field of stroke? An analysis of opinion papers.

Objectives: Despite decades of research using animals to develop pharmaceutical treatments for patients who have had a stroke, few therapeutic options exist. The vast majority of interventions successful in preclinical animal studies have turned out to have no efficacy in humans or to be harmful to humans. In view of this, we explore whether there is evidence of a move away from animal models in this field.

Methods: We used an innovative methodology, the analysis of opinion papers. Although we took a systematic approach to literature searching and data extraction, this is not a systematic review because the study involves the synthesis of opinions, not research evidence. Data were extracted from retrieved papers in chronological order and analysed qualitatively and descriptively.

Results: Eighty eligible papers, published between 1979 and 2018, were identified. Most authors were from academic departments of neurology, neuroscience or stroke research. Authors agreed that translational stroke research was in crisis. They held diverse views about the causes of this crisis, most of which did not fundamentally challenge the use of animal models. Some, however, attributed the translational crisis to animal-human species differences and one to a lack of human in vitro models. Most of the proposed solutions involved fine-tuning animal models, but authors disagreed about whether such modifications would improve translation. A minority suggested using human in vitro methods alongside animal models. One proposed focusing only on human in vitro methods.

Conclusion: Despite recognising that animal models have been unsuccessful in the field of stroke, most researchers exhibited a strong resistance to relinquishing them. Nevertheless, there is an emerging challenge to the use of animal models, in the form of human-focused in vitro approaches. For the sake of stroke patients there is an urgent need to revitalise translational stroke research and explore the evidence for these new approaches.

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
BMJ Open Science
BMJ Open Science Medicine-General Medicine
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
31 weeks
×
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