生物医学研究中考虑性别差异的简史——从动物模型和人体临床试验中给体外社区的教训。

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Helena Niobe Renate Gutleb, Arno Christian Gutleb
{"title":"生物医学研究中考虑性别差异的简史——从动物模型和人体临床试验中给体外社区的教训。","authors":"Helena Niobe Renate Gutleb,&nbsp;Arno Christian Gutleb","doi":"10.1177/02611929231156720","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In recent decades, it has become clear that in many fields - such as drug development, particularly with regard to drug dosage and specific disease treatment - the sex of a patient must be taken into consideration, in view of the fact that male and female physiology and pathophysiology show many differences of practical concern. While, in the last decade or so, considerable efforts have been undertaken to consider the sex of the animals during the planning of experiments, this topic has just started to be acknowledged in <i>in vitro</i> studies. Cells in such studies seem mainly to be used according to their availability, without considering the sex of the original donor. Even when such information is available, experimental data are reported without overtly detailing this information. In recent years, the increasing complexity of <i>in vitro</i> models (e.g. stem cell-based, 3-D cultures, organoids, or organ-on-a-chip technologies) has contributed to systems that better resemble the human <i>in vivo</i> situation. However, the issue of the sex of the experimental organisms being used has not yet been properly taken up by the cell culture community. Thus, alongside the increasing complexity of multicell-type models, we now see <i>in vitro</i> models that incorporate cells from both male and female origin - this representing, in fact, a genetic chimaera. Here, we aim to discuss where we are currently, with respect to considering the sex of any animals or humans used in experiments, and we try to identify what is lacking in the cell culture field, in order to help facilitate change.</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":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Short History of the Consideration of Sex Differences in Biomedical Research - Lessons for the <i>In Vitro</i> Community from Animal Models and Human Clinical Trials.\",\"authors\":\"Helena Niobe Renate Gutleb,&nbsp;Arno Christian Gutleb\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02611929231156720\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In recent decades, it has become clear that in many fields - such as drug development, particularly with regard to drug dosage and specific disease treatment - the sex of a patient must be taken into consideration, in view of the fact that male and female physiology and pathophysiology show many differences of practical concern. While, in the last decade or so, considerable efforts have been undertaken to consider the sex of the animals during the planning of experiments, this topic has just started to be acknowledged in <i>in vitro</i> studies. Cells in such studies seem mainly to be used according to their availability, without considering the sex of the original donor. Even when such information is available, experimental data are reported without overtly detailing this information. In recent years, the increasing complexity of <i>in vitro</i> models (e.g. stem cell-based, 3-D cultures, organoids, or organ-on-a-chip technologies) has contributed to systems that better resemble the human <i>in vivo</i> situation. However, the issue of the sex of the experimental organisms being used has not yet been properly taken up by the cell culture community. Thus, alongside the increasing complexity of multicell-type models, we now see <i>in vitro</i> models that incorporate cells from both male and female origin - this representing, in fact, a genetic chimaera. Here, we aim to discuss where we are currently, with respect to considering the sex of any animals or humans used in experiments, and we try to identify what is lacking in the cell culture field, in order to help facilitate change.</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\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Atla-Alternatives To Laboratory Animals\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02611929231156720\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Atla-Alternatives To Laboratory Animals","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02611929231156720","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: 2

摘要

近几十年来,很明显,在许多领域,例如药物开发,特别是在药物剂量和特定疾病治疗方面,必须考虑到患者的性别,因为男性和女性的生理和病理生理表现出许多实际关注的差异。虽然在过去的十年左右,在实验计划中考虑动物的性别已经做出了相当大的努力,但这个主题刚刚开始在体外研究中得到承认。在这类研究中,细胞似乎主要是根据它们的可用性来使用,而不考虑原始供体的性别。即使有这样的信息,报告的实验数据也没有公开详细说明这一信息。近年来,体外模型(如基于干细胞的、三维培养的、类器官或器官芯片技术)的复杂性日益增加,使得系统更接近人体的体内情况。然而,被使用的实验生物的性别问题还没有被细胞培养界适当地接受。因此,随着多细胞模型的日益复杂,我们现在看到的体外模型包含了来自男性和女性的细胞——这实际上代表了一种基因嵌合体。在这里,我们的目的是讨论我们目前在考虑实验中使用的任何动物或人类的性别方面的进展,并试图找出细胞培养领域缺乏的东西,以帮助促进变革。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Short History of the Consideration of Sex Differences in Biomedical Research - Lessons for the In Vitro Community from Animal Models and Human Clinical Trials.

In recent decades, it has become clear that in many fields - such as drug development, particularly with regard to drug dosage and specific disease treatment - the sex of a patient must be taken into consideration, in view of the fact that male and female physiology and pathophysiology show many differences of practical concern. While, in the last decade or so, considerable efforts have been undertaken to consider the sex of the animals during the planning of experiments, this topic has just started to be acknowledged in in vitro studies. Cells in such studies seem mainly to be used according to their availability, without considering the sex of the original donor. Even when such information is available, experimental data are reported without overtly detailing this information. In recent years, the increasing complexity of in vitro models (e.g. stem cell-based, 3-D cultures, organoids, or organ-on-a-chip technologies) has contributed to systems that better resemble the human in vivo situation. However, the issue of the sex of the experimental organisms being used has not yet been properly taken up by the cell culture community. Thus, alongside the increasing complexity of multicell-type models, we now see in vitro models that incorporate cells from both male and female origin - this representing, in fact, a genetic chimaera. Here, we aim to discuss where we are currently, with respect to considering the sex of any animals or humans used in experiments, and we try to identify what is lacking in the cell culture field, in order to help facilitate change.

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
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