Validating animal models for preclinical research: a scientific and ethical discussion
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2010 |
Outros Autores: | , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/10216/64509 |
Resumo: | The use of animals to model humans in biomedical research relies on the notion that basic processes are sufficiently similar across species to allow extrapolation. Animal model validity is discussed in terms of the similarity between the model and human condition it is intended to model, but no formal validation of models is applied. There is a stark contrast here with non-animal alternatives in toxicology and safety studies, for which an extensive validation is required. In the present paper we discuss the potential and limitations of validating preclinical animal models for proof-of-concept studies using an approach similar to that applied to alternative non-animal methods in toxicology and safety testing. A major challenge in devising a validation system for animal models is the lack of a clear gold standard to compare results with. While a complete adoption of the validation approach for alternative methods is probably inappropriate for research animal models, key feature such as making data available for external validation and defining a strategy to run experiments in a way that permits meaningful retrospective analysis remain relevant. |
id |
RCAP_e8fcaaae71227a213ff5c55b5c5ac5e8 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio-aberto.up.pt:10216/64509 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
7160 |
spelling |
Validating animal models for preclinical research: a scientific and ethical discussionAnimal modelsPredictive validityValidationEthicsThe use of animals to model humans in biomedical research relies on the notion that basic processes are sufficiently similar across species to allow extrapolation. Animal model validity is discussed in terms of the similarity between the model and human condition it is intended to model, but no formal validation of models is applied. There is a stark contrast here with non-animal alternatives in toxicology and safety studies, for which an extensive validation is required. In the present paper we discuss the potential and limitations of validating preclinical animal models for proof-of-concept studies using an approach similar to that applied to alternative non-animal methods in toxicology and safety testing. A major challenge in devising a validation system for animal models is the lack of a clear gold standard to compare results with. While a complete adoption of the validation approach for alternative methods is probably inappropriate for research animal models, key feature such as making data available for external validation and defining a strategy to run experiments in a way that permits meaningful retrospective analysis remain relevant.Fund for the Replacement of Animals in Medical Experiments20102010-01-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10216/64509eng0261-1929Varga, OEHansen, AKSandøe, POlsson, IASinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2024-09-27T07:07:31Zoai:repositorio-aberto.up.pt:10216/64509Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openairemluisa.alvim@gmail.comopendoar:71602024-09-27T07:07:31Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Validating animal models for preclinical research: a scientific and ethical discussion |
title |
Validating animal models for preclinical research: a scientific and ethical discussion |
spellingShingle |
Validating animal models for preclinical research: a scientific and ethical discussion Varga, OE Animal models Predictive validity Validation Ethics |
title_short |
Validating animal models for preclinical research: a scientific and ethical discussion |
title_full |
Validating animal models for preclinical research: a scientific and ethical discussion |
title_fullStr |
Validating animal models for preclinical research: a scientific and ethical discussion |
title_full_unstemmed |
Validating animal models for preclinical research: a scientific and ethical discussion |
title_sort |
Validating animal models for preclinical research: a scientific and ethical discussion |
author |
Varga, OE |
author_facet |
Varga, OE Hansen, AK Sandøe, P Olsson, IAS |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Hansen, AK Sandøe, P Olsson, IAS |
author2_role |
author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Varga, OE Hansen, AK Sandøe, P Olsson, IAS |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Animal models Predictive validity Validation Ethics |
topic |
Animal models Predictive validity Validation Ethics |
description |
The use of animals to model humans in biomedical research relies on the notion that basic processes are sufficiently similar across species to allow extrapolation. Animal model validity is discussed in terms of the similarity between the model and human condition it is intended to model, but no formal validation of models is applied. There is a stark contrast here with non-animal alternatives in toxicology and safety studies, for which an extensive validation is required. In the present paper we discuss the potential and limitations of validating preclinical animal models for proof-of-concept studies using an approach similar to that applied to alternative non-animal methods in toxicology and safety testing. A major challenge in devising a validation system for animal models is the lack of a clear gold standard to compare results with. While a complete adoption of the validation approach for alternative methods is probably inappropriate for research animal models, key feature such as making data available for external validation and defining a strategy to run experiments in a way that permits meaningful retrospective analysis remain relevant. |
publishDate |
2010 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2010 2010-01-01T00:00:00Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/10216/64509 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/10216/64509 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
0261-1929 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Fund for the Replacement of Animals in Medical Experiments |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Fund for the Replacement of Animals in Medical Experiments |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
mluisa.alvim@gmail.com |
_version_ |
1817547469243809792 |