Reduction strategies in animal research: A review of scientific approaches at the intra-experimental, supra-experimental and extra-experimental levels

ATLA Alternatives to Laboratory Animals

Volumn 33, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 369-377

  De Boo, Jasmijn ^a   Hendriksen, Coenraad ^a  

^a NETHERLANDS VACCINE INSTITUTE   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Alternative; Animal; Approach; Reduction; Research; Strategy

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; BREEDING; ETHICS; EXPERIMENT; LEARNING; MEDICAL EDUCATION; NONHUMAN; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REDUCTION; RESEARCH; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; REVIEW; SCIENCE; SCREENING; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 24944555229     PISSN: 02611929     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/026119290503300404     Document Type: Review

References (29)

1. Russell, W.M.S. & Burch, R.L. (1959). The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique. 238pp. London, UK: Methuen.
2. Anon. (1986). European Directive of 24 November 1986 on the Approximation of Laws, Regulations and Administrative Provisions of the Member States Regarding the Protection of Vertebrate Animals Used for Experimental and Other Scientific Purposes (Directive 86/609/EEC). Official Journal of the European Communities L358, 1-29.
3. Anon. (1986). Convention for the Protection of Vertebrate Animals used for Experimental and Other Scientific Purposes (ETS 123), 51pp. Strassbourg, France: Council of Europe.
4. Smyth, D.H. (1978). Alternatives to Animal Experiments. 216pp. London, UK: Scolar Press.
5. Festing, M.F.W. & Lovell, D.P. (1996). Reducing the use of laboratory animals in toxicological research and testing by better experimental design. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 58, 127-140.
6. Anon. (1993). Responsibility in The Use of Animals in Medical Research. Guidance issued by the Medical Research Council, London.
7. Festing, M.F.W., Baumans, V., Combes, R.D., Halder, M., Hendriksen, C.F.M., Howard, B.R., Lovell, O.P., Moore, G.J., Overend, Ph. & Wilson, M.S. (1998). Reducing the use of laboratory animals in biomedical research: problems and possible solutions. ATLA 26, 283-301.
8. Balls, M., Festing, M.F.W. & Vaughan, S., eds. (2004). Reducing the use of experimental animals where no replacement is yet available. ATLA 32, Suppl. 2, 1-104.
9. Fry, D. (2004). Reduction by well-defined objectives. ATLA 32, Suppl. 1, 241-244.
10. Festing, M.F.W. (1997). Experimental design and husbandry. Experimental Gerontology 32, 39-47.
11. Wilgenburg, H. van, Van Schaick Zillesen, P.G. & Krulichova, I. (2003). Sample power and ExpDesign: tools for improving design of animal experiments. Laboratory Animals 32, 40-44.
12. Mead, R. (1988). The Design of Experiments. 634pp. Cambridge University Press, New York.
13. Koudandé, O.D., Thomson, P.C. & Van Arendonk, J.A.M. (1999). Model for population growth of laboratory animals subjected to marker-assisted introgression: how many animals do we need? Heredity 82, 16-24.
14. Festing, M.F.W. (1992). The scope for improving the design of laboratory animal experiments. Laboratory Animals 26, 256-267.
15. Hendriksen, C.F.M., Van der Gun, J.W., Marsman, F.R. & Kreeftenberg, J.G. (1987). The effects of reductions in the numbers of animals used for the potency assay of the diphtheria and tetanus components of adsorbed vaccines by the methods of the European pharmacopoeia. Journal of Biological Standardization 15, 353-362.
16. Festing, M.F.W. (1995). Reduction in animal use 35 years after Russell & Burch's principles of humane experimental technique. ATLA 23, 51-60.
17. Festing, M.F.W. & Altman, D.G. (2002). Guidelines for the design and statistical analysis of experiments using laboratory animals. ILAR Journal 43, 244-258.
18. Balls, M., Goldberg, A.M., Fentem, J.H., Broadhead, C.L., Burch, R.L., Festing, M.F.W., Frazier, J.M., Hendriksen, C.F., Jennings, M., van der Kamp, M.D., Morton, D.B., Rowan, A.N., Russell, C., Russell, W.M.S., Spielmann, H., Stephens, M.L., Stokes, W.S., Straughan, D.W., Yager, J.D., Zurlo, J. & Van Zutphen, B.F. (1995). The three Rs: the way forward: the report and recommendations of ECVAM Workshop 11. ATLA 23, 838-866.
19. Pössnecker, A. & Cüssler, K. (1998). Evaluation of the relevance of the target animal safety test for the quality control of veterinary immunological medicinal products. ALTEX 1, Suppl., 71-75.
20. Knight, P.A. & Roberts, P.A. (1987). An evaluation of some proposals for a reduction in the number of animals used for the potency testing of diphtheria and tetanus vaccines. Journal of Biological Standardization 15, 165-175.
21. Anon. (2002). Consideration of Alternatives to Painful/Distressful Procedures. Animal Care Resource Guide Policy Number 12, 3pp. Riverdale, MD, USA: USDA/APHIS. Website http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ac/policy/policy12.pdf.
22. Nevalainen, T., Berge, E., Gallix, P., Jilge, B., Melloni, E., Thomann, P., Waynforth, B. & Van Zutphen, L.F.M. (1999). FELASA guidelines for education of specialists in laboratory animal science (Category D). Laboratory Animals 33, 1-15.
23. Fentener van Vlissingen, J.M. (1999). The re-use of animals for research - a humane endpoint? In: Humane Endpoints in Animal Experiments for Biomedical Research. Hendriksen C.F.M. & Morton D.B. (eds.) 150pp. London, UK, The Royal Society of Medicine Press Ltd.
24. Anon. (1966). US Animal Welfare Act. Public Law 89-554 of 24 August 1966. United States Code, Title 7, Sections 2131-2159. Washington, DC, USA: US Congress.
25. OECD (2001). OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals No. 420: Acute Oral Toxicity - Fixed Dose Procedure. 14pp. Paris, France: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
26. OECD (2001). OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals No. 423: Acute Oral Toxicity -Acute Toxic Class Method. 14pp. Paris, France: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
27. OECD (2001). OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals No. 425: Acute Oral Toxicity -Up-and-Down Procedure. 26pp. Paris, France: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
28. Anon. (2001). White Paper on the Strategy for a Future Chemicals Policy (COM [2001]88 final). Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. Website http://europa. eu.int/comm/environment/chemicals/whitepaper.htm.
29. Schade, R., Calzado, E.G., Sarmiento, R., Chacana, P.A., Porankiewicz-Asplund, J. & Terzolo, H.R. (2005). Chicken egg yolk antibodies (Ig-Y-technology): a review of progress in production and use in research and human and veterinary medicine. ATLA 33, 129-154.