Fish embryos as alternative models for drug safety evaluation

Predictive Toxicology in Drug Safety

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 244-268

  Scholz, Stefan ^a   Büttner, Anita ^b   Klüver, Nils ^a   Guinea, Joaquin ^c  

^a HELMHOLTZ CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH UFZ   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEIPZIG   (Germany)

^c ZF Biolabs   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84858614709     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511779053.015     Document Type: Chapter

References (109)

1. Li AP. Accurate prediction of human drug toxicity: A major challenge in drug development. Chem Biol Interact. 2004;150(1):3-7.
2. Greener M. Drug safety on trial - Last years withdrawal of the anti-arthritis drug Vioxx triggered a debate about how to better monitor drug safety even after approval. Embo Rep. 2005;6(3):202-204.
3. DiMasi J, Hansen R, Grabowski H. The price of innovation: New estimates of drug development costs. J Health Econ. 2003;22(2).
4. Adams CP, Brantner VV. Estimating the cost of new drug development: Is it really $802 million? Health Affairs. 2006;25(2):420-428.
5. FDA. Challenge and opportunity on the critical path to new medicinal products. Retrieved from http://www.fda.gov. 2004.
6. Light DW, Warburton RN. Setting the record straight in the reply by DiMasi, Hansen and Grabowski. J Health Econ. 2005;24(5):1045-1048.
7. Riggs TL. Research and development costs for drugs. Lancet. 2004;363(9404): 184-194.
8. Kramer JA. Designing safe drugs: what to consider? Expert Opin Drug Discov. 2008;3(7):707-713.
9. Schuster D, Laggner C, Langer T. Why drugs fail - A study on side effects in new chemical entities. Curr Pharma Design. 2005;11(27):3545-3559.
10. Woosley RL, Rice G. A new system for moving drugs to market. Issues Sci Technol. 2005;21(2):63-68.
11. Commission of the European Communities. Fifth Report on the Statistics on the Number of Animals used for Experimental and other Scientific Purposes in the Member States of the European Union{SEC(2007)1455}. 2007.
12. Knight A. Non-animal methodologies within biomedical research and toxicity testing. ALTEX Alternat Tierexp. 2008;25(3):213-231.
13. Taylor K, Gordon N, Langley G, et al. Estimates for worldwide laboratory animal use in 2005. Altern Lab Anim. 2008;36(3):327-342.
14. Fieldent MR, Kolaja KL. The role of early in vivo toxicity testing in drug discovery toxicology. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2008; 7(2):107-110.
15. Amir-Aslani A. Toxicogenomic predictive modeling: Emerging opportunities for more efficient drug discovery and development; Technol Forecast Social Change. 2008; 75(7):905-932.
16. Gunnarsson L, Jauhiainen A, Kristiansson E, et al. Evolutionary conservation of human drug targets in organisms used for environmental risk assessments. Environ Sci Technol. 2008;42(15):5807-5813.
17. Chakraborty C, Hsu CH, Wen ZH, et al. Zebrafish: A complete animal model for in vivo drug discovery and development. Curr Drug Metab. 2009; 10(2): 116-124.
18. Redfern WS, Waldron G, Winter MJ, et al. Zebrafish assays as early safety pharmacology screens: Paradigm shift or red herring? J Pharmacol Toxicol Method. 2008;58(2):110-117.
19. Zon LI, Peterson RT. In vivo drug discovery in the zebrafish. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2005;4(l):35-44.
20. Eimon PM, Rubinstein AL. The use of in vivo zebrafish assays in drug toxicity screening. Expert Opin Drug Metabol Toxicol. 2009;5(4):393-401.
21. Wittbrodt J, Shima A, Schartl M. Medaka - A model organism from the far East. Nat Rev Genet. 2002;3(1):53-64.
22. Shima A, Mitani H. Medaka as a research organism: Past, present and future. Mech Dev. 2004;121(7-8):599-604.
23. Yamamoto T-O. Medaka (Killifish): Biology and Strains. Tokyo: Keigaku Publishing Company; 1975.
24. Westerfield M. The Zebrafish Book. A Guide for the Laboratory Use of Zebrafish (Danio rerio). 4 ed. Eugene: University of Oregon Press; 2000.
25. Coverdale LE, Lean D, Martin CC. Not just a fishing trip - Environmental genomics using zebrafish. Curr Genom. 2004;5(5):395-407.
26. Hill AJ, Teraoka H, Heideman W, et al. Zebrafish as a model vertebrate for investigating chemical toxicity. Toxicol Sci. 2005;86(1):6-19.
27. Eaton RC, Farley RD. Spawning cycle and egg production of zebrafish, Brachydanio rerio, in the laboratory. Copeia. 1974;1(1):195-209.
28. Nanda I, Kondo M, Hornung U, et al. A duplicated copy of DMRT1 in the sexdetermining region of the Y chromosome of the medaka, Oryzias latipes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2002;22(18):11778-11783.
29. Fleming A. Zebrafish as an alternative model organism for disease modelling and drug discovery: Implications for the 3Rs. NC3Rs, Iss. 10, National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in research. Retrieved from www.nc3rs.org.uk. 2007:1-7.
30. Urho L. Characters of larvae - what are they. Folia Zool. 2002;51(3):161-186.
31. EFSA. Opinion on the –Aspects of the biology and welfare of animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes—. EFSA J. 2005;292:1-46.
32. Anonymous. Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. London: HMSO; 1986.
33. Nagel R. DarT: The embryotest with the zebrafish Danio rerio - A general model in ecotoxicology and toxicology. ALTEX Alternat Tierexp. 2002;19(1/2): 38-48.
34. Braunbeck T, Boettcher M, Hollert H, et al. Towards an alternative for the acute fish LC(50) test in chemical assessment: The fish embryo toxicity test goes multispecies - An update. ALTEX. 2005;22(2):87-102.
35. Lammer E, Carr GJ, Wendler K, et al. Is the fish embryo toxicity test (FET) with the zebrafish (Danio rerio) a potential alternative for the fish acute toxicity test? Comp Biochem Physiol Part C: Toxicol Pharmacol. 2009;149(2):196-209.
36. Parng C, Seng WL, Semino C, et al. Zebrafish: A preclinical model for drug screening. Assay Drug Devel Technol. 2002;1(1):41-48.
37. Schirmer K, Tanneberger K, Kramer N, et al. Developing a list of reference chemicals for testing alternatives to whole fish toxicity tests. Aquat Toxicol. 2008;90(2): 128-137.
38. Heiden TCK, Dengler E, Kao WJ, et al. Developmental toxicity of low generation PAMAM dendrimers in zebrafish. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2007;225(1):70-79.
39. Robinson S, Delongeas J-L, Donald E, et al. A European pharmaceutical company initiative challenging the regulatory requirement for acute toxicity studies in pharmaceutical drug development. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2008;50(3):345-352.
40. FDA. International Conference on Harmonisation; Guidance on the Duration of Chronic Toxicity Testing in Animals (Rodent and Nonrodent Toxicity Testing). Notice. Fed Reg. 1999;64:34259-34260.
41. Weil M, Sacher F, Scholz S, et al. Gene expression analysis in zebrafish embryos: A potential approach to predict effect concentrations in the fish early life stage test. Environ Toxicol Chem. 2009;28(9):1970-1978.
42. Scholz S, Fischer S, Gundel U, et al. The zebrafish embryo model in environmental risk assessment - Applications beyond acute toxicity testing. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2008;15:394-404.
43. ICH. International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use: Guidance for Industry S2B Genotoxicity: A Standard Battery for Genotoxicity Testing of Pharmaceuticals. Retrieved from http://www.fda.gov. 1997.
44. Lorge E, Gervais V, Becourt-Lhote N, et al. Genetic toxicity assessment: Employing the best science for human safety evaluation. Part IV: A strategy in genotoxicity testing in drug development: Some examples. Toxicol Sci. 2007;98(1):39-42.
45. Kosmehl T, Krebs F, Manz W, et al. Differentiation between bioavailable and total hazard potential of sediment-induced DNA fragmentation as measured by the comet assay with zebrafish embryos. Journal of Soils and Sediments. 2007;7(6): 377-387.
46. Kosmehl T, Hallare AV, Reifferscheid G, et al. A novel contact assay for testing genotoxicity of chemicals and whole sediments in zebrafish embryos. Environ Toxicol Chem. 2006;25(8):2097-2106.
47. Amanuma K, Takeda H, Amanuma H, et al. Transgenic zebrafish for detecting mutations caused by compounds in aquatic environments. Nat Biotechnol. 2000; 18(1):62-65.
48. McElroy AE, Bogler A, Weisbaum D, et al. Uptake, metabolism, mutant frequencies and mutational spectra in [lambda] transgenic medaka embryos exposed to benzo[[alpha]] pyrene dosed sediments. Mar Environ Res. 2006;62(1):273-277.
49. Winn RN, Norris MB, Brayer KJ, et al. Detection of mutations in transgenic fish carrying a bacteriophage lambda cII transgene target. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2000;97(23):12655-12660.
50. Stephens TD, Bunde CJW, Fillmore BJ. Mechanism of action in thalidomide terato-genesis. Biochem Pharmacol. 2000;59(12):1489-1499.
51. OECD 414. OECD guideline for testing of chemicals. Test No. 414: Prenatal Developmental Toxicity Study. Available at www.oecd.org. 2000.
52. OECD 421. OECD guideline for testing of chemicals. Test No. 421: Reproduction/Developmental Toxicity Screening Test. Available at www.oecd.org. 2000.
53. Bailey J, Knight A, Balcombe J. The future of teratology research is in vitro. Biogen Amines. 2005;19(2):97-146.
54. Spielmann H, Seiler A, Bremer S, et al. The practical application of three validated in vitro embryotoxicity tests - The Report and Recommendations of an ECVAM/ZEBET Workshop (ECVAM Workshop 57). ATLA. 2006;34(5):527-538.
55. Jensen GE, Niemela JR, Wedebye EB, Nikolov NG. QSAR models for reproductive toxicity and endocrine disruption in regulatory use - a preliminary investigation. SAR and QSAR in Environmental Research. 2008;19(7):631-641.
56. Klopman G, Dimayuga ML. Computer Automated Structure Evaluation (CASE) of the teratogenicity of retinoids with the aid of a novel geometry index. Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design. 1990;4(2):117-130.
57. Vijay KG, Borgstedt H, Enslein K et al. A QSAR Model of Teratogenesis. Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationships. 1991;10(4):306-332.
58. Langheinrich U. Zebrafish: A new model on the pharmaceutical catwalk. BioEssays. 2003;25(9):904-912.
59. Bachmann J. Entwicklung und Erprobung eines Teratogenitats-Screening-Testes mit Embryonen des Zebrabarblings Danio rerio [doctoral thesis], TU Dresden; 2002.
60. Nagel R. Dar T. The embryotest with the zebrafish Danio rerio - a general model in ecotoxicology and toxicology. ALTEX Alternativen zu Tierexperimenten. 2002;19 (1/2):38-48.
61. Ito T, Ando H, Suzuki T, et al. Identification of a Primary Target of Thalidomide Teratogenicity. Science. 2010;327(5971):1345-1350.
62. Stigson M, Kultima K, Jergil M, et al. Molecular targets and early response biomarkers for the prediction of developmental toxicity in vitro. Altern Lab Anim. 2007;35(3):335-342.
63. Busquet F, Nagel R, von Landenberg F, et al. Development of a new screening assay to identify proteratogenic substances using zebrafish Danio rerio embryo combined with an exogenous mammalian metabolic activation system (mDarT). Toxicol Sci. 2008;104(1):177-188.
64. Iwamatsu T. Stages of normal development in the medaka Oryzias latipes. Mech Devel. 2004; 121(7-8):605-618.
65. Berman DM, Karhadkar SS, Hallahan AR, et al. Medulloblastoma growth inhibition by hedgehog pathway blockade. Science. 2002;297(5586):1559-1561.
66. Chen JK, Taipale J, Young KE, et al. Small molecule modulation of smoothened activity. PNAS. 2002;99(22):14071-14076.
67. Incardona J, Gaffield W, Kapur R, et al. The teratogenic Veratrum alkaloid cyclopamine inhibits sonic hedgehog signal transduction. Development. 1998;125(18):3553-3562.
68. Ferrari S, Yanega R. Effect of cyclopamine on medaka (Oryzias latipes) embryos. Course Experiment, Developmental Biology, Franklin & Marshall College. Retrieved from http://www.swarthmore.edu/NatSci/sgilber1/DB_lab/Student/Medaka_cyclo.html. 2000.
69. Büttner A, Seifert K, Cottin T, et al. Synthesis and biological evaluation of SANT-2 and analogues as inhibitors of the hedgehog signaling pathway. Bioorg Med Chem. 2009;17(14):4943-4954.
70. Yap YG, Camm AJ. Drug induced QT prolongation and torsades de pointes. Heart. 2003;89(11):1363-1372.
71. EMEA. ICH Topic S7B: The nonclinical evaluation of the potential for delayed ventricular repolarization (QT interval prolongation) by human pharmaceuticals. Retrieved from http://www.emea.europe.eu. 2005.
72. Kimmel CB, Ballard WW, Kimmel SR, et al. Stages of embryonic development of the zebrafish. Developmental Dynamics. 1995;203(3):253-310.
73. Chan PK, Lin CC, Cheng SH. Noninvasive technique for measurement of heartbeat regularity in zebrafish (Danio rerio) embryos. BMC Biotechnol. 2009;9:11.
74. Senior JR. Drug Hepatotoxicity from a Regulatory Perspective. Clinics in Liver Disease. 2007;11(3):507-524.
75. FDA. Nonclinical assessment of potential hepatotoxicity in man. Retrieved from http://www.fda.gov. 2000.
76. McGrath P, Li C-Q. Zebrafish: A predictive model for assessing drug-induced toxicity. Drug Discov Today. 2008;13(9-10):394-401.
77. Vanparys P, Spanhaak S, Steemans M, et al. Larvae of the zebrafish as test organism for hepatotoxicity testing. EPAA (The European partnership for alternative approaches to animal testing) 2007 Annual Conference. Poster. Retrieved from http://ec.europe.eu. 2007.
78. Foster WR, Chen S-J, He A, et al. A retrospective analysis of toxicogenomics in the safety assessment of drug candidates. Toxicol Pathol. 2007;35(5):621-635.
79. FDA. Memorandum of understanding between the United States Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Institute on Aging, Laboratory of Neurosciences and the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration. MOU number: 225-94-3001. Retrieved from http://www.fda.gov. 1994.
80. Richards FM, Alderton WK, Kimber GM, et al. Validation of the use of zebrafish larvae in visual safety assessment. J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods. 2008;58:50-58.
81. Berghmans S, Butler P, Goldsmith P, et al. Zebrafish based assays for the assessment of cardiac, visual and gut function - Potential safety screens for early drug discovery. J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods. 2008;58:59-68.
82. Ton C, Parng C. The use of zebrafish for assessing ototoxic and otoprotective agents. Hearing Res. 2005;208(1-2):79-88.
83. Chiu L, Cunningham L, Raible D, et al. Using the zebrafish lateral line to screen for ototoxicity. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2008;9(2):178-190.
84. Winter MJ, Redfern WS, Hayfield AJ, et al. Validation of a larval zebrafish locomotor assay for assessing the seizure liability of early-stage development drugs. J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods. 2008;57(3):176-187.
85. Giacomini NJ, Rose B, Kobayashi K, et al. Antipsychotics produce locomotor impairment in larval zebrafish. Neurotoxicol Teratol. 2006;28(2):245-250.
86. Milan DJ, Peterson TA, Ruskin JN, et al. Drugs that induce repolarization abnormalities cause bradycardia in zebrafish. Circulation. 2003; 107(10):1355-1358.
87. Langheinrich U, Vacun G, Wagner T. Zebrafish embryos express an orthologue of HERG and are sensitive toward a range of QT-prolonging drugs inducing severe arrhythmia[star, open]. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2003;193(3):370-382.
88. Mittelstadt SW, Hemenway CL, Craig MP, et al. Evaluation of zebrafish embryos as a model for assessing inhibition of hERG. J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods. 2008;57(2):100-105.
89. Hentschel DM, Park KM, Cilenti L, et al. Acute renal failure in zebrafish: A novel system to study a complex disease. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol. 2005;288(5):923-929.
90. Herbomel P, Thisse B, Thisse C. Ontogeny and behaviour of early macrophages in the zebrafish embryo. Development. 1999;126(17):3735 -3745.
91. van der Sar AM, Appelmelk BJ, Vandenbroucke-Grauls CM, et al. A star with stripes: Zebrafish as an infection model. Trends Microbiol. 2004;12(10):451-457.
92. Pressley ME, Phelan PE, Witten PE, et al. Pathogenesis and inflammatory response to Edwardsiella tarda infection in the zebrafish. Dev Comp Immunol. 2005;29(6):501-513.
93. Watzke J, Schirmer K, Scholz S. Bacterial lipopolysaccharides induce genes involved in the innate immune response in embryos of the zebrafish (Danio rerio). Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2007;23:901-905.
94. Alder AC, Bruchet A, Carballa M, et al. Consumption and occurrence. In: Ternes T, ed. Human Pharmaceuticals, Hormones and Fragrances: The Challenge of Micropollutants in Urban Water Management. London: IWA Publ.; 2006:15-54.
95. Heberer T. Occurrence, fate, and removal of pharmaceutical residues in the aquatic environment: a review of recent research data. Toxicol Lett. 2002; 131(1-2):5-17.
96. Fent K. Effects of pharmaceuticals on aquatic organisms. In: Kummer K, ed. Pharmaceuticals in the Environment - Sources, Fate, Effects and Risks. Berlin: Springer; 2008.175-203.
97. Sumpter JP. Environmental effects of human pharmaceuticals. Drug Inf J. 2007;41(2):143-147.
98. Jones OAH, Voulvoulis N, Lester JN. Aquatic environmental assessment of the top 25 English prescription pharmaceuticals. Water Res. 2002;36(20):5013-5022.
99. Zwiener C, Glauner T, Frimmel FH. Biodegradation of pharmaceutical residues investigated by SPE- GC/ITD-MS and on-line derivatization. Hrc-JHigh Res Chromat. 2000;23(7-8):474-478.
100. EMEA/CHMP. Guideline on the environmental risk assessment of medicinal products for human use. EMEA/CHMP/SWP/4447/00; 2006.
101. FDA. Guidance for industry - environmental assessment of human drug and biologics applications. US Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, CMC6, revision 1. 1998.
102. Scholz S, Schirmer K, Altenburger R. Pharmaceutical contaminants in urban water cycles - A discussion of novel concepts for environmental risk assessment. In: Kassinos F, Bester K, K ummerer K, eds. Xenobiotics in the Urban Water Cycle: Mass Flows, Environmental Processes and Mitigation Strategies. Vol 16. Heidelberg: Springer; 2010.
103. OECD 210. OECD guideline for testing of chemicals. Test No. 210: Fish, early life stage toxicity test. 1992.
104. Renshaw SA, Loynes CA, Trushell DM, et al. A transgenic zebrafish model of neutrophilic inflammation. Blood. 2006;108(13):3976-3978.
105. Burns CG, Milan DJ, Grande EJ, et al. High-throughput assay for small molecules that modulate zebrafish embryonic heart rate. Nat Chem Biol. 2005;1(5):263-264.
106. Carvan MJr, Dalton TP, Stuart GW, et al. Transgenic zebrafish as sentinels for aquatic pollution. Ann N Y Acad Sci USA. 2000;919:133-147.
107. Russell W, Burch R. The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique. London: Methuen; 1959.
108. Yang L, Kemadjou J, Zinsmeister C, et al. Transcriptional profiling reveals barcode-like toxicogenomic responses in the zebrafish embryo. Genome Biol. 2007;8(10):R227.
109. Garner RC. Less is more: the human microdosing concept. Drug Discov Today. 2005;10(7):449-451.