Dogs and monkeys in preclinical drug development: The challenge of reducing and replacing

Expert Opinion on Drug Metabolism and Toxicology

Volumn 9, Issue 9, 2013, Pages 1171-1180

  Pellegatti, Mario ^a  

^a DMPK Independent Scientist   (Italy)

Author keywords

3Rs; ADME; Animal experimentation; Safety; Toxicology

Indexed keywords

DRUG ABSORPTION; DRUG BIOAVAILABILITY; DRUG DEVELOPMENT; DRUG DISTRIBUTION; DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG METABOLISM; DRUG SAFETY; DRUG SCREENING; ECHOGRAPHY; EXPERIMENTAL DOG; EXPERIMENTAL MONKEY; LAB ON A CHIP; NON INVASIVE MEASUREMENT; NONHUMAN; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; STANDARD; STEM CELL; STUDY DESIGN; TISSUE DISTRIBUTION; TOXICITY TESTING;

ANIMALS; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; DOGS; DRUG EVALUATION, PRECLINICAL; HAPLORHINI; TOXICITY TESTS;

EID: 84882314613     PISSN: 17425255     EISSN: 17447607     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1517/17425255.2013.804061     Document Type: Review

References (77)

1. Singer P. Animal liberation. Random House; New York, NY: 2009; first published in 1975
2. Shanks N, Greek R, Greek J. Are animal models predictive of humans? Philos Ethics Humanit Med 2009;4:2
3. Festing S, Wilkinson R. The ethics of animal research. EMBO Rep 2007;8:526-30
4. Ferdowsian HR, Beck N. Ethical and scientific considerations regarding animal testing and research. PLoS One 2011;9:e 24059
5. Scientific Committee on Health and Environment Risks (SCHER) Scientific opinion on the need for non-human primates in biomedical research, production and testing of products and devices. 2009. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/ environment/chemicals/lab-animals/pdf/scher-o-110.pdf
6. Russell WMS, Burch RL. The principle of human experimental technique. Methuen, London, UK; 1959
7. Rusche B. The 3Rs and animal welfare: conflict or the way forward. ALTEX 2003;20:63-76
8. Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of September 2010 on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes. Available from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ: L:2010:276:0033:0079:en:PDF
9. Hartung T. Comparative analysis of the revised directive 2010/63/EU for the protection of laboratory animals with its predecessor 86/809/EEC-A t4 report. ALTEX 2010;27:285-303
10. Regulation (EC) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and restriction of CHemicals (REACH). Official Journal of the European Union 30.12.2006. Available from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ. do?uri=OJ:L:2007:136:0003:0280:en:PDF
11. Chemical safety for sustainability, Strategic Research Action plan 2012-2016. United States Environmental Protection Agency. EPA 601/R-12/006 June 2012. Available from: http://www.epa.gov/research/docs/css-strap.pdf
12. Abbott A. Court orders temporary closure of Italian dog-breeding premises. Nat News 2012; doi:10.1038/nature.2012.11121
13. Wadman M. Activists ground primate flights. Nature 2012;483:381-2
14. Eurobarometer. Science and technology report. 2010. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/public-opinion/archives/ebs/ebs-340-en.pdf
15. Sixth report on the statistics on the number of animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes in the member states of the European Union. Accompanying document. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ chemicals/lab-animals/pdf/sec-2010-1107.pdf 16. 2010 US statistics AWA report animal usage United States Department of Agriculture. 2011. Available from: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal-welfare/efoia/downloads/2010-Animals-Used-In- Research.pdf
16. Guidance on Nonclinical Safety Studies for the Conduct of Human Clinical Trials and Marketing Authorization for Pharmaceuticals M3 (R2) CPMP/ICH/286/95. 2009; The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products. Human medicines evaluation unit. Available from: http://www.ema. europa.eu/docs/en-GB/ document-library/Scientific-guideline/2009/09/WC500002720.pdf
17. Olson H, Betton G, Robinson D, et al. Concordance of the toxicity of pharmaceuticals in humans and animals. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2000;32:56-67
18. Matthews RAJ. Medical progress depends on animal models-doesn't it? J R Soc Med 2008;101:95-8
19. Greek R, Menache A. Systematic reviews of animal models: methodology versus epistemology. Int J Med Sci 2013;10(3):206-21
20. Hartung T. Toxicology for the twenty-first century. Nature 2009;460:208-12
21. Animal Research for Life: "Recent examples of alternative methods developed by the pharmaceutical industry". Available from: http: www. animalresearchforlife.euAlternatives
22. Langley G, Evans T, Holgate ST, et al. Replacing animal experiments: choices, changes and challenges. Bioessays 2007;29:918-26
23. Balls M. Replacing, reducing and refining animal experiments: making sound progress, but must do better. ATLA 2009;37:579-80
24. Briggs K, Cases M, Heard DJ, et al. Inroads to predict in vivo toxicology-An introduction to the eTOX project. Int J Mol Sci 2012;13:3820-46
25. National Research Council (NCR). Toxicity testing in the 21st century: a vision and a strategy. National Academy Press. Washington DC. Available from: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record-id=11970
26. Andersen ME, Krewski D. Toxicity testing in the 21st century: bringing the vision to life. Toxicol Sci 2009;107(2):324-30
27. Berg N, De Wever B, Fuchs HW. Toxicology in the 21st century-working our way towards a visionary reality. Toxicol in Vitro 2011;25:874-81
28. Hartung T. From alternative methods to a new toxicology. Eur J Pharm Biopharm 2011;77:338-49
29. Kobel W, Fegert I, Billington R, et al. A 1 year toxicity in dogs is no longer a scientifically justifiable core-data requirement for the safety assessment of pesticides. Critical Rev Toxicol 2010;40(1):1-15
30. Billington R, Lewis RW, Mehta JM, Dewhurst I. The mouse carcinogenicity study is no longer a scientifically justifiable core data requirement for the safety assessment of pesticides. Crit Rev Toxicol 2010;40(1):35-49
31. ICH guideline S6(R1): preclinical safety evaluation of biotechnology-derived pharmaceuticals. Step EMA/CHMP/ICH/731268/1998. Available from: http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en-GB/document-library/Scientific-guideline/ 2009/09/WC500002828.pdf
32. Zurlo J, Bayne KA, Brown DC, et al. Critical evaluation of the use of dogs in biomedical research and testing. ALTEX 2011;28:355-9
33. Wang T, Jacobson-Kram D, Pilaro AM, et al. ICH guidelines: inception, revision and implications for drug development. Toxicol Sci 2010;118(2):356-67
34. Zhang D, Comezoglu SN. ADME studies in animals and humans. In: Zhang D, Zhu M, Humphreys WG, editors. Experimental design, metabolite profiling and identification, and data presentation in "Drug metabolism in drug design and development". John Wiley & sons, Inc, Hoboken, NJ, USA; 2008
35. White RE, Evans DC, Hop CE, et al. Radiolabelled mass-balance excretion and metabolism studies in laboratory animals: a commentary on why they are still necessary. Xenobiotica 2013;43:219-25
36. Obach RS, Nedderman AN, Smith DA. Radiolabelled mass-balance excretion and metabolism studies in laboratory animals: are they still necessary? Xenobiotica 2012;42:46-56
37. Pellegatti M. Preclinical in vivo ADME studies in drug development: a critical review. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 2012;8(2):161-72
38. Hasiwa N, Bailey J, Clausing P, et al. Critical evaluation of the use of dogs in biomedical research and testing in Europe. ALTEX 2011;28:326-40
39. Forster R, Bode G, Ellegard L, et al. The RETHINK Project: minipig as models for the toxicity testing of new medicines and chemicals: an impact assessment. J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods 2010;62:158-9
40. Forster R, Bode G, Ellegard L, et al. The RETHINK project on minipigs in the toxicity testing of new medicines and chemicals: conclusions and recommendations. J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods 2010;62:236-42
41. Helke KL, Swindle MM. Animal models of toxicology testing: the role of pigs. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 2013;98(2):127-39
42. Baldrick P. Juvenile animal testing in drug development. Is it useful? Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2010;57:291-9
43. Bailey J. Non-human primates in medical research and drug development: a critical review. Biog Amines 2005;19:235-55
44. Great Ape Protection and Cost Saving Act of 2011. Available from: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s810/text
45. Baldrick P. Safety evaluation of biological drugs. What are toxicology studies in primates telling us? Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2011;59(2):227-36
46. Buckley LA, Chapman K, Burns-Naas LA, et al. Considerations regarding nonhuman primate use in safety assessment of biopharmaceuticals. Int J Toxicol 2011;30:583-90
47. Chapman KL, Andrews L, Bjramovic JJ, et al. The design of chronic toxicology studies on monoclonal antibodies: implications for reduction in the use of non-human primates. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2012;62(2):347-54
48. Zheng Y, Tesar DB, Benincasa L, et al. Minipig as a potential translatable model for monoclonal antibody pharmacokinetics after intravenous and subcutaneous administration. MAbs 2012;4(2):243-55
49. Ogawa K, Kato M, Honjo T, et al. A new approach to predicting human hepatic clearance of CYP3A4 substrates using monkey pharmacokinetic data. Xenobiotica 2013;43:468-78
50. Ward KW, Smith BR. A comprehensive and qualitative evaluation of extrapolation of intravenous pharmacokinetic parameters from rat, dog and monkey to humans. I Clearance. Drug Met Dis 2004;32:603-11
51. Dong JQ, Salinger DH, Christopher J, et al. Quantitative prediction of human pharmacokinetics for monoclonal antibodies: retrospective analysis of monkey as a single species for first-in-human prediction. Clin Pharmacokinet 2011;50(2):131-42
52. Caldwell J. Problems and opportunities in toxicity testing arising from species differences in xenobiotic metabolism. Toxicol Lett 1992;64-65:651-9
53. Emoto C, Iwasaki K, Koizumi R, et al. Species differences between cynomolgus monkey and humans on Cytochrome P450 2D and 3A-dependent drug oxidation activities in liver microsomes. J Health Sci 2011;57(2):164-70
54. Akabane T, Tabata K, Kadono K, et al. A comparison of pharmacokinetics between humans and monkeys. Drug Metabol Dispos 2010;38(2):308-16
55. Wetmore BA, Wambaugh J, Ferguson SS, et al. Integration of dosimetry, exposure, and high-throughput data in chemical toxicity assessment. Toxicol Sci 2012;125(1):157-74
56. Louisse J, de Jong E, van de Sandt JJM, et al. The use of in vitro toxicity data and physiologically based kinetic modeling to predict dose-response curves for in vivo developmental toxicity of glycol ethers in rat and man. Toxicol Sci 2010;118(2):470-84
57. Caldwell JC, Evans MV, Krishnan K. Cutting edge PBPK models and analyses: providing the basis for future modeling efforts and bridges to emerging toxicology paradigms. J Toxicol 2012;2012:article ID 852384
58. Alternative testing strategies. Progress report 2012. European Commission. European research area. Available from: http://axlr8.eu/assets/ axlr8-progress-report-2012.pdf
59. Van Vliet E. Current standing and future prospects for the technologies proposed to transform toxicity testing in the 21st century. ALTEX 2011;28:17-44
60. Mueller D, Koetemann A, Noor F. Organotypic cultures of HepG2 cells for in vitro toxicity studies. J Bioengineer Biomedical Sci 2011;S2:002
61. Wobus AM, Loser P. Present state and future perspectives of using pluripotent stem cells in toxicology research. Arch Toxicol 2011;85:79-117
62. Peck Y, Wang DA. Three dimensionally engineered biomimetic tissue models for in vitro drug evaluation: delivery, efficacy and toxicity. Exp Opin Drug Deliv 2013;10(3):369-83
63. Sung JH, Esh MB, Shuler ML. Integration of in silico and in vitro platforms for PK-PD modelling. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 2010;6:1063-81
64. Wilcox N, Goldberg A. Food for thoughton validation: a puzzle or a mystery. An approach founded on new science. ALTEX 2011;1:3-8
65. Xu JX, Henstock PV, Dunn MC, et al. Cellular imaging prediction of clinical drug induced liver injury. Toxicol Sci 2008;105:97-105
66. Wang YXS, Yan SX. Biomedical imaging in the safety evaluation of new drugs Lab Anim 2008; 42: 423-41
67. Boyer S. The use of computer models in pharmaceutical safety evaluation. ATLA 2009;37:467-75
68. Valerio LG. Application of advanced in silico methods for predictive modelling and information integration. Exp Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 2012;8(4):395-8
69. Kirchmair J, Williamson MJ, Tyzack JD, et al. Computational prediction of metabolism: sites, products, SAR, P450 enzyme dynamics and mechanisms. J Chem Inf Model 2012;52:617-48
70. Lave T, Chapman K, Goldsmith P, et al. Human clearance prediction: shifting the paradigm. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 2009;5:1039-48
71. Beaumont K, Gardner I, Chapman K, et al. Towards an integrated human clearance prediction strategy that minimises animal use. J Pharm Sci 2011;100:4518-35
72. Smith D, Broadhead C, Descartes G, et al. Preclinical safety evaluation using non rodent species: an industry/welfare project to minimise dog use. ILAR J 2002;43:S39-42
73. Suran M, Wolinsky H. The end of monkey research. EMBO Rep 2009;10(10):1080-2
74. Animal research info. The global resource for scientific evidence in animal research. Available from: http://animalresearch. info/en
75. MerloPich E. Understanding pharmacology in humans: phase 1 and phase Curr Opin Pharmacol 2011;11:557-62
76. Danhof M, de Lange EC, Della Pasqua OE, et al. Mechanism-based pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling in translational drug research. Trends Pharmacol Sci 2008;29(4):186-91
77. Moggs J, Moulin P, Pognan F, et al. Investigative safety science as a competitive advantage for Pharma. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 2012;8(9):1071-82