Validating Animal Models for Preclinical Research: A Scientific and Ethical Discussion

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 the human condition it is intended to model, but no formal validation of models is applied. There is a stark contrast here with the use of non-animal alternatives in toxicology and safety studies, for which an extensive validation is required. We discuss both the potential and the limitations of validating preclinical animal models for proof-of-concept studies, by 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 with which to compare results. While a complete adoption of the validation approach for alternative methods is probably inappropriate for research animal models, key features, such as making data available for external validation and defining a strategy to run experiments in a way that permits meaningful retrospective analysis, remain highly relevant.

[1]  Innovation OR Stagnation Challenge and Opportunity on the Critical Path to New Medical Products , 2004 .

[2]  Spielmann Horst,et al.  Practical Aspects of the Validation of Toxicity Test Procedures , 1995 .

[3]  H. Barnhart,et al.  An Overview on Assessing Agreement with Continuous Measurements , 2007, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[4]  Debra J. H. Mathews,et al.  The Role of Animal Models in Evaluating Reasonable Safety and Efficacy for Human Trials of Cell-Based Interventions for Neurologic Conditions , 2009, Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism.

[5]  Valérie Zuang,et al.  A Modular Approach to the ECVAM Principles on Test Validity , 2004, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[6]  K. Miczek Challenges for Translational Psychopharmacology Research: The Need for Conceptual Principles , 2008 .

[7]  F. V. D. Staay,et al.  Animal models of behavioral dysfunctions: Basic concepts and classifications, and an evaluation strategy , 2006, Brain Research Reviews.

[8]  Michael Balls,et al.  The Principles of Validation and the ECVAM Validation Process , 2002, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[9]  Valérie Zuang,et al.  The Principles of Weight of Evidence Validation of Test Methods and Testing Strategies , 2006, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[10]  Michael Balls,et al.  Translation of new technologies: from basic research to drug discovery and development. , 2008, Current drug discovery technologies.

[11]  Thomas Steckler,et al.  Removing Obstacles in Neuroscience Drug Discovery: The Future Path for Animal Models , 2009, Neuropsychopharmacology.

[12]  Thomas Hartung,et al.  Points of Reference in the Validation Process , 2008, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[13]  Zuang Valerie,et al.  The Principles of Weight of Evidence Validation of Test Methods and Testing Strategies , 2006 .

[14]  P. D. De Deyn,et al.  Drug discovery in dementia: the role of rodent models. , 2006, Nature reviews. Drug discovery.

[15]  Michael Balls,et al.  The principles of validation and the ECVAM validation process. , 2002, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[16]  H. Anders,et al.  Identifying and validating novel targets with in vivo disease models: guidelines for study design. , 2007, Drug discovery today.

[17]  Robert D. Combes,et al.  Practical Aspects of the Validation of Toxicity Test Procedures , 1995 .