Suchergebnisse

This review presents the results of an informal 1993 survey of the distribution of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) in the world's laboratories, and the types of research conducted on them. Based on the available information, there are over 2200 chimpanzees in.laboratories, most of which are located in several US facilities. Europe apparently has less than 200 chimpanzees housed in two facilities. Worldwide, an estimated 80% of the chimpanzees in laboratories are used in studies on AIDS and hepatitis. It is concluded that, if Europe terminated its use of chimpanzees in research, for either financial, moral or political reasons, the impact on experimental research would be relatively minor.

Toxicity testing is a key part of the process of assessing the hazards, safety, or risk that chemicals and other substances pose to humans, animals, or the environment. Standardized methods for such testing, typically involving animals, began to emerge during the first half of the 20th century. In 1959, British scientists William Russell and Rex Burch proposed a framework for reducing, refining, or replacing animal use in toxicology and other forms of biomedical experimentation. This "3Rs" or "alternatives" approach emerged at a time of growing sensitivity to the use of animals in experimentation, and progress in its implementation has been spurred by a growing appreciation of the power of emerging science and technology and the limitations of animal-based approaches. The 3Rs approach, although slow to be embraced, increasingly become a framework for change in toxicity testing during the last quarter of the 20th century. These years saw measurable growth in research activity related to the 3Rs, along with the establishment of 3Rs-based organizations and centers, journals, websites, funding sources, and conferences. As the field matured, the principles for validating new and revised alternative tests were formulated and pioneered. The 3Rs framework reached a tipping point in 2007 with the emergence of a U.S. National Research Council report proposing a radically different, largely animal-free approach to toxicity testing, encapsulated in the phrase "21st Century Toxicology." This chapter reviews these developments, examines 3Rs trends in the toxicological literature, presents measures of the impact of 3Rs activity, and concludes with a summary of some of the remaining challenges to the development, validation, regulatory acceptance, and implementation of 3Rs methods.

The concept of the Three Rs— reduction, refinement, and replacement of animal use in biomedical experimentation—stems from a project launched in 1954 by a British organization, the Universities Federation for Animal Welfare (UFAW). UFAW commissioned William Russell and Rex Burch to analyze the status of humane experimental techniques involving animals. In 1959 these scientists published a book that set out the principles of the Three Rs, which came to be known as alternative methods. Initially, Russell and Burch's book was largely ignored, but their ideas were gradually picked up by the animal protection community in the 1960s and early '70s. In the '80s, spurred by public pressure, the alternatives approach was incorporated into national legislation throughout the developed countries and embraced by industry in Europe and America. Government centers devoted to the validation and regulatory acceptance of alternative methods were established during the '90s. By 2000 the use of animals in research had fallen by up to fifty percent from its high in the 1970s.

The Evidence-based Toxicology Collaboration hosted a workshop on "The Emergence of Systematic Review and Related Evidence-based Approaches in Toxicology," on November 21, 2014 in Baltimore, Maryland. The workshop featured speakers from agencies and organizations applying systematic review approaches to questions in toxicology, speakers with experience in conducting systematic reviews in medicine and healthcare, and stakeholders in industry, government, academia, and non-governmental organizations. Based on the workshop presentations and discussion, here we address the state of systematic review methods in toxicology, historical antecedents in both medicine and toxicology, challenges to the translation of systematic review from medicine to toxicology, and thoughts on the way forward. We conclude with a recommendation that as various agencies and organizations adapt systematic review methods, they continue to work together to ensure that there is a harmonized process for how the basic elements of systematic review methods are applied in toxicology.

The U.S. National Research Council (NRC) report on "Toxicity Testing in the 21st century" calls for a fundamental shift in the way that chemicals are tested for human health effects and evaluated in risk assessments. The new approach would move toward in vitro methods, typically using human cells in a high-throughput context. The in vitro methods would be designed to detect significant perturbations to "toxicity pathways," i.e., key biological pathways that, when sufficiently perturbed, lead to adverse health outcomes. To explore progress on the report's implementation, the Human Toxicology Project Consortium hosted a workshop on 9–10 November 2010 in Washington, DC. The Consortium is a coalition of several corporations, a research institute, and a non-governmental organization dedicated to accelerating the implementation of 21st-century Toxicology as aligned with the NRC vision. The goal of the workshop was to identify practical and scientific ways to accelerate implementation of the NRC vision. The workshop format consisted of plenary presentations, breakout group discussions, and concluding commentaries. The program faculty was drawn from industry, academia, government, and public interest organizations. Most presentations summarized ongoing efforts to modernize toxicology testing and approaches, each with some overlap with the NRC vision. In light of these efforts, the workshop identified recommendations for accelerating implementation of the NRC vision, including greater strategic coordination and planning across projects (facilitated by a steering group), the development of projects that test the proof of concept for implementation of the NRC vision, and greater outreach and communication across stakeholder communities.

Pain and distress are central topics in legislation, regulations, and standards regarding the use of animals in research. However, in practice, pain has received greatly increased attention in recent years, while attention to distress has lagged far behind, especially for distress that is not induced by pain. A contributing factor is that there is less information readily available on distress, including practical information on its recognition, assessment and alleviation. This chapter attempts to help fill that void by reversing the usual pattern and giving greater attention to distress than to pain. In addition, we also bypass the pain versus distress dichotomy by adopting a holistic treatment of adverse effects, i.e., not parsing distress and pain, by providing guidance on how to assess deviations from normality through tools such as score sheets. Our aim is to provide practical information to IACUCs, scientists, technicians and animal care personnel. We organize the chapter according to specific research areas and case studies. However, the principles and approaches are readily generalized to other research areas. CONTENTS Effect of surgical technical skill on pain and distress in animals - Alicia Karas, DVM Carbon dioxide euthanasia: example of aversion techniques - Matthew C. Leach, PhD The Refinement of Infectious Disease Research - Karl A. Andrutis DVM, MS, DACLAM Polyclonal antibody production - Kathleen Conlee, BS, MPA Animal models of human psychopathology: anxiety - John P. Gluck PhD Refinement In Toxicology Testing: A Workshop to Promote Current Advances and Disseminate Best Practices - Andrew N. Rowan, Martin L. Stephens, and Kathleen M. Conlee

The Evidence-based Toxicology Collaboration hosted a workshop on "The Emergence of Systematic Review and Related Evidence-based Approaches in Toxicology," on November 21, 2014 in Baltimore, Maryland. The workshop featured speakers from agencies and organizations applying systematic review approaches to questions in toxicology, speakers with experience in conducting systematic reviews in medicine and healthcare, and stakeholders in industry, government, academia, and non-governmental organizations. Based on the workshop presentations and discussion, here we address the state of systematic review methods in toxicology, historical antecedents in both medicine and toxicology, challenges to the translation of systematic review from medicine to toxicology, and thoughts on the way forward. We conclude with a recommendation that as various agencies and organizations adapt systematic review methods, they continue to work together to ensure that there is a harmonized process for how the basic elements of systematic review methods are applied in toxicology.