31
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Current concepts of Harm–Benefit Analysis of Animal Experiments – Report from the AALAS–FELASA Working Group on Harm–Benefit Analysis – Part 1

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          International regulations and guidelines strongly suggest that the use of animal models in scientific research should be initiated only after the authority responsible for the review of animal studies has concluded a well-thought-out harm–benefit analysis (HBA) and deemed the project to be appropriate. Although the process for conducting HBAs may not be new, the relevant factors and algorithms used in conducting them during the review process are deemed to be poorly defined or lacking by committees in many institutions. This paper presents the current concept of HBAs based on a literature review. References on cost or risk benefit from clinical trials and other industries are also included. Several approaches to HBA have been discovered including algorithms, graphic presentations and generic processes. The aim of this study is to better aid and harmonize understanding of the concepts of ‘harm’, ‘benefit’ and ‘harm–benefit analysis’.

          Related collections

          Most cited references39

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality.

          Modern theories in cognitive psychology and neuroscience indicate that there are two fundamental ways in which human beings comprehend risk. The "analytic system" uses algorithms and normative rules, such as probability calculus, formal logic, and risk assessment. It is relatively slow, effortful, and requires conscious control. The "experiential system" is intuitive, fast, mostly automatic, and not very accessible to conscious awareness. The experiential system enabled human beings to survive during their long period of evolution and remains today the most natural and most common way to respond to risk. It relies on images and associations, linked by experience to emotion and affect (a feeling that something is good or bad). This system represents risk as a feeling that tells us whether it is safe to walk down this dark street or drink this strange-smelling water. Proponents of formal risk analysis tend to view affective responses to risk as irrational. Current wisdom disputes this view. The rational and the experiential systems operate in parallel and each seems to depend on the other for guidance. Studies have demonstrated that analytic reasoning cannot be effective unless it is guided by emotion and affect. Rational decision making requires proper integration of both modes of thought. Both systems have their advantages, biases, and limitations. Now that we are beginning to understand the complex interplay between emotion and reason that is essential to rational behavior, the challenge before us is to think creatively about what this means for managing risk. On the one hand, how do we apply reason to temper the strong emotions engendered by some risk events? On the other hand, how do we infuse needed "doses of feeling" into circumstances where lack of experience may otherwise leave us too "coldly rational"? This article addresses these important questions.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Zebrafish: a model system for the study of human disease.

            K. Dooley (2000)
            The zebrafish (Danio rerio) is a powerful model organism for the study of vertebrate biology, being well suited to both developmental and genetic analysis. Large-scale genetic screens have identified hundreds of mutant phenotypes, many of which resemble human clinical disorders. The creation of critical genetic reagents, coupled with the rapid progress of the zebrafish genome initiative directed by the National Institutes of Health, are bringing this model system to its full potential for the study of vertebrate biology, physiology and human disease.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Canine tumor cross-species genomics uncovers targets linked to osteosarcoma progression

              Background Pulmonary metastasis continues to be the most common cause of death in osteosarcoma. Indeed, the 5-year survival for newly diagnosed osteosarcoma patients has not significantly changed in over 20 years. Further understanding of the mechanisms of metastasis and resistance for this aggressive pediatric cancer is necessary. Pet dogs naturally develop osteosarcoma providing a novel opportunity to model metastasis development and progression. Given the accelerated biology of canine osteosarcoma, we hypothesized that a direct comparison of canine and pediatric osteosarcoma expression profiles may help identify novel metastasis-associated tumor targets that have been missed through the study of the human cancer alone. Results Using parallel oligonucleotide array platforms, shared orthologues between species were identified and normalized. The osteosarcoma expression signatures could not distinguish the canine and human diseases by hierarchical clustering. Cross-species target mining identified two genes, interleukin-8 (IL-8) and solute carrier family 1 (glial high affinity glutamate transporter), member 3 (SLC1A3), which were uniformly expressed in dog but not in all pediatric osteosarcoma patient samples. Expression of these genes in an independent population of pediatric osteosarcoma patients was associated with poor outcome (p = 0.020 and p = 0.026, respectively). Validation of IL-8 and SLC1A3 protein expression in pediatric osteosarcoma tissues further supported the potential value of these novel targets. Ongoing evaluation will validate the biological significance of these targets and their associated pathways. Conclusions Collectively, these data support the strong similarities between human and canine osteosarcoma and underline the opportunities provided by a comparative oncology approach as a means to improve our understanding of cancer biology and therapies.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Lab Anim
                Lab. Anim
                LAN
                splan
                Laboratory Animals
                SAGE Publications (Sage UK: London, England )
                0023-6772
                1758-1117
                17 May 2016
                June 2016
                : 50
                : 1 Suppl , Report from the AALAS-FELASA Working Group report on Harm-Benefit Analysis – Parts 1 & 2
                : 1-20
                Affiliations
                [1 ]University of Bergen, Department of Clinical Medicine, Bergen, Norway
                [2 ]AAALAC International, Frederick, MD, USA
                [3 ]Chief Veterinary Officer, Sanofi, Marcy l’Etoile, France
                [4 ]Department of Laboratory Animal Science, GlaxoSmithKline, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
                [5 ]AAALAC International, Pamplona, Spain
                [6 ]Chief, Comparative Medicine Branch, NIEHS/NIH, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
                Author notes
                [*]Aurora Brønstad, University of Bergen, Vivarium–Haukeland Hospital, 5021 Bergen, Norway. Email: aurora.bronstad@ 123456uib.no
                Article
                10.1177_0023677216642398
                10.1177/0023677216642398
                5815836
                27188275
                f0f2408a-9666-4510-be55-5bda0359a700
                © The Author(s) 2016

                This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License ( http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages ( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

                History
                Categories
                Working Party Report

                Animal science & Zoology
                harm–benefit,ethical review,animal experiment
                Animal science & Zoology
                harm–benefit, ethical review, animal experiment

                Comments

                Comment on this article