Life Sciences Commons^™

Non-Human Primates In Medical Research And Drug Development: A Critical Review, Jarrod Bailey

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

There is much current debate surrounding the use of non-human primates (NHPs) in medical research and drug development. This review, stimulated by calls for evidence from UK-based inquiries into NHP research, takes a critical view in order to provide some important balance against papers supporting NHP research and calling for it to be expanded. We show that there is a paucity of evidence to demonstrate the positive contribution or successful translation of NHP research to human medicine, that there is a great deal of often overlooked data showing NHP research to be irrelevant, unnecessary, even hazardous to human health and …

The Ban On The Use Of Chimpanzees In Biomedical Research And Testing In The Uk Should Be Made Permanent And Legally Binding, Michelle Thew, Jarrod Bailey, Michael Balls, Michelle Hudson

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

The Coalition Government is currently considering how to transpose Directive 2010/63/EU on animal experimentation into UK law. The Directive bans the use of Great Apes in laboratories, but EU Member States can seek (now or, more likely, at some time in the future) a derogation from the Commission to permit such use, where this is considered essential for the preservation of the species in question or in relation to an unexpected outbreak of a life-threatening or debilitating clinical condition in human beings. Currently, the policy of the Government is not to approve any experiments on Great Apes, but it is …

An Assessment Of The Use Of Chimpanzees In Hepatitis C Research Past, Present And Future: 1. Validity Of The Chimpanzee Model, Jarrod Bailey

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

The USA is the only significant user of chimpanzees in biomedical research in the world, since many countries have banned or limited the practice due to substantial ethical, economic and scientific concerns. Advocates of chimpanzee use cite hepatitis C research as a major reason for its necessity and continuation, in spite of supporting evidence that is scant and often anecdotal. This paper examines the scientific and ethical issues surrounding chimpanzee hepatitis C research, and concludes that claims of the necessity of chimpanzees in historical and future hepatitis C research are exaggerated and unjustifiable, respectively. The chimpanzee model has several major …

Chimpanzee Research: An Examination Of Its Contribution To Biomedical Knowledge And Efficacy In Combating Human Diseases, Jarrod Bailey, Jonathan Balcombe, Theodora Capaldo

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

Research on captive chimpanzees incurs considerable animal welfare, ethical and financial costs. Advocates of such research claim these costs are outweighed by substantial advancements in biomedical knowledge, and that the genetic similarity of chimpanzees to humans enables the former to make critical contributions to preventing, diagnosing and combating human diseases. To assess these claims, we examined the disciplines investigated in 749 studies of captive chimpanzees published from 1995-2004 inclusive, and subjected 95 randomly selected papers to a detailed citation analysis:

49.5% (47/95) of papers had not been cited at the time of this study; 38.5% (34/95) were cited by 116 …

An Assessment Of The Use Of Chimpanzees In Hepatitis C Research Past, Present And Future: 2. Alternative Replacement Methods, Jarrod Bailey

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

The use of chimpanzees in hepatitis C virus (HCV) research was examined in the report associated with this paper (1: Validity of the Chimpanzee Model), in which it was concluded that claims of past necessity of chimpanzee use were exaggerated, and that claims of current and future indispensability were unjustifiable. Furthermore, given the serious scientific and ethical issues surrounding chimpanzee experimentation, it was proposed that it must now be considered redundant — particularly in light of the demonstrable contribution of alternative methods to past and current scientific progress, and the future promise that these methods hold. This paper builds on …

Critical Evaluation Of The Use Of Dogs In Biomedical Research And Testing In Europe, Nina Hasiwa, Jarrod Bailey, Peter Clausing, Mardas Daneshian, Sándor Farkas, István Gyertyán, Robert Hubrecht, Werner Kobel, Goran Krummenacher, Marcel Leist, Hannes Lohi, Adám Miklósi, Frauke Ohl, Klaus Olejniczak, Georg Schmitt, Patrick Sinnett-Smith, David Smith, Kristina Wagner, James D. Yager, Joanne Zurlo, Thomas Hartung

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

Dogs are sometimes referred to as “man’s best friend” and with the increase in urbanization and lifestyle changes, dogs are seen by their owners as family members. Society expresses specific concerns about the experimental use of dogs, as they are sometimes perceived to have a special status for humans. This may appear somewhat conflicting with the idea that the intrinsic value of all animals is the same, and that also several other animal species are used in biomedical research and toxicology. This aspect and many others are discussed in an introductory chapter dealing with ethical considerations on the use of …

Recent Efforts To Elucidate The Scientific Validity Of Animal-Based Drug Tests By The Pharmaceutical Industry, Pro-Testing Lobby Groups, And Animal Welfare Organisations, Jarrod Bailey

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

Background: Even after several decades of human drug development, there remains an absence of published, substantial, comprehensive data to validate the use of animals in preclinical drug testing, and to point to their predictive nature with regard to human safety/toxicity and efficacy. Two recent papers, authored by pharmaceutical industry scientists, added to the few substantive publications that exist. In this brief article, we discuss both these papers, as well as our own series of three papers on the subject, and also various views and criticisms of lobby groups that advocate the animal testing of new drugs.

Main text: We argue …

An Examination Of Chimpanzee Use In Human Cancer Research, Jarrod Bailey

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

Advocates of chimpanzee research claim the genetic similarity of humans and chimpanzees make them an indispensable research tool to combat human diseases. Given that cancer is a leading cause of human death worldwide, one might expect that if chimpanzees were needed for, or were productive in, cancer research, then they would have been widely used. This comprehensive literature analysis reveals that chimpanzees have scarcely been used in any form of cancer research, and that chimpanzee tumours are extremely rare and biologically different from human cancers. Often, chimpanzee citations described peripheral use of chimpanzee cells and genetic material in predominantly human …

An Analysis Of The Use Of Dogs In Predicting Human Toxicology And Drug Safety, Jarrod Bailey, Michelle Thew, Michael Balls

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

Dogs remain the main non-rodent species in preclinical drug development. Despite the current dearth of new drug approvals and meagre pipelines, this continues, with little supportive evidence of its value or necessity. To estimate the evidential weight provided by canine data to the probability that a new drug may be toxic to humans, we have calculated Likelihood Ratios (LRs) for an extensive dataset of 2,366 drugs with both animal and human data, including tissue-level effects and Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) Level 1–4 biomedical observations. The resulting LRs show that the absence of toxicity in dogs provides virtually no …

Non-Human Primates In Neuroscience Research: The Case Against Its Scientific Necessity, Jarrod Bailey, Katy Taylor

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

Public opposition to non-human primate (NHP) experiments is significant, yet those who defend them cite minimal harm to NHPs and substantial human benefit. Here we review these claims of benefit, specifically in neuroscience, and show that: a) there is a default assumption of their human relevance and benefit, rather than robust evidence; b) their human relevance and essential contribution and necessity are wholly overstated; c) the contribution and capacity of non-animal investigative methods are greatly understated; and d) confounding issues, such as species differences and the effects of stress and anaesthesia, are usually overlooked. This is the case in NHP …

Monkey-Based Research On Human Disease: The Implications Of Genetic Differences, Jarrod Bailey

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

Assertions that the use of monkeys to investigate human diseases is valid scientifically are frequently based on a reported 90–93% genetic similarity between the species. Critical analyses of the relevance of monkey studies to human biology, however, indicate that this genetic similarity does not result in sufficient physiological similarity for monkeys to constitute good models for research, and that monkey data do not translate well to progress in clinical practice for humans. Salient examples include the failure of new drugs in clinical trials, the highly different infectivity and pathology of SIV/HIV, and poor extrapolation of research on Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s …

An Assessment Of The Role Of Chimpanzees In Aids Vaccine Research, Jarrod Bailey

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

Prior to Simian Immunodeficiency Virus (SIV)-infected macaques becoming the ‘model of choice’ in the 1990s, chimpanzees were widely used in AIDS vaccine research and testing. Faced with the continued failure to develop an effective human vaccine, some scientists are calling for a return to their widespread use. To assess the past and potential future contribution of chimpanzees to AIDS vaccine development, databases and published literature were systematically searched to compare the results of AIDS vaccine trials in chimpanzees with those of human clinical trials, and to determine whether the chimpanzee trials were predictive of the human response. Protective and/or therapeutic …

Lessons From Chimpanzee-Based Research On Human Disease: The Implications Of Genetic Differences, Jarrod Bailey

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

Assertions that the use of chimpanzees to investigate human diseases is valid scientifically are frequently based on a reported 98–99% genetic similarity between the species. Critical analyses of the relevance of chimpanzee studies to human biology, however, indicate that this genetic similarity does not result in sufficient physiological similarity for the chimpanzee to constitute a good model for research, and furthermore, that chimpanzee data do not translate well to progress in clinical practice for humans. Leading examples include the minimal citations of chimpanzee research that is relevant to human medicine, the highly different pathology of HIV/AIDS and hepatitis C virus …

Animal Carcinogenicity Studies: Implications For The Reach System, Andrew Knight, Jarrod Bailey, Jonathan Balcombe

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

The 2001 European Commission proposal for the Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals (REACH) aims to improve public and environmental health by assessing the toxicity of, and restricting exposure to, potentially toxic chemicals. The greatest benefits are expected to accrue from decreased cancer incidences. Hence the accurate identification of chemical carcinogens must be a top priority for the REACH system. Due to a paucity of human clinical data, the identification of potential human carcinogens has conventionally relied on animal tests. However, our survey of the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) toxic chemicals database revealed that, for a majority of the …

Animal Carcinogenicity Studies: 3. Alternatives To The Bioassay, Andrew Knight, Jarrod Bailey, Jonathan Balcombe

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

Conventional animal carcinogenicity tests take around three years to design, conduct and interpret. Consequently, only a tiny fraction of the thousands of industrial chemicals currently in use have been tested for carcinogenicity. Despite the costs of hundreds of millions of dollars and millions of skilled personnel hours, as well as millions of animal lives, several investigations have revealed that animal carcinogenicity data lack human specificity (i.e. the ability to identify human non-carcinogens), which severely limits the human predictivity of the bioassay. This is due to the scientific inadequacies of many carcinogenicity bioassays, and numerous serious biological obstacles, which render profoundly …

Animal Carcinogenicity Studies: 1. Poor Human Predictivity, Andrew Knight, Jarrod Bailey, Jonathan Balcombe

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

The regulation of human exposure to potentially carcinogenic chemicals constitutes society’s most important use of animal carcinogenicity data. Environmental contaminants of greatest concern within the USA are listed in the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) chemicals database. However, of the 160 IRIS chemicals lacking even limited human exposure data but possessing animal data that had received a human carcinogenicity assessment by 1 January 2004, we found that in most cases (58.1%; 93/160), the EPA considered animal carcinogenicity data inadequate to support a classification of probable human carcinogen or non-carcinogen. For the 128 chemicals with human or …

Predicting Human Drug Toxicity And Safety Via Animal Tests: Can Any One Species Predict Drug Toxicity In Any Other, And Do Monkeys Help?, Jarrod Bailey, Michelle Thew, Michael Balls

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

Animals are still widely used in drug development and safety tests, despite evidence for their lack of predictive value. In this regard, we recently showed, by producing Likelihood Ratios (LRs) for an extensive data set of over 3,000 drugs with both animal and human data, that the absence of toxicity in animals provides little or virtually no evidential weight that adverse drug reactions will also be absent in humans. While our analyses suggest that the presence of toxicity in one species may sometimes add evidential weight for risk of toxicity in another, the LRs are extremely inconsistent, varying substantially for …

Which Drugs Cause Cancer?, Andrew Knight, Jarrod Bailey, Jonathan Balcombe

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

Animal tests yield misleading results.

An Analysis Of The Use Of Animal Models In Predicting Human Toxicology And Drug Safety, Jarrod Bailey, Michelle Thew, Michael Balls

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

Animal use continues to be central to preclinical drug development, in spite of a lack of its demonstrable validity. The current nadir of new drug approvals and the drying-up of pipelines may be a direct consequence of this. To estimate the evidential weight given by animal data to the probability that a new drug may be toxic to humans, we have calculated Likelihood Ratios (LRs) for an extensive data set of 2,366 drugs, for which both animal and human data are available, including tissue-level effects and MedDRA Level 1–4 biomedical observations. This was done for three preclinical species (rat, mouse …

Cancerous Contradictions: The Mis-Regulation Of Human Carcinogens Based On Animal Data, Andrew Knight, Jarrod Bailey, Jonathan Balcombe

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

The regulation of human exposures to potential carcinogens constitutes society’s most important use of animal carcinogenicity data. However, for environmental contaminants of greatest U.S. concern, we found that in most cases (58.1%; 93/160) the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considered the animal data inadequate to support a classification of probable human carcinogen or noncarcinogen.

The World Health Organisation’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) is a leading international authority on carcinogenicity assessments. For chemicals lacking human exposure data (the great majority), IARC classifications of identical chemicals were significantly more conservative than EPA classifications (p

Animal Carcinogenicity Studies: 2. Obstacles To Extrapolation Of Data To Humans, Andrew Knight, Jarrod Bailey, Jonathan Balcombe

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

Due to limited human exposure data, risk classification and the consequent regulation of exposure to potential carcinogens has conventionally relied mainly upon animal tests. However, several investigations have revealed animal carcinogenicity data to be lacking in human predictivity. To investigate the reasons for this, we surveyed 160 chemicals possessing animal but not human exposure data within the US Environmental Protection Agency chemicals database, but which had received human carcinogenicity assessments by 1 January 2004. We discovered the use of a wide variety of species, with rodents predominating, and of a wide variety of routes of administration, and that there were …