Joining forces: the need to combine science and ethics to address problems of validity and translation in neuropsychiatry research using animal models

Abstract

Background: Current policies regulating the use of animals for scientific purposes are based on balancing between potential gain of knowledge and suffering of animals used in experimentation. The balancing process is complicated, on the one hand by plurality of views on our duties towards animals, and on the other hand by more recent discussions on uncertainty in the probability of reaching the final aim of the research and problems of translational failure. Methods: The study combines ethical analysis based on a literature review with neuropsychiatry-related preclinical research as a case study. Results: Based on the analysis and the case study we show that neuropsychiatry-related preclinical research is an especially interesting case from an ethical perspective. The 3R principles (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) are used to minimize the negative consequences for the animals used in research. However, neuropsychiatric research is characterized by specific challenges in assessing the probability of success of reaching the final aim, due to our limited mechanistic knowledge of human neuropsychiatric illness. Consequently, the translational value of the currently used animal models may be difficult to prove, which undermines the validity of these models and complicated the ethical assessment. Conclusions: We conclude that a combined approach that deals with both science and the ethical dimensions is necessary to address the problems of validity and translation in neuropsychiatry-related preclinical research. We suggest this approach to comprise first, improved experimental methods, e.g. by using systematic reviews, second, a more patients-based approach that leads to models that reflect interindividual variation better, and third, more interdisciplinary cooperation.

Creative social media use for Covid-19 prevention in Bangladesh: a structural equation modeling approach

“…Doctors’ panic to treat the Covid-19 patients has been a crucial issue in the healthcare system in Bangladesh. In some cases, some doctors were dismissed from their service due to showing reluctance to serve the patients (Swazo et al 2020 ). Overall, the loopholes of the healthcare system of Bangladesh are characterized using three points: “poor governance and increased corruption, inadequate healthcare facilities and weak public health communication” (Al-Zaman 2020 ).…”

Experimental Models to Study Autism Spectrum Disorders: hiPSCs, Rodents and Zebrafish

“…Animal research has been a source of many debates in the past decade, as there is public concern about the ethics of the use of animal models in science [ 290 , 291 ]. Critics argue that the biological differences between humans and other animals can mislead research investigations (approximately 90% of drugs that pass animal tests do not pass clinical trials) and that they could be substitute by in vitro models [ 292 ].…”

“…However, this does not mean that the use of animals in research should be free of regulation and animal facilities should follow standard procedures to ensure the well-being of the animals. This is necessary from both the ethical and the scientific point of view as trustworthy results can only be obtained if animals are maintained in accurate, non-stressful conditions [ 290 , 291 , 294 ].…”

Consideraciones éticas en el uso de animales de experimentación

“…1 De acuerdo con diversos lineamientos internacionales, se considera que el uso de animales para la investigación científica es éticamente aceptable solo en caso de que el beneficio derivado del conocimiento que podría obtenerse sea mayor en comparación con el sufrimiento que se les causaría (1) ; sin embargo, no existe un consenso respecto a lo que esta afirmación implica (1) . La deliberación ética acerca de los estudios preclínicos es un enorme reto para los Comités de Ética, los cuales frecuentemente se limitan a la evaluación técnica de sus procedimientos, sobre la cual resulta más fácil lograr consensos.…”

“…La deliberación ética acerca de los estudios preclínicos es un enorme reto para los Comités de Ética, los cuales frecuentemente se limitan a la evaluación técnica de sus procedimientos, sobre la cual resulta más fácil lograr consensos. De este modo, evitan evaluar a fondo si los beneficios esperados son mayores al sufrimiento que podría causarse a los animales (1) .…”