Cargando…
Is it Time for Reviewer 3 to Request Human Organ Chip Experiments Instead of Animal Validation Studies?
For the past century, experimental data obtained from animal studies have been required by reviewers of scientific articles and grant applications to validate the physiological relevance of in vitro results. At the same time, pharmaceutical researchers and regulatory agencies recognize that results...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7675190/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33240763 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/advs.202002030 |
_version_ | 1783611652393926656 |
---|---|
author | Ingber, Donald E. |
author_facet | Ingber, Donald E. |
author_sort | Ingber, Donald E. |
collection | PubMed |
description | For the past century, experimental data obtained from animal studies have been required by reviewers of scientific articles and grant applications to validate the physiological relevance of in vitro results. At the same time, pharmaceutical researchers and regulatory agencies recognize that results from preclinical animal models frequently fail to predict drug responses in humans. This Progress Report reviews recent advances in human organ‐on‐a‐chip (Organ Chip) microfluidic culture technology, both with single Organ Chips and fluidically coupled human “Body‐on‐Chips” platforms, which demonstrate their ability to recapitulate human physiology and disease states, as well as human patient responses to clinically relevant drug pharmacokinetic exposures, with higher fidelity than other in vitro models or animal studies. These findings raise the question of whether continuing to require results of animal testing for publication or grant funding still makes scientific or ethical sense, and if more physiologically relevant human Organ Chip models might better serve this purpose. This issue is addressed in this article in context of the history of the field, and advantages and disadvantages of Organ Chip approaches versus animal models are discussed that should be considered by the wider research community. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7675190 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-76751902020-11-24 Is it Time for Reviewer 3 to Request Human Organ Chip Experiments Instead of Animal Validation Studies? Ingber, Donald E. Adv Sci (Weinh) Progress Reports For the past century, experimental data obtained from animal studies have been required by reviewers of scientific articles and grant applications to validate the physiological relevance of in vitro results. At the same time, pharmaceutical researchers and regulatory agencies recognize that results from preclinical animal models frequently fail to predict drug responses in humans. This Progress Report reviews recent advances in human organ‐on‐a‐chip (Organ Chip) microfluidic culture technology, both with single Organ Chips and fluidically coupled human “Body‐on‐Chips” platforms, which demonstrate their ability to recapitulate human physiology and disease states, as well as human patient responses to clinically relevant drug pharmacokinetic exposures, with higher fidelity than other in vitro models or animal studies. These findings raise the question of whether continuing to require results of animal testing for publication or grant funding still makes scientific or ethical sense, and if more physiologically relevant human Organ Chip models might better serve this purpose. This issue is addressed in this article in context of the history of the field, and advantages and disadvantages of Organ Chip approaches versus animal models are discussed that should be considered by the wider research community. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-10-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7675190/ /pubmed/33240763 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/advs.202002030 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Progress Reports Ingber, Donald E. Is it Time for Reviewer 3 to Request Human Organ Chip Experiments Instead of Animal Validation Studies? |
title | Is it Time for Reviewer 3 to Request Human Organ Chip Experiments Instead of Animal Validation Studies? |
title_full | Is it Time for Reviewer 3 to Request Human Organ Chip Experiments Instead of Animal Validation Studies? |
title_fullStr | Is it Time for Reviewer 3 to Request Human Organ Chip Experiments Instead of Animal Validation Studies? |
title_full_unstemmed | Is it Time for Reviewer 3 to Request Human Organ Chip Experiments Instead of Animal Validation Studies? |
title_short | Is it Time for Reviewer 3 to Request Human Organ Chip Experiments Instead of Animal Validation Studies? |
title_sort | is it time for reviewer 3 to request human organ chip experiments instead of animal validation studies? |
topic | Progress Reports |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7675190/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33240763 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/advs.202002030 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ingberdonalde isittimeforreviewer3torequesthumanorganchipexperimentsinsteadofanimalvalidationstudies |