Matthew M. Abernathy, Derek D. Best, Derek J. Leishman
{"title":"比较当代对照组、历史对照组和交叉实验室对照组在评估意识清醒的非人灵长类动物 QTc 时的表现。","authors":"Matthew M. Abernathy, Derek D. Best, Derek J. Leishman","doi":"10.1016/j.vascn.2024.107510","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Cardiovascular safety pharmacology and toxicology studies include vehicle control animals in most studies. Electrocardiogram data on common vehicles is accumulated relatively quickly. In the interests of the 3Rs principles it may be useful to use this historical information to reduce the use of animals or to refine the sensitivity of studies.</p><p>We used implanted telemetry data from a large nonhuman primate (NHP) cardiovascular study (<em>n</em> = 48) evaluating the effect of moxifloxacin. We extracted 24 animals to conduct a <em>n</em> = 3/sex/group analysis. The remaining 24 animals were used to generate 1000 unique combinations of 3 male and 3 female NHP to act as control groups for the three treated groups in the <em>n</em> = 3/sex/group analysis. The distribution of treatment effects, median minimum detectable difference (MDD) values were gathered from the 1000 studies. These represent contemporary controls.</p><p>Data were available from 42 NHP from 3 other studies in the same laboratory using the same technology. These were used to generate 1000 unique combinations of 6, 12, 18, 24 and 36 NHP to act as historical control animals for the 18 animals in the treated groups of the moxifloxacin study. Data from an additional laboratory were also available for 20 NHP.</p><p>The QT, RR and QT-RR data from the three sources were comparable. However, differences in the time course of QTc effect in the vehicle data from the two laboratories meant that it was not possible to use cross-lab controls. In the case of historical controls from the same laboratory, these could be used in place of the contemporary controls in determining a treatment's effect. There appeared to be an advantage in using larger (≥18) group sizes for historical controls. These data support the opportunity of using historical controls to reduce the number of animals used in new cardiovascular studies.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16767,"journal":{"name":"Journal of pharmacological and toxicological methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparison of the performance of contemporary, historical, and cross-lab controls in QTc assessment in conscious nonhuman primates\",\"authors\":\"Matthew M. Abernathy, Derek D. Best, Derek J. Leishman\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.vascn.2024.107510\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Cardiovascular safety pharmacology and toxicology studies include vehicle control animals in most studies. Electrocardiogram data on common vehicles is accumulated relatively quickly. In the interests of the 3Rs principles it may be useful to use this historical information to reduce the use of animals or to refine the sensitivity of studies.</p><p>We used implanted telemetry data from a large nonhuman primate (NHP) cardiovascular study (<em>n</em> = 48) evaluating the effect of moxifloxacin. We extracted 24 animals to conduct a <em>n</em> = 3/sex/group analysis. The remaining 24 animals were used to generate 1000 unique combinations of 3 male and 3 female NHP to act as control groups for the three treated groups in the <em>n</em> = 3/sex/group analysis. The distribution of treatment effects, median minimum detectable difference (MDD) values were gathered from the 1000 studies. These represent contemporary controls.</p><p>Data were available from 42 NHP from 3 other studies in the same laboratory using the same technology. These were used to generate 1000 unique combinations of 6, 12, 18, 24 and 36 NHP to act as historical control animals for the 18 animals in the treated groups of the moxifloxacin study. Data from an additional laboratory were also available for 20 NHP.</p><p>The QT, RR and QT-RR data from the three sources were comparable. However, differences in the time course of QTc effect in the vehicle data from the two laboratories meant that it was not possible to use cross-lab controls. In the case of historical controls from the same laboratory, these could be used in place of the contemporary controls in determining a treatment's effect. There appeared to be an advantage in using larger (≥18) group sizes for historical controls. These data support the opportunity of using historical controls to reduce the number of animals used in new cardiovascular studies.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16767,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of pharmacological and toxicological methods\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of pharmacological and toxicological methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1056871924000200\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of pharmacological and toxicological methods","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1056871924000200","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
A comparison of the performance of contemporary, historical, and cross-lab controls in QTc assessment in conscious nonhuman primates
Cardiovascular safety pharmacology and toxicology studies include vehicle control animals in most studies. Electrocardiogram data on common vehicles is accumulated relatively quickly. In the interests of the 3Rs principles it may be useful to use this historical information to reduce the use of animals or to refine the sensitivity of studies.
We used implanted telemetry data from a large nonhuman primate (NHP) cardiovascular study (n = 48) evaluating the effect of moxifloxacin. We extracted 24 animals to conduct a n = 3/sex/group analysis. The remaining 24 animals were used to generate 1000 unique combinations of 3 male and 3 female NHP to act as control groups for the three treated groups in the n = 3/sex/group analysis. The distribution of treatment effects, median minimum detectable difference (MDD) values were gathered from the 1000 studies. These represent contemporary controls.
Data were available from 42 NHP from 3 other studies in the same laboratory using the same technology. These were used to generate 1000 unique combinations of 6, 12, 18, 24 and 36 NHP to act as historical control animals for the 18 animals in the treated groups of the moxifloxacin study. Data from an additional laboratory were also available for 20 NHP.
The QT, RR and QT-RR data from the three sources were comparable. However, differences in the time course of QTc effect in the vehicle data from the two laboratories meant that it was not possible to use cross-lab controls. In the case of historical controls from the same laboratory, these could be used in place of the contemporary controls in determining a treatment's effect. There appeared to be an advantage in using larger (≥18) group sizes for historical controls. These data support the opportunity of using historical controls to reduce the number of animals used in new cardiovascular studies.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Pharmacological and Toxicological Methods publishes original articles on current methods of investigation used in pharmacology and toxicology. Pharmacology and toxicology are defined in the broadest sense, referring to actions of drugs and chemicals on all living systems. With its international editorial board and noted contributors, Journal of Pharmacological and Toxicological Methods is the leading journal devoted exclusively to experimental procedures used by pharmacologists and toxicologists.