非啮齿动物毒理学研究中心电图和血压记录方法的比较:回顾性分析。

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Journal of pharmacological and toxicological methods Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI:10.1016/j.vascn.2024.107537
Emma Pawluk, Annie Delaunois, Bastien Gamboa, Jean-Pierre Valentin
{"title":"非啮齿动物毒理学研究中心电图和血压记录方法的比较:回顾性分析。","authors":"Emma Pawluk,&nbsp;Annie Delaunois,&nbsp;Bastien Gamboa,&nbsp;Jean-Pierre Valentin","doi":"10.1016/j.vascn.2024.107537","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Our study retrospectively examines 51 non-rodent general toxicology studies conducted over the past 8 years to ascertain the influence of recording methodologies on baseline cardiovascular (CV) parameters and statistical sensitivity. Specifically, our work aims to evaluate the frequency of cardiovascular parameter recording categorized by therapeutic modality and study type, to assess the variability in these parameters based on measurement techniques, and to determine the sample sizes needed for detecting relevant changes in heart rate (HR), blood pressure (BP), and QTc interval in non-human primate (NHP) studies.</p><p>Results indicate that electrocardiogram (ECG) measurements in dogs and NHP were recorded in 63% of studies, combined with BP recording in 18% of studies, while BP was never recorded alone. Trend analysis reveals a decline in the utilisation of restraint-based methods for ECG measurements post-2017, to the benefit of telemetry-based recordings, particularly Jacketed External Telemetry (JET). There was a marked difference in baseline values, with restraint-based methods showing significantly higher HR and QTc values compared to JET, likely linked to animal stress.</p><p>Further analysis suggests an unrealistic and unethical sample size requirement in NHP studies for detecting biologically meaningful CV parameter changes using restraint-based methods, while JET methods necessitate significantly smaller sample sizes.</p><p>This retrospective study indicates a notable shift from snapshots short-duration, restraint-based methods towards telemetry approaches over the recent years, especially with an increased usage of implanted telemetry. The transition contributes to potential consensus within industry or regulatory frameworks for optimal practices in assessing ECG, HR, and BP in general toxicology studies.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16767,"journal":{"name":"Journal of pharmacological and toxicological methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of electrocardiogram and blood pressure recording methods in non-rodent toxicology studies: A retrospective analysis\",\"authors\":\"Emma Pawluk,&nbsp;Annie Delaunois,&nbsp;Bastien Gamboa,&nbsp;Jean-Pierre Valentin\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.vascn.2024.107537\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Our study retrospectively examines 51 non-rodent general toxicology studies conducted over the past 8 years to ascertain the influence of recording methodologies on baseline cardiovascular (CV) parameters and statistical sensitivity. Specifically, our work aims to evaluate the frequency of cardiovascular parameter recording categorized by therapeutic modality and study type, to assess the variability in these parameters based on measurement techniques, and to determine the sample sizes needed for detecting relevant changes in heart rate (HR), blood pressure (BP), and QTc interval in non-human primate (NHP) studies.</p><p>Results indicate that electrocardiogram (ECG) measurements in dogs and NHP were recorded in 63% of studies, combined with BP recording in 18% of studies, while BP was never recorded alone. Trend analysis reveals a decline in the utilisation of restraint-based methods for ECG measurements post-2017, to the benefit of telemetry-based recordings, particularly Jacketed External Telemetry (JET). There was a marked difference in baseline values, with restraint-based methods showing significantly higher HR and QTc values compared to JET, likely linked to animal stress.</p><p>Further analysis suggests an unrealistic and unethical sample size requirement in NHP studies for detecting biologically meaningful CV parameter changes using restraint-based methods, while JET methods necessitate significantly smaller sample sizes.</p><p>This retrospective study indicates a notable shift from snapshots short-duration, restraint-based methods towards telemetry approaches over the recent years, especially with an increased usage of implanted telemetry. The transition contributes to potential consensus within industry or regulatory frameworks for optimal practices in assessing ECG, HR, and BP in general toxicology studies.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16767,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of pharmacological and toxicological methods\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"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/S1056871924000479\",\"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/S1056871924000479","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们的研究回顾性地检查了过去 8 年中进行的 51 项非啮齿类动物普通毒理学研究,以确定记录方法对基线心血管 (CV) 参数和统计敏感性的影响。具体来说,我们的工作旨在评估按治疗方式和研究类型分类的心血管参数记录频率,根据测量技术评估这些参数的可变性,并确定在非人灵长类动物 (NHP) 研究中检测心率 (HR)、血压 (BP) 和 QTc 间期的相关变化所需的样本量。结果表明,在 63% 的研究中记录了狗和 NHP 的心电图 (ECG),在 18% 的研究中结合了血压记录,而从未单独记录过血压。趋势分析表明,2017 年后,基于束缚的心电图测量方法的使用率有所下降,而基于遥测的记录方法,尤其是夹套式体外遥测技术 (JET) 则更受青睐。基线值存在明显差异,与 JET 相比,基于束缚的方法显示的心率和 QTc 值明显更高,这可能与动物应激有关。进一步分析表明,在使用基于束缚的方法检测具有生物学意义的 CV 参数变化时,对 NHP 研究样本量的要求既不现实也不道德,而 JET 方法所需的样本量要小得多。这项回顾性研究表明,近年来,特别是随着植入式遥测技术使用的增加,基于束缚的短时快照方法已明显转向遥测方法。这一转变有助于在行业或监管框架内就评估一般毒理学研究中心电图、心率和血压的最佳方法达成共识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of electrocardiogram and blood pressure recording methods in non-rodent toxicology studies: A retrospective analysis

Our study retrospectively examines 51 non-rodent general toxicology studies conducted over the past 8 years to ascertain the influence of recording methodologies on baseline cardiovascular (CV) parameters and statistical sensitivity. Specifically, our work aims to evaluate the frequency of cardiovascular parameter recording categorized by therapeutic modality and study type, to assess the variability in these parameters based on measurement techniques, and to determine the sample sizes needed for detecting relevant changes in heart rate (HR), blood pressure (BP), and QTc interval in non-human primate (NHP) studies.

Results indicate that electrocardiogram (ECG) measurements in dogs and NHP were recorded in 63% of studies, combined with BP recording in 18% of studies, while BP was never recorded alone. Trend analysis reveals a decline in the utilisation of restraint-based methods for ECG measurements post-2017, to the benefit of telemetry-based recordings, particularly Jacketed External Telemetry (JET). There was a marked difference in baseline values, with restraint-based methods showing significantly higher HR and QTc values compared to JET, likely linked to animal stress.

Further analysis suggests an unrealistic and unethical sample size requirement in NHP studies for detecting biologically meaningful CV parameter changes using restraint-based methods, while JET methods necessitate significantly smaller sample sizes.

This retrospective study indicates a notable shift from snapshots short-duration, restraint-based methods towards telemetry approaches over the recent years, especially with an increased usage of implanted telemetry. The transition contributes to potential consensus within industry or regulatory frameworks for optimal practices in assessing ECG, HR, and BP in general toxicology studies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of pharmacological and toxicological methods
Journal of pharmacological and toxicological methods PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-TOXICOLOGY
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
10.50%
发文量
56
审稿时长
26 days
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.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Comparative analysis of high-throughput RNA extraction kits in Naïve Non-Human Primate (NHP) tissues for downstream applications utilizing Xeno Internal Positive Control (IPC) Pharmacokinetic profiles of methylcobalamin in rats after multiple administration routes by a simple LC-MS/MS assay with a small volume of plasma The efficient method to get better raw brain signal on rat anesthetics experiment Understanding lymphatic drug delivery through chylomicron blockade: A retrospective and prospective analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1