Login / Signup

Toxicologic Pathology Forum: Opinion on Not Euthanizing Control Animals in the Recovery Phase of Non-Rodent Toxicology Studies.

Kyathanahalli S JanardhanRadhakrishna SuraSmita Salian-MehtaThierry D FlandreXavier PalazziDoris ZaneBhanu SinghBinod JacobRenee Rosemary HukkanenMuthafar Al-HaddawiBindu BennetVictoria LaastDonna LeeRichard PetersonAnnette RomeikeFrederic SchorschMagali Guffroy
Published in: Toxicologic pathology (2022)
Nonclinical toxicology studies that are required to support human clinical trials of new drug candidates are generally conducted in a rodent and a non-rodent species. These studies typically contain a vehicle control group and low, intermediate, and high dose test article groups. In addition, a dosing-free recovery phase is sometimes included to determine reversibility of potential toxicities observed during the dosing phase and may include additional animals in the vehicle control and one or more dose groups. Typically, reversibility is determined by comparing the test article-related changes in the dosing phase animals to concurrent recovery phase animals at the same dose level. Therefore, for interpretation of reversibility, it is not always essential to euthanize the recovery vehicle control animals. In the absence of recovery vehicle control tissues, the pathologist's experience, historical control database, digital or glass slide repositories, or literature can be used to interpret the findings in the context of background pathology of the species/strain/age. Therefore, in most studies, the default approach could be not to euthanize recovery vehicle control animals. This article provides opinions on scenarios that may or may not necessitate euthanasia of recovery phase vehicle control animals in nonclinical toxicology studies involving dogs and nonhuman primates.
Keyphrases
  • high dose
  • clinical trial
  • emergency department
  • systematic review
  • gene expression
  • low dose
  • case control
  • climate change
  • open label
  • stem cell transplantation