Evaluation of animal biosafety webinar series for professionals working in animal facilities across Pakistan during the COVID-19 pandemic

Experimental research with animals can help the prevention, cure, and alleviation of human ailments. Animal research facilities are critical for scientific advancement, but they can also pose a higher risk than other biomedical laboratories. Zoonosis, allergic reactions, bites, cuts, and scratches by animals are all substantial concerns that can occur in animal facilities. Furthermore, human error and unexpected animal behavior pose a risk not just to humans, but also to the environment and the animals themselves. The majority of biosafety and biosecurity training programs focus on clinical and biomedical laboratories dealing with human safety factors, with little emphasis on animal biosafety. The current virtual training was designed to improve biosafety and biosecurity capabilities of animal laboratory personnel, researchers, and veterinarians from different regions of Pakistan. The results revealed that understanding was improved regarding triggers for risk assessment in addition to annual and regular reviews (56% to 69%), biosecurity (21% to 50%), decontamination (17% to 35%), safe handling of sharps (21% to 35%), Dual Use Research of Concern (DURC) (17% to 40%), Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) usage by waste handlers (60.9% to 75%), waste management (56% to 85%), animal biosafety levels (40.57% to 45%), and good microbiological practices and procedures (17% to 35%). To bring human and animal laboratories up to the same level in terms of biosafety and biosecurity, it is critical to focus on areas that have been overlooked in the past. Training programs focusing on animal biosafety should be conducted more frequently to strengthen bio risk management systems in animal research facilities.Copyright © 2021

The Importance of Animal Models in Biomedical Research: Current Insights and Applications.

Animal research is considered a key element in advance of biomedical science. Although its use is controversial and raises ethical challenges, the contribution of animal models in medicine is essential for understanding the physiopathology and novel treatment alternatives for several animal and human diseases. Current pandemics' pathology, such as the 2019 Coronavirus disease, has been studied in primate, rodent, and porcine models to recognize infection routes and develop therapeutic protocols. Worldwide issues such as diabetes, obesity, neurological disorders, pain, rehabilitation medicine, and surgical techniques require studying the process in different animal species before testing them on humans. Due to their relevance, this article aims to discuss the importance of animal models in diverse lines of biomedical research by analyzing the contributions of the various species utilized in science over the past five years about key topics concerning human and animal health.

IACUC and Veterinary Considerations for Review of ABSL3 and ABSL4 Research Protocols.

With the recent upswing of infectious disease outbreaks (coronavirus, influenza, Ebola, etc), there is an ever-increasing need for biocontainment animal use protocols to better address the research of emerging diseases and to increase the health of both animals and humans. It is imperative that we as a research community ensure these protocols are conducted with the utmost scrutiny and regulatory compliance for the welfare of the animals as well as the health and safety concerns of the individual conducting these studies. Both the welfare of the animals and the health and safety of the research staff must be balanced with the integrity of the science being studied. Even prior to reviewing biocontainment protocols, the research stakeholders should have professional and collegial interactions across all levels of the proposed project. These stakeholders should include the attending veterinarian, the principal investigator, the sponsor, and any organic institutional health and safety assets (environmental health and safety, occupational health, biosafety personnel, medical personnel, facilities operations and maintenance, etc). At most institutions, these stakeholders are members of the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee and may not possess the necessary tools to properly assess an Animal Biosafety Level 3 and 4 animal use protocol. It is the goal of this article to review some basic concepts of biocontainment, discuss critical communications and preapprovals, clinical observations, medical interventions and supportive care, scientific and study endpoints, euthanasia criteria, animal manipulations, documentation, training, emergency response and contingency plans, security, and decontamination and provide a scenario-based and informative thought-provoking process Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee members and veterinary staff may consider during Animal Biosafety Level 3 and 4 protocol review. These topics will enhance the ability of all stakeholders to balance the protection of the people with the integrity of the science and ultimately the welfare of the animal.

Modernizing Medical Research to Benefit People and Animals

Simple SummaryThe use of animals in research has been the subject of significant public debate and concern. Some argue that animal experiments are essential to medical progress, while others believe that this practice is unethical and does not produce results that can be reliably translated to people. A growing range of modern techniques can replace the use of animals and provide results that are more relevant to human patients. These include the use of human cells and tissues, and computer-based methods. Our work aimed to explore the societal benefits of accelerating the replacement of animals with these new research methods. We found that this approach would benefit animal welfare, public health and the economy. We also found that the British public is generally in favor of efforts to replace animals, and that focusing on this area would help to support the British Government’s policy and economic goals. We suggest that the British Government could greatly expedite the replacement of animal experiments by appointing a new minister to take responsibility for this transition.In the context of widespread public and political concern around the use of animals in research, we sought to examine the scientific, ethical and economic arguments around the replacement of animals with New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) and to situate this within a regulatory context. We also analyzed the extent to which animal replacement aligns with British public and policymakers’ priorities and explored global progress towards this outcome. The global context is especially relevant given the international nature of regulatory guidance on the safety testing of new medicines. We used a range of evidence to analyze this area, including scientific papers;expert economic analysis;public opinion polls and the Hansard of the UK Parliament. We found evidence indicating that replacing animals with NAMs would benefit animal welfare, public health and the economy. The majority of the British public is in favor of efforts to replace animals and focusing on this area would help to support the British Government’s current policy priorities. We believe that this evidence underlines the need for strong action from policymakers to accelerate the transition from animal experiments to NAMs. The specific measure we suggest is to introduce a new ministerial position to coordinate and accelerate the replacement of animals with NAMs.

Animal Study Translation: The Other Reproducibility Challenge

Animal research is currently an irreplaceable contributor to our efforts to protect and improve public health. Its relevance, importance, and contributions are represented in historical precedent, regulatory expectations, evidence of our rapidly developing understanding of human health and disease, as well as success in the development of novel therapeutics that are improving quality of life and extending human and animal life expectancy. The rapid and evolving success in responding to the current COVID pandemic significantly supported by animal studies is a clear example of the importance of animal research. But there is growing interest in reducing our dependence on animals and challenges to the effective translation of current animal studies to human applications. There are several potential contributors to gaps in the translatability of animal research to humans, including our approaches to choosing or rationalizing the relevance of a particular animal model, our understanding of their biological variability and how that applies to outcomes, the data we collect from animal studies, and even how we manage the animals. These important contributors to the success of animal research are explored in this issue of the ILAR Journal.

Do we still need animals? Surveying the role of animal-free models in Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease research.

The use of animals in neuroscience and biomedical research remains controversial. Policy is built around the "3R" principle of "Refining, Reducing and Replacing" animal experiments, and across the globe, different initiatives stimulate the use of animal-free methods. Based on an extensive literature screen to map the development and adoption of animal-free methods in Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease research, we find that at least two in three examined studies rely on animals or on animal-derived models. Among the animal-free studies, the relative contribution of innovative models that may replace animal experiments is limited. We argue that the distinction between animal research and alternative models presents a false dichotomy, as the role and scientific value of both animal and animal-free approaches are intertwined. Calls to halt all animal experiments appear premature, as insufficient non-animal-based alternatives are available and their development lags behind. In light of this, we highlight the need for objective, unprejudiced monitoring, and more robust performance indicators of animal-free approaches.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Infection Challenge Experiments in Nonhuman Primates: An Ethical Perspective.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has stimulated massive investment in biomedical research with the aims of understanding the disease and developing effective vaccine and therapeutic interventions. What role should animal research play in this scientific endeavor? Both the urgency to evaluate candidate interventions for human use and growing societal concern about ethical treatment of (nonhuman) animals put into question the justifiability of animal research as a precursor to clinical trials. Yet forgoing animal research in the rush to undertake human testing might expose human research participants to unacceptable risks. In this article, we apply a recently developed framework of principles for animal research ethics in exploring ethical questions raised by a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection challenge experiment involving rhesus macaques, which evaluated the protective efficacy of the mRNA-1273 vaccine that was recently approved for emergency use. Our aim is to illuminate the ethical issues while introducing, and illustrating the use of, the framework.

Evaluation of animal biosafety webinar series for professionals working in animal facilities across pakistan during the covid-19 pandemic

Experimental research with animals can help the prevention, cure, and alleviation of human ailments. Animal research facilities are critical for scientific advancement, but they can also pose a higher risk than other biomedical laboratories. Zoonosis, allergic reactions, bites, cuts, and scratches by animals are all substantial concerns that can occur in animal facilities. Furthermore, human error and unexpected animal behavior pose a risk not just to humans, but also to the environment and the animals themselves. The majority of biosafety and biosecurity training programs focus on clinical and biomedical laboratories dealing with human safety factors, with little emphasis on animal biosafety. The current virtual training was designed to improve biosafety and biosecurity capabilities of animal laboratory personnel, researchers, and veterinarians from different regions of Pakistan. The results revealed that understanding was improved regarding triggers for risk assessment in addition to annual and regular reviews (56% to 69%), biosecurity (21% to 50%), decontamination (17% to 35%), safe handling of sharps (21% to 35%), DURC (17% to 40%), PPE usage by waste handlers (60.9% to 75%), waste management (56% to 85%), animal biosafety levels (40.57% to 45%), and good microbiological practices and procedures (17% to 35%). To bring human and animal laboratories up to the same level in terms of biosafety and biosecurity, it is critical to focus on areas that have been overlooked in the past. Training programs focusing on animal biosafety should be conducted more frequently to strengthen bio risk management systems in animal research facilities.